The High Court will allow an appeal against last month’s ruling which found the Home Office’s Rwanda policy to be lawful. Under the £120m migration partnership scheme, people seeking asylum would be sent to Rwanda where their claim would be assessed. The case will now be heard before the Court of Appeal and no flights will be leaving the UK to Rwanda under the scheme until a ruling has been made.
The High Court ruling, last month, found that the relocation of asylum seekers to Rwanda is consistent with the Refugee Convention and with the statutory and other legal obligations on the government, including the obligations imposed by the Human Rights Act 1998.
Asylum Aid, a charity which provides legal representation to some of the most vulnerable people seeking asylum in the UK, stated: “We believe that the Court’s finding that asylum seekers don’t have a right to comment on the general safety of Rwanda is obviously wrong in law, and also inconsistent with other parts of the Court’s judgment, including its findings in relation to cases brought by individuals.”
The charity has continued its crowdfunding efforts which will help support their appeal. Asylum Aid continued:
“What’s more, it is the opposite of the case put by the Home Office until the last day of the hearing, at which point the Judges invited the Home Office to consider changing their case on the law having suggested that otherwise Asylum Aid almost certainly would have won as 7 days was too short.”
A concern that was raised by the charity following the high court’s ruling is that individuals have an incredibly short time to respond to notices of intent, which they will receive before being sent to Rwanda. Given the importance of what is at stake for asylum seekers, it is important that individuals are able to access legal advice in adequate time.
Protecting people’s rights
The Rwandan government has been widely criticised for its failure to comply with its international human rights obligations, including by the British government. This raises serious questions about whether expelled asylum seekers will be safe in Rwanda.
Kigali has also received attention as the Rwandan government has stated that it will no longer accept refugees from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Rwanda’s President Paul Kagame told the upper house of parliament: “We cannot keep hosting refugees – this is not Rwanda’s problem. And we are going to ensure that everybody realises that it is not Rwanda’s problem. I am refusing that Rwanda should carry this burden”.
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees had previously told the court that Rwanda “lacks irreducible minimum components of an accessible, reliable, fair and efficient asylum system” and that the British policy would lead to a serious risk of breaches of the Refugee Convention.
The court of public opinion
A recent YouGov survey found that the majority of the UK public (72%) do not agree with the policy, while 73% of people said they were unhappy that the immigration system was being run in an ‘incompetent’ or ‘chaotic’ manner.
The Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants called the decision to allow an appeal: “Good news for everyone who cares about humanity, dignity and the right to seek sanctuary.”
