UK Faces Last-Ditch Court Bid to Halt Rwanda Deportation Flights

Home Secretary Priti Patel’s “conclusion as to the safety of Rwanda was irrational,” said Raza Husain, a lawyer for the asylum seekers. He said the United Nations refugee agency had warned of serious shortcomings in Rwanda’s asylum procedures, saying it would be overstretched with new arrivals from the UK. 

The government announced the plan to fly asylum-seekers who cross the English Channel to the east African nation in April but has not until now attempted to move ahead with the deportations. Human rights groups and opposition parties have condemned the transfer program as “cruel“ and “unworkable, unethical, and extortionate.” The plan is expected to cost the U.K. taxpayer about £120 million ($149 million).

Husain asked Judge Jonathan Swift to order an urgent but temporary ban that would prevent the removal of the individuals to Rwanda ahead of a full court hearing later in the summer. He said if the flight went ahead, it would harm the ability of the asylum seekers to properly challenge the case.  

The government said it has already agreed to cancel the deportations of three individuals. Any blanket ban was entirely unjustified, Mathew Gullick said in a legal filing. The program was “intended to deter people from making dangerous journeys to the UK” particularly by crossing the Channel in small boats.

“We are completely confident that the relocation partnership scheme with Rwanda complies with national and international law and is fundamentally legal,” a Home Office spokesperson said.

The government has been publicly critical of a number of recent judicial reviews, warning of overreach by the courts in matters that ought to be decided by lawmakers. It comes after it lost a key Brexit case when Johnson tried to suspend Parliament.

“This is a legal issue,” Swift said. “I’m going to be applying legal standards, not my own subjective opinions.” 

Husain said the UN High Commissioner for Refugees had highlighted “serious concerns” about the deportation program, which deprived asylum seekers of a fair and efficient system. He said asylum seekers in Rwanda even risked the “arbitrary denial of access” to the system. 

“How can you possibly implement a removal when the UNHCR have said this to you?” Husain asked the judge. 

He argued that the UK had claimed that they had UNHRC approval for the program. “It’s nonsense,” he said. “You need to have an evidence based assessment which shows that these processes are safe.”

Source: Bloomberg Business News