« The UK government’s plan to send migrants to Rwanda is facing a legal challenge. The government says it’s to discourage Channel crossings, but asylum seekers and the UN refugee agency disagree, saying Rwanda isn’t safe.
Footage shows lawyers entering the Supreme Court in London for a three-day hearing regarding the dispute between the British government and asylum seekers scheduled for deportation.
Government lawyers have appealed to the Supreme Court to overturn a prior ruling that deemed sending asylum seekers to East Africa illegal due to safety concerns in Rwanda. Recent laws may lead to most migrants arriving by small boats from France having their asylum claims denied and facing deportation.
In the past, London’s Court of Appeal had determined that sending individuals to Rwanda could potentially lead to their return to their home countries, where they might face harm, thus violating the UK’s Human Rights Act. This ruling is a setback for Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s plans to limit the number of migrants arriving on the southern coast of England.
The government’s lawyer argues that discouraging risky Channel crossings is crucial. However, lawyers for some asylum seekers believe sending people to Rwanda could breach international law because Rwanda is known for mistreating its opponents.
The UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNCHR) also opposes the plan, stating that it’s unsafe to send asylum seekers to Rwanda. Legal teams representing migrants from various countries want the court to declare the scheme illegal due to concerns about mistreatment in Rwanda. »