British High Court rules it is illegal to return asylum seekers to Rwanda

Published on: 11/15/2023 – 11:29an average : 11/15/2023 – 12:39

2 minutes

Senior judges therefore rejected the appeal by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s government, ruling that the Court of Appeal was correct in concluding that Rwanda could not be considered a safe third country.

The British Court of Appeal rejected the project last June.

The Supreme Court issued its ruling unanimously.

To justify their decision, the judges rely on Rwanda’s human rights record and treatment of asylum seekers, our correspondent in London reported. Emmeline Finn. According to them, Rwanda does not respect its international obligations, as it 100% rejects asylum requests coming from Syrians, Yemenis or Afghans – who are fleeing conflict areas.

They also criticize the state for sending applicants and even refugees to their countries of origin, a practice that contravenes a UN convention.

This partnership would put asylum seekers at risk and violate UK laws.

This decision represents a severe blow to Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, who must face pressure from his conservative party and part of public opinion on the immigration issue, less than a year before the next legislative elections.

Although he inherited the project from his predecessors, Rishi Sunak made it a pillar of his promise to reduce immigration. The revised government has not yet revealed the details of its formation. Plan B » ; Ministerial sources reject the possibility of exiting the European Convention on Human Rights.

Kigali He disputes ” the decision

After the announcement, Kigali immediately announced: challenge » Legal decision. ” We challenge the decision that Rwanda is not a safe third country for asylum seekers and refugees.This was announced by Rwandan presidential spokesman Yolande Makolo.