By Aysu Bicer
LONDON (AA) - As the UK's general election draws near, uncertainty is growing about the government’s already controversial Rwanda deportation policy.
The outcome of the polls could either solidify the policy or lead to its dismantlement, making the vote pivotal for the future of the UK's approach to asylum seekers.
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has affirmed that no flights will depart for Rwanda before the July 4 general election, but he has vowed that if re-elected, the first transfers would occur in July.
The government introduced the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill in December last year, aimed at clarifying in domestic law that Rwanda is a safe country for deporting asylum seekers.
The legislation, which followed a Supreme Court ruling that deemed the scheme unlawful, mandates courts to disregard key sections of the Human Rights Act and other relevant British and international laws, including the Refugee Convention, that would otherwise obstruct deportations to Rwanda.
The bill's passage came after intense political debates and has been met with strong opposition from various quarters.
Opposition parties and numerous charities representing asylum seekers have fiercely criticized the bill. Despite this, the bill was finally approved, compelling the judiciary to align with the government's stance on the matter.
In conjunction with the legislative changes, the UK government has signed a new migration treaty with Rwanda.
Home Secretary James Cleverly gave assurances that the treaty includes guarantees preventing anyone sent to Rwanda from being returned to their home country, thereby addressing concerns about the safety of deportees.
However, the approval of the Rwanda Bill has not marked the end of the legal battles. Illegal Migration Minister Michael Tomlinson acknowledged the anticipation of further legal challenges following the bill's enactment.
Sunak said that 25 courtrooms and 150 judges are on standby to handle any legal cases that arise.
Additionally, 500 trained individuals are ready to escort illegal migrants to Rwanda, with another 300 in training.
The FDA union representing senior civil servants has announced its intention to launch a legal challenge, expressing concerns that officials could be forced to break the law while implementing the scheme.
Similarly, the charity Asylum Aid has notified the Home Office of its plans to contest the bill in court, arguing that the new rules for officials undermine crucial safeguards for refugees.
Adding to the government's challenges, Belfast’s High Court has ruled that significant parts of the UK's Illegal Migration Act should not apply in Northern Ireland.
The court found that these provisions violate human rights laws and the Windsor Framework, a post-Brexit legal agreement adopted in 2023 between the European Union and the UK which adjusts the operation of the Northern Ireland Protocol.
- Legal challenges and implementation hurdles
The UK Home Office has lost track of numerous asylum seekers eligible for removal to Rwanda, according to Peter William Walsh, a senior researcher from the Migration Observatory at Oxford University.
This outcome is not unexpected, given the government's stringent policy threatening deportation to Rwanda, which has driven many to abscond and go underground, he said.
"And again, that's no surprise if you're threatening individuals with removal to Rwanda. We don't have the capacity to detain them all. Those that have not been detained, many of them have absconded, and that's where the current news is right now."
The discourse surrounding asylum in the UK has become increasingly harsh, backed by restrictive legislative changes.
These amendments effectively close the asylum system to those arriving without authorization, a move the United Nations has described as an "asylum ban."
According to the 1951 UN Refugee Convention, people are allowed to arrive irregularly without documents, but the UK government has legislated that such individuals should not be granted residence even if their asylum claims are successful.
"The government's view, and it's backed this up with legislation, is that none of those people should be given residence in the UK by virtue of a successful asylum claim. So it's a really restrictive set of amendments to policy, and that's what we're seeing here," Walsh said.
The government has been tight-lipped about how many people will actually be sent to Rwanda.
Estimates suggest that potentially up to 90,000 people could be eligible for removal this year, a number that will likely increase as more people arrive by small boats. Realistically, it is inconceivable that all these people will be deported anytime soon.
"The big question is, what will happen to those who are not sent to Rwanda?" Walsh said. "Under the current legislative framework, they're not able to be given legal status in the UK, so they could be living in the UK, in government accommodation with government asylum support indefinitely without legal status. It's what NGOs have referred to as the perma-backlog. It's really a limbo state for the individuals who are in this position. It's not good for them. And also it's considerably expensive for the government."
Further complicating the issue, the government has been making threats about its continued membership in the Council of Europe and its subjection to the European Court of Human Rights.
A potential collision course with the Strasbourg-based court looms, where individuals could challenge their removal to Rwanda. In 2022, an injunction from the court halted the first scheduled flight to Rwanda.
"There's something in government legislation in the Illegal Migration Act passed last year that says the government can ignore these injunctions, these interim measures," Walsh noted.
"But we would expect the Strasbourg Court to take a different view. In fact, it stated that no countries that are part of the Council of Europe and subjected to this court can ignore those injunctions."
- Labour would cancel Rwanda policy
Labour, the main opposition party, has announced that it would cancel the Rwanda deportation policy if it wins the election.
However, in December 2023, Labour explored the possibility of processing asylum claims overseas, allowing successful applicants to live in the UK. They also aim to negotiate a returns deal with the EU.
Labour plans to redirect funds currently allocated to the Rwanda scheme toward enforcement activities. The party has proposed establishing a new “Border Security Command” to prosecute gangs operating small boat routes and enhancing security cooperation with the EU.
Additionally, Labour intends to empower police to search individuals suspected of people smuggling and grant new powers to monitor their financial accounts.
With Labour promising to scrap the Rwanda policy and introduce new measures, the outcome of the election could lead to a significant shift in the UK’s asylum strategy.
As the election draws near, the uncertainty surrounding the Rwanda deportation policy underscores the broader debate over how the UK handles asylum seekers and border security.