The UK Supreme Court has deemed sending vulnerable asylum seekers to a country with a poor human rights record, thousands of miles away unlawful.
The judgement makes interesting reading however I found some of the reasoning behind the judgement quite disturbing…
The reasoning and evidence
Rwanda has a poor human rights record. In 2021, the UK government criticised Rwanda for “extrajudicial killings, deaths in custody, enforced disappearances and torture”. UK government officials have also raised concerns about constraints on media and political freedom.
UNHCR’s evidence is that there are serious and systematic defects in Rwanda’s procedures and institutions for processing asylum claims. In summary, these include:
(i) Concerns about the asylum process itself, such as the lack of legal representation, the risk that judges and lawyers will not act independently of the government in politically sensitive cases, and a completely untested right of appeal to the High Court,
(ii) The surprisingly high rate of rejection of asylum claims from certain countries in known conflict zones from which asylum seekers removed from the UK may well emanate,
(iii) Rwanda’s practice of refoulement, which has continued since the MEDP was concluded, and (iv) the apparent inadequacy of the Rwandan government’s understanding of the requirements of the Refugee Convention.
Rwanda has recently failed to comply with an explicit undertaking to comply with the non-refoulement principle given to Israel in an agreement for the removal of asylum seekers from Israel to Rwanda which operated between 2013 and 2018.
Surely the government must have known all this…surely.
Yet, despite knowledge of the inherent danger that Rwanda poses for vulnerable people, the government still spent over one hundred million pounds of the taxpayer money to send asylum seekers there.
It appears to me the British Government has a hatred of Asylum Seekers and a desire to make them a scapegoat for the ills besetting the populace.
Can’t buy a house?
Can’t get a school place?
How about that doctor’s appointment?
It’s those asylum seekers, nothing to do with 13 years of austerity, incompetence and cronyism, no… asylum seekers, its them.
Immediate government reaction
Clarke-Smith was quick out of the blocks, designating the Supreme Court as ‘enemies of the people’.
An incredibly stupid and dangerous statement that could put a target on the back of the judiciary.
Hot on his heels came Lee Anderson who just wants to ignore the law and start sending Asylum Seekers to Rwanda anyway.
Wow! Just wow!
Simon Clarke raced to the television studio and looked like he was on the verge of tears when railing against the judgement.
At least we can rely on the Prime Minister to respect the UK’s highest Court…yeah right.
Sunak railed about not letting foreign courts rule us.
I am certain that the UK Supreme Court is a UK institution, there is, after all, a clue in the title.
All entirely predictable.
I am old enough to remember that one of the major reasons for Brexit was for UK courts to decide legality or otherwise, but only if the court agrees with this Conservative Government it seems.
What comes next
Sunak is currently drafting legislation to designate Rwanda as a ‘safe’ country.
Look again at the reasons and evidence behind the Supreme Courts’ (unanimous) judgement.
“Extrajudicial killings, deaths in custody, enforced disappearances and torture.”
This ‘self-designated’ compassionate and caring Conservative Party believes that legislation can be put forward to allow them to deport asylum seekers anywhere they wish to.
Evidence and facts apparently don’t matter anymore.
This is more in line with a dictatorship or a despotic regime rather than a democratic country.
If they get away with this, what will they set their sights on next?
They are already going down an authoritarian path…trying to ban strikes, protests etc.
Does this government adhere to the British Values that we keep hearing about with regard to migrants and asylum seekers?
Democracy
A culture built upon freedom and equality, where everyone is aware of their rights and responsibilities.
That’s a failure, Robert Jenrick banned a charity from attending an asylum centre as they were giving advice on making claims and appeals if initially rejected.
The rule of law
The need for rules to make a happy, safe, and secure environment to live and work.
That’s a failure, Lee Anderson wants to ignore the law and has been defended by the PM.
Individual liberty
Protection of your rights and the rights of others around you.
That’s a failure, try protesting against deportation of asylum seekers
Mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs
Understanding that we all don’t share the same beliefs and values. Respecting those values, ideas and beliefs of others whilst not imposing our own onto them.
That’s a failure also, how many Ministers and MPs complain about other people’s values and beliefs not matching their own.
When Braverman, Jenrick, Rees-Mogg etc talk about ‘British Values’ you need to understand they apply to me, you, and asylum seekers, but definitely not them!
I believe 100% that you can take the treatment of migrants and asylum seekers as an example of how Sunak et al will treat other vulnerable sections of society if they think they can get away with it.
