The British Supreme Court today upheld a lower court ruling that the government's controversial plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda if they arrived illegally on British soil is illegal.
The judges of the Supreme Court thus rejected the appeal of the government of Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and confirmed the conclusions of the appeals court that Rwanda cannot be considered a safe third country, reports Agence France-Presse.
Judges at Britain's highest court ruled that the asylum seekers would be at "real risk" of ill-treatment because they could be returned to their countries of origin once they arrive in Rwanda.
Britain and Rwanda signed an agreement in April 2022 to send some migrants arriving in Britain across the English Channel to Rwanda, where their asylum applications would be processed and, if accepted, they could stay there, AP reports.
The British government believes that a policy with Rwanda would deter people from risking their lives crossing the English Channel and stop gangs of people smugglers. Opposition politicians, refugee support groups and human rights organizations consider the plan unethical and unenforceable.
No one has yet been sent to Rwanda under the plan, as appeals against the plan have followed in the courts.
Reading the judges' unanimous decision, Chief Justice Robert Reid said Rwanda could not be relied on to keep its promise not to ill-treat asylum seekers sent from Britain.
He cited the country's poor performance in respect of human rights, including enforced disappearances and torture, and the practice of "refoulement", or sending migrants back to their countries of origin where they may be in a risky position.
The first deportation flight was stopped at the last moment in June 2022 when the European Court of Human Rights intervened.
DON'T MISS IT
In December last year, the High Court in London ruled that the Rwanda plan was illegal, and that the government must consider the individual circumstances of each case before putting anyone on a plane.
An appeals court in June upheld an appeal by asylum seekers from countries including Syria, Vietnam and Iran. The court ruled that the plan was illegal because Rwanda was not a "safe third country" and there was a risk that migrants sent there would be returned to the country they fled.
The government appealed the decision to the Supreme Court, and argued at a hearing last month that it had fully assessed the risks and to ensure that the Rwandan government adheres to the agreement to protect the rights of migrants.
Former interior minister Suela Braverman, who was dismissed by Sunak on Monday over a series of intemperate statements that deviated from the government's position, advocated for a policy with Rwanda. In the weeks before her sacking, she described migrants as a "hurricane" bearing down on Britain, said living homeless was a "lifestyle choice" and accused police of being too soft on pro-Palestinian protesters.
DON'T MISS IT
She called on Britain to withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights if the plan with Rwanda is blocked.
Bonus video:
