Credit: Getty
Politics
A high court challenge against the government’s Rwanda policy is officially underway
By Lauren Geall
3 years ago
1 min read
A group of asylum seekers and organisations are taking the Home Office to court over its plans to deport some people who cross the Channel seeking asylum to north Africa.
On the same day that Liz Truss was named the UK’s next prime minister, the government is facing a court battle over its plans to send asylum seekers to Rwanda.
The five-day hearing – which kicked off this morning – is the result of a challenge by a group of asylum seekers and organisations including Care4Calais.
They argue that the Home Office wrongly concluded that Rwanda is a “safe third country” and that sending asylum seekers there puts their right to freedom from inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) at “real risk” of being breached.
Speaking in court earlier today, Raza Husain QC, who is representing a collection of asylum seekers in the case, described Rwanda as a “one-party authoritarian state” which is home to “extreme levels of surveillance” and “does not tolerate political opposition”.
He also argued that Rwanda’s government tolerates political oppression, punishes those who speak out and lacks the interpreters and immigration lawyers necessary to deal with asylum claims.
“These issues are significant because an asylum system which doesn’t understand what individuals are telling you doesn’t ensure individuals have legal help to make their case,” he said.
“[If it] can’t take decisions according to properly resourced processes and a proper understanding of the law, it will get decisions wrong. It will wrongly deny asylum seekers their rights.”
Credit: Getty
The Home Office will be defending its choice of Rwanda – which a spokesperson for the department previously described as a “fundamentally safe and secure country” – with lawyers for the defence arguing that the policy is “lawful” with “no risk of harm”.
“All the individual claimants who have received [removal directions] for removal to Rwanda have been preapproved by Rwanda for the purposes of processing their asylum claims,” argued Lord Pannick QC, who is leading the Home Office’s counsel team.
“There is no risk of them being refused entry. Even if they are not granted refugee status in Rwanda, there is no risk of their being removed from Rwanda to their country of origin. Rwanda does not conduct forcible removals to the countries of which these claimants are nationals.”
The case comes after the first Rwanda deportation flight – which was due to take off on 14 June – was grounded by a dramatic 11th-hour ruling by the European Court of Human Rights.
At the time, Home Secretary Priti Patel – who spearheaded the scheme – said she was “disappointed” by the legal challenge, but said the Home Office would “not be deterred from doing the right thing and delivering our plans to control our nation’s borders”.
The hearing continues.
Images: Getty
Sign up for the latest news and must-read features from Stylist, so you don’t miss out on the conversation.
By signing up you agree to occasionally receive offers and promotions from Stylist. Newsletters may contain online ads and content funded by carefully selected partners. Don’t worry, we’ll never share or sell your data. You can opt-out at any time. For more information read Stylist’s Privacy Policy
Thank you!
You’re now subscribed to all our newsletters. You can manage your subscriptions at any time from an email or from a MyStylist account.