Controversial Rwanda deal expert: 'This means judges are no longer allowed to use the insecurity argument'

Controversial Rwanda deal expert: ‘This means judges are no longer allowed to use the insecurity argument’

Posted On: May 20, 2024

This has been hotly debated in the UK for two years. But what exactly is in the British Rwanda deal?

“The agreement itself begins on 14 April 2022. The UK’s aim is to reduce the influx of migrants crossing the Channel illegally. The agreement states that Rwanda is willing to allow British asylum seekers to come to the country. They then begin asylum procedures and decide the fate of the migrants. The first plane carrying asylum seekers was supposed to take off on June 14 2022, but was stopped by the European Court of Human Rights on the grounds that Rwanda was not a safe country for asylum seekers. This is partly because their asylum system is flawed, but also because Rwanda has violated human rights in the past.

“Yesterday, the British Parliament passed a law establishing that Rwanda is a safe third country for asylum seekers. This means judges are no longer allowed to use the insecurity argument to prevent flights.”

What are the consequences?

“The British really wanted to create a deterrent effect, they wanted to prevent people from crossing the English Channel. The hope was that the UK would arrange flights very quickly: as long as no flights left, there was no deterrent effect. But people will of course continue to try to reach the UK, but mostly under the radar or under the water. In addition, it is expected that there will be many lawsuits against this bill.”

Human rights organizations have previously spoken out against the bill, calling it ‘shameful’. Does this agreement conflict with international law?

“Yes, what happened yesterday was truly unprecedented in Europe. The law passed stipulates that a minister can unilaterally decide to waive interim measures taken by a judge. This is of course disturbing.”

The controversy surrounding the agreement has not subsided, the United Nations (UN) asked the British government to review the bill. Can this still terminate the agreement?

“Not really. This is a difficult thing in the field of international law, no one can enforce anything. There is no court that can enforce rules in cross-border countries. It will be difficult for international organizations to prevent such agreements, it will depend a lot on the legal process in England.”

Hanne Beirens: ”The decreed law provides that a minister can unilaterally decide to ignore actions taken by a judge.’Picture RVs

Does this agreement set a precedent? In other words, will this be the way European countries handle migration?

“Yes, when this agreement was reached it was a real change. Previously, such deals always failed when a third country had to give its consent. Such deals have always been hypothetical, but are now becoming increasingly real. Countries where migration is viewed negatively will certainly consider this model. But there are still big questions about whether the first flight from the UK to Rwanda will take off.”

How will Rwanda benefit from this deal? Are deals there also under pressure?

“The financial support that the UK promised to Rwanda received less exposure in the media, but was also an important part of the agreement. Analysts believe that Rwanda wants to strengthen its position within the Commonwealth. The country also seeks higher status in the African Union in this way. Rwanda showed that it is capable of entering international relations.”