British PM Sunak’s Plan to Send Asylum Seekers to Rwanda Gains International Attention

• 

  Fleur Launspach

  UK and Ireland journalist

If the British Parliament approves, the United Kingdom could send asylum seekers to Rwanda. Asylum seekers and migrants who enter the UK illegally – often on rubber boats across the Channel – can then be sent away on a one-way ticket to Kigali. The British plan is being followed with interest from other European countries that are also struggling to welcome asylum.

It remains to be seen whether the law will pass today, as the two houses of parliament do not agree on several details.

This legislation was announced two years ago under Boris Johnson and has already cost over £100 million, but so far no one has been sent to Rwanda. In 2021, a plane carrying selected asylum seekers was stopped at the last minute on the runway by a European judge. Since then, Rwanda’s policy has been plagued by a series of legal problems.

In November, the highest courts in the UK ruled that it is possible to send asylum seekers and migrants to other places, but that the designated place must be safe. Rwanda was called “not safe” by the judges: there was a risk that the migrants would be returned illegally to their country of origin. In addition, there were concerns about the asylum process in the African country.

Prime Minister Sunak then decided to make additional agreements with the Rwandan government to ease the judges’ concerns. Legal experts and staff from the British Immigration Service were sent to Rwanda to set up the procedures.

Sunak led legislation through the Houses of Commons and Lords, effectively declaring Rwanda a safe country and enabling ministers to, in effect, ignore international treaties and the Human Rights Act. That legislation is now in the final stages of a ping-pong between the House of Commons and the House of Lords.

For Sunak, it is vital that a plane carrying asylum seekers to Africa leaves as soon as possible. His Conservative Party faces a historic defeat in the elections later this year. He hopes to restore their popularity and fulfill his big promise to “stop the boats” with these policies.

The focus on illegal immigration is somewhat skewed: the number of people arriving in the UK illegally by boat is around 40,000 a year – out of proportion to the estimated 1.2 million immigrants who enter the country legally.

The reasoning behind Rwanda’s exports is that they would have a deterrent effect and disrupt the revenue model of human smugglers. The aim is to discourage people from paying thousands of euros to smugglers and crossing the Channel in rickety boats – at the risk of ending up not in the UK, but in Rwanda. However, there is little evidence that the measure has a real deterrent effect.

The rest of Europe is watching with great interest the United Kingdom’s efforts to accommodate asylum seekers in Rwanda. Politicians in the Netherlands, Austria, Italy and Germany are also showing interest in maintaining asylum procedures elsewhere from now on. Denmark has even enacted a law to extend the asylum procedure to Rwanda, although this has not yet been implemented.

If the British Parliament passes the law now, it will mark an important moment, symbolizing the way in which countries are trying to change the asylum system. For a long time it was thought that the plan would fail in court. But after the vote, the king could ratify the legislation within days. After that, it may take several weeks before the first flight departs.

It remains to be seen whether sending migrants to Rwanda deters asylum seekers and migrants who want to come to the UK. The question remains whether this will make a difference to voters in the coming battle between Labor and the Tories. If Labor wins the election, there is a good chance that the export program to Rwanda will be stopped immediately.