The government’s controversial Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill has passed into law amid a storm of criticism
The Act provides that asylum seekers who arrive in the UK will be detained and deported to Rwanda for processing.
Criticism has focused on the Rwanda scheme’s potential breach of international law, impact on human rights, high cost, likely ineffectiveness as a deterrent, and impact on the deployment of judges.
Michael O’Flaherty, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, said this week the scheme raised ‘major issues’ about human rights and the rule of law, highlighting that it ‘prevents individuals from having any meaningful recourse to UK courts in relation to the key question of refoulement… [and] requires decision makers to regard Rwanda as “safe” for removal, regardless of the specific facts on the ground’.
He urged the UK government to ‘reverse the Bill’s effective infringement of judicial independence’.
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said deportations could begin in ten to 12 weeks, and that 200 trained caseworkers are ready to process claims quickly. He added: ‘The judiciary have made available 25 courtrooms and identified 150 judges who could provide over 5,000 sitting days.’
The Home Office will pay £370m to Rwanda for the scheme, plus £20,000 per person plus up to £150,874 per person for processing costs and a further £120m once 300 people have been deported, according to the National Audit Office, in its March report ‘Investigation into the costs of the UK-Rwanda partnership’.
Law Society vice president Richard Atkinson said: ‘It remains a defective, constitutionally improper piece of legislation. It is extremely disappointing that the sensible amendments made by peers to remove some of the Bill’s worse excesses have been ignored. ‘This Bill is a backward step for the rule of law and the UK’s constitutional balance, and it limits access to justice.’
