The intervention of the European Court of Human Rights in the government’s Rwanda asylum plan was a rare success, as Neil Parpworth explains
- The legal basis for the decision of the European Court of Human Rights to prevent the UK government’s removal of asylum seekers to Rwanda under the interim measures mechanism contained within rule 39 of its rules of court.
Unsurprisingly, the UK government’s Rwanda asylum plan which was announced in April has attracted considerable media attention, and has resulted in legal challenges before the courts. At the time of writing, a judicial review of the plan is to be heard sometime in July. Prior to this, however, lawyers acting on behalf of those affected sought interim relief to stay their removal on a charter flight to Rwanda pending the hearing of the substantive claim. At first instance, Swift J refused to grant the relief sought. An appeal against his decision was dismissed by the Court of Appeal, and a panel of three Justices of the Supreme Court (Lords
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=e3c4b2f1_1)
