[ad_1]
LONDON (AP) — Britain’s top court is due to rule Wednesday on whether the government plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda is legal, providing a boost or a blow to a controversial central policy of Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s administration.
Five UK Supreme Court judges will rule on the Conservative government’s attempt to overturn a lower court ruling that blocked evictions.
The government said it had prepared “options for possible scenarios” – a victory, a defeat or a mixed verdict.
The saga began when Britain and Rwanda signed an agreement in April 2022 to send some migrants arriving in the UK as stowaways or on small boats across the Channel to the East African country, where their asylum claims would be processed. People granted asylum would stay in Rwanda rather than return to the UK
The British government says the policy will deter people from risking their lives crossing one of the world’s busiest shipping lanes and break the business model of smuggling gangs.
Opposition politicians, refugee groups and human rights organizations say the plan is unethical and unworkable.
No one was sent to Rwanda because this project was debated in court. The first deportation flight was stopped at the last minute in June 2022, following the intervention of the European Court of Human Rights.
In December, the High Court in London ruled that Rwanda’s plan was legalbut that the government must take into account the individual circumstances of each case before putting anyone on a plane.
Court of Appeal in June, supported a protest launched by asylum seekers from countries including Syria, Vietnam and Iran. The court ruled that the project was illegal because Rwanda is not a “safe third country” and there is a risk that migrants sent there will be sent back to the country of origin they fled .
The decision was challenged in the Supreme Court by the government, which said at a hearing last month that it had carefully assessed the risks and would ensure that the Rwandan government respected its agreement to protect rights. migrants.
Wednesday’s ruling will mark the end of the road through the British courts, but the losing side can appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. The prospect of further legal action means evictions are unlikely to begin for weeks or even months, even if the government wins on Wednesday.
Much of Europe and the United States is wondering how best to manage migrants seeking refuge from war, violence, oppression and global warming which has caused devastating droughts and floods.
The UK receives fewer asylum seekers than many European countries, including Germany, France and Italy. Thousands of migrants from around the world travel to northern France every year in the hope of crossing the Channel. Sunak pledged to “stop the boats”.
More than 27,300 migrants have crossed the Channel this year, which is expected to be lower than the 46,000 who made the journey in 2022. The government says this shows its tough approach is working, although others cite factors such as weather.
Rwanda’s policy was defended by the former Minister of the Interior, Suella Bravermanwas fired by Sunak Monday because of a series of intemperate statements that deviated from the government line. In the weeks before her dismissal, she described migrants as a “hurricane” heading towards Britain, called homelessness a “life choice” and accused police of being too lenient on pro-Palestinian demonstrators.
Braverman called on the UK to leave the European Convention on Human Rights and its tribunal if the Rwandan plan was blocked. His departure makes that less likely.
A court ruling against the government will be a test for new Home Secretary James Cleverly on his third day in office.
The British government says it plans to conclude similar deportation deals with other countries if the Rwandan plan succeeds. He says several other European countries are considering similar ideas, with the European Union study the creation of processing centers at the bloc’s borders to screen people upon arrival.
Italy recently reached an agreement with Albania for the Balkan country to temporarily accommodate and welcome some of the thousands of migrants who reach Italian shores.
However, unlike the British plan, the journey would not be one-way. Successful asylum seekers could start a new life in Italy and not in Albania.
Source: job
[ad_2]
Source link