British parliament takes a tack: deportation of asylum seekers to Rwanda appears to be becoming a reality this summer

TWhile members of the House of Commons and House of Lords played parliamentary ping-pong with the controversial Rwanda law, five boat migrants drowned in the night from Monday to Tuesday near Dunkerque, France. They were on their way to the United Kingdom in apparently calm weather. There they would have run the risk of being forwarded to Rwanda. According to the government, the tragedy proved the necessity of the Rwanda plans, intended to deter potential British sailors. Stopping the boats, as the credo goes. According to critics, it actually emphasized its inhumanity.

“Nothing will stand in our way,” Rishi Sunak proclaimed after the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill was passed. As far as the Prime Minister is concerned, no Labor MP, Scottish nationalist, European judge, British human rights lawyer, Amnesty worker, UN envoy, Antifa activist or veteran of his own Conservative Party will prevent the first plane carrying asylum seekers to the East in July. African country will leave. A one-way ticket for a ton and a half, in hard pounds, per passenger. A flight every month.

The Sunak government will spare no expense. So far the implementation has cost the British taxpayer almost half a billion pounds, a significant sum for three hundred asylum seekers, young men traveling alone from all corners of Asia, Africa and the Balkans. Parliamentarians have discussed it for hundreds of hours, judges have read the files for hundreds of hours. The Rwanda policy is the flagship of the problems and scandal-ridden Sunak government, the only chance to win the parliamentary elections later this year. That’s why it sometimes looks like an election stunt.

Horrible law

The morality, or immorality, disgusted some representatives, especially those on the left. “I will be very disappointed if this bill passes at the end of the night,” said Lord Carlile of Berriew in the House of Lords on Monday, a lawyer and son of immigrants. “I think it’s a horrible law, the worst I’ve seen in parliament in 38 years.” Labor spokesperson Yvette Cooper dismissed it as ‘an excessively expensive gimmick’. Liberal Democrat Tim Farron called the deportation policy “cruel.” The Scottish nationalists even went a step further by accusing the government in London, which they despised, of human trafficking.

But the unelected lords and ladies in the House of Lords could not stop the law, they could only delay and modify it. The bill went back and forth five times – ping-pong in Westminster language – but eventually an amendment was accepted by the government: Afghans who have worked for the British army, for example as interpreters, will not be deported. The government did not intend to do that anyway, and the legal asylum route is open to these Afghans. In the House of Commons, after a marathon debate of eight hours, 312 MPs voted in favor and 237 against. A big victory.

The question now is whether it will be a Pyrrhic victory. Initially, this involves the deportation of three hundred asylum seekers, while approximately 120,000 migrants have arrived via the Channel in the past six years. Sunak therefore also emphasizes the deterrent effect. There is a paradox in this, because Rwanda is portrayed as a beautiful and safe country on the rise, something that the highest judges thought differently. The British will send lawyers to monitor asylum procedures and Rwanda will not send asylum seekers to other countries. Kigali may only send asylum seekers back to the United Kingdom.

Selection of asylum seekers

The initial intention was to start flights this spring, but before the parliamentary debate Sunak had said it would be July, which gives him extra preparation time. The British Immigration Service immediately started selecting asylum seekers to be deported. They will be taken to an army base, where 2,200 shelters have been set up. Despite large backlogs in the justice system, 25 courtrooms have been set up where 150 immigration judges will handle objection procedures. No fewer than 500 counselors will escort the asylum seekers to Rwanda.

Despite the legal and logistical hurdles, the government is convinced that the Rwanda policy will actually be implemented. Two years ago, a chartered plane with a handful of asylum seekers was on the runway at Boscombe Down. Then a European judge ruled, during an evening service, that British judges must first pass judgment on the legality of the policy. To avoid such a late surprise, the British government has now laid down in law that the sovereignty of the British Parliament takes precedence over that of the judges in Strasbourg.