Rwanda has accused the United Nations refugee agency (UNHCR) of fabricating allegations after the agency argued in a British court that the UK's plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda could endanger them by potentially sending them to countries where they might face torture or death. This dispute comes amid ongoing legal challenges to the British government's controversial asylum policy, which Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s administration aims to implement if the Conservative Party secures a victory in the upcoming July 4 general election.
The British plan, announced in 2022, aims to deter migrants from making perilous journeys across the English Channel by sending them to Rwanda. However, the initiative has faced numerous legal hurdles, with critics arguing it violates international human rights laws. The UNHCR has been a prominent opponent, asserting that Rwanda’s asylum system is inadequate and poses significant risks to the safety of deported individuals.
On Monday, during a court hearing in the UK, lawyers representing the UNHCR warned that the policy could lead to refoulement—a banned practice where refugees are forcibly returned to countries where they could face persecution. The UNHCR highlighted past evidence that influenced the British Supreme Court’s decision to rule the policy unlawful last year. They argued that asylum seekers sent to Rwanda might not receive the protection they need and could be relocated to other states with poor human rights records.
In response, Rwanda issued a vehement denial, accusing the UNHCR of lying. “UNHCR is lying,” stated the Rwandan government in a statement, accusing the agency of making "a series of wholly unserious allegations" against Kigali. The statement pointed out the paradox of the UNHCR partnering with Rwanda to resettle African migrants from Libya, while simultaneously criticizing its treatment of asylum seekers.
Rwanda’s government clarified that the cases mentioned by the UNHCR in court involved individuals with legal status in other countries who did not meet Rwanda’s entry requirements, as well as people who left Rwanda voluntarily. The government defended its asylum system, stating that it provides adequate protection and opportunities for those seeking refuge.
The British government, led by Prime Minister Sunak, has remained steadfast in its commitment to the deportation scheme, arguing that it is essential to deter illegal immigration. Sunak has promised to move forward with the policy if his party wins the July 4 election. He maintains that the scheme will discourage migrants from risking their lives crossing the Channel from northern France.
However, the plan faces significant opposition from the Labour Party, with leader Keir Starmer pledging to abandon the deportation policy if his party wins the election. Starmer has criticized the plan as inhumane and ineffective, advocating for alternative measures to address the issue of illegal immigration.
The UNHCR reiterated its longstanding concerns about the risks associated with "externalization" of asylum responsibilities. “UNHCR finds that the UK-Rwanda Asylum partnership shifts responsibility for making asylum decisions and for protecting refugees,” the agency said in a statement. They emphasized that their intervention in the British court is part of ongoing efforts to ensure that the rights and safety of refugees are upheld.
The legal battles over the British asylum policy continue, with the latest court hearings adding to the complex and contentious debate. As the July 4 election approaches, the future of the policy remains uncertain, hinging on the political outcomes and further judicial decisions. The international community, particularly human rights advocates, will be closely watching the developments, advocating for the protection and humane treatment of asylum seekers.
