<
https://theconversation.com/supreme-court-rules-rwanda-plan-unlawful-a-legal-expert-explains-the-judgment-and-what-happens-next-217730>
"The UK supreme court has unanimously ruled that the government’s plan to send
asylum seekers to Rwanda is unlawful.
Upholding an earlier decision by the court of appeal, the supreme court found
that asylum seekers sent to Rwanda may be at risk of refoulement – being sent
back to a country where they may be persecuted, tortured or killed.
The courts cited extensive evidence from the UN refugee agency (UNHCR) that
Rwanda does not respect the principle of non-refoulement – a legal obligation.
The UNHCR’s evidence questioned the ability of Rwandan authorities to fairly
assess asylum claims. It also raised concerns about human rights violations by
Rwandan authorities, including not respecting non-refoulement with other asylum
seekers.
It is important to note that the supreme court’s decision is not a comment on
the political viability of the Rwanda plan, or on the concept of offshoring
asylum processes generally. The ruling focused only on the legal principle of
non-refoulement, and determined that in this respect, Rwanda is not a “safe
third country” to send asylum seekers.
The ruling is another blow to the government’s promise to “stop the boats”. And
since the Rwanda plan is at the heart of its new Illegal Migration Act, the
government will need to reconsider its asylum policies. This is further
complicated by Conservative party infighting and the firing of home secretary
Suella Braverman, just two days before the ruling."
Cheers,
*** Xanni ***
--
mailto:xanni@xanadu.net Andrew Pam
http://xanadu.com.au/ Chief Scientist, Xanadu
https://glasswings.com.au/ Partner, Glass Wings
https://sericyb.com.au/ Manager, Serious Cybernetics
