Government policy Send immigrants to RwandaThe Supreme Court ruled that the asylum claim was legal.
Priti Patel, then home secretary, announced April’s proposals to the east African country. She called it the “world’s first agreement” and hoped to discourage migrants from crossing the canal.
The first deportation flight — it was scheduled to take off on June 14 — has been halted amid a series of protests over individual deportations and the policy as a whole.
The The European Court of Human Rights issued an urgent injunctionJust hours after the UK Supreme Court had rejected his petition, he was able to prevent the trip.
It ruled that no flight would be allowed to leave the UK for Rwanda before three weeks had passed since any internal UK challenges to its legality were resolved.
However, senior judges of the High Court in London rejected arguments claiming that the plans were illegal.
We concluded that it was legal.
Delivering the verdict after a five-day hearing, Lord Justice Lewis said: “The government’s proposal to transfer asylum seekers to Rwanda has been the subject of much public debate.
“The role of the Court is only to ensure that the law is properly understood and observed and that the rights guaranteed by Parliament are respected.
“We have concluded that it is legal for the government to arrange for asylum seekers to be resettled in Rwanda and to process their asylum claims in Rwanda rather than in the UK.
“On the basis of the evidence before this Tribunal, the Government has made arrangements with the Government of Rwanda designed to ensure that asylum claims of persons transferred to Rwanda are duly adjudicated in Rwanda.
“In these circumstances, the transfer of asylum seekers to Rwanda is consistent with the Refugee Convention and other legal obligations on the government including those under the 1998 Human Rights Act.”
8 cases were not properly taken into consideration
It ruled, however, that eight cases involving asylum seekers crossing the Channel in small boats were not properly reviewed by the Home Office. Soella Braverman, the Home secretary, was notified.
“The Home Secretary must properly consider the circumstances of each individual applicant. The Home Secretary must decide whether there is anything to do with each person’s particular circumstances which means their asylum application should be determined in the UK or whether there are reasons why they should Passing it on to him said Lord Justice Lewis.
“The Home Office has not properly considered the circumstances of the eight individual claimants whose cases we have heard. For this reason, decisions in these cases will be overturned and their cases will be referred to the Home Secretary for further consideration.”
After months of uncertainty over its legality, the decision is seen as a major victory for government lawyers. However, the union and two charities that challenged this policy are likely to appeal. This means that flights to Rwanda won’t begin until the Supreme Court hears their case.
This ruling comes after two legal challenges were filed against the government policy.
Source link
[Denial of responsibility! wideworldmag.co.uk is an automatic aggregator of the all world’s media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, all materials to their authors. If you are the owner of the content and do not want us to publish your materials, please contact us by email – at wideworldmag.co.uk The content will be deleted within 24 hours.]
