Asylum seekers in Rwanda are sometimes forced to wait years for a decision, and two-thirds are eventually rejected, according to a report by the Interior Ministry.
As Priti Patel plans to send migrants seeking asylum in Britain 4,000 miles to have their claims processed, a new assessment released by the department highlights shortcomings in Rwanda’s asylum system.
In addition to delays and high rejection rates, the document cites evidence that both LGBTQ + people and people in the Middle East face discrimination in the asylum decision-making process, and these groups are more likely to be rejected.
He cites sources who say that those who have been granted refugee status face barriers to finding work, forcing many refugees to turn to informal work, and some are subsequently pushed into exploitation.
Ms Patel said the UK’s £ 120m deal with Rwanda would enable deportees who have been granted asylum there to “build their lives” in the country and “provide protection for the truly vulnerable”.
The Interior Ministry’s guide to Rwanda’s asylum system, released on Monday, quoted the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) as saying that although asylum decisions in the country take 45 days, this “often does not happen”. as people sometimes wait up to two years.
UNHCR officials assisting asylum seekers and refugees in the country say there was only one staff member in 2020 to assess all asylum cases in Rwanda, citing a lack of capacity and decision-makers who do not always have adequate training.
The report reveals that in 2019, two-thirds of asylum seekers in Rwanda – 62 out of 124 – were denied refugee status. Only 24 of those refused appealed the decision, and two of them overturned the decision.
The document also states that translators are not provided to asylum seekers during their interviews, citing the Rwanda Immigration Directorate, which told the UK government on 22 March 2022 that “applicants can arrange their own translators”. .
UNHCR says the reasons for the refusal of asylum “have not been properly explained, including to asylum seekers”, according to the report.
The organization added: “No additional reasons are provided for the decision, which makes the right to appeal against a negative decision difficult or impossible to exercise in practice.”
In addition to the initial £ 120 million paid to Rwanda under the deal, the Home Office said the UK would provide funding for asylum staff, access to legal advice, translators and a “comprehensive integration package”.
However, a UNHCR spokesman in the United Kingdom told the Independent that he remained “seriously concerned” about the agreement.
“Rwanda does not have the capacity to accept an increased number of refugees and to fairly and effectively identify their claims or provide long-term solutions,” they added.
The country guidelines also cite concerns that LGBTQ + asylum seekers in Rwanda face “challenges” in registering asylum applications.
Interior Minister Priti Patel and Rwanda Minister Vincent Biruta (Flora Thompson / Pennsylvania)
(PA conductor)
It states that UNHCR has expressed concern that “some asylum seekers, especially lesbians, gays, bisexuals, trans and transgender people, have faced challenges in trying to apply for asylum, with applications being rejected orally”.
The report also suggests that the decision-making process may discriminate against asylum seekers from countries not close to Rwanda.
It quotes UNHCR as saying: “There is a tendency to provide asylum to those from neighboring countries; the rejection rate is higher for people in the Middle East and other countries.
“There is an opinion that they have to go to neighboring safe countries – they do not see that there is a need for protection. Sometimes they also don’t see that some refugees can be refugees on the ground. “
In the employment section, the report states that people granted refugee status in Rwanda may continue to face discrimination and potential exploitation when trying to find work in the country.
“Sources noted that there are illegal barriers that prevent refugees from accessing work and self-employment,” the Interior Ministry said in a report.
“Many employers, for example, are not aware of the legality of hiring refugees and are not aware of the ID card of refugees, which leads many refugees to informal employment.
It quotes UNHCR as saying: “When it comes to the general public, unemployment is still high in Rwanda. There is competition between local people and refugees, with a tendency to recruit local people. “
The report also cites the Rwanda Legal Aid Forum, which said: “Refugees are allowed to work but are exploited and not paid the same and find it very difficult to find work. They are often denied contracts. “
Bella Sanki, director of Detention Action, which has launched a legal challenge to the policy, said: “According to the government’s own evidence, Rwanda’s asylum system would be completely incapable of guaranteeing justice and protecting some of the world’s most traumatized people.
Sonia Steats, chief executive of Freedom from Torture, which is also leading the lawsuit, said: “Our concerns about the safety of this brutal scheme for people fleeing torture and war have only increased and we will continue to push for judicial review.
Yolanda Makolo, a spokesman for the Rwandan government, said it was not true that some asylum applications in the country took two years to resolve, saying all applications had been processed within 30 days of the application. .
“Given the additional resources invested in this partnership, we are confident that all will be processed in a timely manner,” he added.
He said that no refugee had been refused on the basis of their sexuality or nationality and that, regardless of whether the asylum seekers’ applications were accepted, they would receive “the same opportunities to live, work and become members of our society”. .
A spokesman for the Home Office said: “As part of the partnership, the United Kingdom is providing an initial investment of £ 120 million to promote Rwanda’s development, including jobs, skills and opportunities for both migrants and host communities.
Add Comment