Lawyers for the Interior Ministry, who are due to respond later, are expected to say plans to evacuate migrants to Rwanda “pursue an important public interest”.
They say the removal is intended to stop people from making dangerous small boat trips to the UK to seek asylum.
They say their removal is legal under rules that consider asylum inadmissible if they have made dangerous and unnecessary trips from a safe third country such as France.
About 130 migrants who have entered the UK are currently in custody, ready for flights starting next Tuesday, although at least 90 individuals have filed legal complaints about their removal.
The migrants, who are to be sent to Rwanda, are likely to be released into the community and may be marked by fears that they will try to flee if the government loses the battle for orders on Friday.
“Serious concerns about access to fair procedures”
The UNHCR document submitted to the court states that there are “serious concerns that asylum seekers transferred from the United Kingdom to Rwanda will not have access to fair and effective refugee status determination procedures, with subsequent risks of return. “.
Refoulement is the legal term for the forced return of refugees to a country where they are persecuted.
He warns that the asylum system in Rwanda, where migrants are expected to seek asylum, is “nascent” as it has largely dealt with refugees from neighboring countries such as Burundi.
According to UNHCR, there is a serious risk that the burden of processing asylum applications from newcomers from the United Kingdom could further overwhelm the capacity of Rwanda’s national asylum system, thus undermining its ability to protect all applicants. asylum, “he said.
UNHCR concluded: “The agreement between the United Kingdom and Rwanda does not meet the required standards regarding the legality and appropriateness of bilateral or multilateral transfers of asylum seekers.
This agreement, which, among other concerns, seeks to transfer responsibility and lacks the necessary guarantees, is incompatible with the letter and spirit of the 1951 Convention.
“According to UNHCR, the agreement between the United Kingdom and Rwanda cannot be brought into line with international legal obligations through minor adjustments.
“The serious concerns outlined in this analysis require urgent and appropriate consideration by the governments of the United Kingdom and Rwanda in accordance with their obligations under well-established and binding rules of international refugee law.”
Add Comment