Rishi Sunak's flagship plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda is in tatters after the Supreme Court ruled it is unlawful.
The UK’s highest court ruled on Wednesday that flights will not be able to go ahead in a blow to the prime minister’s key pledge to cut immigration to the UK.
The unanimous ruling by judges agreed with a Court of Appeal decision in June that found that Mr Sunak’s £140m deal was unlawful because of deficiencies in the Rwandan asylum system. The lower court found that sending anyone to Rwanda would be in breach of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) as there was a “real risk” they could be returned to their home countries to face “persecution or other inhumane treatment”.
No courts have found the plan to remove asylum seekers to a third-country unlawful in principle but have rather taken issue with the system in place in Rwanda. This could open up the possibility that the government could re-negotiate the deal with Rwanda in future or seek a similar deal with other countries.
President of the Supreme Court Lord Reed was clear in the judgement that the refugee agency UNHCR, who gave evidence in the case, should be trusted in their assessment that Rwanda was not a safe country for asylum seekers. He also emphasised that withdrawing the UK from the ECHR would not solve the government’s problems as the UK has other legal obligations to protect the rights of refugees.
The ruling of the five judges was a resounding loss for the government, with Lord Reed telling the court: “The evidence shows that there are substantial grounds for believing that there is a real risk that asylum claims will not be determined properly, and that asylum seekers will therefore be at risk of being returned directly or indirectly to their country of origin.”
He said that “the changes and capacity-building needed to eliminate that risk may be delivered in the future”, but that they were not currently in place.
The Rwanda plan is a core part of the prime minister’s pledge to stop small boat crossings, although charities and ministers disagree over whether it will be a significant deterent.
It is also an important part of the Illegal Migration Bill, which would deport all small boat migrants without their asylum claims being considered.
Without the Rwanda agreement, the government has nowhere to deport asylum seekers to. The Rwanda deal was originally signed by Priti Patel in April 2022 as a five-year arrangement.
Under the agreement, the UK has already paid £120m in development funding to Rwanda and £20m to receive the first group of asylum seekers, and will also pay for the processing and integration costs for each person sent there. This will cost an estimated £169,000 per person, according to a government assessment.
Refugee charities hailed the ruling as a “victory for the rights of men, women and children who simply want to be safe”.
The ruling comes just days after Mr Sunak sensationally sacked his home secretary Suella Braverman and replaced her with James Cleverly, the former foreign secretary.
In a scathing letter published on Tuesday night ahead of the court decision, Ms Braverman accused Mr Sunak of betraying his promise to the nation to do “whatever it takes” to stop the boats. She said that Mr Sunak had agreed a deal with her when she was appointed home secretary that would have allowed specific “notwithstanding clauses” into new legislation enabling the government to exclude international law. This would in effect be a way of ignoring the ECHR on certain issues without fully withdrawing from it.
She accused Mr Sunak of rejecting this proposal and failing to prepare a plan B if the government didn’t succeed in the courts. She added that even if the government won in the courts “the government will struggle to deliver our Rwanda partnership in the way the public expects”.
Robert Jenrick said before the judgement that the government’s Rwanda deportation plans would go through with “no ifs, no buts”.
He said: “We must ensure the Rwanda policy succeeds before the next general election. No ifs, no buts, we will do whatever it takes to ensure that happens.”
At Mr Sunak’s new-look cabinet on Tuesday, new home secretary Mr Cleverly outlined the options available to the government in light of the Supreme Court ruling. The prime minister’s official spokesman said that leaving the ECHR was not discussed at the meeting.
Mr Cleverly has in the past said that he did not think leaving the ECHR was necessary to ensure the UK’s tough approach to immigration.
More to follow...
