The British Supreme Court has handed down a major ruling, ruling that the government’s plan to deport asylum seekers who arrived illegally in the UK to Rwanda is unlawful. The decision dealt a major setback to Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and his policies to combat illegal immigration.
The five senior judges of the Supreme Court unanimously rejected the Interior Ministry’s appeal, confirming the appeal court’s conclusion that the policy is illegal. The Supreme Court emphasized that its decision is based on legal, not political, reasons.
This expulsion plan to Rwanda was announced a year and a half ago, but was never implemented. Last June, the London Court of Appeal had already ruled this project illegal, ruling that Rwanda could not be considered a “safe third country”. The European Court of Human Rights also canceled a first flight to Rwanda.
This decision by the Supreme Court is a hard blow for the British Prime Minister, who had promised to “stop the boats” of migrants arriving on British coasts. Since the start of the year, more than 27,000 migrants have crossed the Channel, beating the previous year’s record.
The UK government responded by announcing its intention to consider next steps, while noting that the Supreme Court has confirmed that the principle of sending illegal migrants to a safe third country is legal.
The Rwandan government, for its part, challenged the Supreme Court’s decision, saying that Rwanda is a safe third country for asylum seekers and refugees.
This decision by the British Supreme Court also raises questions about the effectiveness of government measures aimed at tackling illegal immigration. It marks a new stage in the debate on UK migration policy and leaves uncertainty surrounding the next measures planned by the government.
This news highlights the importance of the role of the Supreme Court in protecting fundamental rights and in monitoring the legality of political decisions. It also shows the complex issues and difficulties that governments face in managing migration flows.
It is essential to find a balance between protecting the rights of asylum seekers and managing the socio-economic and security realities facing host countries. This requires thoughtful political and humanitarian solutions, supported by informed judicial decisions that respect international standards for the protection of human rights.