LONDON (AP) — The British government hopes one last push can revive its stalled plan to send some asylum-seekers on a one-way trip to Rwanda. A bill aimed at overcoming a U.K. Supreme Court block on the deportation flights returns to the House of Commons on Monday, and could be passed into law within days.
That would be a boost for Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, who is facing disquiet from fellow Conservative lawmakers as the party lags in opinion polls ahead of an election due this year.
Lawmakers in the House of Commons are due to consider changes made to the Safety of Rwanda Bill by Parliament’s upper chamber, the House of Lords. The Lords inserted a series of amendments designed to water down the legislation.
All 10 amendments are likely to be removed by lawmakers in the Commons, where the Conservatives have a majority. After a back-and-forth tussle with the upper house, the Commons is almost certain to prevail because the unelected Lords can’t overrule the elected lower house.
Once the bill becomes law, it could be weeks before any flights to Rwanda take off, as people chosen for deportation are likely to lodge legal appeals.
Sunak said Monday that he was sticking to a previous promise that flights would start “in the spring.”
Britain and Rwanda signed a deal almost two years ago that would see migrants who cross the English Channel in small boats sent to the East African country, where they would remain permanently.
The plan is key to Sunak’s pledge to “stop the boats” bringing unauthorized migrants to the U.K. Sunak argues that deporting unauthorized asylum-seekers will deter people from making risky journeys and break the business model of people-smuggling gangs.
Just under 30,000 people arrived in Britain in small boats in 2023, many of them not from the African continent at all.
“We need to make it clear that if you come here illegally, you won’t be able to stay and we will be able to remove you. That is the only way to properly solve the issue of illegal migration,” Sunak told reporters.
The agreement faced multiple legal challenges, and no one has been sent to Rwanda. Britain has promised Rwanda at least 370 million pounds ($470 million) as part of the deal, whose cost is rapidly rising.
In November, the U.K. Supreme Court ruled that the Rwanda plan is illegal because the nation is not a safe destination for asylum-seekers. For decades, human rights groups and governments have documented alleged repression of dissent by Rwanda’s government both inside the country and abroad, as well as serious restrictions on internet freedom, assembly and expression.
In response, Britain and Rwanda signed a treaty pledging to strengthen protections for migrants. Sunak’s Conservative government argues the treaty allows it to pass a law declaring Rwanda a safe destination.
The Safety of Rwanda Bill pronounces the country safe, makes it harder for migrants to challenge deportation and allows the British government to ignore injunctions from the European Court of Human Rights that seek to block removals.
Human rights groups, refugee charities, senior Church of England clerics and many legal experts have criticized the legislation. A parliamentary rights watchdog said last month that the Rwanda plan is “ fundamentally incompatible ” with the U.K.’s human rights obligations.
___
Follow AP’s coverage of migration issues at https://apnews.com/hub/migration
Source: post
