Exile of Refugees: A British Solution
Britain’s Deportation of Migrants to Rwanda is a Legal Principle
Exile of Refugees: A British Solution. The British Parliament has given the green light to the plan to deport illegal migrants to Rwanda. It is believed that the first flight will be in July, but the United Nations warns that this is a dangerous precedent. After months of political struggle, the government’s proposal to deport refugees to Rwanda was accepted and became law, an initiative championed by Rishi Sunak, the British Prime Minister, who has tied his electoral survival to it, considering the expected vote in the fall. It was reviewed and decisively approved by Parliament.
Now, the Conservatives expect the first flight to Kigali to occur by July, but refugee rights associations announce their intention to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. Additionally, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights has asked the British Prime Minister to reconsider this plan.
However, based on the Prime Minister’s statements, it can be concluded that Sunak has no intention of doing so. He said this is a turning point that changes the global migration equation and emphasizes that no court can stop the transfers. The government has announced that it has already chartered planes for transfers in early summer. Approximately 350 places have been reserved for men over 40 who entered Britain illegally after January 1, 2022, and they will be notified five days before the transfer.
Meanwhile, a few hours after the Rwanda plan was approved in Westminster, three men, a woman, and a seven-year-old girl drowned while attempting to cross from Wimereux in southern Calais in the English Channel.
What Does the Rwanda Plan Include?
This plan was launched in 2022 by the then-government of Boris Johnson, but due to unconstitutional aspects confirmed by the High Court, which forced the government to provide a Rwanda safety bill, it never became operational. The plan includes transferring migrants who have illegally entered Britain via the English Channel. Upon arrival in Kigali, the capital of Rwanda, those who apply for asylum are given the opportunity to apply for asylum.
If successful and their asylum request is accepted, they can be granted refugee status and residency in the country. Otherwise, they can settle in Rwanda or apply for asylum in another safe third country, but under no circumstances can they apply to return to Britain.
Currently, according to the BBC, about 52,000 people are under government supervision, including Asian and African migrants as well as Afghan citizens who have reached the other side of the Channel to escape the Taliban. This idea is meant to satisfy everyone, with London feeling less guilty for handing Afghanistan over to the Taliban after twenty years of war and the government of Paul Kagame benefiting from it, hoping that no restrictions or sanctions will be imposed on Rwanda in exchange for welcoming them.
The Cost of Transferring Each Refugee
London has previously paid the equivalent of 290 million euros and will pay an additional 100 million dollars to the Kigali government, which is not well-regarded for respecting human rights, over the next two years. However, according to a survey conducted by the Whitehall cost control body, the total cost of this plan could reach half a billion pounds. A report from the National Audit Office shows that there are millions in additional costs, including 11,000 pounds for each plane ticket, while Rwanda will receive 20,000 pounds for each refugee and 120 million pounds once the number of refugees reaches 300.
The British government responds that the cost of managing this phenomenon internally is much higher. In Britain, there is no structure comparable to reception centers, and as a result, the costs of managing migrants are significantly higher. Due to the lack of a dedicated system for housing migrants, they are temporarily hosted in hotels. According to the British Home Office, the average cost per night for each refugee is 140 pounds, which also includes the cost of essential services. This means that the total cost for each refugee over five years is around 150,000 pounds.
A Threat to the Rule of Law
In fact, in Sunak’s and the British government’s intentions, the threat of deportation should act as a deterrent to prevent illegal entry via the Channel. Although, according to several observers, it is very unlikely that this prospect alone will be enough to dissuade those who knowingly risk their lives in a dangerous passage to reach the shores of Britain.
The British Prime Minister said, ‘I know that now there are some who hear all these decisions and accuse me of lacking compassion, but the truth is the opposite. The truth is that we need innovative solutions to tackle the migration crisis, to dismantle the business model of smuggling gangs, and to save lives.’ Sunak added that he seeks to gain credit as a champion of legislative creativity against the migration phenomenon in the eyes of other leaders who look at this new experience with interest.
However, his plan has faced severe criticism from human rights groups as a violation of international laws. The charity Freedom from Torture, along with Amnesty International and Liberty, called the passage of this law a national disgrace and said it poses a significant threat to the rule of law, describing Parliament as the scene of a crime. Furthermore, for human rights activists, this law is a complete violation of international laws and will expose survivors to torture and other abuses.
Regardless of what foreign courts may say, flights will soon begin, Sunak, the British Prime Minister, reiterated with determination before and after the approval of the Rwanda plan. His government will continue even contrary to the statements of foreign courts, referring to the European Court of Human Rights, which, along with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, had previously opposed the passage of this bill and the legalization of this project.
After World War II, England was one of the main promoters of international conventions and multilateral institutions that have so far shaped the global balance based on them, such as the European Convention on Human Rights of 1950.
The contemptuous attitude of Sunak’s government unfortunately confirms the warning of the latest Amnesty International report. We are witnessing the collapse of an order based on international laws because many countries responsible for the post-war architecture are abandoning the fundamental values of humanity and universality enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.