Asylum Procedure: London wants to bring refugees to Rwanda

Again and again, refugees arrive in Great Britain by boat through the English Channel. Now the country wants to deport illegal immigrants to Rwanda so they can wait there for a decision to seek asylum. The idea has met with harsh criticism.

The British government wants to bring some asylum seekers to Rwanda in Africa in the future, where they will have to wait for a decision to seek asylum. An agreement was reached between the two countries. Male immigrants in particular are said to be flown to the East African country after arriving in the UK illegally.

Stop the kidnappers doing business

Simon Hart, Secretary of State for Wales, said the arrangement would cost Britain about 120m (€ 144m). The aim is to break the business model of the kidnappers.

The East African country announced a multi-million pound deal with London. “Rwanda welcomes this partnership with the United Kingdom to obtain asylum seekers and immigrants and provide them with legal avenues of residency in Africa,” said Foreign Minister Vincent Britta.

According to Rwanda, immigrants should be “integrated into communities across the country.” They can “if they decide to settle permanently in Rwanda”.

Navy to prevent illegal entry

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has made it clear that the British navy must prevent future entry into the country illegally through the English Channel. “We need to make sure the only way to get asylum in the UK is safe and legal,” he said. Anyone trying to “avoid the queue or misuse our systems” should be taken to a third country or country of origin “quickly and humanely”.

Preventing illegal immigration is one of Johnson’s key campaign promises. He promised that after Brexit, Great Britain would once again freely determine its borders and settlements. During his tenure, however, the number of refugees attempting to cross the English Channel was at an all-time high.

“Impossible and inhumane”

While the government in London is talking about an “economic development partnership”, the plan has met with harsh criticism from opposition politicians and refugee aid organizations. They called the plan “unworkable and inhumane.” There were also warnings about what the Navy called a pushback, i.e. the rejection of boats that could not go to sea in the open sea.

Steve Waltz-Symonds, the UK refugee director of Amnesty International, called it a “shocking misconception”. This will create more misery and at the same time waste large sums of taxpayers’ money. Rwanda’s poor human rights record makes the idea even worse.

Enver Solomon, chairman of the UK-based Refugee Council, spoke of a “terrible and bad decision” and predicted it would not deter traffickers. Labor called Johnson’s plans “unenforceable, unethical and threatening.”

Denmark with similar plans

Denmark announced similar plans last summer. The law, passed in June, calls for asylum seekers to be taken to a reception center outside the EU after registering in person at the Danish border. There are only a few exceptions to this, for example in the case of serious diseases.

At the time, the plans met with criticism from the UN refugee agency UNHCR and the European Union. The Danish government has signed a declaration of intent to cooperate with Rwanda in the field of asylum and migration.