In April, the government announced its Rwanda policy, under which those asylum seekers who crossed the English Channel by small boat would be transferred to Rwanda to have their claims assessed.
Rishi Sunak has consistently declined to state if the United Kingdom would have to withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to implement his government’s intention to remove illegally arriving asylum seekers.
Joanna Cheery of the SNP questioned the prime minister, in his first appearance before the Commons Liaison Committee, if the United Kingdom would have to deviate from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to implement his measures to reduce immigration.
“You will see the legislation next year, and we will have the chance to debate it then,” he said. “But I won’t speculate on that now.”
Mr. Sunak expressed his satisfaction with the High Court’s verdict on Monday that the government’s policy of expelling asylum applicants to Rwanda is legal.
He informed members of parliament that he believes the initiatives will assist address the issue of tiny boats crossing the Channel.
However, the Prime Minister refused to comment on whether the Rwanda policy would necessitate revisions to the Human Rights Act or the UK’s commitment to the ECHR.
Home Secretary Suella Braverman and Justice Secretary Dominic Raab have both stated that the government may have to contemplate withdrawing from the ECHR to implement its plans properly.
“We anticipate additional legal challenges. As necessary, we will continue to pursue this,” he stated.
“I believe the Rwanda plan is an essential component of our strategy to combat illicit migration and stop small boats. It is not the only component, but it is an essential component. That is why I applaud yesterday’s court judgment.
“In the new year, we will present legislation that will accomplish the objective I outlined.” I am convinced that we will be able to execute this plan, which will make a difference and lower the number of arriving vessels.”
Lord Justice Lewis stated in his judgment on Monday that the contentious policy implemented by Boris Johnson was “compatible with the refugee convention.”
However, he stated that the home secretary should consider “individual situations” before deporting people to the central African nation.
The home secretary stated in the Commons following the verdict that the Rwanda policy is a “humane” and “realistic alternative” for those who enter the United Kingdom via “dangerous, illegal, and unnecessary means.”
“Being moved to Rwanda is not a punishment, but rather an innovative approach to redressing the imbalance between illegal and legitimate migration pathways,” she told members of parliament.
In April, the government announced its Rwanda policy, under which those asylum seekers who crossed the English Channel by small boat would be transferred to Rwanda to have their claims assessed.
Ms. Patel stated that it would discourage individuals from undertaking the perilous voyage; however, human rights activists, charities, and political parties denounced the scheme as callous.
The first flight was scheduled to take off in June with four passengers, but it was blocked following several legal challenges and a judgment by the European Court of Human Rights that the plan posed “a serious risk of irreversible injury.”
However, both Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss insisted that the strategy would be implemented when they assumed control of Number 10.
In the meantime, the Prime Minister informed the Commons Liaison Committee that he was determined to eliminate the backlog of 92,000 asylum claims, as of the end of June 2022, by the end of the year.
The present backlog, however, is at 117,000.
“I believe it would be one of the most substantial decreases in the backlog we have ever witnessed. If we can proceed further, I would love to,” he remarked.
