- UK’s Rwanda deportation plan rejected.
- Rwanda criticizes UN assessments.
- Supreme Court deems policy illegal.
The Supreme Court ruling, according to a spokesman for the Rwandan government, is founded on “dishonest” and “hypocritical” assessments by the United Nations refugee agency.
The government of Rwanda has criticized the “disappointing” ruling of the highest court in the United Kingdom that deemed an illegal scheme to deport asylum claimants to the African nation.
The United Kingdom encountered a significant setback regarding its Rwanda policy on Wednesday when the Supreme Court rejected the plan.
Rwandan Government’s Response
However, a representative of the Rwandan government refuted the notion that the East African country was perilous for refugees. They maintained that its asylum claim processing was “imperfect.”
The judgment was based on “dishonest” and “hypocritical” assessments, according to UNHCR spokesperson Yolande Makolo, who told.
Concerning the verdict, she responded, “The ultimate determination rests with the judicial system in the United Kingdom.” “This is extremely disappointing, as our nation has an excellent track record of welcoming and hosting migrants and refugees.”
“Don’t miss out! Grab your free shares of Webull UK today!”
She stated that Rwanda maintains its “vigilance” towards the partnership and is “prepared” to accept migrants.
Supreme Court Decision and International Law
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court stated that individuals detained in Rwanda faced an imminent “real risk” of repatriation, irrespective of the legitimacy of their asylum claims. This statement violated international law.
Sky’s Mark Austin probed Ms. Makolo on this, to which she responded that the court had been referring to “hypocritical criticism from the UNHCR” and that this was in reference to the risk of refoulement, which is the forcible return of refugees or asylum seekers to a country where they may face persecution.
She stated that Rwanda had been a UNHCR partner “for quite some time” without having refouled anyone.
Austin subsequently inquired about an additional matter raised by the Supreme Court. The court said the Rwandan Directorate-General of Immigration dismissed 8% of requests without a written justification or appeal.
Ms. Makolo stated that once more, the UNHCR provided examples that were “either untruthful or lack the complete context.”
Additionally, she stated, “We have corrected any deficiencies found since last year.”
The spokesperson stated that she believed the Supreme Court’s decision to be “political” and informed Austin, “Rwanda was not being evaluated. “Rumania is not at fault.”
Notwithstanding the setback, Rishi Sunak, the prime minister of the United Kingdom, has affirmed his commitment to advancing the policy and has proposed that the country introduce legislation designating Rwanda as a “safe” nation.
Seventy percent of parents worry about insufficient child savings
