Supreme Court rules that government’s asylum policy towards Rwanda is unlawful

The Supreme Court has ruled that Rwanda’s asylum policy is unlawful, in a major blow to Rishi Sunak’s promise to “stop the boats”.

Five judges at Britain’s highest court have unanimously dismissed the government’s appeal against its policy of deporting asylum seekers to the East African country if they arrive there unauthorised.

Forced deportation flights of migrants to Kigali will continue to be grounded following a ruling on the flagship policy, which has been on hold for more than a year due to legal wrangling.

In a summary of the judgment read on Wednesday by Supreme Court President Lord Reed, the judges said there was a risk that genuine asylum seekers would be sent back from Rwanda to the home country they fled.

The flagship asylum policy was first announced by Boris Johnson in April 2020, but not a single migrant has been deported to Kigali after a series of legal challenges – despite the UK paying Kigali £140m.

Mr Sunak will give his verdict on the ruling at Prime Minister’s Questions, after which new Home Secretary James Cleverly will provide further details.

Suella Braverman warned after her sacking as Home Secretary that she had no “credible plan B” if the Supreme Court rejected the government’s appeal.

Lord Reed agreed that the Court of Appeal was entitled to find that there were “substantial” grounds for believing there was a “real risk” of refugees being returned to countries where they could face “ill-treatment”.

However, he clarified that the ruling was based solely on the current failure to “eliminate the risk” in Rwanda and said that changes needed to reduce it “may be implemented in the future.”

Activists welcomed the verdict, with charity Freedom from Torture calling it a “victory for reason and compassion”.

Steve Smith, chief executive of refugee charity Care4Calais, said: “The Supreme Court ruling is a victory for humanity.

“This dirty deal where people get paid cash has always been cruel and immoral, but most importantly, it is illegal.

“Today’s verdict should put an end to this shameful stain on British history.”

Mr Sunak will now face pressure from Ms Braverman and the right-wing Conservative Party to withdraw the UK from the European Convention on Human Rights.

Lord Reed made it clear that this was not the only international treaty relevant to the court’s decision, which also took into account domestic law.

The rulings were made based on evidence of Kigali’s “poor human rights record”, including warnings by British police to Rwandans living in the UK about credible plans by the government to kill them.

Issues were also raised about political and media freedom and the inability of Rwandan courts to operate independently of the government.

Data from UNHCR, the UN refugee agency, shows a 100 percent rejection rate in Rwanda for applications submitted by countries in conflict zones such as Syria, Yemen and Afghanistan.

This is despite the UK authorities often deeming these claims to be “legitimate”.

The body also produced evidence of more than 100 cases of “refoulement” – the process of returning refugees to their countries of origin – that took place after the UK struck a deal with Rwanda.

Natalie Elphicke, Conservative MP for Dover, said an agreement with France was currently the best way to stop small boats from crossing the Channel.

She said the Supreme Court ruling in the Rwanda case “means that this policy has effectively come to an end.”