Rishi Sunak’s flagship immigration policy faces a crunch moment on Wednesday, when the supreme court will decide whether it is lawful to remove people seeking asylum to Rwanda.
Five justices of the supreme court will issue a decision on the government’s plan to deport 10 asylum seekers, the central plank of the Conservative party’s immigration policies under the governments of Boris Johnson, Liz Truss and Sunak.
A decision in favour of the government could result in asylum seekers being hauled on to planes and sent 4,000 miles to east Africa – a policy that Sunak believes will be popular among core voters of the party.
The ruling comes at a moment of jeopardy for Sunak, who is facing a revolt from “red wall” MPs after the sacking of Suella Braverman as home secretary.
If the government loses, it will lead to demands from dozens of Tory MPs that the government place leaving the European convention on human rights at the heart of the party’s manifesto in the next general election.
A meeting of hard-right Tory MPs will be held to consider the judgment on Wednesday at 10.30am. If it goes against the government, the meeting is expected to back calls to leave the convention.
In an explosive letter on Tuesday, Braverman accused the prime minister of breaking an agreement to insert clauses into UK law that would have “blocked off” legal challenges to the Rwanda scheme using the convention and the Human Rights Act.
She said he has no “credible plan B” and warned: “If we lose in the supreme court, an outcome that I have consistently argued we must be prepared for, you will have wasted a year and an act of parliament, only to arrive back at square one.”
She also said that if the government wins, the judgment will still be open to legal challenges.
Should the government triumph, Home Office sources say no flights will take off before February in what is being described within the department as a “soft launch”.
The applicants are expected to consider whether the judgment leaves scope for taking the case to the European court of human rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg and could request another interim injunction to halt flights to Rwanda until the case has been fully considered by Strasbourg.
If the government loses, ministers are expected to explore other options including a new deal with Rwanda addressing the supreme court judgment and any deficiencies in the Rwandan system.
They could elevate the existing deal to treaty status with parliamentary approval, making it harder for the courts to intervene.
Another option is to expand the list of countries under the Illegal Migration Act whose nationals’ claims are automatically inadmissible and can be sent back quickly.
Enver Solomon, the chief executive of the Refugee Council, said: “We are already seeing a rise in distress, anxiety and wider mental health issues as a consequence of concerns among those we work with that they could be sent to Rwanda.
“Instead of outsourcing our international commitment to provide safe haven to those fleeing for their lives – including people from Afghanistan and Sudan – we should be focusing on operating an orderly, humane and fair asylum system.”
