The High Court has ruled that the government’s plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda is lawful, following an appeal by campaigners, charities and migrants. A summary of the ruling stated:
“We have concluded that it is lawful for the government to make arrangements for relocating asylum seekers to Rwanda and for their asylum claims to be determined in Rwanda rather than the UK”.
However, the ruling included an important caveat that could potentially render the policy if not moot then more challenging for the government to operate. The justices added that the home secretary “must consider fully the circumstance of each individual claimant.”
That is a potentially critical judgement, because it raises questions not about the morality of the policy but whether it is capable of working as envisaged, with asylum seekers sent quickly to Rwanda should they arrive in Britain by illegal means. Today’s ruling likely makes that far more difficult – by increasing the amount of time, legal restrictions and cost for each removal.
Of course, the plan was never about sending large numbers of people to Rwanda. The country lacks the capacity to handle any significant figures. This is about deterrence, predicated on the idea that anyone could be deported, and relatively swiftly.
So today’s High Court ruling represents a victory for the government, but it is far from clear where this ends up. One thing that is certain however is that the legal wrangling will go on. As our Courts Correspondent Tristan Kirk notes, it is expected today’s ruling will be challenged in the Court of Appeal, with a Supreme Court battle also possible, blocking flights until next year at the earliest.
Ultimately, if the government’s priority were to be preventing illegal immigration and putting the people smugglers out of business, it could make it easier for people to apply for asylum from overseas by creating more legal and safe routes. Then there would be less need for people to risk their lives on small boats.
But without a hard cap, this would likely have the effect of generating many more applications. There is so much in our immigration debate that is simply left unsaid, and by all sides.
In the comment pages, Stephen King explains what the strikes are really about – who should take the hit for sky-high inflation. Plus world cup finals – aren’t they usually bad games? Not this one – Dan Kilpatrick sends his last piece from Doha.
And finally, 10 of London’s top chefs share their tips for a perfect Christmas lunch. But to cover all bases, check out the best restaurants open on December 25. Just in case.
