The UK’s controversial plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda hit another legal snag this week as the Court of Appeal rejected a second attempt to halt deportations. Despite the ruling, the policy remains fiercely debated, with human rights groups and opposition lawmakers calling it “inhumane” and a breach of international obligations.
What’s the Rwanda Policy?
Under the five-year deal signed in April, the UK aims to relocate asylum seekers who arrive via unauthorized routes—such as small boats crossing the English Channel—to Rwanda. Single men, who account for over 70% of arrivals this year, would be prioritized. The UK government has committed $150 million to fund housing, healthcare, and job training for relocated individuals in Rwanda.
Why the Backlash?
Critics argue the policy violates refugee protections and risks destabilizing vulnerable people. Over 10,000 migrants have crossed the Channel in 2023 alone, doubling last year’s numbers. While Prime Minister Rishi Sunak claims the plan will deter smugglers, NGOs warn it sets a dangerous precedent for outsourcing humanitarian responsibilities.
What’s Next?
Legal challenges are expected to continue, with activists vowing to escalate the case to the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, the first deportation flight—originally scheduled for June—remains grounded pending further hearings. The outcome could reshape how wealthy nations address migration crises globally.
Reference(s):
UK's Rwanda immigration policy: What is it and why the controversy?
cgtn.com
