A Supreme Court justice has rejected an activist bid for a halt to Rwanda’s first deportation flight to Rwanda, which was scheduled to depart on Tuesday with 31 migrants. Despite outrage from human rights groups and opposition lawmakers, up to 130 people have been warned they could be sent to the Central African nation for “asylum processing” as the Home Office plans to schedule more flights this year. Ms Patel welcomed the court’s decision on Friday and insisted she “would not be discouraged” by any further efforts “to prevent their relocation through legal disputes and last minute claims” by activists. “Rwanda is a safe country,” he said. “We will continue preparations for the first flight to Rwanda, along with a number of other measures aimed at reducing crossings by small vessels.” Campaigners said they were “disappointed” and “deeply concerned” about the verdict – but promised to continue fighting Rwanda’s plan. The ruling will not prevent individual refugees from making their own legal objections to deportation. Court documents reveal that the Interior Ministry canceled deportations to Rwanda for five migrants who appealed. Lawyers for nearly 100 immigrants have filed lawsuits seeking to remain in the UK, while the rest are expected to follow suit. The lawsuit was filed by attorneys for Care4Calais and Detention Action and the Public Service and Commercial Services (PCS), who challenged the legal principle of the policy. Rejecting the offer to block the flight, Judge Jonathan Swift said some of the risks faced by deported asylum seekers were small and “in the realm of speculation”. Judge Swift said there was a “material public interest” in allowing the interior minister to enforce immigration rulings. Clare Moseley, founder of Care4Calais, responded: “Today was just the beginning of this legal challenge. “We believe that the next stage of the legal process can put an end to this completely barbaric plan.” Justice Swift allowed the teams to appeal Friday’s verdict, proposing that the Court of Appeals judges hear the case on Monday. The judge also said that a full court hearing to decide the overall legitimacy of the system would take place before the end of July. Detention Action said: “Our appeal will be heard on Monday and our biggest legal case against this policy will be heard in the coming weeks. We thank all those who stand with us. “ Priti Patel and Rwandan Minister Vincent Biruta sign a cooperation agreement (PA) According to the government program, anyone who arrives in Britain on routes deemed illegal from 1 January can relocate to Rwanda. Government lawyer Matthew Galik said there was a “significant public interest” in preventing illegal immigration. However, the court was informed that the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) had a number of concerns about the asylum process in Rwanda, including discrimination against LGBT + persons and lack of legal representation. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) also told the Supreme Court that the Home Office had falsely claimed that its plan for Rwanda had been approved by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Laura Dubinsky QC, representing the agency, said there were “inaccuracies” in the way the agency’s views were described. He said the UN High Commissioner for Refugees had informed the interior minister that it was illegal and added that the body was still concerned about the risk of “serious, irreparable harm” to refugees sent to Rwanda. Shadow Interior Minister Yvette Cooper said the UN agency’s criticism of Rwanda’s plan was “condemnatory”, adding that it was “a warning of the lack of proper treatment for Rwandan refugees”. Sir Keir Starmer called Rwanda’s plan a “chaotic diversion” on Friday and said Labor would form “a proper plan with the French authorities” to tackle human trafficking. Boris Johnson said he welcomed the news from the Supreme Court, writing on Twitter: “We can not allow traffickers to risk their lives and our top cooperation in the world will help break the business model of these rogue criminals.” Enver Soloman, chief executive of the Refugee Council, said the government’s plans to continue despite these legal challenges were “extremely worrying”. He said: “The government’s claims that this agreement would act as a deterrent to end the trafficking model have already been refuted by the number of people traveling across the channel since the announcement was almost doubled at the same time. last year. ”
