Unlock the Publisher’s Digest for free
Roula Khalaf, editor of the FT, selects her favorite stories in this weekly newsletter.
Rishi Sunak’s proposed Rwanda asylum bill is “fundamentally incompatible” with the UK’s human rights obligations, a cross-party parliamentary committee has warned, as the legislation is set to be considered by the House of Lords.
In a report underlining the high stakes in the prime minister’s attempt to relocate asylum seekers to Rwanda before the next general election, the Joint Committee on Human Rights said the bill violates the principle of universality of human rights and jeopardizes the UK’s reputation for respecting the rule of law.
“Hostility to human rights is at the heart of the problem and no amount of amendment can save it,” said Joanna Cherry, chair of the Scottish National Party committee, stressing that, among other safeguards, the legislation would remove asylum seekers’ fundamental right to access a court.
The report, published on Monday, found that the bill eroded human rights protection under domestic law, breached the European Convention on Human Rights and failed to meet the UK’s commitments under international treaties.
“It’s not just about the rights and wrongs of Rwanda politics itself,” Cherry said. “By taking this approach, the bill risks unspeakable damage to the UK’s reputation as an international champion of human rights.”
Rwanda’s asylum law was introduced late last year after the Supreme Court ruled that the government’s plan to send asylum seekers to the African country was illegal.
The court found that there was a risk that people transferred to Kigali could be sent back to their countries of origin and be persecuted in violation of international and national law.
In an attempt to save the Kigali agreement, Sunak enacted “emergency” legislation that deemed Rwanda a legally safe country, paving the way for sending migrants there.
But the commission argued that it should be up to the courts, not parliament, to assess whether a new treaty signed with Kigali could “resolve the realities on the ground that led the Supreme Court to conclude that Rwanda is unsafe”.
It also noted that the United Nations Refugee Agency, whose evidence was given significant weight by the Supreme Court, said it had observed no changes in Rwanda’s asylum processes that would overcome its initial concerns.
After passing easily through the House of Commons before Christmas, despite threats from the right and left of the Tory party, the bill will begin line-by-line consideration in the House of Lords from Monday.
The Home Office said the bill, and the related treaty, provide the “best way to get flights to Rwanda underway as soon as possible”. Responding to the JCHR report it states: “Rwanda is clearly a safe country that cares deeply about supporting refugees.”
.