Eight asylum-seekers, aid groups and a border officials' union filed lawsuits to stop the Conservative government acting on a deportation agreement with Rwanda that is intended to deter migrants from trying to reach the U.K. on risky journeys across the English Channel.
The judges said the policy did not breach Britain's obligations under the UN Refugee Convention or other international agreements. But they added that the government "must decide if there is anything about each person's particular circumstances" which meant they should not be sent to Rwanda, and had failed to do that for the eight claimants in the case.
Rwandan government spokeswoman Yolande Makolo said the court ruling was "a positive step in our quest to contribute innovative, long-term solutions to the global migration crisis." Paul O'Connor of the Public and Commercial Services Union, which represents border workers, called the government's policy "morally reprehensible."
Human rights groups say it is immoral and inhumane to send people more than 4,000 miles to a country they don't want to live in. They also cite Rwanda's poor human rights record, including allegations of torture and killings of government opponents. The U.K. receives fewer asylum-seekers than many European nations, including Germany, France and Italy, but thousands of migrants from around the world travel to northern France each year in hopes of crossing the Channel, and the number has grown rapidly in the past few years.
Send them all back
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: CP24 - 🏆 30. / 67 Read more »
Source: globeandmail - 🏆 5. / 92 Read more »
Source: TheTorontoSun - 🏆 23. / 68 Read more »