Gathering to protest the UK's plan to send irregular migrants to Rwanda (Anatolia Agency)
Discussions of the illegal immigration law in Britain, which includes the deportation of asylum seekers to Rwanda, continue between those who reject and are enthusiastic about the project and those who are conservative and fear its repercussions and the effects that it could have, especially with regard to the project’s conflict with the British laws that it has been calling for and keen to implement.
In April 2023, the British government announced its intention to send asylum seekers to Rwanda, where the Rwandan government would decide on their asylum applications there, which sparked a storm of criticism, rejection, and disapproval, and the marathon of legalization and legislation began in order to pass it and implement what the British government considered to serve the taxpayers.
The project was presented for reading on January 29 and was subjected to severe criticism, but the government still believes that the project must find approval and enter into force, even though it was met with a storm of criticism and rejection because it conflicts with a number of international and local charters and laws.
Beginning of the story
The story of the search for solutions to the issue of immigrants and asylum seekers in Britain began when, on April 27, 2023, Parliament approved a new draft law on nationality and borders, which aims primarily to review immigration and citizenship laws, and it was approved by a majority of 212 votes to 157 votes.
The first goal of the new project will be to prevent anyone who does not hold a visa from entering the United Kingdom, which, according to this legislation, allows for the possibility of immediate deportation without the need for a long wait before the courts.
The new legislation also allows the government to strip people of citizenship without their knowledge, if the government believes they are eligible to obtain it elsewhere.
Rules for dealing with immigrants
The British writer interested in refugee issues, Bernard Andonian, says that the new British law enacts strict and harsh new rules against immigrants and refugees.
British researcher interested in refugee issues, Bernard Andonian, explains the most important provisions of the new British law and the strict rules against immigrants:
Implementing a new, stricter system to increase the level of difficulties for people trying to enter the country illegally.
Using advanced technologies such as facial recognition to identify people trying to enter Britain without a valid passport or visa.
Tightening checks for those entering the country legally, making them more stringent.
Increase the number of detention centers used to detain illegal immigrants.
Accelerating the process of their deportation to a third country by expediting the decision on refugee files, especially those related to the judiciary.
Introducing stricter laws on employers who employ illegal immigrants, with penalties of up to imprisonment and heavy fines.
The law also allows the authorities to get rid of the numbers that remain stuck in the courts waiting for their files to be decided.
Motives for the new law
The British Home Office says that the number of immigrants arriving there has been steadily increasing in recent years, and it has high doubts that most of them may not be forced to seek asylum or meet the specifications of asylum laws.
She adds that the number of migrants via small boats to Britain reached 45,700 in 2022, an increase of 60% from what was 28,500 in 2021, while expectations were that the number of migrants in 2023 would reach 65,000.
When talking about the costs of immigrants and refugees, the British Home Office says that this costs the state approximately 3 billion pounds sterling annually, and about 6 million pounds daily.
The number of hotels rented to immigrants is 398, and the number of their residents is 56,42 immigrants, with the total number of asylum seekers in Britain reaching 74,751 people.
Procedures and measures
Until the legal aspects of the anti-immigration project adopted by the British government are finalized, its officials, led by the Prime Minister and the Ministry of the Interior, have embarked on specific measures:
First: immigration detention:
It was decided to detain migrants until their deportation is arranged, make use of old military bases as detention sites, use former prisons or use houseboats to accommodate thousands of asylum seekers.
But the British Refugee Council Association says that due to the lack of sufficient places to accommodate more than 190,000 people, the campaign requires a cost of up to 9 billion pounds sterling.
To implement the theory of immigration detention, the Ministry of the Interior rented a barge in the Port of Portland to house hundreds of asylum seekers, in order to reduce pressure on the asylum system in the Kingdom, and reduce costs, and according to a statement by Immigration Minister Robert Jenrick, who said: “We will not prioritize the interests of immigrants except... "Legitimists at the expense of the British people whom we were elected to serve."
Second: Deportation to Rwanda:
Rwanda was one of the options that the British authorities turned to as a refuge for refugees who refuse to grant them asylum in accordance with the new legislation.
The Rwanda project was presented to Parliament and is still in the stage of readings and discussions, and was subjected to severe criticism. However, the first attempts at deportation took place in June 2023, but after the refusal of the deportees, their lawyers, and a number of voluntary organizations working in the field of refugees, the deportation was temporarily stopped.
Third: Dealing with appeals:
Measures include ending time-consuming court appeals, which migrants use as a tactic to delay deportation.
Fourth: Detention powers:
The bill strengthens long-term detention powers so that migrants and refugees can only receive court bail after 28 days, giving the government a chance to deport before a ruling is decided.
Echoes and positions of the law
The law faced strong opposition as it went against a feature to which the UK had been committed throughout its history, and was contrary to human rights, as Home Office officials acknowledged after the initial court ruling on the legality of the new government plans, but the targeted migrants and an organization sympathetic to them filed complaints against the government measure.
Civil society organizations
Before the final reading of the SAFE Rwanda (Asylum and Migration) draft, more than 265 civil society organizations and other entities across the United Kingdom, including State Watch, issued a statement calling on Parliament to reject the draft resolution.
These organizations advanced a number of reasons that they believe the project establishes, including undermining the protection of human rights, encroaching on the role of the judiciary and the rule of law, in addition to conflict with the European Court of Human Rights, and finally undermining the international system for protecting refugees and international law.
UNHCR
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees accused Rishi Sunak's government of abolishing the right to seek protection, and expressed serious concern about the illegal immigration bill introduced by the UK government, which it said amounts to an asylum ban.
The Commission believes that the law deprives refugees of the right to protection and their opportunities to present their cases, which, according to the Commission, constitutes a clear violation of the 1951 Refugee Convention, and would undermine the ancient humanitarian tradition of which the British people are proud.
UNHCR believes that those fleeing war and persecution cannot obtain passports and visas and therefore there are no safe and legal routes for them to follow, and denying them asylum on this basis undermines the purpose for which the Refugee Convention was established.
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has accused the UK government of wrongly classifying refugees and victims of human trafficking as criminals who may in this way be at risk of violations of their international obligations and the rule of law.
The association adds that the Kingdom's new direction raises many concerns with its strong insistence on introducing fundamental amendments to the interpretation of international law and human rights law.
She stressed that the new British project confuses immigrants, refugees and criminals, which deprives the most vulnerable groups of their humanity.
She explained that by implementing the new legislation, the Kingdom finds itself in contradiction with 5 different relevant European agreements.
Supreme Court decision
Last November 15, the Supreme Court in the United Kingdom ruled that the government’s plans to deport refugees to Rwanda were invalid and illegal, saying that they were illegal.
The justification for the ruling stated that the judges believe that Rwanda cannot be considered safe to send asylum seekers to because there is a risk that they will be returned to the countries from which they fled.
Despite all the reservations and fears about the repercussions of the proposed project, Rishi Sunak’s government insists on passing the project despite the moral and political costs that it could inflict on the United Kingdom, and their slogan is, “We will not give priority to the interests of illegal immigrants at the expense of the British people whom we were elected to serve.”
Source: Al Jazeera