The UK government will likely not be able to enact its Rwanda Asylum Seekers scheme until July. Despite Monday’s monumental progression of the Rwanda Bill after countless parliamentary exchanges between the House of Commons and the House of Lords, this doesn’t suggest things will run smoothly. Attorneys have vowed to challenge each expulsion in court, and there are lingering doubts regarding the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) acceptance of the law aiming to eliminate its appellate jurisdiction.
Previously, the UK courts had questioned the characterization of Rwanda as a “safe” asylum destination, a definition now enshrined in the new bill. The staunch right-wing Tories’ push for a UK exit from the court and the removal of the court’s legal integration in the UK still remains a possibility. This could have adverse effects on the Belfast Agreement, with its rights clauses secured by the European court.
The Council of Europe’s human rights monitor has criticised the bill, pointing out serious concerns regarding asylum seekers’ rights and the rule of law. The bill’s real capacity to discourage channel crossings into Britain is disputed and following the bill’s approval, five more lives were tragically lost in an attempt to make the journey.
The rocky progress of the bill, primarily aimed at discouraging human trafficking rather than effectively reducing refugee influx, was labelled as a “historic occasion” by Home Secretary James Cleverly. The Tories are likely to portray it as a significant accomplishment with possible elections looming this summer, despite its actual effectiveness being questionable, beyond generating headlines.
The effects of the much-touted legislation, whether through deterrence or a few initial flights to Rwanda, are unlikely to be visible before national voting takes place. The implemented bill points towards a merciless stance from the Conservative government, showing a readiness to overrule its own courts and disregard international law.