On March 4th, British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak encountered his initial setbacks in implementing legislation aimed at sending asylum seekers to Rwanda. The upper house of parliament insisted on the inclusion of enhanced protections before deportation flights could proceed. As outlined in the Rwanda plan, a measure yet to be executed, individuals arriving on England's southern coast via small inflatable boats would be relocated to Rwanda. However, the execution of this plan has been stalled due to persistent legal challenges, and as of now, no deportations have taken place (Macaskill, 2024). The issue raises concerns with regard to injustice, inequality and diversity of the asylum seekers who are to be deported.
Background
Deportation of refugees in the UK is not new. Back in 2006, the then Prime Minister Tony Blair, celebrated his government's success in significantly increasing the number of deportations of rejected asylum seekers on the ground that it sought to uphold the integrity of the system and offer protection to legitimate refugees (Gibney, 2008). In April 2022, a bilateral agreement ' commonly referred to as the 'Rwanda Plan,' was inked between the UK and Rwanda, allowing for the deportation of asylum seekers from Britain to Rwanda. However, the UK Supreme Court deemed this plan illegal on the basis that it would violate both British and international human rights laws and agreements (Collyer and Shahani, 2023). In response to this judicial setback, the Prime Minister initiated a new treaty with Rwanda and introduced fresh legislation known as the 'Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill.' The primary objective of this legislation was to overcome any legal impediments and officially designate Rwanda as a safe destination for deported individuals. Under the provisions of this scheme, once refugees are sent to Rwanda, they will undergo processing within Rwanda's legal system and will not have the option to return to the UK (Collyer and Shahani, 2023).
What injustices and inequalities arise from the Rwanda Plan?
First and foremost, Britain is a signatory of the Refugee Convention which provides that asylum seekers have a right to apply for asylum in the signatory countries without being penalized (United Nations, 2009). This is because these people are already vulnerable as it is. Majority of them are running away from traumas of persecution, war and other injustices. So why should they be punished for seeking asylum? The rationale behind the U.K. government's policy is to dismantle the operational structure of criminal organizations involved in transporting migrants through dangerous routes across one of the world’s busiest maritime passages (Associated Press, 2023).
Tragically, these dangerous journeys have already claimed lives, such as that of a seven-year-old girl who lost her life over the weekend while attempting to reach Britain when the small boat she was on capsized off the coast of France (Macaskill, 2024). However, human rights activists have argued that this plan is inhumane and unjust. Transporting these people to a new location that they had not planned to go to poses a significant threat to their mental health and overall well-being, potentially resulting in severe and enduring long-term effects. These human right activists also point to Rwanda's questionable human rights record, which includes accusations of engaging in torture and the alleged execution of government opponents (Hassan, 2023). Further, reports from the World Food Program (WFP) indicate that East Africa is already a host of over 5 million refugees. This is a very large number considering that funding to the region is usually strained. Due to the strain in funds, approximately 70% of the refugees there do not receive enough food rations (Bullen and Bartram, 2024). According to Silver (2023), UK is a leading global economy, thus it is at a better position to protect and cater for these refugees. So why should they ship them off to an already struggling place where they might not even get enough food?
How is Diversity an issue in this plan?
Deportation, as largely understood by many refers to the compelled removal of non-citizen individuals from a state's territory. One thing that has been overlooked by many is how deportation is linked with the issue of diversity (Lauro, 2020). Examining the perspectives presented by activists opposing deportation from the late 1970s to the mid-1990s, it became evident that they contended that deportation amounted to the implementation of biased immigration controls. Among the measures they highlighted were restrictions on visas for specific countries, specific immigration policies and the imposition of carrier sanctions, all of which restricted the movement of racialized populations.
In a recent study by Steele and Abdelaaty (2018), it was revealed that ethnic diversity was associated with less support for refugees. The demographic data available from the UK Home Office indicates that a significant proportion of individuals subjected to deportation have historically belonged to people of color, primarily originating from Iran(16%), Afghanistan (55%), Syrai, Iraq (15%) and Albania (Doebler, 2022). Notably, the destinations for deportation consist of countries with predominantly non-white populations and historical ties to colonialism. Can it be that the UK move to deport refugees is linked to the issue of diversity?
In conclusion, the UK grapples with accusations of inhumanity and potential violations of human rights there is a need to re-evaluate this measure to ensure that it does not lead to any form of injustice or inequality.
References
Academic sources
Collyer, M. and Shahani, U. (2023). Offshoring Refugees: Colonial Echoes of the UK-Rwanda Migration and Economic Development Partnership. Social sciences, [online] 12(8), pp.451–451. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12080451.
Gibney, M.J. (2008). Asylum and the Expansion of Deportation in the United Kingdom. Government and Opposition, 43(2), pp.146–167. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-7053.2007.00249.x.
Steele, L.G. and Abdelaaty, L. (2018). Ethnic diversity and attitudes towards refugees. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 45(11), pp.1833–1856. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2018.1513785.
Non-academic sources
Associated Press (2023). UK Appeals Court Rules That Plan To Send Asylum Seekers to Rwanda Is Unlawful. [online] Voice of America. Available at: https://www.voanews.com/a/uk-court-rules-plan-to-relocate-asylum-seekers-to-rwanda-is-unlawful-/7159748.html [Accessed 5 Mar. 2024].
Bullen, P. and Bartram, N. (2024). Rwanda Plan explained: Why the UK Government should rethink the scheme | International Rescue Committee (IRC). [online] www.rescue.org. Available at:https://www.rescue.org/uk/article/rwanda-plan-explained-why-uk-government-should-rethink-scheme.
Doebler, S. (2022). The UK’s ‘hostile environment’ has moved into a new phase of state violence but public resistance to it is growing. [online] EURAC Research. Available at: https://www.eurac.edu/en/blogs/mobile-people-and-diverse-societies/the-uk-s-hostile-environment.
Hassan, T. (2023). The UK’s Convenient Silence on Rwanda | Human Rights Watch. [online] Human Rights Watch. Available at: https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/07/06/uks-convenient-silence-rwanda.
Lauro, D. (2020). Rethinking the Controversies of Deportation. [online] Rethinking Refuge. Available at: https://www.rethinkingrefuge.org/articles/rethinking-the-controversies-of-deportation-discrimination-mobility-and-the.
Macaskill, A. (2024). UK plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda suffers first parliamentary defeats. [online] Reuters. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-plan-deport-asylum-seekers-rwanda-suffers-first-parliamentary-defeats-2024-03-04/ [Accessed 5 Mar. 2024].
Silver, C. (2023). The Top 25 Economies in the World. [online] Investopedia. Available at: https://www.investopedia.com/insights/worlds-top-economies/.
United Nations (2009). UNTC. [online] Un.org. Available at: https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetailsII.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=V-2&chapter=5&Temp=mtdsg2&clang=_en.
Comments