According to London, 130 asylum seekers were notified their possible departure to Rwanda. The UN and human rights associations denounce an “illegal” policy.
Le Monde with AFP
a few days before the first scheduled departures, British justice authorized, Friday, June 10, the controversial project of the government to send asylum seekers to Rwanda, rejecting the recourse of human rights associations.
The judge of the High Court of London, Jonathan Swift, who examined the case in emergency, estimated “important, in the public interest, that the Minister of the Interior could implement decisions to control immigration “.
The complainants, including the Care4Calais associations and Action detention, appealed, who will be heard on Monday on the eve of a first flight carrying around thirty asylum seekers to the Eastern African Country, Grand Dam of the United Nations (UN) and associations of refugee assistance, which denounce an “illegal” policy. On Monday, the High Court must also hear another recourse, brought by the association of assistance to refugees asylum aid.
associations denounce a “neocolonial program”
Sonya Sceats, Director General of the Freedom from Torture association, said she was “disappointed”, but stressed that the fight was “far from being finished”, promising to use “all the means available” for May it be abandoned what it considers as a “neocolonial program”. This highly criticized project was also denounced on Friday by the Labor Opposition as an attempt at “diversion” in the face of political scandals weakening the Prime Minister, Boris Johnson.
By sending asylum seekers more than 6,000 kilometers from London, which recalls the policy pursued by Australia, the conservative government intends to dissuade clandestine crossings from the English Channel, which is more numerous. Since the beginning of the year, more than 10,000 migrants have illegally crossed the Channel to reach the British coast on small boats, a considerable increase compared to previous years.
During the hearing, the UN strongly condemned this strategy, by the voice of his lawyer. Representing the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), M e Laura Dubinsky said that the UN agency worried about the risk of “serious and irreparable damage” caused to refugees sent to Rwanda, and did not approve “in any case the Anglo-Rwandan arrangement”. “The UNHCR is not involved in the arrangement between the United Kingdom and Rwanda, despite the contrary assertions of the Minister of State,” she said, accusing the government of lies.
According to London, thirty-two asylum seekers sent next week
According to the Care4Calais organization, some Sudanese thirty-five, eighteen Syrians, fourteen Iranians, eleven Egyptians, but also nine Afghans having fled the Taliban, are among the more than 130 asylum seekers who have been notified Their possible departure. According to British government lawyer, Mathew Gullick, thirty-two migrants must be sent to Rwanda next week, and other flights should follow in the next months.
Rwanda, led by Paul Kagame since the end of the 1994 genocide, which left 800,000 dead, according to the UN, is regularly accused by NGOs of repressing freedom of expression, critics and opposition Politics. Friday, twenty-three NGOs called on the leaders of the Commonwealth to put pressure on Rwanda, which will welcome from June 20 a meeting of the organization, so that this country releases criticism of power and allows greater freedom of Expression.
However, the British Ministry of the Interior says it is “determined” to implement its project, hammering that it is “fully in line with international and national law”. For Mr. Johnson’s spokesperson, this plan is “the right approach, in particular to fight against the criminal gangs which exploit migrants on the French coasts and force them to climb in boats unfit for navigation to perform an incredibly crossing dangerous towards the United Kingdom “.
The government has suggested that asylum seekers could settle permanently in Rwanda. The manager of the Hope Hostel, in Kigali, who is preparing to welcome them, stressed that his establishment “is not a prison”, but a hotel from which residents will be “free” to go out.