The government has once again hit failure in its plan to stop illegal Channel crossings. Supreme Court judges this morning unanimously backed a judgement that the ‘Rwanda Plan’ is unlawful.
The scheme was supposed to see people arriving in the UK illegally deported to the African nation where their asylum claims would be assessed. It cost the government £120 million (€138 million) and also tied it to housing some of Rwanda’s vulnerable asylum seekers.
It has caused little other than embarrassment for ministers since its inception, with the very first flight in June 2022 cancelled due to legal action.
Judges today said that the plan could see asylum seekers sent to Rwanda then returned to their own country where they could face persecution. Delivering the verdict, Lord Reed said:
The legal test which has to be applied in this case is whether there are substantial grounds for believing that asylum seekers sent to Rwanda would be at real risk of refoul[e]ment. In the light of the evidence which I have summaries [summaried], the Court of Appeal concluded that there were such grounds. We are unanimously of the view that they were entitled to reach that conclusion. Indeed, having been taken through the evidence ourselves, we agree with their conclusion.
He added that there was no doubt the government was acting in “good faith,” but that there was a “real risk” attached to its policy.
The ruling comes after former Home Secretary Suella Braverman wrote a stinging letter suggesting that her former boss, Rishi Sunak, has no “plan B” for if the Supreme Court gives the verdict that it has.
Sunak will now face questions on the ruling at this afternoon’s session of Prime Minister’s Questions.
