Five asylum seekers fighting their deportation from the UK to Rwanda will not be sent to the African country, the Home Office has said.
The news came as part of submissions by Home Office lawyers to the High Court on Friday as a bid began to block a deportation flight to the African country under the government’s controversial new asylum seeker removal policy.
Five people due to be deported next week have now had their removal directions cancelled.
Two campaign groups – Detention Action and Care4Calais – joined the PCS Union and four individual asylum seekers bringing legal action against the Home Office after it announced the first group of people would be sent to Rwanda on Tuesday.
Lawyers for almost 100 additional migrants have submitted legal challenges asking to stay in the UK.
Downing Street has said Boris Johnson is still hopeful that the first flight will go ahead next week. The court was also told that a second flight may be scheduled for Thursday.
A No 10 spokesman said: “Yes. You’re aware of the ongoing court case today but we’ve set out our position on why we think this is the right approach.”
Rwanda deportation: First migrants to be sent to east African country in a fortnight, says Home Office
Migrant crossings: Asylum seeker who fled war says he would rather die than be sent to Rwanda
‘I will kill myself’ before I’m sent to Rwanda, says Channel migrant
Those taking the action had asked that if the decision did go in their favour, the flight should be halted completely – meaning the ruling did not just apply to the asylum seekers they are representing.
‘It’s not safe’
In the first stage of legal action, brought today, Raza Husain QC told the High Court: “The system is not safe. It is not that it is not safe after July, it is just not safe.
“You may be arbitrarily denied access to it. If you do get into it, there are concerns about the impartiality of the decision-making.”
He continued: “The evidence is that if you are not from a neighbouring country, then there are high levels of rejection.”
Mr Husain said this included asylum seekers from Syria, who are largely accepted by the UK system.
“The procedure is simply unsafe,” he said.
Home Office asks court to reject legal challenge
In court documents, Home Office lawyers urged the court to reject the application, arguing it “fails at the first stage”, adding: “The claimants have not identified a serious issue to be tried, still less the strong case they allege for the grant of relief at trial.”
The High Court was told that the UN refugee agency, the UNHCR, had a number of concerns about the asylum process in Rwanda, including discriminatory access to asylum – including for LGBT people – a lack of legal representation and interpreters, and difficulties in appealing.
The High Court is due to hear a further challenge to the policy on Monday, brought by refugee charity Asylum Aid and supported by fellow campaign group Freedom From Torture.
Care4Calais says it was aware of around nine Afghans; 35 Sudanese; 18 Syrians; 14 Iranians; 11 Egyptians as well as Iraqi, Pakistani, Albanian, Algerian, Chadian, Eritrean, Turkish and Vietnamese people who were told they could be put on the first flight.
‘Cruel’ and ‘inhumane’
The scheme, which the government said would provide “safe and legal” routes for migrants has been described as “inhumane” and “cruel” by human rights organisations.
Under the plans, those illegally seeking refuge in the country would be placed on chartered flights to Rwanda where they would enter the Rwandan asylum system and not be considered for return to the UK.
It comes as the latest figures show more than 10,000 migrants have crossed the Channel to the UK so far this year.
We’ll be answering any questions you may have about this, and the UK’s immigration policy tonight at 7pm, on Sky News – Freeview Channel 233. You can send your questions to [email protected]
Follow the Daily podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, Spreaker
James Wilson, deputy director of Detention Action, said: “In her desire to punish people for seeking asylum by forcing them on to a plane to Rwanda, Priti Patel has overstepped her authority.
“By rushing through what we say is an unlawful policy, she is turning a blind eye to the many clear dangers and human rights violations that it would inflict on people seeking asylum.
“It’s vital that new government policies respect and uphold the laws that we all, as a society, have agreed to follow. That’s why we’re seeking an injunction to keep this plane to Rwanda from leaving the runway.”
Home Office defends ‘world-leading partnership’
A Home Office spokeswoman previously said: “We have been clear from the start that we expected legal challenges, however we are determined to deliver this new partnership.
“We have now issued formal directions to the first group of people due to be relocated to Rwanda later this month. This marks a critical step towards operationalising the policy, which fully complies with international and national law.”
