On the occasion of a visit of the British Home Secretary Priti Patel to Rwanda, London and Kigali signed a controversial agreement for the reception on Rwandan soil of migrants and asylum seekers of various nationalities brought from the UK. This decision, although an agreement between two states, was opposed by some institutions such as the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)
The United Kingdom announced on Thursday 14 April a controversial plan to send illegally arrived asylum seekers to Rwanda and entrusted the surveillance of the English Channel to the Royal Navy. In this way, they hope to dissuade the ever-increasing number of illegal migrants crossing the border. Indeed, the number of illegal crossings has tripled since 2021 and continues to rise in the kingdom despite Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s promise to control the phenomenon. Speaking at an airport in Kent (south-east England), he said: “From today (…) anyone entering the UK illegally and those who have arrived illegally since 1st January can now be relocated to Rwanda.
Moreover, he adds that Rwanda will be able to host “tens of thousands of people in the years to come”. For him, the East African country is “one of the safest countries in the world, internationally recognised for its record in receiving and integrating migrants”. By sending asylum seekers more than 6,000 km away from the UK, the government hopes to discourage the growing number of would-be asylum seekers from leaving for the UK. 28,500 people in 2021, compared to 8,466 in 2020 and 299 in 2018, according to Home Office figures.
A highly controversial agreement
There have been much criticism from around the world against such an agreement. However, both countries remain adamant about their decision. For the time being, no details are given on the selection criteria for migrants who will be sent to Rwanda. The UN, which strongly opposed the agreement, believes that similar projects in Israel, for example, had not been successful.
Amnesty International in turn criticised the agreement as a “scandalously ill-conceived idea” which it said would “cause suffering while wasting huge amounts of public money”. He also highlighted the African nation’s “dismal human rights record”.
In the same vein, Tim Naor Hilton, Executive Director of Refugee Action, expressed his disapproval, calling the agreement “a cowardly, barbaric and inhumane way to treat people fleeing persecution and war”. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has also expressed strong opposition to the UK plan. “People running from the war, conflict and persecution deserve compassion and empathy. They should not be traded like commodities and transferred abroad to have their cases processed,” UNHCR said in a statement.
Even this Sunday, the spiritual leaders of the Anglican Church took issue with the project. The Archbishop of Canterbury said in his Easter sermon that sending asylum seekers abroad raises “serious ethical questions”.
However, under the agreement announced on Thursday, London will initially fund the scheme to the tune of £120 million (€144 million). The Rwandan government has said that it will offer those who will be hosted the possibility of “settling permanently in Rwanda” if they so wish.
