Ask Onix
UK avoids financial penalty in Rwanda asylum dispute
The UK will not owe Rwanda millions of pounds following the cancellation of a controversial asylum agreement, an international tribunal has determined. The Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague ruled against Rwanda's claim for over £100 million in damages, concluding the UK did not breach the deal's terms when the scheme was scrapped.
Background of the Rwanda asylum plan
The agreement, brokered by the Conservative government, proposed relocating asylum seekers who arrived illegally in the UK to Rwanda for processing. If granted refugee status, they would remain in Rwanda. The policy, introduced by former Prime Minister Rishi Sunak in 2022, aimed to deter illegal Channel crossings but faced immediate legal challenges.
A planned deportation flight in 2022 was halted by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), sparking prolonged litigation. Despite these setbacks, the UK government persisted with the policy until Labour's election victory in 2024, when Prime Minister Keir Starmer declared the scheme "dead and buried."
Legal arguments and tribunal's decision
During a three-day hearing in the Netherlands, UK lawyers argued that Labour's decision to abandon the plan was a logical consequence of its election manifesto. They maintained that no further payments were owed, as the agreement's termination aligned with the change in government. The UK also denied breaching any contractual obligations.
"Rwanda is not entitled to any of the forms of relief it seeks,"
UK legal team at the Permanent Court of Arbitration
Rwanda's justice minister, Emmanuel Ugirashebuja, countered that the UK failed to notify Rwanda before scrapping the deal, leaving officials to learn of the decision through media reports. He described the UK's actions as a breach of legal obligations, citing "significant costs" Rwanda incurred in preparing for the partnership.
Rwanda's response and dissenting opinion
A Rwandan government spokesperson stated the country respected the tribunal's ruling but noted a dissenting opinion by Professor Mohamed Abdel Wahab. The dissent suggested the case presented complex legal questions, including whether the UK's November 2024 communications validly altered financial arrangements between the two nations.
UK government and opposition react
A UK government spokesperson welcomed the ruling, emphasizing the administration's focus on "restoring order and control" to the country's borders. The statement highlighted plans to remove incentives for illegal migration and increase deportations of those without legal status.
Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp, however, criticized Labour's decision to cancel the Rwanda plan, arguing it had led to record numbers of Channel crossings and asylum claims. He reiterated that the UK should not be subject to international courts' jurisdiction over sovereign parliamentary decisions.
Criticism from refugee advocates
Imran Hussain, director of external affairs at the Refugee Council, condemned the Rwanda scheme as chaotic, citing delays in asylum decisions and prolonged uncertainty for applicants. He advocated for a "fair and functioning asylum system" capable of swiftly determining who qualifies for protection and who must be returned.
Aftermath of the scheme
Following the policy's cancellation, the UK introduced a voluntary removals program in 2024, offering migrants whose claims were rejected up to £3,000 to relocate to Rwanda. Only four individuals accepted the offer before the program was discontinued.
