Supreme Court declares Rwanda's asylum policy illegal

The UK's highest court has ruled that the asylum policy regarding Rwanda is illegal. The government wanted to deport asylum seekers to east Africa and prevent them from returning in order to discourage illegal small boat crossings. However, the Supreme Court found that there is a possibility the Rwandan government could send these individuals back to the country they fled initially. This means that the policy violates human rights laws by potentially exposing these people to harm. The court's decision comes after the Court of Appeal declared the policy unlawful in June. The case is based on the principle of "non-refoulement," which states that individuals seeking asylum should not be sent back to their home country if doing so would put them in danger, as established by both UK and international human rights law. The ten claimants in this case argued that the government overlooked clear evidence that Rwanda's asylum system is unfair and arbitrary. The Supreme Court justices unanimously agreed with the Court of Appeal, stating that there had not been a proper evaluation of Rwanda's safety. The ruling does not prohibit sending migrants to another country, but it undermines the £140 million Rwanda scheme, and it is uncertain if other countries would be willing to form a similar agreement with the UK. The Supreme Court judges stated that there are substantial concerns that people deported to Rwanda could be sent to unsafe places by the Rwandan government. Additionally, the court expressed doubt in Rwanda's ability to fulfill its assurances and address the deficiencies in its asylum system in the short term.