The United Nations has reacted strongly to the passage of a bill in the United Kingdom this week that seeks to deport asylum seekers to the African country of Rwanda, in violation of international legal obligations. Following the passage of the "Safety of Rwanda" Bill by the UK Parliament, two UN leaders reiterated their alarm at the damaging impact it will have on refugee protection, human rights and global responsibility-sharing.
The British House of Lords passed the bill on Monday in a move condemned by the United Nations, human rights groups and human rights experts. The legislation became law on Thursday after receiving royal assent from King Charles III. Royal assent is the approval of the monarch required to make a bill an act of parliament.
Under the bill, asylum seekers would be processed in the African state and would not have the right to return to Britain, even if they were granted refugee status. Meanwhile, Botswana has rejected a proposal to accept asylum seekers from the UK, an arrangement similar to the one Rwanda has agreed to.
The "Rwanda policy" was first introduced two years ago, but the UK Supreme Court ruled it unlawful last year, halting deportations. Following Monday's passage of the bill, the UK is expected to begin deporting asylum seekers to Rwanda, which has a poor human rights record at home and sponsors grave human rights abuses in other countries, by mid-July.
Filippo Grandi, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, and Volker Türk, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, on Tuesday called on the UK government to reconsider its plan to transfer asylum seekers to Rwanda and instead take practical measures to address irregular flows of refugees and migrants, based on international cooperation and respect for international human rights law.
“The new legislation marks a further step away from the UK’s long tradition of providing refuge to those in need, in breach of the Refugee Convention,” Grandi said in a statement.
“Protecting refugees requires all countries – not just those neighboring crisis zones – to uphold their obligations. This arrangement seeks to shift responsibility for refugee protection, undermining international cooperation and setting a worrying global precedent.”
People fleeing violence and persecution must be granted access to territory to seek asylum and be protected against refoulement. Refugees and asylum seekers already abroad must not be forced to return when they seek international protection.
The principle of non-refoulement is a cornerstone of international law and is binding on all states. The principle of international refugee law prohibits states from returning refugees - directly or indirectly - to countries or territories where their lives or freedom may be threatened.
Because the principle is part of customary international law, it is binding on all states, whether or not they are parties to the 1951 Refugee Convention or other international conventions. This means that even if the UK were to withdraw from the Refugee Convention or the European Convention on Human Rights, it would still be in breach of international law, regardless of what the UK Parliament might decide.
The new legislation is the third in a series of restrictive UK laws that have undermined access to refugee protection in the UK since 2022, including a ban on access to asylum or other forms of permission to stay in the UK for those who arrive irregularly via a third country.
According to rights group Amnesty International, the UK government continues to pursue a policy agenda that violates its international human rights obligations and restricts rights protections. The rights of refugees, asylum seekers and migrants are particularly targeted.
In June 2023, the "Illegal Immigration Act", which contravenes the UN Refugee Convention and the European Convention on Human Rights, was passed into law. The Act prohibits the government from processing asylum claims from people who have arrived without prior authorization, and requires the government to deport them and never allow them to legally reside in the UK.
Also in June, the UK Court of Appeal found the Rwanda policy to be unlawful. After the UK government appealed this ruling, the UK Supreme Court ruled in November 2023 that the proposed transfer of asylum seekers to Rwanda would breach international and UK law because of the risk that refugees from Rwanda would be returned to their countries of origin, highlighting Rwanda's poor human rights record and weaknesses in its system for determining individual asylum claims.
The Supreme Court also ruled that forcible deportations to Rwanda would violate Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which prohibits torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
The "Safety of Rwanda" legislation effectively instructs the courts to ignore existing UK laws or international treaties that might block the deportations. The bill was introduced to Parliament alongside the UK-Rwanda Asylum Partnership Treaty after the UK Supreme Court ruling.
But in practice, the Bill and the treaty do not address the protection gaps identified by the Supreme Court. Rather, once enacted, they will prevent UK courts from properly reviewing deportation decisions, leaving asylum seekers with limited avenues of appeal, even when they face significant risks.
“By shifting responsibility for refugees, reducing the UK’s courts’ ability to scrutinize removal decisions, restricting access to legal remedies in the UK and limiting the scope of domestic and international human rights protections for a specific group of people, this new legislation seriously hinders the rule of law in the UK and sets a perilous precedent globally,” said UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Türk.
“It is critical to the protection of the human rights and dignity of refugees and migrants seeking protection that all removals from the UK are carried out after assessing their specific individual circumstances in strict compliance with international human rights and refugee law.”
If implemented, the latest legislation would pave the way for asylum seekers, including families with children, to be summarily sent to Rwanda to make their asylum claims, with no prospect of return to the UK.
It will also drastically limit the ability of asylum seekers to challenge or appeal deportation decisions, with decision-makers and judges being required to conclusively treat Rwanda as a "safe" country in terms of protecting asylum seekers - regardless of any evidence to the contrary, now or in the future.
This situation is all the more worrying given that the law expressly authorizes the government to disregard any protective interim measures issued by the European Court of Human Rights.
UN experts say asylum seekers at risk of refoulement
On Monday, UN experts expressed concern about the role of airlines and aviation authorities in facilitating unlawful removals to Rwanda under the agreement between the UK government and the Rwandan government and the "Safety of Rwanda" Bill.
“Even if the UK-Rwanda agreement and the ‘Safety of Rwanda’ Bill are approved, airlines and aviation regulators could be complicit in violating internationally protected human rights and court orders by facilitating removals to Rwanda,” the experts said.
The UN-appointed independent experts stressed that returning asylum-seekers to Rwanda or any other country where they would be at risk of refoulement would violate the right to be free from torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.
Refoulement is the forcible return of refugees and asylum seekers to countries or territories where their lives or freedom may be threatened.
“If airlines and aviation authorities give effect to State decisions that violate human rights, they must be held responsible for their conduct,” the experts said.
“As the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights underline, aviation regulators, international organizations and business actors are required to respect human rights.”
The corporate responsibility to respect human rights requires companies to comply with all applicable laws, to respect internationally recognized human rights, and to treat the risk of contributing to gross human rights abuses as a compliance issue wherever they operate.
The UN experts have been in contact with the UK Government, as well as national, European and international aviation regulators, including the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), and international stakeholders, including the International Air Transport Association (IATA) and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), to raise concerns and remind them of their responsibilities.
Rwanda: Sponsor of war and human rights abuses in eastern Congo
Rwanda has a dismal human rights record and is waging war in its neighboring country, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), by providing arms and other support to the Mouvement du 23 mars (M23) rebel group, according to the United Nations.
The March 23 Movement, a non-state armed group operating in eastern DRC with the support of the Rwandan military and government, has committed numerous human rights abuses, including widespread killing or maiming of civilians, enforced disappearances or abductions, forcible displacement of civilians, torture, physical abuse, and conflict-related sexual violence or punishment.
UN reports, US reports, the European Union, and independent observers have accused Rwanda of serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law, as well as of plundering natural resources in eastern DRC. Human rights experts warn that the security situation in eastern DRC is deteriorating as armed violence by the M23 intensifies.
The most serious abuses include the unlawful recruitment or use of children in armed conflict by the government-backed armed group M23. The Rwandan government does not investigate or prosecute abuses committed by its proxy forces abroad.
Since March 2022, the M23 has continued to seize large swaths of Congolese territory, displacing more than 1.3 million women, children, and men from their homes. Repeated attacks on UN peacekeepers and difficult access to combat zones hamper the ability of the UN and humanitarian organizations to assist millions of civilians in need.
In January 2023, Rwandan President Paul Kagame openly politicized refugee rights by threatening not to host Congolese refugees.
Rwanda's domestic human rights record
Rwanda also has a poor human rights record at home and is furthermore taking action against its citizens, refugees and critics in other countries.
According to the US Department of State, significant human rights problems in the country include credible reports of arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings; harsh and life-threatening prison conditions; arbitrary arrest or detention; political prisoners or detainees; cross-border repression against individuals in another country; arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy; and punishment of family members for alleged crimes committed by a relative.
In Rwanda, there are serious restrictions on freedom of expression and the media, including threats of violence against journalists, unjustified arrests or prosecutions of journalists, and censorship, as well as serious restrictions on internet freedom.
There is significant interference with the freedom of peaceful assembly and association in the country, including overly restrictive laws on the organization, financing, or operation of non-governmental and civil society organizations. In addition, there are serious and unreasonable restrictions on political participation and serious government restrictions on or harassment of domestic NGOs.
According to the international human rights organization Human Rights Watch (HRW), Rwanda continues to target Rwandans around the world, including asylum seekers and refugees, in an effort to silence critics and discourage political opposition abroad.
Refugees, the United Kingdom and international law
Refugees are persons who have crossed an internationally recognized border and who, owing to circumstances beyond their control, have been forced to flee their country of origin and are in need of protection and assistance in finding safety in another country. Refugees are formally defined and protected under international law, including the 1951 United Nations Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol, other regional and national legal frameworks such as the European Convention on Human Rights, and international customary law.
As defined under international law, refugees have certain rights and protections, including the right to seek asylum in another country, the right to protection and assistance, and the right not to be returned to a country where they would be persecuted or harmed. The principle of non-refoulement prohibits states from returning refugees to countries or territories where their lives or freedom may be threatened.
The United Kingdom is a party to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and was one of its original signatories. The Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol are key legal documents that define the term "refugee" and outline the rights of refugees and the legal obligations of states to protect them. The Refugee Convention remains one of the most important legal instruments protecting the rights of refugees around the world.
The United Kingdom is also a party to the 1950 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the 1954 and 1961 UN Conventions on the Reduction of Statelessness, the 1989 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the 2005 Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings, and must comply with its obligations under international law.
The UK is prohibited from subjecting people to refoulement, even indirectly, under the Refugee Convention, Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and a range of other international legal instruments. If the country fails to comply, it risks becoming a pariah state.
Further information
Full text: UK-Rwanda asylum law: UN leaders warn of harmful consequences, Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, press release, published April 23, 2024
https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/04/uk-rwanda-asylum-law-un-leaders-warn-harmful-consequences
Full text: UK: Airlines and aviation authorities should not facilitate unlawful removals to Rwanda, UN experts say, Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, press release, published April 22, 2024
https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/04/uk-airlines-and-aviation-authorities-should-not-facilitate-unlawful-removals