Rwanda Asylum Plan: High Court rules UK plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda is legal

The government’s plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda is lawful, the High Court has ruled.

Lord Justice Lewis said the controversial policy, introduced under Boris Johnson, was "consistent with the refugee convention".

However, he said the home secretary should look at people’s "particular circumstances" before deporting them to the central African country.

The government announced its £140m Rwanda policy back in April, which would see some asylum seekers who had reached the UK via small boat Channel crossings deported to the country before having their cases processed.

The UK was forced to cancel the first deportation flight at the last minute in June after the European court of human rights ruled the plan carried “a real risk of irreversible harm.”

The government says the plan will deter people arriving in the UK through "illegal, dangerous or unnecessary methods", such as on small boats which cross the English Channel.

More than 44,000 people have arrived in the UK this year by crossing the Channel in small boats and several have died, including four last week when a boat capsized in freezing weather.

Eight people brought their cases to the High Court to fight against the decision to send them to Rwanda, giving the UK’s most senior judges the opportunity to rule on the overall policy, as well as the individuals.

In a summary of his ruling, Lord Justice Lewis said: "The court has concluded that it is lawful for the government to make arrangements for relocating asylum seekers to Rwanda and for their asylum claims to be determined in Rwanda rather than in the United Kingdom.

"On the evidence before this court, the government has made arrangements with the government of Rwanda which are intended to ensure that the asylum claims of people relocated to Rwanda are properly determined in Rwanda."

However, he added: "The home secretary must consider properly the circumstances of each individual claimant.

“The home secretary must decide if there is anything about each person’s particular circumstances which means that his asylum claim should be determined in the United Kingdom or whether there are other reasons why he should not be relocated to Rwanda.

"The home secretary has not properly considered the circumstances of the eight individual claimants whose cases we have considered.

"For that reason, the decisions in those cases will be set aside and their cases will be referred back to the home secretary for her to consider afresh."

The chief executive of the Refugee Council, Enver Solomon, said he was "disappointed" by the overall ruling, saying it would "damage the UK’s reputation as a country that values human rights".

He added: "Treating people who are in search of safety like human cargo and shipping them off to another country is a cruel policy that will cause great human suffering.

"The scheme is wrong in principle and unworkable in practice."

Josie Naughton, of migrant charity Choose Love, said the High Court’s decision would "tear apart families, prolong persecution and put victims of torture and trauma in danger once again".

She said the decision was at odds with the UK’s international commitments, insisting campaigners would continue to fight for the "human right to seek asylum".

Sonya Sceats, head of the Freedom from Torture charity, said she was concerned that the High Court’s decision failed to recognise the "serious risks" the government scheme presented for torture survivors.

While migrant charity Care4Calais said: “This is only the first court judgement. We remain steadfast in our opposition to the policy & in our determination to ensure that no human is forcibly deported.”

Labour’s shadow home secretary, Yvette Cooper, did not argue against the decision, but called the Rwanda scheme "unworkable, unethical [and] extortionately expensive", adding it was "a damaging distraction from the urgent action the government should be taking to go after the criminal gangs and sort out the asylum system".

The Liberal Democrats echoed the sentiment, with MP Alistair Carmichael saying it was "immoral, ineffective and incredibly costly for taxpayers".

He added: "It will do nothing to stop dangerous Channel crossings or combat people smuggling and human trafficking; instead it will give criminal gangs more power and profits."

But it was welcomed by the Rwandan government, with spokeswoman Yolande Makolo saying: "We welcome this decision and stand ready to offer asylum seekers and migrants safety and the opportunity to build a new life in Rwanda.

"This is a positive step in our quest to contribute innovative, long-term solutions to the global migration crisis."

Lord Justice Lewis said a further hearing would take place in mid-January to handle the consequences of the judgment, including costs and applications to go to the Court of Appeal.