Botswana rejects UK immigration deal
The government of Botswana has rejected a UK diplomatic treaty that would allow for UK asylum seekers to be deported to Botswana as a means of easing the immigration problem in greater Europe. Botswana, a former colony of Great Britain, itself has shown not even that slightest interest to the proposed treaty rejecting it upon proposal.
In an interview with Mmegi this week, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Dr Lemogang Kwape, revealed that the UK through its diplomatic channels reached out to Botswana in the wee months of 2023 proposing an immigration treaty that would open doors for UK-based asylum seekers to find amnesty in Botswana.
The envisaged model would be that the UK sends its asylum seekers to Botswana in exchange for enhanced monetary support to the economy of Botswana.
Kwape revealed this is a plan to dump asylum seekers in Botswana by the UK, almost throwing water on the treaty that failed to see the light of the day. According to him, the government didn’t find enough rationale to entertain the proposal from its former colonial master as it would exacerbate immigration crisis already happening in the region.
“It just didn’t make sense to us to allow for UK’s asylum based seekers to find way into Botswana. We already have migrants from DRC, Zimbabwe and other countries; we have enough on our plate,” he said.
Kwape further also said Botswana was not ready to be a dumping site for UK bound asylum seekers. Quizzed on whether this was a diplomatic abnormally for UK to table such a request, Kwape revealed that the UK’s agreement with Rwanda recently makes it a reoccurring norm but it is something that Botswana was not comfortable with.
The United Kingdom has been experiencing a surge in asylum refugees seeking protection there. The common passage being France through a sea opening called the English Channel.
According to the UK media, about 6, 265 people have crossed the English Channel in small boats since the start of 2024, almost a quarter more compared to the same period last year. Last year 29, 437 people arrived in the UK in small boats.
Under the leadership of former Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, the government tabled a Bill that allowed for any asylum seeker entering the UK “illegally” after 1 January 2022, from a safe country such as France, could be sent to Rwanda.
The Bill would mean that the asylum seekers would have their asylum claims processed there, rather than in the UK. If successful, they could be granted refugee status and allowed to stay in the landlocked east-central African country. If not, they could apply to settle in Rwanda on other grounds, or seek asylum in another “safe third country.”
No asylum seeker would be able to apply to return to the UK. Johnson would later relay that the plan would deter people from arriving in the UK on small boats across the English Channel.
In November 2023, the UK Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the Rwanda scheme was unlawful. It said genuine refugees would be at risk of being returned to their home countries, where they could face harm.
This breaches the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which prohibits torture and inhuman treatment. The UK is a signatory to the ECHR. The ruling also cited concerns about Rwanda’s poor human-rights record, and its past treatment of refugees.
Judges said that in 2021, the UK government had itself criticised Rwanda over “extrajudicial killings, deaths in custody, enforced disappearances and torture.”
They also highlighted a 2018 incident, when Rwandan police opened fire on protesting refugees, killing at least 11. Rwanda, which seems to know something Botswana doesn’t get, has thus far been paid £240m by the end of 2023.
However, the total payment will be at least £370m over five years, according to the National Audit Office. If more than 300 people are sent to Rwanda, the UK would pay a one-off sum of £120m to help boost the country’s economy, with further payments of £20,000 per individual relocated.On top of that, up to £150,000 will be paid for each person sent there, the NAO report said. These figures would not include the cost of payments to anyone to who chooses to go to Rwanda voluntarily.