Weekend Argus (Saturday Edition)
Sunak’s Rwanda Bill a threat to Africa’s peace and stability
AFTER lengthy legal warfare and remonstration from human rights advocates, the Rwandan Bill has finally been passed in the British Parliament.
For migrants entering the UK illegally in the hope of being granted asylum, this new legislation shuts out that opportunity. Rather those that reach the shores of the UK will be sent all the way to Rwanda, as the UK effectively outsources its migrant crisis.
For the beleaguered UK Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, the first wave of deportations cannot come early enough.
Sunak is hoping that the outward flights of asylum seekers from the UK to Rwanda will begin in July. He has pledged that the legislation will stop thousands of asylum seekers arriving on British shores.
“I am determined to end the burden of illegal migration on the British people,” Sunak has said.
There were more than 67000 asylum applications in the UK last year, largely from people fleeing Afghanistan, Iran, India, Pakistan and Türkiye.
In the first four months of this year, more than 7 000 people arrived on the shores of Britain after journeying across dangerous seas in small boats.
Sunak’s popularity is sinking fast and furiously due to his poor management of the British economy. By purging “undesirable” asylum seekers, he is hoping to restore his sullied reputation, lift his prospects of reelection in the next election, and keep the increasingly flagging Conservative Party in office.
The Tories could be facing an epic fail in the coming election. Opinion polls across the UK point to a significant plunge in support for the governing Conservatives.
Author Samuel Earle recently wrote in The Guardian that, “Tories have always had a fear of political extinction. After the next election, they could be right”.
A cleverly crafted Bloomberg headline says it all: “UK Conservative MPs flee sinking ship before general election.”
Sunak looks set to take the Tories into what could be the party’s worst showing ever. For the sinking Sunak, the Rwanda Bill is a political life jacket.
The prime minister has tried to float the Rwanda Bill as a moral initiative which will “deter vulnerable migrants from making perilous crossings” across the English Channel and “break the business model of the criminal gangs who exploit them”.
Human rights groups do not believe that this legislation will stop the flood of asylum seekers or stop human traffickers.
Desperate people in search of a better, safer life for themselves and their children will continue to undertake turbulent and dangerous journeys and routes to touch a shore of possibility.
The Rwanda Bill is but a buoy of populist talk and political opportunism. It is stewarded to save and protect the prime minister and the party. It is a surf of distraction from the waves of failure of both Sunak and the Tories.
Although the bill has been passed, it is not all ready, steady and go for Sunak.
More legal challenges are expected. Moral outrage has yet to be drowned out. Refugee rights organisations have raised concerns about how this “inhumane” legislation criminalises authentic asylum seekers.
Enver Solomon, the chief executive of the Refugee Council, said: “The government is determined to recklessly pursue its inhumane Rwanda plan despite the cost, chaos, and human misery it will unleash. We know it is likely to cause a catastrophic system meltdown.”
Legal scholars have expressed outrage about how this legislation is in contravention of refugee law obligations, international law, and the Geneva Convention. The UN Refugee Agency and UN Human Rights Office have raised concerns about the impact on human rights and international refugee protection systems.
Both the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, Filippo Grandi, are among those who have raised concerns that the bill is not in line with international human rights and refugee laws and protections.
The UN representatives argue that the legislation extinguishes access to asylum, refugee protection, and requires removal to another country, where migrants may not be able to access protection.
Additionally, the UN has raised concern that those who may have suffered human rights violations or may have been victims of human trafficking, wars or have other wellfounded claims under international human rights and humanitarian law, will be placed in jeopardy.
The Rwanda Bill disregards the 1951 Refugee Convention, which takes cognisance of the many refugees who may be forced to enter a country of asylum irregularly, and without necessary personal or identity documentation.
Türk has said: “In addition to raising very serious legal concerns from the international perspective, this bill sets a worrying precedent for dismantling asylum-related obligations that other countries, including in Europe, may be tempted to follow, with a potentially adverse effect on the international refugee and human rights protection system as a whole.”
The UK is not the first country to introduce such a dramatic anti-migrant programme. Nor will it be the last. Germany is now looking at a similar initiative to process asylum seeker claims.
In 2001, Australia introduced a plan discouraging sea crossing by boat and sent asylum seekers to detention centres in Papua New Guinea and Nauru for their claims to be processed.
In 2014, Israel developed a policy to send illegal immigrants and unsuccessful asylum seekers to Rwanda and Uganda. This programme ended abruptly after an intervention by the Supreme Court.
The UK is taking an easy route by sending its “undesirables” to Rwanda, as if Africa is the place for “undesirables” and a dumping ground for Europe.
The UK’s attempts to make immigration problems an African one could have dire consequences for peace and stability on the continent. It is an unfair burden to place on Africa which is already suffering from massive refugee, migrant and displacement issues, caused by war and poverty.
This has not stopped the UK from approaching other African countries, including Angola and Botswana, to assist. The president of Botswana rejected the partnership. For now, it looks like, once again, the UK is flexing its financial muscle to exploit Africa. It is a post-colonialism of a special type, where Africa remains a servant.
Rwandan government spokesperson Yolande Makolo says Kigali is ready to welcome those “relocated to Kigali”.
President Paul Kagame believes that Rwanda is in a strong position to offer a positive and progressive solution to the UK migrant issue. Rwanda will receive £290 million for their assistance. This would be used by Rwanda to not only prepare to receive and care for the migrants but also to support Rwanda’s economic development.
Rwanda is not only one of the poorest countries in the world, but one of the most densely populated. Like many other African nations, it is battling to accommodate refugees. It is unfortunate that Kagame, who had displayed such foresight in bringing stability and development to Rwanda, would reduce himself to a pawn in this British gambit of political chess.
He would do well to focus on resolving internal issues rather than being a colonial port for the UK’s “unwanted goods”.