Rwanda hits back: Does this really look like a hellhole?
As UN criticises Priti’s plan to deport migrants...
RWANDAN officials hit out at the UN’s refugee agency yesterday for its ‘unjustified’ meddling in Britain’s plan to deport migrants to the African nation.
The UNHCR denounced Priti Patel’s new immigration policy earlier this year, saying the UK was ‘abdicating responsibility’ for migrants, and it later intervened in a legal challenge brought by human rights activists to halt the deportations.
Yesterday the Rwandan government hit back at the agency, which has previously endorsed the African country for welcoming migrants from other nations.
‘They obviously think Rwanda is safe enough for other migrants. It’s a bit inconsistent,’ a source said.
Rwandan government spokesman Yolande Makolo said her country had been misrepresented by charities, campaigners and even British officials as a ‘ hellhole’ and ‘punishment’ to live in, and condemned critics for implying that Africa is ‘full of disease and no opportunities’.
Miss Makolo said Rwandan officials had been in touch with the UNHCR to ‘correct the record’ about certain claims about the country’s asylum process.
‘ The UNHCR has always praised Rwanda’s open- door policy,’ Miss Makolo said. ‘In the last couple of years, both the head of the UNHCR and his deputy have visited Rwanda, and they have been very effusive about what a welcoming country Rwanda is.
‘So it’s a bit of a surprise that they come up at this point to try and bring unjustified challenges to this partnership instead of working with us to iron out whatever they think is not working correctly.
‘We would like to see them play a more positive role.’
Rwanda has agreed initially to take up to 1,000 migrants from the UK in a trial deal worth £120million. If the legal challenge fails, the first plane load of migrants will be deported in September, but Rwanda is currently only prepared to take around 200 asylum seekers despite the full £120million being paid in advance.
Plans are in place to house 100 migrants in the £58 a night Hope Hostel in the country’s capital Kigali – which would cost the British taxpayer up to £5,800 a night – while several other locations are being looked at for another 100 migrants.
Miss Makolo said the migrants would have the opportunity to study and work both in Rwanda and online at universities and businesses across the world.
But officials also admitted Rwanda would not be able to stop migrants from leaving and attempting a journey back to the UK. ‘Everybody who wishes to leave can leave,’ said Doris Uwicyeza Picard, from the Rwandan ministry of justice.
Hitting back at critics, Miss Makolo said: ‘We are still seen as a problematic place, a place of problems. This is not something that we want.
‘Africa is also a source of solutions. This is an innovative solution to a global problem.’
She added: ‘We don’t consider living in Rwanda a punishment or something bad. I don’t see why anyone would. People have their own reasons for wanting to go to different places.
‘But I would say that when you pull back and look at this with a wider lens, part of the reason that people think they should be living in Europe or richer countries is that they think the streets are paved with gold.
‘There is this narrative cast by different media that Africa is basically a hellhole. The kind of stories that are coming out of Africa present it as a terrible place to live, which isn’t true.
‘Those of us who live here are working really hard to make our countries work on behalf of our citizens.’ Miss Makolo said the country could provide a safe home to migrants and that it wanted to retain ‘young African talent’ as well as help people from all over the world.
A spokesman for the UNHCR said: ‘The UNHCR is not a direct party to any of the actions currently before the courts regarding the UK’s intention to forcibly transfer asylum seekers to Rwanda.
‘UNHCR has been granted permission by the UK High Court to intervene in... our capacity as the UN refugee agency and a friend of the court.
‘Where appropriate, UNHCR intervenes in a select number of asylum cases and raises issues of concern with our counterparts in the UK Government.’
‘Innovative solution to a global problem’
‘Unjustified challenges’