In 2022, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), which is part of the Council of Europe, prevented the UK from sending asylum seekers of different nationalities by plane to Rwanda…reports Asian Lite News
The Council of Europe, a European rights body, has sharply criticised the UK for its controversial asylum pact with Rwanda.
“The UK government should refrain from removing people under the Rwanda policy and reverse the Bill’s effective infringement of judicial independence,” said the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights, Michael O’Flaherty, in Strasbourg on Tuesday. The law raises questions about the human rights of asylum seekers and the rule of law in general, he said.
The Council of Europe is independent of the EU and was founded in 1949 to protect democracy, human rights and the rule of law in Europe.
Also Read
The British bill, which was approved by the House of Lords on Tuesday night after lengthy opposition, declares Rwanda a safe third country by law. In doing so, the government wants to prevent appeals against deportations before British courts.
The asylum pact with Rwanda stipulates that irregular migrants will no longer be given the opportunity to apply for asylum in the UK. Instead, they are to be taken to Rwanda and apply for asylum there.
The regulation is intended to deter people from making the dangerous crossing across the English Channel in small boats. However, opponents doubt that the law will deter migrants.
“Managing asylum and migration is undoubtedly a complex endeavour for states, but it must always be done in full compliance with international standards,” O’Flaherty said.
The British law “is another representation of an ongoing trend towards externalization of asylum and migration policy in Europe, which is a matter of concern for the global system of protection of the rights of refugees,” he said.
In 2022, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), which is part of the Council of Europe, prevented the UK from sending asylum seekers of different nationalities by plane to Rwanda.
Earlier, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk said, “Settling questions of disputed fact — questions with enormous human rights consequences — is what the courts do … It should be for the courts to decide whether the measures taken by the government since the Supreme Court’s ruling on risks in Rwanda are enough. You cannot legislate facts out of existence. It is deeply concerning to carve out one group of people, or people in one particular situation, from the equal protection of the law. This is antithetical to even-handed justice, available and accessible to all, without discrimination.”
The UN human rights office has reiterated the concerns expressed by the UN refugee agency (UNHCR) that the scheme is not compatible with international refugee law, the statement said.
“The combined effects of this Bill, attempting to shield government action from standard legal scrutiny, directly undercut basic human rights principles,” Turk added.
“Such a stance is today more vital than ever.”
ALSO READ-UK Parliament passes Rwanda asylum law
[soliloquy id="151345"]