After a court stop: Great Britain sticks to its plan

The British government does not want to be dissuaded from the plan to deport thousands of asylum seekers to Rwanda by the objections of European judges and the outraged protests of prominent Britons against their refugee policy. And that despite the fact that the first deportation flight on Wednesday night had to be canceled by Interior Minister Priti Patel under spectacular circumstances.

The minister announced yesterday in Parliament that she was “very surprised” and “disappointed” by a judgment by the European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday evening, which prevented the first plane, which was already waiting with seven refugees on board, from taking off at the last minute.

But she won’t let that stop her from “doing the right thing,” Patel assured. Further preparations to ship asylum seekers to Africa are already underway, she added.

The background to the controversial flights is an agreement between Great Britain and Rwanda in April this year. This envisages that Rwanda will take in tens of thousands of UK asylum seekers over the next few years in exchange for hundreds of millions of pounds in development aid. The authorities there are supposed to decide for themselves who will be granted residency rights in Rwanda and who will be sent back to their home country, even if they have fled from there.

The deportation to Rwanda is intended to deter refugees

With the mass deportation, London hopes to stem the flow of people across the English Channel and discourage boat people – considered “illegal migrants” – from crossing. From the outset, however, the plan was highly controversial in Great Britain and has been condemned by opposition politicians, human rights lawyers and refugee organizations as “totally inhumane” and “downright unbelievable”.

The government had scheduled the first deportation flight for Tuesday. A Boeing 767 said to have been chartered for half a million pounds stood by at a military airfield. Of the originally planned 130 refugees who were to be flown to Rwanda that day, only seven were on board a few hours before the start, according to legal submissions.

In fact, several British courts on Tuesday upheld the government’s right to deport the asylum seekers concerned. In a special decision in the evening, however, the European Court of Human Rights stopped the flight. The Strasbourg court demanded that an Iraqi should only be flown out after the end of his trial in Great Britain. This opened the door for further appeals – all of which were ultimately successful. Secretary Patel said she will ensure that the UK people’s will to secure Britain’s borders is heeded. The conservative Daily Mail warned against European judges “interfering” in British affairs.

After Boris Johnson’s government went on a sharp collision course with the EU on Brexit and Northern Ireland this week, British national conservatives are again scenting “foreign paternalism” in the refugee issue. The Strasbourg court has nothing to do with the EU, from which Great Britain has left. It is the highest legal body of the Council of Europe, whose 46 member states include the United Kingdom.

Prince Charles reportedly called the flights ‘outrageous’ in a private conversation

This week, for the first time, the Prime Minister also alluded to the possibility that his country could escape the jurisdiction of Strasbourg in order to be able to carry out his deportation policy undisturbed.

Of course, the government is concerned that, in addition to opposition politicians and welfare organizations, more and more members of the British establishment are condemning the mass deportations to Rwanda. After Prince Charles allegedly called the flights “outrageous” in a private conversation, the leadership of the Anglican Church classified the deportation concept as “immoral politics” and “a disgrace to Great Britain”. The plan has also been condemned by high-ranking representatives of other denominations and well-known national athletes, artists, actors and authors.