Next week, Three Asylum Seekers Scheduled For Deportation To Rwanda Will Not Be Removed

Three asylum seekers who were set to be deported to Rwanda will not be removed, the Home Office revealed, as opponents sought to scupper Priti Patel’s flagship policy with a last-ditch High Court legal challenge.

About 100 people have been told they will be put on a flight to the Central African nation next Tuesday, but charities, campaigners and a union representing Border Force staff have brought a legal challenge on behalf of a number of them.

Lawyers acting for the groups say the policy is unlawful and LGBT migrants could face discrimination. They’re pursuing an urgent injunction to stop next week’s scheduled flight, and any other such flights, ahead of a full hearing of the case later in the year.

The fightback is being led by top QCs Raza Husain and Chris Buttler, both from Matrix, a chamber of liberal barristers co-founded by Cherie Booth, the wife of former Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair. She left in 2014.

The Home Office insists their claim should fail because it’s not justified and that Priti Patel’s policy is in the public interest to discourage migrants from crossing the English Channel. The flight could be grounded if the High Court grants the injunction.

Raza Husain QC, for the claimants, told the High Court that the system’s not safe. It’s not that it’s not safe after July, it’s just not safe, and he said: ‘You may be arbitrarily denied access to it. If you do get into it, there are concerns about the impartiality of the decision-making.’

He continued that the evidence is that if you’re not from a neighbouring country, then there are high levels of rejection.

Mr Husain said this included asylum seekers from Syria, who were largely tolerated by the UK system, and he added that the procedure was simply unsafe.

Calling for an evidence-based assessment for the procedure, not an aspirational basis, or hopes, Mr Hussain said that the Secretary of State’s conclusion as to the safety of Rwanda was irrational and that they had an extremely strong case on that, later adding: ‘We say there is no answer whatsoever to this case on irrationality on the assessment that Rwanda’s procedures are safe.’

The barrister later said that the agreement between the two countries, known as a Memorandum of Understanding, was unenforceable.

Some would say that they shouldn’t be here in the first place. That they arrived illegally, and who is paying for their lawyers?

If the United Kingdom had proper checks in place this wouldn’t happen. Let’s face it, it doesn’t happen in Australia because they have very strict immigration laws.

Name one country in the world you can enter, and get free hotels. All expenses paid and access to all services. Our judicial system and illegal border enforcement are a complete shambles, but then it can only happen in the United Kingdom.

Our charity and generosity have been badly taken advantage of over the years, and those charities that are supporting migrants should perhaps be supporting our homeless or veterans that are in need of assistance instead.

Charities require charitable donations from the public, but of course, now you at least know where your donations are going and it’s not the citizens of the United Kingdom, and if you were one of those people that donated to one of these charities, I’m guessing you didn’t know that your donations would be used on legal fees to oppose the British government? And could someone at least name these charities so that people can stop giving them support?

Published by Angela Lloyd

My vision on life is pretty broad, therefore I like to address specific subjects that intrigue me. Therefore I really appreciate the world of politics, though I have no actual views on who I will vote for, that I will not tell you, so please do not ask! I am like an observation station when it comes to writing, and I simply take the news and make it my own. I have no expectations, I simply love to write, and I know this seems really odd, but I don't get paid for it, I really like what I do and since I am never under any pressure, I constantly find that I write much better, rather than being blanketed under masses of paperwork and articles that I am on a deadline to complete. The chances are, that whilst all other journalists are out there, ripping their hair out, attempting to get their articles completed, I'm simply rambling along at my convenience creating my perfect piece. I guess it must look pretty unpleasant to some of you that I work for nothing, perhaps even brutal. Perhaps I have an obvious disregard for authority, I have no idea, but I would sooner be working for myself, than under somebody else, excuse the pun! Small I maybe, but substantial I will become, eventually. My desk is the most chaotic mess, though surprisingly I know where everything is, and I think that I would be quite unsuited for a desk job. My views on matters vary and I am extremely open-minded to the stuff that I write about, but what I write about is the truth and getting it out there, because the people must be acquainted. Though I am quite entertained by what goes on in the world. My spotlight is mostly to do with politics, though I do write other material as well, but it's essentially politics that I am involved in, and I tend to concentrate my attention on that, however, information is essential. If you have information the possibilities are endless because you are only limited by your own imagination...

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: