THE European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has intervened at the last minute in the UK Government’s scheme to send asylum seekers to Rwanda, which could ground the plan’s inaugural flight.
Lawyers representing one of the asylum seekers set to fly on Tuesday evening have succeeded in making an emergency application to the ECHR after running out of options with UK courts.
The last-ditch move will come as a blow to Boris Johnson as his controversial flagship policy was set to commence with its first flight after a severe public backlash to the plan.
READ MORE: Rwanda scheme: Protesters block vans taking migrants to the airport
It follows Johnson threatening to take the UK out of the European Convention on Human Rights as he accused lawyers of aiding human traffickers who exploit refugees trying to cross the Channel.
A letter from the courts from an initial decision said that the asylum seekers should not be sent on the flight. In its ruling, the court took particular account of evidence provided by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees that those taken to Rwanda would not have access to fair and efficient procedures for the determination.
The court’s decision also cited a previous ruling from Justice Swift, who refused to grant an injunction to halt the flight but added that the question of treating Rwanda as a safe country was irrational or based on “insufficient enquiry” and gave rise to “serious triable issues”.
The news comes after protesters demonstrated outside of an immigration removal centre in an attempt to stop vans from taking asylum seekers to Gatwick Airport for their flight to Rwanda.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel