The House of Lords strikes a serious blow to Rishi's Rwanda plans

The ruling will be a major blow for Rishi Sunak (Picture: Reuters)

The House of Lords has voted against ratifying Rishi Sunak’s treaty with Rwanda in a major blow to the Prime Minister’s plans to deport migrants over to the African country.

The House of Lords backed by 214 votes to 171, majority 43, an unprecedented move seeking to delay a treaty with the east African nation that paves the way for the divisive asylum scheme.

The motion read: ‘This House resolves, in accordance with section 20 of the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010, that His Majesty’s Government should not ratify the UK-Rwanda Agreement on an Asylum Partnership until the protections it provides have been fully implemented.’

The Government agreed the legally-binding treaty with Kigali in December, saying it addressed concerns raised by the Supreme Court about the possibility of asylum seekers deported to Rwanda then being transferred to a country where they could be at risk.

But the cross-party committee said promised safeguards in the agreement are “incomplete” and must be implemented before it can be endorsed.

Unlike the Commons which has the power to delay ratification of a treaty, the Lords can only advise.

However, ignoring the demand by peers could later be used in a legal challenge against the Government.

The bill has been met with fierce opposition (Picture: Getty)

Rwanda President Paul Kagame has previously met with Sunak regarding the bill (Picture: AFP)

Labour former attorney general Lord Goldsmith, who chairs the IAC, said: ‘In total our report identifies at least 10 sets of issues where on the basis of the Government’s evidence significant additional legal and practical steps are needed in order to implement the protections the treaty is designed to provide. The difficulty is that the Government has already presented a Bill to Parliament asking it to make a judgment that Rwanda is safe now.’

Lord Goldsmith added: ‘We are not saying the treaty should never be ratified but we are saying that Parliament should have the opportunity to scrutinise the treaty and its implementing measures in full before it makes a judgment about whether Rwanda is safe.’

Liberal Democrat Lord Razzall said: ‘If we go back to the beginning, the whole reason for the proposal to send people to Rwanda was that it was going to be such a hellhole that nobody would want to get on a boat if they thought they were going to go to Rwanda.

‘The dilemma the Government now faces is that, because of the Supreme Court, they have to demonstrate what a wonderful, safe place Rwanda is. I wonder whether this might just be a moment for them to reflect on the purpose of their policy.’

More than 29,000 people crossed the English Channel to seek asylum in the UK in 2023, down from 46,000 in 2022.

The government has made ‘stopping the boats’ a key policy pledge, with its solution being placing asylum seekers crossing via ‘irregular routes’ on a one-way flight to Rwanda.

This is a developing news story, more to follow soon… Check back shortly for further updates.

Got a story? Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at [email protected]. Or you can submit your videos and pictures here.

For more stories like this, check our news page.

Follow Metro.co.uk on Twitter and Facebook for the latest news updates. You can now also get Metro.co.uk articles sent straight to your device. Sign up for our daily push alerts here.

Get your need-to-know latest news, feel-good stories, analysis and more by signing up to Metro’s News Updates newsletter