Rwanda has ‘issues with human rights’ Government admits

Documents sent by the Home Secretary to convince MPs and Lords to back the Rwanda bill contain an admission that the country still has “issues with its human rights record” due to the treatment of political opposition.

James Cleverly wrote to all MPs and peers on Thursday to highlight “evidence” designed to support the Government’s controversial claims that Rwanda is a “safe” country – a key element of Rishi Sunak’s legislation to save his flagship deportation deal, after it was ruled unlawful in November.

But buried among the cache of papers slipped out by the Home Office on Thursday, is an admission that “while Rwanda is now a relatively peaceful country with respect for the rule of law, there are nevertheless issues with its human rights record around political opposition to the current regime, dissent and free speech”.

The assessment came in a Government “policy statement” summarising new country information notes for Rwanda, which Mr Cleverly told MPs amounted to “an objective and impartial assessment” of the nation, which was compiled according to international principles also used by the EU, Canada, US, Australia and New Zealand.

Also within the policy statement is an admission it could take “months” for Rwanda to pass a new asylum law it needed to implement its new treaty with the UK, which the Prime Minister has made central in his efforts to convince judges the scheme is lawful.

Mr Cleverly said that the evidence pack will nevertheless “address the findings of the domestic courts” by showing that Rwanda “is a safe third country that it is capable of, and willing to, deliver on its commitments” under the deportation deal.

The Home Secretary’s letter, leaked to i, appeared at least partially designed to appease Tory moderates who are threatening to rebel against the declaration that Rwanda is safe.

Former justice secretary Sir Robert Buckland has tabled a series of amendments to the Safety of Rwanda Bill, including one which would remove clauses that declare the east African nation “a safe country”.

However, Tory moderates are expected to hold back from rebelling, unless they are forced to counter any concessions Mr Sunak makes to MPs from the so-called “five families” of right-wing factions who want to toughen up the legislation.

Related Article

All the changes Tory rebels want to make to Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda bill

PoliticsExplained

All the changes Tory rebels want to make to Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda bill

Read More

A source on the One Nation caucus of moderates said: “We are still waiting to see how the Government reacts to the five families amendments and hope we won’t have to take any action in response.”

It came as former prime minister Liz Truss joined the 40-strong right-wing rebellion aimed at making the Bill more hardline in an effort to ensure Mr Sunak can get a deportation flight to Rwanda before the next election.

Ms Truss said: “We have told the British people time and again that we intend to crack down on illegal migration yet keep being thwarted by a range of spurious legal loopholes being exploited by activist lawyers.

“It is essential that the legislation we are passing is watertight and closes all those possible loopholes, which is why I am backing this raft of amendments.”

Meanwhile, ministers were accused of having a “woefully inadequate” plan to curb Channel crossings after failing to offer asylum seekers more legal ways to travel to the UK.

The Government was duty-bound under the Illegal Migration Act passed last year to produce a report setting out what is meant by safe and legal asylum routes, and detailing which programmes are already in place, as well as any proposed additional ones.

But in a written statement published to fulfil the duty, Mr Cleverly did not set out any proposed new safe routes.

The Refugee Council said the report “offers no new safe routes and no improvement of existing schemes”.

Its chief executive Enver Solomon said: “The Government’s plans are woefully inadequate with no meaningful commitment to expand safe routes for refugees from war-torn countries such as Sudan and Syria, and those fleeing repressive regimes in countries such as Iran.

“By simply focusing on describing the existing limited schemes, the Government has completely overlooked the urgent need to reduce dangerous Channel crossings by providing safe passage to our shores.”

In his letter to MPs Mr Cleverly says: “We consider that via the Treaty and the capacity building work undertaken with the Government of Rwanda, the findings of the domestic courts have been addressed and that, as set out at clause 2 of the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill, Rwanda is a safe third country that it is capable of, and willing to, deliver on its commitments under the Partnership.”

The Government argued in the policy statement that because human rights violations are mostly against political opponents of Paul Kagame’s Rwanda regime, those deported from the UK would not suffer the same abuses.

The country information notes also highlights refugee protests over food rations in 2018 “which resulted in fatalities” and potential discrimination against LGBT people in Rwanda

But in its policy statement, the Government described the protest as an “isolated” incident that took place in a refugee camp, which is not the type of accommodation that will be used by deportees from the UK, who will get support under the deal.

The Government also said Rwandan legal protection for LGBT people is “generally considered more progressive than that of neighbouring countries”.