An expediently tragic disaster in the English Channel has underscored the need for much-improved safety at sea mere hours after British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak succeeded in his plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda “for processing”.
At least five people, including a child, drowned while attempting to reach the United Kingdom on an overcrowded small boat carrying 112 people.
The incident, off the coast of Wimereux in France, occurred just hours after the British Parliament approved a controversial Bill enabling the UK government to send asylum seekers arriving without permission to Rwanda for processing.
Reuters reported that rescuers had picked up 49 people, with four taken to hospital, but others stayed on the boat, determined to get to Britain.
The UK and Rwanda Migration and Economic Development Partnership, intended to discourage asylum seekers from crossing the English Channel, could potentially also permanently bar asylum seekers from ever returning to the UK.
The plan, conceived by the UK's Conservative government, aims to deter dangerous crossings and curb people-smuggling networks. When it was first mooted, King Charles, who has the last say in whether to implement the plan or not, called it “appalling”.
Human rights groups have denounced the scheme as inhumane and illegal, expressing concerns over the safety and fairness of Rwanda's asylum practices and said the contemptibly titled Safety of Rwanda Bill, would not deter hard-up asylum seekers from trying to cross the English Channel.
Since January 1, an estimated 6 000 refugees have flooded into the UK to try to escape the poverty, persecution and lack of a future in countries like Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Albania, Syria, Sudan and Eritrea, and several other countries in Asia.
Many cite human rights as one of the reasons for fleeing from their home countries. However, this is a principal threat in Rwanda, which is ruled by the government of Paul Kagame, who has ruthlessly tightened his grip on the landlocked country since becoming President in 2000.
For Sunak to say that sending asylum seekers to Rwanda is a safe method for dealing with its influx problem, couldn’t be further from the truth.
Nevertheless, there’s no denying the position that the UK finds itself in vis a vis asylum seekers. Last year the largest number came from Afghanistan, with 9 307 individuals seeking asylum. The next biggest group consisted of 7 400 people from Iran, Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh.
Despite assurances from the UK government that asylum seekers deported to Rwanda would not be sent anywhere other than back to the UK, human rights groups remain sceptical due to Rwanda's poor human rights record and high rejection rate of asylum claims from certain countries in known conflict zones.
The Bill, which renders some sections of Britain's Human Rights Act inapplicable, has been criticised for setting a dangerous precedent and potentially infringing the European Convention on Human Rights.
Legal challenges to the Bill are expected, with the European Court of Human Rights potentially issuing orders to block deportation flights.
The UK government has pledged that the first flight carrying deportees will leave as early as July, promising a wave of deportations 'come what may' throughout the summer.
The estimated cost of the scheme is £540 million or $669m to deport the first 300 migrants, a significant expense given the current £3 billion ($3.7bn) annual cost of processing asylum applications and housing migrants awaiting decisions.
