UK’s Illegal Migration Act 2023 Provokes Local and Intl. Public Opinion, Slammed Racist

Denounced as “inhumane, harsh, and ineffective,” opposing politicians and civil rights organizations confronted the United Kingdom over the approval of a new law aimed at combating illegal immigration through arbitrary means.

On July 18, 2023, the British Parliament passed a controversial immigration bill that specifically prohibits undocumented immigrants who arrived in the United Kingdom from seeking asylum in the country.

Following the detention of these irregular migrants, the government led by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak intends to deport them as quickly as possible, either to their countries of origin or to a third country such as Rwanda, regardless of where they came from.

 

Government Insistence

This legislation serves as a cornerstone of Sunak’s project to combat illegal immigration, which he has placed at the top of his priorities. The Prime Minister promised to “stop” the arrival of irregular migrants to the UK through small boats, often departing from nearby French coasts.

In 2022, over 45,000 migrants arrived at the shores of England via these boats, a record number, and more than 13,000 have arrived since the beginning of the year, according to AFP.

The bill on illegal immigration has been the subject of a battle between the House of Commons and the House of Lords, the unelected upper chamber in the United Kingdom, which has repeatedly amended the legislation to soften it.

Initially, the legislation will enable the government to send tens of thousands of asylum seekers who arrive at its shores from distances exceeding 6400 kilometers to Rwanda.

The legislation empowers the government to prevent individuals who arrive in the United Kingdom without permission from seeking asylum and to deport them either to their country of origin or to a so-called safe state like Rwanda.

London accuses asylum seekers who clandestinely enter its territory of jumping the queue at the expense of those who enter the country legally and safely.

This text has sparked widespread criticism within the United Kingdom from international human rights organizations, who assert that safe and legal routes are rarely available to most fleeing from conflicts, often unable to obtain passports or visas.

In 2022, the United Kingdom reached a preliminary £140 million ($180 million) deal with Rwanda to send irregular migrants to the country, but no deportations have been carried out under this agreement.

The first deportation operation was scheduled for June 2022, but the flight was canceled following a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights.

At the end of the mentioned month, the judiciary declared this agreement to be unlawful, but the British government announced its intention to appeal this ruling.

 

Legal Precedent

The United Nations swiftly condemned the new law, emphasizing that it violates international law and sets a concerning precedent. In a joint statement, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Turk, and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Filippo Grandi, asserted that the proposed law contravenes the country’s obligations under international human rights and refugee law.

“This bill sets a worrying precedent for dismantling asylum-related obligations that other countries, including in Europe, may be tempted to follow, with a potentially adverse effect on the international refugee and human rights protection system as a whole,” said the UN high commissioner for human rights, Volker Turk, as he urged the UK government to renew its commitment to human rights by reversing the law.

The two senior UN officials warned, in their statement released on July 18, that this law would have severe consequences for those in need of international protection.

They explained that the legislation establishes detention authorities with broad powers and limited judicial oversight.

According to them, the new legislation significantly undermines the legal framework that provided protection to many individuals and exposes refugees to serious risks, constituting a violation of international law.

In their statement, the UN officials pointed out that the 1951 Refugee Convention explicitly recognizes that refugees may be compelled to illegally enter the country of asylum.

They also cautioned against the danger that this British legislation may set a legal precedent followed by other countries, including those in Europe. They highlighted that without workable deportation arrangements, hundreds of thousands of migrants would remain in the UK indefinitely, facing precarious legal situations.

Furthermore, they stated that the act of removal under these circumstances would contradict the prohibition of forced return, collective expulsion, the right to due process, the right to family and private life, and the best interests of the affected children.

Turk and Grandi further emphasized that the new British legislation does not include any guarantees that asylum seekers will be able to obtain protection in Rwanda, exposing them to the risk of detention and extreme poverty.

Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby, the spiritual leader of the Anglican Church and also a member of the House of Lords, is one of the staunchest opponents of this law. During the discussions in the House of Lords, he expressed his skepticism about how this legislation would stop migrant boats, stating, “Even if this Bill succeeded in temporarily stopping the boats, and I don’t think it will, it won’t stop conflict or climate migration.”

The Refugee Council, a British non-governmental organization, also referred to the law as “a dark day” for the United Kingdom’s reputation and a critical moment for those seeking protection, emphasizing the ongoing struggle for a fair and humane asylum system.

 

Chaos in Asylum

According to Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary of the Labour Party, the new law is a ploy that will only worsen the asylum chaos within the Conservative Party.

She stated, as reported by BBC on July 19, 2023, that the backlog of asylum applications is at a record high, the number of people in hotels is still increasing, the Rwanda plan is falling apart, and boat crossings in June 2023 were higher than in 2022.

She also criticized the government’s approach to curbing small boat crossings, stating that the plans to accommodate migrants in tents indicate that the government is struggling without direction.

The Times was the first to report that the Home Office purchased tents for up to 2,000 individuals to be housed on disused military sites.

While a government source confirmed the use of tents as a contingency, Ms. Cooper viewed this as an “admission” that the ministers did not anticipate their approach to be effective.

The number of migrants crossing the English Channel in boats this year has reached nearly 15,000, according to the BBC.

“The bill would prevent a large group of extremely vulnerable refugees from relying on human rights protections, by leaving it up to the Home Secretary to decide who should be protected and who should be deported—and excluding the courts almost entirely,” says Adam Wagner, a leading human rights barrister.

“For example, victims of modern slavery will not be able to use laws designed to protect them. This attacks the core idea of human rights that everyone is protected, and that states must, under the ECHR, give people access to an effective remedy,” he adds.

“The bill, the government says, is an essential piece of legislation aimed at stopping the small boats. Government data shows that over 3,000 people have already arrived on small boats this year,” CNN reported.

Another critical perspective of the new law comes from a leading expert on refugees and migration, Zoe Gardner, who explains that even if the bill worked as intended, “there are still thousands of people who feel they would be safest coming to the UK. Those people will not disappear. They are making these journeys because they want to be found.”

She adds that the bill “makes it less likely they will be considered for asylum in the UK if they come through a route where they are very likely to be seen and given the opportunity to present themselves to the authorities.” This, consequently, could lead to “a dangerous incentive to come into the UK and not be found. That means more people living without formal documentation within the UK who are then made vulnerable to modern-day slavery and sex trafficking,” Gardner adds.

 

Sympathy for Refugees

Despite the stern stance of the British government towards irregular migrants, public sympathy for these individuals remains present.

For example, Portland Labour Councilor Paul Kimber continued to sympathize with the men who will be arriving. “Our objections are that having the barge here, it is going to be like a prison for them. We are not against refugees, we welcome them here,” he said.

The barge arrived at Portland Harbor in southern Britain on July 18, 2023, in a government initiative aimed at reducing the cost of accommodating irregular refugees in hotels.

Philip Marfleet, from Dorchester, also of Stand Up to Racism, said asylum seekers would be made welcome. He said volunteers had offered to put on English lessons and legal sessions for them and welcome them into cricket and football clubs.

“Very large numbers of people across Weymouth and Portland are coming forward to support them,” he added. “But hostility is being whipped up by government strategy and policy.”

Charities have described the passage of the bill as a black day, while Jess Phillips, member of Parliament of the United Kingdom, described it as a trafficker’s dream and a tool for control.

“Traffickers are today showing their slaves images of where they will end up in detention on a mega barge, or deported home right back to those who trafficked them in the first place,” she added.