Will the New Asylum Law Succeed in Permanently Removing Refugees From the UK?

As he grapples with multiple political challenges, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak of the United Kingdom faced fresh scrutiny over his handling of a scandal involving his home secretary, Suella Braverman, who sought special treatment from senior officials after she was caught speeding.

Sunak tried to defuse the situation by announcing that he had consulted with his special adviser on government ethics and decided not to launch an inquiry into Braverman’s conduct, saying the matter did not warrant any further action.

But The Independent reported that Braverman, who oversees a controversial plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda, had a potential conflict of interest because of her previous work as a director of the African Justice Foundation, a group that trains lawyers in Rwanda.

She held that position for five years but did not disclose it when she became home secretary, according to the newspaper.

Neither Braverman nor Sunak’s office responded to requests for comment on the report, which added to the growing list of allegations against the home secretary.

Braverman had previously resigned from the same post under former Prime Minister Liz Truss after she leaked classified security documents about the deportation scheme to Conservative lawmakers from her personal email account.

She has also made inflammatory remarks about refugees, saying that her top priority was to stop small boats from reaching Britain and that her dream was to see the first plane take off for Rwanda with asylum seekers on board.

Chris Doyle, a British expert on the Middle East, said that Sunak was trying to contain the latest crisis involving Braverman “because he has complex political calculations, the first of which is that he does not want to cause a shake-up in his government, and secondly because the home secretary represents an important wing within the Conservative Party and carries the ideas of hard-line immigration policy, and her dismissal may draw the anger of this current on the prime minister.”

 

Firm Law

A new immigration bill introduced by the British government would bar asylum seekers who arrive in the country by crossing the English Channel on small boats, a move that Sunak said was in line with international law and human rights.

But the bill, which would also make it easier to detain and deport migrants to their home countries or safe third countries, has drawn sharp criticism from rights groups and opposition parties, who say it violates the United Kingdom’s obligations under the 1951 Refugee Convention and amounts to an asylum ban.

The United Nations refugee agency said the bill would undermine the right to seek asylum based on how people arrive in the country, rather than on their need for protection.

The bill is part of Sunak’s effort to overhaul the United Kingdom’s immigration system and crack down on what he calls “illegal” migration, a key issue for his Conservative Party base.

He told The Sun newspaper that the bill would send a clear message: “If you come to this country illegally, you will be swiftly removed.”

The number of migrants arriving in the UK by crossing the perilous waters of the Channel has surged in recent years, reaching more than 45,000 last year and about 3,000 so far this year, according to government figures. Most of them come from Albania, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, and Syria.

Under the bill, migrants who arrive in the UK through “irregular” routes—such as small boats or trucks—would be denied the right to claim asylum and settle in the country or obtain British citizenship.

They would also face a higher risk of detention until they are removed to a third country deemed safe by the government and have limited access to legal appeals.

Migrants who arrive through “regular” routes—such as resettlement programs or family reunification schemes—would be treated more favorably and subject to an annual quota set by Parliament.

Suella Braverman said the new immigration law would create a “fair but firm” system that would deter migrants from making dangerous journeys and encourage them to seek protection in the first safe country they reach.

She said she was confident that the bill complied with the UK’s international obligations but acknowledged that she could not “definitively” confirm whether it was consistent with British human rights law.

She said she was in talks with the European Court of Human Rights about the bill.

Furthermore, she defended the bill as “strong,” saying: “In the face of a global migration crisis, yesterday’s laws are simply no longer fit for purpose.”

 

Anti-Humanitarian

The United Kingdom’s new immigration bill, which would effectively bar asylum seekers from entering the country, drew sharp criticism from the United Nations, human rights groups, and opposition parties, who denounced it as illegal and unworkable.

The bill would create a two-tier system that would favor refugees who arrive through official resettlement programs over those who make their own way to the UK, often by crossing the English Channel in small boats.

The latter group would face removal to a third country deemed safe or to offshore processing centers.

Refugee advocates said that such measures would not deter desperate people fleeing war and persecution but would instead expose them to more danger and hardship.

They also argued that the UK had a legal and moral obligation to offer protection to those who reach its shores, regardless of how they got there.

Christina Marriott, the chief executive of the British Red Cross, said in a statement: “If you are escaping Afghanistan or Syria and fear for your life, how are you supposed to claim asylum in the UK?”

Care4Calais, a charity that helps migrants in northern France, questioned the feasibility of the government’s plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda or other countries. “If people are to be removed, where is the government intending to send them?” it asked.

The Labour Party, the main opposition force in Parliament, accused Mr. Sunak of using the immigration bill as a distraction from his party’s declining popularity ahead of local elections in May.

Sunak became UK’s first prime minister from an ethnic minority in October 2022 after his predecessor Liz Truss resigned amid a scandal over her handling of the coronavirus pandemic.

Keir Starmer, the Labour leader, said that he doesn’t think putting forward proposals that are undeliverable is going to do much good.

Sunak, a Hindu who took his oath of office on the Bhagavad Gita, a sacred text of his faith, has faced allegations of discrimination and Islamophobia for his comments linking Islam and terrorism and his harsh rhetoric against Muslim migrants.

His rise to power has raised fears among some British Muslims of further marginalization and hostility.