They dreamed of the United Kingdom, they could end up in Africa. Despite the outcry, the British government seems determined to move forward with its program to deport migrants to Rwanda, which says it is ready to take them in.
Posted at 12:00 a.m.
On Tuesday, a dozen young men – including two Iranians, two Iraqis, a Syrian and two Albanians – were to be flown to Kigali, more than 6,000 km from London. But a last-minute legal challenge forced the cancellation of the scheduled flight around 10 p.m. local time.
PHOTO HANNAH MCKAY, REUTERS
Police officers walk near a plane which was to carry migrants to Rwanda, at Boscombe Down Air Base, UK.
“Last ticket canceled. NO ONE IS GOING TO RWANDA,” tweeted refugee support charity Care4Calais, while government sources confirmed the plane would not take off due to interventions by the European Court of Human Rights.
Boris Johnson’s controversial government’s new policy aims to deter illegal Channel crossings, which are on the rise despite his repeated promises to control immigration since Brexit.
Since the beginning of the year, an estimated 10,000 migrants have managed to enter British soil by transiting through the French city of Calais, either on makeshift boats or in the back of goods trucks.
According to Boris Johnson and his Home Secretary, Priti Patel, who is responsible for the file, the threat of deportation to Rwanda would have the effect of discouraging these illegal immigrants and stamping out the smuggling industry which exploits this network. .
A choice far from being unanimous
But many voices are raised against this controversial decision.
The UN High Commissioner for Refugees, Filippo Grandi, on Monday condemned this “catastrophic precedent”, while the Anglican Church castigated an “immoral” project.
Coming out of his neutrality, Prince Charles for his part said he was “dismayed” by this initiative, as were all the British NGOs which have put themselves in battle order.
“It’s inhumane and completely irresponsible,” said Tom Davies, spokesperson for Amnesty International in the UK.
For this activist, responsible for asylum issues, the government’s project is quite simply “incompatible with the convention relating to the status of refugees”, yet signed by the country in 1951.
“It’s an announced disaster,” he adds.
PHOTO ANDREW MATTHEWS, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Protesters gather at the perimeter of Boscombe Down Air Force Base, UK, where a plane was to take asylum seekers from the UK to Rwanda.
Mr. Davies points out that Israel had tried the same thing a few years ago, without success.
” This initiative [d’Israël] was abandoned, but not before many of these deported migrants suffered abuse in Rwanda”, he said, recalling that the regime of President Paul Kagame is regularly accused by NGOs of repressing freedom of expression and the political opposition.
The British program is also inspired by the deportation program of Australia, with its detention centers offshore, especially in New Guinea. With the difference that the expulsions from the United Kingdom will be permanent: according to the agreement, those expelled will be forced to remain in Rwanda and apply for asylum there.
“This time, we are completely outsourcing asylum,” notes François Gemenne, professor at the Paris Institute of Political Studies and director of the Hugo Observatory on environmental migration. “That is to say that if the request of these people is rejected, it will be up to Rwanda to manage them. »
Rwanda is ready
Responding to criticism, Kigali on Tuesday defended the agreement with London, saying it was ready to welcome “thousands” of migrants expelled under this program described as “innovative”, which constitutes a “solution to an asylum system failing world”.
“We are doing it for good reasons,” said a government spokeswoman at a press conference, arguing that it was not “immoral to offer people a home”.
The agreement between the two countries provides that the United Kingdom will initially finance the program to the tune of 120 million pounds (188 million Canadian dollars).
It may seem extremely expensive for results that will ultimately be quite limited in terms of effectiveness.
François Gemenne, professor at the Paris Institute of Political Studies and director of the Hugo Observatory on environmental migrations
“I would say that we are rather in the order of the symbol. That Johnson wants to show Brexit voters that they did not vote for nothing and that the UK has absolute control over its borders,” he adds.
However, the effects seem to be felt. Joined in Calais, Pierre Rocques, head of the migrant aid organization Utopia 56, confirms that migrants have become rarer since the announcement of the British plan.
“There is real angst,” he said. People are very afraid of being sent to Rwanda. They moved a little away from the border and retreated towards Brussels and Paris while waiting to see if it will happen or not… We know very well that it will not be applicable. They do it to scare. If it works, it will only work for a while…”