UK to agree law banning boat migrants from seeking asylum: Reports

• 

The UK government will reveal next week its plans to ban illegal migrants by boat from claiming asylum, facilitating their relocation abroad, media reported on Saturday.

Stopping the migrant boats has been among UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak's leading priorities, since a record 45,756 people crossed the English Channel in 2022 and came ashore in the country, according to British newspaper inews, up 60 percent from the previous year.

While the surge in migrant arrivals is expected soon in Spring, the UK government will agree on legislation to deport illegal migrants to a "safe" third country such as Rwanda "as soon as reasonably practicable" and ban them permanently from coming back, the report said.

The new step would face major obstacles as it risks infringing on the European Convention on Human Rights and will raise concerns about where tens of thousands of migrants will be accommodated as several considered disused military sites are unfit to live in.

A survey revealed in January that nearly half of asylum seekers facing deportation to Rwanda are married, with one-fifth having children.

The survey found that the majority of asylum seekers facing deportation to Rwanda come from countries where more than 80% of people have had their refugee status recognized by the UK. 

Read: UK judges rule Rwanda deportation plan is lawful

The new study refutes claims made by former home secretary Priti Patel, who introduced the program to stop people from attempting to cross the English Channel in small boats, claiming that they were "not genuine asylum seekers" and "elbowing out the women and children, who are at risk and fleeing persecution."

In a pool of 213 people, 72% of those who were threatened with being deported to Rwanda by the Home Office came from Western-torn Arab countries. At least 82% of applicants from these nations are accepted in the UK.

Between August 2022 and January 17, 2023, the Home Office sent notices of intent to every participant in the survey. Anyone who gets such a notification could end up being transported to Rwanda.

When she was home secretary, Patel said: “In the last 12 months alone, 70% of the individuals who have come to our country illegally via small boats are single men, who are effectively economic migrants. They are not genuine asylum seekers … These are the ones who are elbowing out the women and children, who are at risk and fleeing persecution.”

Is Rwanda the solution? 

A recent YouGov poll indicated that only 10% of those questioned agreed that sending individuals to Rwanda was the best method to address the issue of small boat arrivals. Despite the high court agreeing that this ruling can be appealed, it did rule the plan legal in December of last year.

Read more: Rishi Sunak, Liz Truss promise expansion of 'cruel' Rwanda asylum plan

A spokesperson for Together With Refugees and chief executive of Safe Passage, Beth Gardiner-Smith, said: “This scheme is not just morally wrong; it’s expensive and unworkable. If our government were serious about tackling smuggling and saving lives at sea, they would scrap this plan and urgently expand safe routes for refugees.”

Moreover, Clare Moseley, founder of Care4Calais, said “This brutal policy will not end small boat crossings, it won’t stop people smugglers and it won’t keep refugees safe. There is a kinder and more effective option: give safe passage to refugees in Calais.”

A Home Office spokesperson said that everyone in scope for relocation to Rwanda will be "individually assessed," without relocating any of them to a proper place.