Rwanda: What is the government policy and why has it ended up in the courts?

Published

2 years ago

November 15, 2023

admin

The government’s flagship immigration policy, known as the Rwanda plan, is hanging in the balance this morning as ministers wait for the judgement of the highest court in the land.

But what is the scheme? Why is it so controversial? And how has it ended up in the judicial system?

The Rwanda plan was first proposed by Boris Johnson back in April 2022 as the government came under increasing pressure to tackle the growing number of small boats crossing the Channel.

The then-prime minister outlined his policy that would see anyone arriving in the country illegally deported to the east African nation.

Those who successfully applied for refugee status when there would then be given the right to remain in Rwanda – not return to the UK.

But if their claim was unsuccessful, they could then be removed to their country of origin.

The deal, signed by the home secretary at the time, Priti Patel, and her Rwandan counterpart, cost the government £120m.

Mr Johnson said it would help deter people from making the dangerous crossing to the UK and tackle the “barbaric trade in human misery” caused by people traffickers.

Opposition parties and charities deemed the plan “cruel and nasty”, and claimed the policy would break international human rights laws.

There were even reports that King Charles – then the Prince of Wales – was a critic of the scheme.

But the government pushed ahead, with the first flight to Kigali set to take off in June 2022.

Come the day, there were only seven asylum seekers on board the plane.

Numerous court cases were launched by refugee charities, as well as the Public and Commercial Services union, ahead of take off, calling the policy “inhumane” and demanding the deportations were stopped.

Protesters also tried to stop the flight, locking themselves together with metal pipes and blockading exits of the Colnbrook Immigration Removal Centre at Heathrow, where the migrants were believed to be held.

However, English judges ruled the seven people could be deported, saying there had been an “assurance” from government that if the policy was found to be unlawful at a later stage, steps would be taken to bring back any migrants.

This didn’t stop further last minute legal challenges to prevent take off though.

In the end, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) issued injunctions to halt the deportations altogether, leaving the plane grounded on a Ministry of Defence runway.

The government said it would appeal against the ruling, with Tory MPs angered that a European court could overrule the decision of English judges.

But campaigners said it showed the “inhumanity” of the plan for the human rights watchdog to intervene.

In the months that followed, there was a change in government, with Liz Truss taking the keys to Number 10 and Suella Braverman heading up the Home Office.

However, both women stood by the Rwanda plan and, even when Ms Truss was ousted weeks later, her successor Rishi Sunak also gave it his backing.

The ruling of the ECHR – which ensures the European Human Rights Convention is adhered to – was still fresh in the minds of Tory backbenchers, as they saw it as holding up the policy they believed would stop the boats.

And it led to a number of calls for the UK to leave the convention, though they appeared to remain in the minority.

The plan itself headed back to the courts as campaigners tried a new tactic to stop it in its tracks, launching a judicial review on the Home Office’s assessment of Rwanda as a safe third country.

The government doubled down on its belief in the scheme – with Ms Braverman telling the Conservative Party conference it was her “dream” to see flights take off.

And come December of 2022, that dream looked closer to reality, as the High Court ruled in the favour of ministers, saying the scheme did not breach either the UN’s Refugee Convention or human rights laws, and that Rwanda was a “safe third country” for migrants to be sent to.

But the legal battle was far from over.

Campaigners were then allowed to appeal the ruling in the Court of Appeal, and the three sitting judges overturned the High Court’s decision.

Lord Chief Justice Lord Burnett concluded Rwanda was not a safe place for people to be housed while their asylum claims were processed, adding: “The result is that the High Court’s decision that Rwanda was a safe third country is reversed, and unless and until the deficiencies in its asylum process are corrected, removal of asylum seekers will be unlawful.”

The government was outraged, with the prime minister saying he “fundamentally disagreed” with the ruling, and would do “whatever is necessary” to get the removal flights going.

The anger of Ms Braverman and her right wing supporters also grew, with further demands to leave the ECHR, and others calling for the human rights convention to be overhauled.

The government got approval to appeal that ruling and, as a result, it was sent to the Supreme Court.

Those judges will announce their decision today – and if they stick by the ruling of the Court of Appeal, that would signal the end of the government’s long fought for, but extremely controversial, Rwanda scheme.

Follow the Supreme Court ruling at news.sky.com, on the app, or on Sky News from 10am

UK

‘This shouldn’t have happened’: Bishop who interrupted church choir in dressing gown apologises

Published

5 hours ago

August 2, 2025

admin

'This shouldn't have happened': Bishop who interrupted church choir in dressing gown apologises

A bishop who interrupted a church concert in his dressing gown – and told singers to “leave his house” – has formally apologised to the choir.

Jonathan Baker was filmed standing barefoot at a microphone as he criticised performers for making a “terrible racket” at St Andrew’s Church in central London.

Addressing the City Academy Voices choir directly, the bishop of Fulham said: “I write to apologise for the distress and offence I caused in bringing the concert to a premature end.

“This should not have happened … I also apologise for remarks which were made in haste, and which have understandably caused hurt and distress.”

Mr Baker had demanded for the performance to stop because it was 10pm – and says he didn’t realise the choir had booked the church until 11pm.

In the statement obtained by Sky News, he added: “I have lived here on site at St Andrew’s for 10 years, for much of which City Academy has rehearsed and performed here.

“You have been, and continue to be, welcome – and I hope that you will be able to continue the relationship with us.

“I can give you every assurance that the events of Friday evening will not recur, and I apologise again to performers (especially those unable to perform at the end of the evening) and the audience alike.”

The choir was performing to a 300-strong audience in Holborn when the lights were suddenly turned off, with Mr Baker declaring the concert was “over”.

A church employee then asked the crowd to leave quietly and for the musicians to step down from the stage, attracting boos from the audience.

The choir went on to perform one last song, an A cappella version of ABBA’s Dancing Queen, before bringing their show to a close.

One member of the audience, who was attending with his 10-year-old daughter, told Sky News he initially thought the interruption was a staged joke.

Benedict Collins had told Sky News: “This work deserves respect, not to be disparaged as a ‘terrible racket’. The people here had put their heart and soul into it.

“The bishop cut them off in midstream, preventing soloists who had worked their hardest from singing – and preventing the audience, which included people of all ages, from enjoying it to the end.”

The choir told Sky News it was “upsetting” that they were unable to finish their show as planned, but “hold no hard feelings and wish the bishop well”.

A spokesperson added: “If anyone is thinking of joining one of our choirs, the City Academy Voices rehearse on Mondays in central London. Dressing gowns optional.”

UK

X criticises Online Safety Act – and warns it’s putting free speech in the UK at risk

Published

6 hours ago

August 2, 2025

admin

X criticises Online Safety Act - and warns it's putting free speech in the UK at risk

The Online Safety Act is putting free speech at risk and needs significant adjustments, Elon Musk’s social network X has warned.

New rules that came into force last week require platforms such as Facebook, YouTube, TikTok and X – as well as sites hosting pornography – to bring in measures to prove that someone using them is over the age of 18.

The Online Safety Act requires sites to protect children and to remove illegal content, but critics have said that the rules have been implemented too broadly, resulting in the censorship of legal content.

X has warned the act’s laudable intentions were “at risk of being overshadowed by the breadth of its regulatory reach”.

It said: “When lawmakers approved these measures, they made a conscientious decision to increase censorship in the name of ‘online safety’.

“It is fair to ask if UK citizens were equally aware of the trade-off being made.”

X claims the timetable for platforms to meet mandatory measures had been unnecessarily tight – and despite complying, sites still faced threats of enforcement and fines, “encouraging over-censorship”.

“A balanced approach is the only way to protect individual liberties, encourage innovation and safeguard children. It’s safe to say that significant changes must take place to achieve these objectives in the UK,” it said.

A UK government spokesperson said it is “demonstrably false” that the Online Safety Act compromises free speech.

“As well as legal duties to keep children safe, the very same law places clear and unequivocal duties on platforms to protect freedom of expression,” they added.

Users have complained about age checks that require personal data to be uploaded to access sites that show pornography, and 468,000 people have already signed a petition asking for the new law to be repealed.

In response to the petition, the government said it had “no plans” to reverse the Online Safety Act.

Reform UK’s leader Nigel Farage likened the new rules to “state suppression of genuine free speech” and said his party would ditch the regulations.

Technology Secretary Peter Kyle said on Tuesday that those who wanted to overturn the act were “on the side of predators” – to which Mr Farage demanded an apology, calling Mr Kyle’s comments “absolutely disgusting”.

Regulator Ofcom said on Thursday it had launched an investigation into how four companies – that collectively run 34 pornography sites – are complying with new age-check requirements.

These companies – 8579 LLC, AVS Group Ltd, Kick Online Entertainment S.A. and Trendio Ltd – run dozens of sites, and collectively have more than nine million unique monthly UK visitors, the internet watchdog said.

The regulator said it prioritised the companies based on the risk of harm posed by the services they operated and their user numbers.

It adds to the 11 investigations already in progress into 4chan, as well as an unnamed online suicide forum, seven file-sharing services, and two adult websites.

Ofcom said it expects to make further enforcement announcements in the coming months.

UK

British children who drowned off Spanish coast named

Published

7 hours ago

August 2, 2025

admin

British children who drowned off Spanish coast named

Two siblings who drowned while on holiday in Spain have been named – with a fundraiser for their family reaching £40,000.

Ameiya and Ricardo Junior Parris, aged 13 and 11, died on Tuesday evening after getting into difficulty off Llarga beach in Salou, Catalonia.

Their father Ricardo tried to rescue them, but he also got into difficulty and was unconscious when he was pulled from the water. He was later released from hospital with a concussion.

Ricardo Senior and his partner, Shanice Del-Brocco, 31, were staying at the Hotel Best Negresco right by the beach with their six children when tragedy struck.

The construction worker from Birmingham had taken their two oldest children for one final swim while Shanice had taken the younger ones back to the hotel.

“They’d gone out. They were being sensible. They’re very good swimmers,” the children’s aunt, Kayla Del-Brocco, said.

“They knew it was late. However, they’d been doing this every day on holiday, so that day was no different. They didn’t go out far, but the current was just too strong and pulled them.”

A hotel worker saw the siblings struggling in the water and called for help. When Shanice returned to the beach, emergency services were already at the scene, with Junior, nicknamed Joby, taken away in a helicopter.

“It’s breaking (Ricardo), if I’m honest, because he was in the water, and I know he said things to my sister like: ‘I had him, I had Joby in my arms, and we got smacked up the rocks, and that’s the last thing I remember,'” Shanice’s sister said.

Ricardo Senior suffered a “nasty concussion and some bumps and batters”, Ms Del-Brocco said, adding that he was the first to be rescued.

The couple were unable to see their children’s bodies until Thursday at the mortuary and are now waiting for them to be repatriated to the UK, which they were told “could be anything from seven to 15 days”, Ms Del-Rocco said.

“They are just numb. They’re holding each other up and keeping it together for the little ones at the minute; going through the motions and desperately waiting to come home now.”

The GoFundMe page to help cover the cost of repatriating the bodies of Ameiya and Ricardo Junior, which was set up by her cousin, has already raised around £40,000, which Ms Del-Rocco described as “phenomenally overwhelming”.

“Maya was intelligent, thoughtful, and growing into a strong young woman. Ricardo Junior was playful, kind, and always smiling. They brought so much love, laughter, and energy into the lives of everyone around them,” the fundraising page reads.

“Their absence has left an unbearable silence not just for their parents, but for their whole family, who were incredibly close and shared an unbreakable bond.”

Ms Del-Brocco said that Ameiya and Junior, who were in Years 7 and 8 at North Birmingham Academy, were doting older siblings, with their mother describing them as “hilarious, sensitive and loving – the best big brother and sister anyone could want”.

Their aunt said that Ameiya, a talented runner with ambitions of going to the Olympics, was “unapologetically just herself” and “driven by being unique”.

Ricardo Junior was a “very, very special one-of-a-kind character” who wanted to become a famous YouTuber.

A Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office spokesperson said: “We are supporting the family of two British children who have died in Spain and are in contact with the local authorities.”