There is no question that expulsion to Rwanda under this Arrangement is not lawful since it is plainly contrary to vital principle & purpose of the legal agreement into which the UK voluntarily entered in making & adopting the Refugee Convention. 1/7
theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/j…
theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/j…
Oddly, the Rwanda Arrangement expressly recognises some of that principle & purpose in its Preamble while expressly undermining that by its content & intention. 2/7 
It is plainly not an exercise in #SharingResponsibility for UK to cast off its asylum responsibilities onto Rwanda & is generally destructive of that principle for UK to encourage or licence other relatively rich countries to do likewise. 3/7
It is plainly a penalty on account of arriving without prior permission to seek asylum, to transport a refugee to Rwanda for having done that as a means to deter other refugees doing the same. 4/7
It is equally plainly not expeditious to transfer people in the UK thousands of miles to a country without any equivalent resource to manage its own existing responsibilities to refugees for consideration of the asylum claims they have made in the UK. 5/7
Whether UK courts will consider themselves able to recognise these or other international law principle & purpose in considering the questions before them, remains to be seen. The UK Government has sought to avoid that be making the Rwanda Arrangement formally ‘not binding’. 6/7
But nonetheless what remains unarguable is that the Rwanda Arrangement is, even just on the matters of principle & purpose identified above, unlawful for profoundly undermining & contravening a legal agreement into which UK has entered. 7/7
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
