Breaking: Despite ongoing legal challenges being considered by the Court of Appeal, the UK government has rewritten the Rwanda deal to expand it to cover everyone crossing the Channel - including modern slavery victims - rather than just asylum seekers
Suella Braverman has removed the previous test of "inadmissibility", which is detailed below, to bring it in line with her Illegal Migration Bill - which was only introduced in parliament this month and hasn't been scrutinised or considered in the Lords
independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-n…
independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-n…
A Home Office press release said: "The Home Secretary and Dr Biruta signed an update to the Memorandum of Understanding, expanding the Partnership further to all categories of people who pass through safe countries and make illegal and dangerous journeys to the UK...
"...This will have the added benefit of preparing the UK to deliver on the measures proposed in the Illegal Migration Bill, as it will mean that anyone who comes to the UK illegally – who cannot be returned to their home country – will be in scope to be relocated to Rwanda"
The Memorandum of Understanding has never been voted on by Parliament and doesn't have to be, but I'm sure many MPs and peers won't be pleased about their scrutiny being bypassed like this
What happens if parliament significantly changes the bill and the MOU is out of line?
What happens if parliament significantly changes the bill and the MOU is out of line?
Modern slavery victims are a major target of bill, despite a tiny proportion of small boat migrants being referred for protection and no evidence of systematic abuse
New legal challenges are highly likely and there is a big question about the current one
independent.co.uk/independentpre…
New legal challenges are highly likely and there is a big question about the current one
independent.co.uk/independentpre…
It is objectively insane for people to may have been trafficked to the UK to be forcibly deported to Rwanda
People self-harmed and threatened to kill themselves on first attempted flight, some were carried onto plane and attached to seats in restraints
independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-n…
People self-harmed and threatened to kill themselves on first attempted flight, some were carried onto plane and attached to seats in restraints
independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-n…
The govt has been making much of the fact that the High Court ruled the Rwanda policy lawful in December
But it's being appealed and they considered the policy as it stood - what happens now there is a new MOU changing how people are selected? Eligibility was core to the case
But it's being appealed and they considered the policy as it stood - what happens now there is a new MOU changing how people are selected? Eligibility was core to the case
Look how many times the MOU and inadmissibility threshold are mentioned in this interim Court of Appeal judgment from last week
This isn't a minor "tweak" that can just be glossed over and the hone secretary must know that
bailii.org/cgi-bin/format…)
This isn't a minor "tweak" that can just be glossed over and the hone secretary must know that
bailii.org/cgi-bin/format…)
It would be great to get the help of legal Twitter on this but I think the new MOU wipes out the 2nd current ground of appeal covering inadmissibility decisions
Can the Court of Appeal roll with the changes or do legal challenges go back to square one?
Can the Court of Appeal roll with the changes or do legal challenges go back to square one?
Inadmissibility is mentioned 325 times in December High Court judgment that ruled Rwanda policy - but no decisions for individual asylum seekers - lawful
It said the policy considered was "set out in a Memorandum of Understanding made on 13 April 2022" and 2 supplementary docs
It said the policy considered was "set out in a Memorandum of Understanding made on 13 April 2022" and 2 supplementary docs
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
