East Africa

The United Kingdom defends its intention to send asylum seekers to Rwanda.

Priti Patel, the Home Secretary, has retaliated against critics of the government’s plan to transfer asylum seekers to Rwanda, claiming that they have failed to provide answers.

She and Rwanda’s foreign minister wrote in the New York Times that they had presented an innovative solution to the “deadly trade” of people smuggling.

They claimed that no “humanitarian nation” could allow such suffering to endure.

It comes after Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby stated that the idea raises “severe ethical concerns.”

Under the weight of humanitarian crises and human trafficking, Ms Patel and Rwanda’s foreign minister, Vincent Biruta, warned the global refugee system was “collapsing.”

According to them, the plan to transport illegally entered asylum seekers to Rwanda, where they can apply to settle, will assist those escaping persecution to find shelter.

They went on to say that the UK’s £120 million investment in Rwanda for educational programs would help to address the shortage of possibilities that drive economic migration.

“We’re taking daring and imaginative actions, and it’s astonishing that people who criticize the plans haven’t come up with their own answers,” they wrote.

“Any humanitarian nation can no longer afford to allow this suffering to continue.”

It was also revealed that some Rwandan refugees will be relocated to the United Kingdom under the terms of a bilateral agreement.

.According to the Bazzup, the UK government will assist Rwanda in resettling “a part of the most vulnerable refugees.”

The Archbishop of Canterbury, who spoke out against the proposal on Easter Sunday, accused the government of “subcontracting our responsibilities” and said it could not “stand the judgment of God.”

The Archbishop of York, Stephen Cottrell, joined him in calling the policy “depressing and disturbing,” and saying, “We can do better than this.”

The plan has been slammed by opposition parties and some Conservative MPs, while over 160 charities and campaign organizations have branded it “shamefully brutal” and urged the prime minister and Ms Patel to withdraw it.

Rwanda’s own human rights record was one of their worries, with the UK raising claims of arbitrary executions, disappearances, and torture in the east African country at the United Nations last year.

Ms. Patel and Mr. Biruta wrote in the New York Times that Rwanda “ranks as one of the world’s safest countries” and that it had already taken in 130,000 refugees from various countries.

While the home secretary and Rwanda’s foreign minister both stated that the strategy would “deter migrants from endangering their lives” by embarking on risky voyages, a letter from the Home Office’s senior officer stated that evidence for a deterrent effect was “very dubious.”

Permanent Secretary Matthew Rycroft warned that the program would come at a great cost and would only be worthwhile if it decreased the number of people who died.

ADVERTISMENT

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Back to top button