Rwanda Bill latest: Rishi Sunak’s asylum plan becomes law as five migrants die trying to cross the Channel

The Law Society, which is the independent professional body for solicitors in England and Wales, has criticised Rishi Sunak’s new Rwanda legislation.

Richard Atkinson, Law Society of England and Wales vice president, said: “The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill will soon become law but it remains a defective, constitutionally improper piece of legislation.

“It is extremely disappointing that the sensible amendments made by peers to remove some of the Bill’s worse excesses have been ignored.

“This Bill is a backward step for the rule of law and the UK’s constitutional balance and it limits access to justice. “Some of the most vulnerable asylum seekers will now be at further risk due to this fundamentally flawed Bill.

“UK government must be extremely careful about how it implements the legislation, ensuring it continues to work with the domestic courts and in line with our international obligations and commitments.”

Preparations for the first flights to Rwanda will begin within days, with asylum seekers who could be relocated being identified and potentially detained.

Charter planes are expected to leave for Rwanda in 10-12 weeks, with Rishi Sunak promising “multiple flights a month”, although minsters conceded numbers being sent to Kigali will be small at first.

Some £290 million has already been committed to the Rwanda scheme, with a further £100 million earmarked over the next two years.

The cost of putting each migrant on a plane is expected to reach £11,000, while Rwanda will get £20,000 for each asylum seeker relocated there and a £120 million top-up once 300 have arrived.

UN experts have expressed concern over Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda bill and urged airlines not to facilitate the UK-Rwanda asylum transfers.

The first plane carrying asylum seekers could depart in July, after Mr Sunak acknowledged it could still take 10 to 12 weeks to get flights off the ground.

Independent experts with the UN said: “Airlines and aviation regulators could be complicit in violating internationally protected human rights and court orders by facilitating removals to Rwanda.”

They added that airlines should be held responsible if they assist in the removal of asylum seekers from the UK.

Five migrants have died in an attempt to cross the English Channel just hours after Rishi Sunak’s flagship Rwanda bill was passed by Parliament.

The French coast guard confirmed there was a failed attempt to cross the Channel on Tuesday morning.

A spokesperson said its agents were still operating at sea after what the official called a ‘busy’ morning, with several crossing attempts.

Senior United Nations (UN) figures have urged Rishi Sunak to reconsider the Rwanda scheme, which they say “shifts responsbility” for refugee protection.

Filippo Grandi, the UN high commissioner for refugees said: “The new legislation marks a further step away from the UK’s long tradition of providing refuge to those in need, in breach of the Refugee Convention.

“Protecting refugees requires all countries – not just those neighbouring crisis zones – to uphold their obligations. This arrangement seeks to shift responsibility for refugee protection, undermining international cooperation and setting a worrying global precedent.”

Volker Turk, the UN high commissioner for human rights, said: “By shifting responsibility for refugees, reducing the UK’s courts’ ability to scrutinise removal decisions, restricting access to legal remedies in the UK and limiting the scope of domestic and international human rights protections for a specific group of people, this new legislation seriously hinders the rule of law in the UK and sets a perilous precedent globally.

“It is critical to the protection of the human rights and dignity of refugees and migrants seeking protection that all removals from the UK are carried out after assessing their specific individual circumstances in strict compliance with international human rights and refugee law.”

As the Tories face a bloodbath at upcoming local elections, the PM is desperate to get his backbenchers onboard, writes Andrew Grice.

Migrants seem undeterred about the risk of being sent to Rwanda, according to the BBC.

Migrants told BBC Breakfast “If there is a risk of going to Africa, that doesn’t matter to me. First I want to go to the UK it is worth the risk.”

A small percentage of those crossing will go to Rwanda at the start Illegal migration minister Michael Tomlinson admits.

But he said there will be a “regular rhythm of flights” as the Rwanda bill starts to work.

He said: “They are trying to come to the UK. But when they see they won’t get there.

“If you come to the UK illegally you will be detained and removed to Rwanda that is when you will see the deterrent effect kick in.”

Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda Bill is finally set to become law after weeks of parliamentary deadlock, paving the way for deportation flights to get off the ground.

The legislation is the latest attempt by the government to revive its plan to hand asylum seekers who come to the UK by crossing the Channel a one-way ticket to Kigali. The deal has been plagued by setbacks since it was signed two years ago.

When will Rwanda flights take off?

The first plane carrying asylum seekers could depart in July, after Mr Sunak acknowledged it could still take 10 to 12 weeks to get flights off the ground.

This would be more than two years since the first flight ever attempted under the deal was grounded amid last-minute legal challenges.

Chief executive of the refugee charity Care4Calais, Steve Smith, has said asylum seekers will “suffer irreversible harm” if the Rwanda Bill goes ahead.

Mr Smith told Times Radio: “So for example, the Wethersfield camp, where the home office is supposed to apply criteria that determine who is sent to the camp. We often find people with mental illness, physical disabilities, victims of torture, modern-day slavery… these are the same sorts of reasons that people end up as asylum seekers.

“Where those criteria are present. We will support individuals in launching challenges.”

He described the idea of Rwanda being designated as a safe country for refugees by the Government as “fictional”.

“I mean, how do you just determine that the Supreme Court rules, (which) rule that it’s not a safe country for refugees? The United Nations High Commission for Refugees says that this is not a safe country, for refugees,” he said.

“Who in the Government has actually been to Africa other than a handful right up the top… it’s just nonsense.”