ASYLUM SEEKERS could be sent back to the war-torn countries they fled from if they choose not to relocate to Rwanda under the government’s controversial asylum policy.
The Home Office has outlined services for those escaping conflict to return on a voluntary basis to their country of origin following documents that will see the first set of 100 refugees face removal.
“You have the option to leave the UK voluntarily. However, should you be removed it will be to Rwanda,” the document reads.
“There is no right of appeal against the decision to treat your asylum claim as inadmissible.”
Asylum seekers from countries such as Iran and Eritrea, with the majority coming from Sudan, are all expected to be hit hard by the UK-Rwanda deal after the Home Office concluded that their means of finding refuge in Britain as “inadmissible.”
As the deal prepares to take effect, Karen Doyle – an organiser at Movement For Justice – told the Guardian: “It’s as if the Home Office is saying to this group of asylum seekers: ‘Here’s a hell we created for you in Rwanda but you can choose to go back to the hell you escaped from instead.’ This is not a choice. These are refugees who cannot return home. In practice this is ripping up the UK’s stated commitment to refugees.”
On Friday, those held at Brook House detention centre near Gatwick airport staged a demonstration in the exercise yard against the deal and some began a hunger strike against the Home Office’s plans.
Sudanese asylum seekers are thought to have been ranked seventh as one of the largest nationalities to arrive in the UK on small boats between January and March of this year alone and have a staggering 92% grant rate for asylum claims.
The group are followed by refugees from Afghanistan who make up 1,094 of asylum seekers making their way across the Channel with 722 people from Iran.
As the plans are set to go out ahead in the first cohort of asylum seekers, legal action has already been taken by some human rights charities in opposition to the Home Office plans.
Speaking to the Guardian, Clare Moseley, chief executive of Care4Calais, said: “It is deeply disturbing that the profile of people issued with Rwanda notices does not reflect those who cross the Channel in the largest numbers. Sudanese refugees often have no money to pay people smugglers and yet represent more than a third of those being sent to Rwanda.
“We are told that more than 25% of those crossing the Channel in the first three months of this year are Afghans yet they do not appear to be facing offshoring in such large numbers. The Rwanda plan is highly political. Is the selection process more so?”
A Home Office spokesperson said: “Our world-leading partnership with Rwanda is a key part of our strategy to overhaul the broken asylum system and break the evil people-smugglers’ business model.
“We have now issued formal directions to the first group of people due to be relocated to Rwanda later this month, where they will be given the opportunity to rebuild their lives there. This marks a critical step towards operationalising the policy and we remain fully committed to working with Rwanda to offer safety to those seeking asylum and ultimately save lives.”
Comments Form
2 Comments
SHE IS BASCIALLY TELLING PEOPLE. YOUR NOT WELCOME HERE. RUNNING SCARED OF THE REFORM PARTY(BREXIT PARTY). FARAGE OLD HAUNT.
Over 5,000 people have now arrived illegally in England from France on small boats.
They are housed in hotels at taxpayer’s expense.
They are treated far better than London’s native homeless.
Local Authorities have been asked to prioritise housing for these people who have no connection to the local Councils.
Moreover, the massive influx of mostly unaccompanied young men needs to be addressed and stop immediately.
No who cares about the welfare of this already overcrowded island would welcome the unmanaged influx of young men on this scale, illegally breaching England’s undefended borders.