The British House of Commons is once again grappling with the contentious Rwanda bill, aimed at facilitating deportations to Africa regardless of asylum-seekers’ origin, sparking heated debates and opposition from various quarters.
At the forefront of the opposition is 91-year-old Alfred Dubs, a former child refugee who fled the Holocaust via the Kindertransport. Dubs, now a life peer in the House of Lords, vehemently opposes the government’s plan to deport refugees to Rwanda, labeling it as “shameful” and detrimental to the UK’s reputation.
Despite opposition from the Lords, the Conservative-dominated House is expected to push forward with the bill, driven by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s agenda to “stop the boats” and curb irregular arrivals. The proposed legislation seeks to deport refugees arriving in the UK, including those crossing the English Channel, to Rwanda, where they would be required to lodge their asylum applications.
This move has faced legal hurdles in the past, with courts blocking similar plans by Boris Johnson’s government. However, Sunak remains determined to implement the bill, citing the exorbitant costs of accommodating refugees in British hotels and the need for a deterrent to stem irregular migration.
Critics, including human rights lawyers and refugee organizations, argue that the bill is not only inhumane but also unlikely to deter refugees from seeking asylum in the UK. They point to the traumatic experiences of refugees facing deportation and emphasize the need for safe and legal migration routes.
Despite the government’s insistence on swift implementation, legal and ethical concerns persist, with civil servants’ associations and legal experts calling for further scrutiny of the bill’s compliance with international law. For Dubs, who experienced the UK’s generosity as a child refugee, the government’s stance represents a stark departure from its humanitarian obligations and warrants continued resistance.