Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
LAST UPDATE | 14 Jun 2022
THE EUROPEAN COURT of Human Rights (ECHR) has issued an order to prevent the deportation of one of the seven asylum seekers scheduled to be on the first flight from the UK to Rwanda this evening.
In a statement, the ECHR said: “On 13 June 2022 the European Court of Human Rights received a request to indicate an urgent interim measure to the UK Government, under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, in relation to an Iraqi national who, having claimed asylum upon arrival in the UK on 17 May 2022, is facing removal to Rwanda on the evening of 14 June 2022.”
The ECHR has now indicated to the British Government that the applicant should not be sent to Rwanda until three weeks after the delivery of the final domestic decision in his ongoing judicial review proceedings.
Under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, the ECHR may indicate interim measures to any State Party to the European Convention on Human Rights.
“Measures under Rule 39 are decided in connection with proceedings before the Court, without prejudging any subsequent decisions on the admissibility or merits of the case. The Court grants such requests only on an exceptional basis, when the applicants would otherwise face a real risk of irreversible harm.
An application for permission to appeal by the man seeking to avoid being sent to Rwanda was rejected by the Supreme Court.
But Supreme Court president Robert Reed said: “In bringing that application, the appellant’s lawyers were performing their proper function of ensuring that their clients are not subjected to unlawful treatment at the hands of the Government.”
In a statement on Twitter, charity Care4Calais claimed that the ECHR’s order will make it possible for the other asylum seekers to make similar claims.
Today seven men and their families have been put through total hell. Why? If our government truly wanted to stop people smugglers and save lives there are more effective and humane options available. The Rwanda plan is brutal, unnecessary and shames our nation.
— Care4Calais (@Care4Calais) June 14, 2022
“Today seven men and their families have been put through total hell. Why? If our government truly wanted to stop people smugglers and save lives there are more effective and humane options available,” the charity said.
“The Rwanda plan is brutal, unnecessary and shames our nation. We are so relieved we have more time to put this right.”
Earlier today, Boris Johnson suggested lawyers representing migrants were “abetting the work of criminal gangs” as last-ditch court hearings took place ahead of the first flight sending asylum seekers to Rwanda.
The British Prime Minister insisted the Government would not be deterred from its policy, despite criticism from the Church of England and reportedly also from Prince Charles.
Johnson acknowledged there had been criticism of the plan from “some slightly unexpected quarters” but highlighted the legal profession as the main source of opposition to the Rwanda policy, which will see asylum seekers sent on a one-way trip to the African nation.
As Johnson stepped up his attack on the legal profession, Reed pointedly referred to lawyers “performing their proper function” representing their clients against the Government as he dealt with one of the cases related to the Rwanda policy.
The Bar Council and Law Society of England and Wales issued a joint statement condemning the “misleading and dangerous” comments from Johnson.
“Anyone at risk of a life-changing order has a right to challenge its legality with the assistance of a lawyer, who has a duty to advise their client on their rights,” the statement said.
“The Bar Council and Law Society of England and Wales together call on the Prime Minister to stop attacks on legal professionals who are simply doing their jobs.”
At a Cabinet meeting today, Johnson said: “They are, I’m afraid, undermining everything that we’re trying to do to support safe and legal routes for people to come to the UK and to oppose the illegal and dangerous routes.”
He said what the “criminal gangs are doing and what … those who effectively are abetting the work of the criminal gangs are doing, is undermining people’s confidence in the safe and legal system, undermining people’s general acceptance of immigration”.
Johnson was later asked, on a visit to Staffordshire, whether the UK would have to leave the European Convention on Human Rights to avoid the kind of legal battle he faces.
He said lawyers were “very good at picking up ways of trying to stop the Government from upholding what we think is a sensible law”, adding: “Will it be necessary to change some laws to help us as we go along? It may very well be and all these options are under constant review.”
The Government already plans a shake-up of human rights laws, with a new Bill of Rights promised in the Queen’s Speech delivered in May.
But Johnson hinting at leaving the European Convention on Human Rights would be a much bigger step, potentially triggering a fresh conflict with Tory moderates.
Cases involving the potential passengers were heard at the High Court and Supreme Court today.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
@David A. Murray: That was four years ago at this point and no one has emerged since. I’m also surprised that no party has taken a tougher stance on issues like illegal immigration and crime, as it would clearly be a vote winner based on that 26% that you referred to. In my opinion he would have got more votes than that had he being more articulate and had a little more charm. I’d hope that we don’t get a party that would be fully far-right on immigration issues as I do think some sensible immigration is a positive thing for a country, but the free for all system we have at the moment will only serve to push people to more extremes if it continues into the future.
Seems odd that the EU, with all their directives and rules, have not stepped in and warned France to do something about turning a blind eye to all these boats setting sail from french beaches and ports. Such reticence implies the EU care not a jot to possible asylum seekers risking their lives on the open seas.
@Keth Warsaw: If it was the other way a round and the boats were landing on French beaches do you think the French government would not act . The French are more than happy to see the back of them on the way to Dover .
@Keth Warsaw: you miss the point. Refugees crossing the Channel are leaving the EU for a third country. Nothing to do with the EU. This is a consequence of Brexit. When the UK was a member it was a Union problem. Now its not and the Brits have to deal with it on their own.
@Ciaran O’Mara: I understand that. But to allow this organized exodus day after day, and it’s certainly not and cannot be hidden, to continue, is tantamount to France, and thus the EU encouraging it. The refugees are leaving go from an EU country by means of organised criminals and setting sail on a life or death mission. This is turning into a proxy war between the EU and UK.
@Keth Warsaw: why do you want the EU via france protects the uk from migrants who for most of them come from countries which were british colonies and after were destroyed by wars leaded by the us and the uk ? before brexit france did what it could to stop them going to the uk but after brexit it is not its problem but only a british problem !
Unfortunately if this scheme is successful you will see an upsurge in refugees heading to Ireland .Irish government need to look into this and prepare now America under Joe is looking into something similar . If it is successful more countries will follow .UK spending £5 million a day on hotels to house these channel crossers .
@Robert Preston: it’s already happening, asylum seeker applications have increased 700% this year (176% on 2019 figures,.ie before covid). That’s not including the refugees fleeing Ukraine.
@Robert Preston: Economic. Migrants.
@v39e84kK: Your populistic bla bla makes me sick
@Johannes Baader: if you think people are crossing through France and reckon it’s not safe then you are a fool.
@v39e84kK: and the whole world is littered with Irish economic migrants, and has been for centuries
@Bridget O’Hanlon: So because there is loads of Irish economic immigrants around the world the UK should let all these in. Most of the Irish economic immigrants applied legally from Ireland and those that didn’t if found are usually expelled from the country they are in.
@The next small thing: Source of your ‘statistic’?
@Nick Caffrey: https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2022/0613/1304642-red-cow-refugees-reaction/
Here you go, I did make a slight error in my original post, its 164% in 2019 rather than the 176% I quoted.
Rwanda is ment to be lovely this time of the year
@John Kavanagh: In fairness, the war of types (that the Clinton administration ignored) between the Tuttsie and Hutu people’s is long over. The president a very fair man. I hope it stays that way. I can see why this now-stable country was chosen.
@Keth Warsaw: If you consider mass murdering, mass raping and suppression of any opposition or democracy to be very fair….. Well then……
@Johannes Baader: What and when are you referring to here? I’m referring to the Hutu / Tutsie civil war during the Clinton era. Rwanda today is run by Paul Kagame, and is part of the united nations. No war there now. Where did you get these facts?
@Derek Moean: ti’s right send em back home
@Irishman1: Ireland will also likely become more of a target for ‘Tell It Like It Is’ opportunist ‘politicians’, who were encouraged by the 26% of the last presidential vote won by a guy who ran around during the campaign looking for a ‘hook’ to hang his chances on and after targeting various people and ‘issues’, finally hit pay dirt. It’s clear that a number of people saw that and thought about carving some of that vote out for themselves.
Johnson gets more like Trump by the day
@Great White Hope: If 1200 boat people per day where landing at Rosslare i am sure Martin would have to act . What did Trump do that Boris is doing . Joe Biden is considering the same thing https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/06/02/joe-biden-set-send-migrants-spain-landmark-deal/
How come the Journal has comment’s off in the LBGTQIZWTYUIKJav®©£€¢√π××]™=πi ‘outrage’ article re live line & Joe Duffy? Wheres the balance Journal? I mean, The mentally ill preson with dysphoria only called for the term ‘woman’ to be removed from legal documentation and for people to stop using it. The woke cancer has made its way over here.
@Bricesypherthron Smith: They are afraid. I find it weird how Transgender has usurped gay, lesbian, bi etc to seemingly rule over the equality movement. I do not listen to Joe Duffy but unless the callers were advocating violence or something horrendous I would defend their right to express a view. The statement by Dublin Pride was so arrogant and presumptuous. It was like something an entitled 14 year old would write on tiktok when someone makes a joke they didn’t like.
@v39e84kK: Exactly, and this is their tactic. To be soo outraged by alternative views as to disengage and have a 2yo sulk until they get their way. It might have worked in the US but it won’t work here. They want terms like ‘breeder’ & ‘chest feeder’ to supplant Woman. Its literally insane and must be called so at every opportunity
@Bricesypherthron Smith: I agree, I am personally appalled by the erasure of women. If a man wants to cut off parts of his body and dress as a women then I think he should get mental help but I respect his right to autonomy. That said, I do not and will not say he is a woman. Reality matters.
@v39e84kK: Absolutely, if you want to chop you’re nuts off and call yourself Charlene go ahead, fill your boots. Just don’t expect me & the majority nof sane people to buy into your delusion and use ever changing pronouns, we’re not interested. Not drinking the kool-aid
@Bricesypherthron Smith: @Dominic Carr : Spoken like two people who haven’t an iota what they’re talking about and think that their personal life experience is how everyone experiences the world. You are not threatened by trans people. Get a grip.
@Great White Hope: why? Send them home? They are a better alternative to our own home grown living on the boardwalk. They want to work, they want to get an education…they want a life.
Our own grown scrotes want to live for free, get paid for the privilege of having kids, expect a house next to their Mam who babysit while they get wasted.
I’m sick of this government giving the well and able a free pass.
I’m all for supporting those that need it. But there’s plenty of hard working families also need it, some paying 42% paye..let’s help them.
Will they Have A seat on the plane For Borris
@Irishman1: oh give it a rest
@jenni: Yeah hmmmm…..let’s not bring in loads of economic migrants with no skills and also get the scrotes off their asses and into work. Hows that?
Shameless
@Mary N. Cooke: Brexit GB 2.0. Nothing shames that london govt anymore. I think it will get worse before it gets better unfortunately. Grateful that current Irish politics is driven by different values.
Does anybody, on any side of the argument, read the article? This is an interim order that does not prejudice the final outcome after all evidence has been heard. This is a standard order by the ECHR, indeed by any court. If there is an action that may break the law, the court can forbid it until its legality can be determined. That’s all it is so far. And for what it’s worth, I hope that they do prohibit his deportation to Rwanda.
Why send them to rwanda plenty of uninhabited islands around britain build detention centers on them n send them there
@Sue OB: exaactly bring them to the mainland when needed to harvest agriculture etc. Perfect solution
@Sue OB: Too many people thinking with their hearts, and not with the minds. Compassion can be practical. I think the culture of a country and people must also be respected and protected. This last sentiment when it comes to the indigenous Red Indians is sacred, but for the British Isles and Europe it’s seemingly disposable.
Excellent news. Now let’s hope when the judges review the other 6 people’s cases that they block their removal too. Horrendous, immoral and nonsensical policy in the first place that does nothing but feed the baying right wing mob of the tory party.
@Alan Cowdell-Browne: What do you advocate? Someone turns up after being in 5 safe countries says “lads I need to stay here costing you a million pounds. Why? Uh…..i’m persecuted or something. Proof? no” What’s your solution just let them come? How many? There are a billion people in Africa, can the UK take 10%? 15%? Enlighten me.
@v39e84kK: maybe start with empathy. Then realise the privilege you have not having gone through what they have gone through. Next, the UK could quite simply set up processing centres abroad to reduce the drive to get physically to the UK. Finally, avoid populist and factually incorrect media sources. I know this requires a bit of thinking beyond tabloid headings but sometimes it’s necessary to look beyond what’s being fed to those vulnerable to the ‘quick fix’ that’s in no way a fix, quick or otherwise.
@Alan Cowdell-Browne: Oh god. The tripe of the virtue signaller “start with empathy then carry on suggesting absolutely nothing viable blah blah privilege blah blah waffle waffle”. Let’s think this through, you are in France. You are safe. You are genuine asylum seeker. What earthly reason do you have to visit the UK processing centre located in France that you propose? None. You are already in a safe country.
@Alan Cowdell-Browne: Also note when asked specifics the virtue signaller cannot answer. Is it 10%, 15%? How many can the UK take out of the billion in Africa? The virtue signaller cannot answer. He can only lament “muh empathy”.
@v39e84kK: A first, incredibly obvious reason – you don’t speak French. You could pull your head out of your arse for 2 seconds and think about the practicalities of an actual human being somewhere they don’t know and a few more obvious ones might come to you.
The Chinese term for it is ‘Population Pollution” They enforce stringent border controls right across the whole continent! We have a land in Belfast with a world colonial British passport and a taxi ride takes you South ! The plan to settle thousands of Hong Kong British Passport holders in Northern Ireland was stopped by the Chinese Government not allowing them out ! Only yesterday meat factories were found with 30% illegals employed! The idea of giving Irish Passports to Brexiteers is anathema to any freedom loving Irishman !
@Bala mc blaha: got to agree. Misappropriated information at best. Kind of like an armchair referee. Does nothing, but gets to shout about it
@Irishman1: What a load of BS. Ireland doesn’t have a problem with asylum seekers. there are 9000 total in the country, with roughly 2000 arriving each year. Not big numbers.
@Steve O’Connor: Last count was 45,000 refugees from Ukraine.. 2000 is not a real number.
have your say