Can Sunak override the Supreme Court’s refusal to deport refugees? | Policy

Al Jazeera Net correspondents

London- The British government received a painful blow to its plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda, after the Supreme Court ruled that this plan was illegal, which means it was invalidated, after months of human rights and legal controversy and the government’s insistence on launching this plan, whatever the cost.

While some expected that the Supreme Court ruling might put an end to the plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda once and for all, given that the decisions of the Supreme Court are not subject to cassation or appeal, but the British Prime Minister Rishi Sonak Opening the door again to other options that may force the government to circumvent the Supreme Court ruling to proceed with the deportation of asylum seekers.

The options proposed by the British government are not without risk in damaging the country’s legal and legal image and showing it as a country that does not respect the law and judicial rulings.

What comes after the court ruling?

Immediately after the Supreme Court’s ruling – which said that “the plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda is illegal due to the presence of real dangers to the lives of asylum seekers if they are deported to other countries, while the government does not provide the necessary guarantees that asylum seekers will not be deported from Rwanda to other countries” – The response from the Prime Minister was that he had two options. The first was to sign a new agreement with Rwanda in which it pledged that it would not deport any asylum seeker to a third country.

The other option is the most controversial from both a legal and political standpoint, which is to pass an emergency law that states that “Rwanda is a safe country under a law voted on by the House of Commons, in which the Conservatives have an overwhelming majority.” Thus, the British courts will have to deal with this law and not oppose deportation again. Other.

But there will be an obstacle to this law, which is the European Court of Human Rights, which has the power to reject the law and cancel the deportation again, and here Sunak hinted – without declaring – the possibility of withdrawing from the European Court of Human Rights, saying that he will not allow a foreign court to control Britain’s sovereign decisions.

The spiral will never end

In response to the Prime Minister’s plan to establish an emergency law to pass the deportation plan to Rwanda, Steve Smith, Executive Director of the “Care for Calais” Foundation – the institution that filed the lawsuit before the Supreme Court to drop the deportation plan – said, “There is a nickname for political leaders who bypass the rule of law, which is The title of dictator.

The British jurist said in his interview with Al Jazeera Net, “Rishi Sunak, through his new plan, does not respect the sovereignty of the Supreme Court in the United Kingdom. All of this is in the name of a cruel, immoral, and illegal policy from the point of view of local law, as well as in relation to the international treaties that the United Kingdom is proud of.” “It is a party to it.”

Smith was surprised by what he called the British Prime Minister’s insistence on “continuing this cycle through an emergency law, because any legislation, even if it is passed under the emergency clause, will be able to be appealed in the local courts in the United Kingdom, and we will return to the same point.”

The director of the “Care for Calais” Foundation considered that the only solution is “the Prime Minister’s acceptance of the Supreme Court’s ruling, because this will make him think about solving the real immigration problem and searching for a system that protects those fleeing from persecution, slavery and torture.”

An important victory for asylum seekers

In turn, the lawyer specializing in immigration affairs, Mahmoud Hassan, confirmed that according to the Supreme Court’s decision, “no deportation decision should be issued at the current stage, and any decision issued is considered an infringement of the decision of the British Supreme Court and does not carry any legal status as long as the proposal for the new emergency law has not yet been issued and has not been issued.” It is ratified.”

Hassan continued in his speech to Al Jazeera Net, “If the deportation decision is issued later after the ratification of the new law proposal, there are many local and international organizations and associations in Britain that seek with all their might to provide support and appoint free lawyers to every person against whom a deportation decision is issued.”

The expert in immigration law provided some important advice to asylum seekers, including: “If the asylum seeker suffers from a health condition, he must declare this in his first interview and provide a detailed explanation, because this helps to avoid issuing a deportation decision, which may constitute an obstacle to delaying his file and obtaining the right to obtain asylum. seek refuge”.

The other point – which is the most important from the lawyer’s point of view – is that “if he has relatives – whether first or second degree, or if there is a person in Britain related to him and they plan to start a family or get married – then he must declare this in his first interview with him.” .