The Rwanda judgment was not a foregone conclusion

This morning, the Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeal’s judgment on the Rwanda plan and declared that the scheme is unlawful. The Court of Appeal had said that the principle of sending asylum seekers to foreign countries was unexceptionable. But the courts had to decide if Rwanda was likely to be a safe country which would not mistreat asylum seekers, or send them on to third countries where they would face mistreatment. It determined that Rwanda was not safe. The Supreme Court’s decision was, broadly, that the Court of Appeal had been right to take that line, and that the justices agreed with it. 

This decision is not particularly good news for believers in democracy, or those who believe elected authorities should have the right to police borders. 

Most popular

Katy Balls

The real significance of Reform’s membership milestone

For one thing, for all the smooth reasoning in the judgment, the result was not a foregone conclusion.