Post Views: 12

In our previous article, which can be found here, we explained that there was a high chance of the Migrant Flight to Rwanda being delayed over legal challenges that occurred along with a vast number of protests. We also explained that the originally planned flight was set to carry 130 economic migrants, that number has drastically decreased to only a handful after an array of legal challenges allowed a few of those told they were being deported, to remain in the UK.

From 130, the number is now down to an appalling 11, though Lord Justice Sing suggested that the number could actually be much lower than that. This is what I meant when I said “do the Tories think we’re stupid?” Priti Patel and the rest of the Conservative establishment don’t care about the original and historic core values of their party, they just want to look like they are doing something so it can look in their way favourably before the next general election. I will reiterate the fact that only 11 of the original 130 will be on that flight tomorrow. Bear that in mind.

After the decision of a High Court Judge last Friday, an appeal was heard today which saw the courts reiterate what they said last time, that the flight would not be halted as no formal decision as to the legality of this policy has yet been made. The appeal court actually said that they “cannot interfere” with the prior decision and the flight is to go ahead.

As explained in an article from Sky News, “Rights campaigners have argued that the government policy is inhumane and will put migrants at risk”, to which officials responded by saying that, “the strategy will deter people from making dangerous Channel crossings from France in flimsy small boats run by smugglers.”

This decision is a major victory, even if the Rwanda plan doesn’t last long due to the large amount of criticism the government and Tory party are facing, along with lawsuits they are fighting from Refugee charity organisations.

Further in the article from Sky News, they state “Mr Husain told the packed courtroom that British law says it has ‘never been a criminal offence to arrive in the UK without relevant documents’.” I find this statement an important thing to discuss. I call them illegal immigrants because they came here without going through the official visa process, and coming here claiming asylum/refugee status even though they are only attempting to enter this country for economic reasons. The only reason entering the UK without the relevant documentation isn’t a crime is because Britain spent 47 years in the EU. What this means is that, as part of the EU membership, we weren’t allowed to have secure borders or laws against “illegal immigration.”

https://news.sky.com/story/rwanda-deportation-plan-first-flight-taking-asylum-seekers-to-african-country-can-go-ahead-says-court-of-appeal-12633234