The European Human Rights Court issued a ban, and Britain's dispatched refugee programs to Rwanda was suspended!

[Global Times Special Journalist Ji Shuangcheng Global Times Special Journalist Mu Zhi] Due to the ban from the European Human Rights Court, the British government was originally scheduled to take off the refugees to Rwanda on the 14th. Despite many oppositions and criticisms, the British government still has no intention of changing its position. According to British media analysis, in order to ensure that the plan is smooth, Britain will launch a new human rights bill to replace the human rights law formulated based on EU laws and may abandon the status of the members of the European Human Rights Convention.

According to the BBC report on the 15th, the first charter of the British sessage of refugees to Rwanda was originally scheduled to leave on the evening of the 14th. The plan has "irreversible damage risk", and the charter was canceled. In the past few days, multiple immigration rights groups issued a lawsuit to prevent the first "refugee sent to the Rwanda" flight. The British High Court ruled that they lost the case on the 10th and supported the Johnson government to implement this policy. The plaintiff appealed, but was rejected by the British Court on the 13th. The Johnson government then announced that the first "repatriation" charter was performed on the 14th. According to charitable organizations, according to the original plan, the first "sent to the Rwanda" charter was about 37 people. They mainly came from Afghanistan, Syria, Iran, and Iraq, but only 7 people on the plane eventually. A British government sources confirmed that the cost of the first flight was about 500,000 pounds.

British Prime Minister Johnson said at the Cabinet Conference on the 14th that the British government would not be "fear or shame" because of the criticism and legal challenges of the refugee repatriation plan and the legal challenges of the refugees. He also threatened Britain to withdraw from the European Human Rights Convention. After the cancellation of the Lweda charter on the same day, the British Internal Affairs Minister Prieti Patt expressed his disappointment and said that the European Human Rights Court's judgment "will not stop the government from continuing to do the right thing." She added: "Our legal team is re -examining and evaluating, and now prepare for the next flight." Essence The BBC reports that the British High Court is scheduled to hold a formal hearing in July to ride whether the "refugee's deportation of Rwanda" policy itself is legal.

Rwanda government spokesman Joned Marco said at a press conference on the 14th that the refugee repatriation agreement reached by Lu Ying was "a solution to failed global asylum systems." She added: "We don't think it is immoral to provide people with a residence, and Rwanda welcomes thousands of refugees." However, Felipo Grandi, a senior commissioner of the United Nations refugee affairs, said at a press conference on the same day that although although Rwanda has a long history in accepting and processing thousands of Congo (Gold) and Burundi refugees in the past, but the country has no ability or infrastructure to evaluate the refugee application one by one as required.

The British government's plan to transport refugees has been criticized by many parties in the country. Shadow Internal Affairs Minister Cooper criticized on Twitter on the 14th that the British government must be responsible for the charter of this failed charter. Its implementation of this "inevitable policy" is to create disputes with the European Human Rights Court and try to blame others. "We are glad to see the court's ruling to stop the flight. The government wants to stop this inhumane policy, and those who come to our country to seek asylum should be fair Treatment. "However, there are also local public opinion's annoying attitude towards the European Union. The British "Daily Mail" reported on the 15th that on the morning of the 14th, a ship full of refugees sailed in the British Geely Strait, next to a huge tanker, which was very dangerous. The British government plans to end the dangerous actions of smuggling, but has been "destroyed" by the European Human Rights Court.

The British "Guardian" reported on the 14th that the ruling was a "major and embarrassing blow" for Johnson. Since Johnson took office in 2019, it has promoted legislation to strengthen border control and curb the wave of illegal immigration. The draft controversial "nationality and border law" was approved by the parliament at the end of April this year and became a barrier -free law. The "refugee repatriation of Rwanda" policy is one of the most criticized contents of the "Nationality and Border Law". According to this policy, the Rwanda government will be responsible for taking care of the refugees sent by the UK in the newly -built shelter and handling their shelter applications. right. Those who do not pass the application will be repatriated to their original status. According to British media, as the cost of "cooperation" in the early stage, the British party will pay 120 million pounds to Lu Fang, and will follow up with additional payment.

The British "Daily Telegraph" analysis on the 15th believes that although the United Kingdom has "Brexit", it is still the signing country of the European Human Rights Convention, so the ruling of the European Human Rights Court is still applicable to the UK. However, Britain has intended to launch a new human rights bill and may consider abandoning the status of the European Human Rights Convention.

- END -