Alf Dumpes, who was transported to Britain from Czechoslovakia on one of the Kindertransport trains in 1939, told the Guardian that the government was trying to “ignore” international agreements designed to help those seeking refuge. After announcing that many of those who arrived in the UK in small boats across the Channel would be removed and relocated to Rwanda, Dobbs said his peers would fight against the “awful, shocking decision” once the legislation was introduced. “I think it’s a way to get rid of people the government does not want, to throw them in a distant African country and they will have no chance of leaving again,” he said. “I think it is a violation of the 1951 Geneva Conventions for Refugees. “You can not just dismiss them as unwanted people.” While Conservative lawmakers have hailed the policy as a way to avoid the exploitation of desperate immigrants by human trafficking gangs and to limit the high number of crossings, Dumbs said there will likely be legal challenges and fierce resistance from colleagues. He pointed to an amendment to the bill on nationality and borders, passed in the House of Lords earlier this month, which said the government could make any withdrawal only with the explicit permission of both houses of parliament. The amendment is likely to be repealed when the bill returns to the Commons next week. Asked if the resettlement program was ever likely to take off, given the threat of judicial review and other judicial action, Dobbs said: “I think it is unlikely. “Once they try to oust a person, I’m sure there will be a legal challenge and I’m not sure the government will win.” Despite Secretary of State Pretty Patel’s reported boasting to Tory lawmakers that he would oppose “left-wing lawyers”, Dobbs said the government seemed “very happy to ignore” the UK’s commitments under the Geneva Conventions. And he continued: “If [Patel] says he will get rid of the claims of left-wing lawyers, so I think something else may come. I understand that they will have real difficulties in overcoming it anyway “. Dubs said the legislation needed to legally negotiate the agreement with Rwanda would lead to a “battle in parliament”, particularly in the House of Lords. Referring to the process by which the Commons and the Lords continue to disagree and send bills to each other, Dobbs added: “There is no doubt the government will force us to sit down and then play table tennis until they think they can. to wear us down. “But I think there will be a big battle for that.” The Bishop of Durham, Paul Butler, who is in the House of Lords, also vowed to fight the movement. “The whole idea of declaring asylum seekers inadmissible is wrong,” he told the Guardian. “It does not matter where international asylum seekers come from or how. It is also obviously wrong to punish those who seek asylum. “They are the traffickers who must be targeted and brought to justice for their heinous crimes.” Butler called on the United Kingdom not to “unload our international responsibility on another nation” – warning that “this would be essentially state-sponsored trafficking if we forcibly remove people from our shores to a nation that asylum seekers do not know and do not want to go for examination as asylum seekers “. Butler agreed with Dumpes that the project would be “extremely costly” and said the money would be better spent on improving the way asylum applications are processed in Britain and providing further safe and legal channels alongside those existed for Afghans, Ukrainians and British Citizens Abroad in Hong Kong. The Home Office said συνεργασία 120m co-operation with Rwanda was necessary because existing approaches had failed and there was no single solution to tackling migrant crossings in the Channel. He praised Rwanda’s “strong experience in supporting and integrating refugees” and said the country was “internationally recognized for its security, strong governance, low corruption, gender equality and one of the fastest growing economies in the world.” Africa “.
