Rwanda Sues UK over Scrapped Asylum Deal at The Hague Court

Rwanda has filed a case against Britain at the Netherlands-based Permanent Court of Arbitration, accusing London of failing to honour financial and legal commitments under a controversial deal to send some asylum seekers to the East African nation.

The Rwandan government said the United Kingdom breached obligations under the Migration and Economic Development Partnership, signed in 2022, after abandoning the scheme and halting scheduled payments.

Downing Street said it would fight the case, arguing that the policy was ineffective and represented poor value for taxpayers.

“The government will robustly defend this claim,” a spokesperson said, adding that Britain had acted lawfully in ending the programme.

Under the agreement, Britain was to send some people who arrived illegally on its shores to Rwanda, where their asylum claims would be processed and, if approved, they would settle.

In return, London pledged to provide financial support and development funding to Kigali.

Rwanda says Britain still owes more than £100 million under the deal, including instalments that were due in 2025 and 2026, and failed to meet commitments related to refugee resettlement and infrastructure support.

The asylum partnership was launched in April 2022 by then Prime Minister Boris Johnson as a key plank of efforts to deter migrants from crossing the English Channel in small boats.

It quickly became one of the most divisive policies in modern British immigration history, drawing criticism from human rights groups, opposition politicians and international organisations.

Legal challenges stalled the plan for months, and in late 2023 Britain’s Supreme Court ruled that Rwanda could not be considered a safe country for deported asylum seekers, effectively blocking transfers under the existing framework.

Only a handful of volunteers were ever sent to Rwanda before flights were suspended.

After winning power in 2024, Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Labour government scrapped the scheme, describing it as costly, unworkable and legally flawed.

It repealed legislation designed to revive the plan and stopped further payments to Rwanda.

Kigali argues that while Britain may have changed its domestic policy, it did not properly terminate the bilateral treaty and remains bound by its financial and legal obligations.

Rwanda has increasingly presented itself as a partner to Western countries on migration management, despite concerns raised by rights groups about political freedoms and the treatment of dissenters.

The case will be handled under international arbitration rules, with a panel of judges expected to hear arguments from both sides before issuing a binding ruling, a process that could take several years.

The dispute highlights the growing legal and diplomatic risks faced by governments that reverse major cross-border agreements after changes in political leadership.

gandae@businessdayafrica.org