Rwanda refuses to return $300m to UK over extradition deal

The Rwandan government has indicated it will not return more than $300 million it received from the United Kingdom from 2022 under a deal to relocate asylum seekers deemed to have entered the country illegally from the East African country. A controversial deal to deport migrants scrapped by the New Labor government does not include a provision to claw back relevant funding. Information from CNN.

On Tuesday (9), Rwandan government spokesman Alain Muguralinda said there was no provision for refunds in the immigration deal with the United Kingdom after new British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced he would abandon the controversial deal.

Muguralinda stressed that the contract contained no provision for repayment, and highlighted that there was no guarantee of a refund, as stated in a video broadcast by the state agency. Rwanda Broadcasting Agency.

According to a briefing released by the British government in April this year, the United Kingdom has to date provided 240 million pounds (approximately US$307 million) to Rwanda as part of the agreement.

Muguralinda sums up: “We signed an international agreement and we have started implementing it. If you want to leave now, good luck. “

The controversial plan, announced by Boris Johnson’s Conservative government in April 2022, has faced political and legal challenges due to human rights concerns.

The Council of Europe deplored the move, stressing the importance of following international standards on asylum and migration. At least five people have recently died trying to cross the English Channel following the approval of a law allowing the deportation of migrants to Rwanda.

In his first press conference as prime minister on Saturday, Starmer said he did not want to go ahead with a controversial deal to send asylum seekers to Rwanda, calling the plan a “trick” and rejecting the idea that the bill acted as a deterrent.

After the bill was approved in April this year, former Prime Minister Rishi Sunak argued that it was aimed at preventing vulnerable migrants from making dangerous crossings and disrupting the business model of criminal gangs that exploit them.

UN Refugee Agency High Commissioner Filippo Grandi criticized the bill, arguing that it attempts to shift responsibility for protecting refugees, undermines international cooperation and sets a worrying global precedent.

In February, the UN human rights chief said UK legal measures to expedite the removal of asylum seekers to Rwanda were contrary to the fundamental principles of the law and risked dealing a “severe blow” to human rights.

“You can’t legislate facts that don’t exist,” said Volker Dürk, who at the time called on the UK government to reconsider the bill in light of recent reports that raised many concerns.