Government officials ignored "serious concerns" that were raised over Rwanda's human rights record because of Boris Johnson and Priti Patel's "interest" in the nation, it has been claimed.
Lawyers representing a number of asylum seekers presented fresh evidence at the High Court on the first day of the week-long showdown over the controversial policy.
Foreign Office (FCDO) officials had sounded warnings against the “migration partnership” with Rwanda from as early as September 2020 when it was first being considered, the court heard.
The legal documents noted Dominic Raab, who was then Foreign Secretary, approved criteria that stated countries would be excluded if “individuals faced a real risk of violations of international human rights law”.
Rwanda did not make the second list of nations that were recommended as potential partners for a deportation scheme back in February 2021.
But the now outgoing PM Mr Johnson and his Home Secretary Ms Patel shared a “particular interest” in Rwanda, at the time, pushing FCDO officials to put the country back into consideration, according to Government documents shared with claimants.
Last June, the FCDO was told that the PM was “frustrated at the rate of progress” on an asylum processing deal with a foreign country, and shared a “particular interest in Rwanda” with Ms Patel and the immigration minister.
In written submissions, claimants told the court that Ms Patel and the government “including the Foreign Office and No 10 were themselves aware of, and appear to have had serious concerns, over Rwanda’s present and historic human rights record”.
Raza Husain QC, representing a number of those bringing the case against the Home Secretary, said: “We make no bones about our submission that Rwanda is a one-party authoritarian state, with extreme levels of surveillance.”
He added that the “regime” in the country “tortures and murders those it considers to be its opponents”.
Hundreds of protesters gathered outside the Royal Courts of Justice with placards that read “migrants 4 refugees welcome here” and “tear down the borders”.
Government lawyers representing the Home Office argued have that the east African nation is a “safe and secure country” with a “track record of supporting asylum seekers”.
It comes as more than 1,000 migrants crossed the Channel to the UK in a single day for the second time in a fortnight.
This is the second time this year the daily total has topped 1,000, after August 22 saw a record 1,295 people intercepted in 27 boats.
Some 2,341 people have made the journey in September so far in three days.
It comes after August had the highest monthly total on record for crossings, with 8,644 people making the journey on 189 boats.
More than 27,300 people have crossed the Channel from France to the UK in small boats, such as dinghies, so far in 2022. It's just over 1,000 short of the number of arrivals for the whole of last year (28,526).
Richard Harrington, quit as refugees minister a day before Liz Truss was confirmed as the next Prime Minister.
Lord Harrington publicly declined to endorse the Government's own Rwanda policy.
Bella Sankey, director of Detention Action, said: “The British courts have a fine tradition of guaranteeing fundamental rights and holding the executive to account when it overreaches.
"We believe that the Government’s policy of expelling traumatised torture and trafficking survivors to an autocratic country thousands of miles away is unlawful, immoral and counterproductive.
"We are going to court today to test the lawfulness of the policy on behalf of our clients and hundreds of others liable to forced expulsion.”
Clare Moseley, founder of Care4Calais, said: “When the Government attempted the flight in June we supported 121 people who had been issued Rwanda notices. We saw harrowing suicide attempts, self harm and over 20 people on hunger strike.
"We spoke to mothers, wives and children who begged us to help their loved ones.
"We supported people who had escaped from bloody conflicts and survived torture only to be detained and told the terrifying news that they would be deported half way across the world.
“It is sickening to contemplate this horror happening once more. Given the more effective and humane options available, is this really what we as a compassionate country want to do?”
