Priti Patel was accused by Labour of overseeing a “shambles” and participating in a “government by gimmick” after the 11th-hour cancellation of the first plane carrying asylum seekers to Rwanda.
The home secretary disclosed that some cancelled Rwandan flight passengers will be released into the community wearing tags, as she promised to continue to pursue the policy of outsourcing refugees to the east African state.
It comes as government insiders said that they hoped to try again to send asylum seekers to Rwanda within weeks.
Up to seven people who had come to the UK seeking refuge had been expected to be removed to Rwanda an hour and a half before the flight was due to take off.
But a ruling granting a temporary injunction by the European court of human rights (ECHR) on one of the seven cases allowed lawyers for the other six to make successful last-minute applications.
There is no right of appeal to the temporary injunction. It halted the deportation of an Iraqi asylum seeker to Rwanda until three weeks after a judicial review by the UK’s courts had delivered its verdict, potentially delaying any flight until August.
Sources close to the government have criticised the lack of transparency surrounding the ECHR judgment, saying on Wednesday that the Home Office was still trying to establish the name of the judge who made the ruling.
Government lawyers wish to establish the criteria by which the ECHR is making decisions on injunctions and the criteria for turning them down.
Appearing before the Commons, the home secretary said she was surprised by the ECHR’s intervention, which overruled domestic judicial decisions, but told MPs it was inevitable there would be legal challenges.
“This government will not be deterred from doing the right thing. We will not be put off by the inevitable legal last-minute challenges. Nor will we allow mobs to block removals,” she said.
She said the court had not ruled the policy was unlawful but “prohibited the removal of three of those on last night’s flight”.
“Those prohibitions last for different time periods but are not an absolute bar on their transfer to Rwanda. Anyone who has been ordered to be released by the courts will be tagged while we continue to progress their relocation,” she said.
Patel and Boris Johnson have repeatedly criticised lawyers bringing legal challenges against the government and the groups and MPs supporting them.
Before the Commons, Patel said: “I am afraid the usual suspects, with the blessings of honourable and right honourable members opposite, have set out to thwart and even campaign against these efforts, and, with that, the will of the British people.”
Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, said the situation is “a shambles and it is shameful and the home secretary has no one but herself to blame”.
“This is not and never has been a serious policy and she knew that when she chartered the plane.”
The ruling by the Strasbourg court was greeted with fury by Tory MPs, with fresh demands for the UK to pull out of the European convention on human rights.
The ECHR rules on issues relating to the convention and is not an EU institution, so its influence has not been affected by Brexit.
Greg Smith, the Conservative MP for Buckingham, called on the government to bring forward its promised UK Bill of Rights and “remove all power of the European court of human rights over our sovereign decisions”.
Jonathan Gullis, a ministerial aide to the Northern Ireland secretary, Brandon Lewis, said “the ECHR’s role in UK law needs looking at urgently” – but reportedly deleted an initial social media post suggesting the court’s role should be removed entirely.
Starmer’s spokesperson declined to confirm that Labour would cancel the policy on principle if it got into government, only saying that it would set out a fuller immigration policy in the party’s manifesto.
The spokesperson said the policy “isn’t delivering the results that the government’s claiming that it would” but would not say whether the Labour leader believed it to be wrong in principle. Starmer has previously described it as unethical.
Johnson’s official spokesperson made clear the government was not ruling out withdrawing from the convention, in light of Tuesday evening’s judgment.
“We will do whatever it takes to deliver this new approach, including being prepared to explore any and all further legal reforms,” he said.
Asked repeatedly whether that could include withdrawal from the convention, he said: “We are keeping all options on the table. We will look at all of the legislation and processes in the round.”
