Hours after his flagship Rwanda asylum scheme had been ruled unlawful by the Supreme Court, Rishi Sunak came out fighting. Amid pressure from the Tory Right to withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the Prime Minister pledged he would “not allow a foreign court to block these flights”.
This was a confounding statement for two reasons. First, the Supreme Court is a British court. Second, its ruling made clear that membership of the ECHR was not the only international treaty relevant to the decision and that there were issues surrounding domestic human rights laws as well.
Yesterday’s ruling was no surprise, yet the Government’s reaction indicates it is flailing. The Home Secretary has suggested that the Rwanda policy, under which not a single migrant has been sent to Kigali, was “already having an effect” in deterring people smugglers. Meanwhile, deputy party chair Lee Anderson thinks ministers should simply “ignore the laws”.
The public wants an asylum system that is humane, efficient and most importantly works. At present, the Government’s key policy to stop the boats is failing on all three fronts.
Starmer’s resolve
Sir Keir Starmer has his own political problems. Last night, more than 50 of his MPs defied a three-line whip to back an SNP amendment calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. The Labour leader’s position is one that mirrors the UK, US and other G7 governments, for longer “humanitarian pauses”.
It is impossible not to be horrified by the dire humanitarian situation in Gaza, and the loss of innocent civilian life. Yet Starmer understands that a ceasefire would leave Hamas in place to launch further terrorist atrocities, as it has confirmed is its intention, and it would not return the more than 240 hostages seized on October 7.
Starmer has not been in Parliament for long and the public is still learning about his character. On the recent conflict in the Middle East, voters are finding out that he is prepared to stick to a position in the face of pressure from his own side, if he believes it is the right thing to do.
Nazanin’s lesson
Few understand the meaning of free speech, and the feeling of it being taken away, like Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe. She spent years in Iranian captivity on bogus charges, surrounded by women who had fought — and been detained — for seeking the fundamental rights that the Islamic Republic denies to them.
It is the responsibility of those who enjoy these precious freedoms to protect them. The alternative is on grotesque display around the world.
