A British law to send unwanted migrants to Rwanda, which passed this week after months of wrangling, has generated fierce criticism at home and abroad. In Rwanda, opponents of the longtime president say the country is unfit to host asylum seekers – while accusing the UK of outsourcing its responsibilities.
Under the new law, first agreed with the Rwandan government two years ago, any asylum seeker who travels to the UK illegally will be sent to Rwanda.
British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has promised the first flights will leave as soon as July. The Rwandan presidency, meanwhile, says it's "pleased" the plan is moving ahead.
But Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza – an outspoken critic of President Paul Kagame and who was once jailed after running against him – told RFI the deportation deal equated to "modern slavery" because Rwanda was being paid to take the people the UK does not want.
Her country, Ingabire said, was not ready to shelter hundreds or thousands of asylum seekers.
"Regime fanatics are saying the country will get lots money .... but people forget that we're talking about human beings who are looking for safety," she said.
"We have problems with food security, malnutrition, poverty, joblessness, lack of housing, repression... So what will happen to these refugees?"
€700 million policy
Another opposition figure, Frank Habineza, said he disagreed with the arrangement on principle.
"Rich nations like the UK should fulfil their responsibility to host refugees and not send them to third countries," said Habineza, who heads the Democratic Green Party of Rwanda.
"We are completely against these kind of deals whether it is with Denmark or the UK or Israel."
The British government has already paid Rwanda the equivalent of €256 million to host migrants. This will be followed by at least €175 million more over the next three years.
The UK will also pay Rwanda a further €176,000 to cover expenses for each person resettled, according to an assessment by the UK's National Audit Office, which estimates that in total the policy could end up costing around €700 million.
Some 50,000 people could potentially be sent to Rwanda, but it remains unclear how many people the country can actually take.
In the capital, Kigali, authorities have spent the past two years preparing accommodation for people deported from the UK.
Facilities built or renovated using UK funds, including the 100-bed Hope Hostel, remain empty.
Deterrent effect?
The British government argues that the law will have a deterrent effect, discouraging would-be asylum seekers from attempting to cross from northern France to southern England by boat.
Boo Adam, a 26-year-old migrant from Sudan, told RFI he had already tried to cross the Channel unsuccessfully before learning of the UK's Rwanda deal.
"It's really a shock. I'm afraid," he said, speaking from the French port of Calais.
"I crossed six countries in five months... I travelled more than 5,000 kilometres, and after I reach my goal, I'm told: 'you will go back to Africa'. This is not fair for our case."
But Adam said he hadn't given up on his goal of seeking asylum in the UK.
"I will wait, but try again to cross the Channel."
Potential challenges
The Rwanda scheme will most likely trigger further legal challenges by charities, campaigners and judges who argue that Rwanda is not a safe destination.
The European Court of Human Rights, which blocked the UK's first attempt to deport migrants in June 2022, could again issue orders to halt flights – though Sunak insisted this week that he would not let "a foreign court" get in the way.
The UK is due to hold a general election later this year, which could see Sunak's government replaced.
His opponents on the left have repeatedly denounced the policy, along with United Nations agencies, human rights watchdogs and refugee organisations.
If elected, the opposition Labour party says it will scrap the scheme and instead pursue a deal with the European Union to return some migrants to mainland Europe.
