Britain struck a £140 ($180 million) deal last year to send tens of thousands of asylum seekers living in the United Kingdom more than 6,400 kilometers to Rwanda.

A protracted legal fight followed, with opposition politicians and civil rights groups calling the scheme inhumane, cruel and ineffective.

Last month the Court of Appeal ruled the plan was unlawful because Rwanda could not be trusted to process asylum seekers' claims fairly. In a split judgment, two of the three judges said migrants were at risk of refoulement – forced removal to countries where they would be at risk of harm.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said he "fundamentally" disagrees with last month's ruling. On Thursday, the government was given permission by the Court of Appeal to appeal to the UK Supreme Court.

"Deterring" boat crossings

The government hopes its Rwandan deal would deter asylum seekers from making the dangerous crossing from France to the southern coast of England on small, often unseaworthy boats.

Last year, a record 45,755 people came to Britain in small boats across the Channel, mainly from France. More than 12,000 have arrived this year, a rate similar to 2022.

The numbers are relatively small compared with the more than 600,000 people who migrated to Britain legally last year. But the arrivals are an embarrassment to the country's Conservative government, which promised to "take back control" of UK borders when Britain officially left the European Union in 2020.

It costs the country some £3 billion ($3.9 billion) to house the newcomers while their asylum claims are addressed.

The first planned Rwanda deportation flight was blocked a year ago in a last-minute ruling by the European Court of Human Rights, which imposed an injunction preventing any deportations until the conclusion of legal action in Britain.

Asylum seekers from several countries and human rights groups are challenging the government's deportation plan in the courts.

Illegal Migration Bill

In addition to pushing ahead with its Rwanda plan, the UK government is also trying to pass its 'Illegal Migration Bill', despite legal challenges. The bill places a legal duty on the government to detain and remove irregular migrants arriving in the UK.

The bill seeks to reinforce the UK's Rwanda plan by placing a legal duty on the government to detain and remove irregular arrivals in the UK to Rwanda or to another "safe" third country.

Most refugees arriving in the UK would be affected by these provisions, which would effectively strip any migrants who enter the country irregularly of their ability to claim asylum upon arrival.

This type of entry is common because Britain provides little in the way of safe and legal routes.

The current draft of the bill also risks the UK breaching its international law commitments under the European Convention on Human Rights, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Council of Europe Convention on Trafficking.

There are concerns about how children would be treated under the new migration bill and that existing UK regulations to prevent modern slavery would be undermined.

Although the government's duty to detain and deport would not apply to children directly, the new bill would provide ministers with new powers to deport minors in certain circumstances and detain them for extended periods. Under the bill, the limit on how long children could be detained before applying for bail would be extended from three days to eight. A previous version of the bill sought to allow the detainment of children without the ability to apply for bail for up to 28 days.

Standoff in parliament over bill changes

The House of Lords, the UK parliament's upper house of parliament, recently voted to overturn several parts of the proposed bill. UK charities, as well as the Law Society and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCR), have also raised significant legal, moral, humanitarian and practical concerns over the bill.

Strong opposition in the House of Lords has led the government to agree to changes which will affect the treatment of children and pregnant women.

However the government has stated it is unwilling to make further amendments. Speaking to BBC Radio 4's Today program, UK immigration minister Robert Jenrick said: "It's not a serious or grown-up way to conduct a debate to say, 'we don't want this, we don't want that', and not to come up with an alternative," he said, adding that the UK has the "most comprehensive plan to tackle illegal migration of any European country."

Sunak has presented the bill as key to his policies on stopping small boat crossings across the English Channel.

Also speaking on the same radio program, the shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said the bill was "a con that will makes things worse", accusing the government of losing its common sense and decency.

The government is seeking to pass the bill before Parliament's summer break begins next Thursday, but this is looking increasingly difficult amid the current standoff between the two houses.

With Reuters