Britain reacts after flight scheduled to fly asylum seekers to Rwanda stopped by Court of Human Rights

There has been furious reaction in Britain after a judge dramatically blocked its plan in a last-gasp intervention.

Britain's Home Secretary Priti Patel. Picture: PRU / AFP

Furious Conservatives called on Britain’s government to abandon a European human rights pact after a judge dramatically blocked its plan to fly asylum-seekers to Rwanda.

The last-gasp intervention by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) forced the government to abandon the first flight, after the number of claimants aboard had already been whittled down by legal challenges in the UK.

Under the UK’s agreement with Rwanda, all migrants arriving illegally in Britain are liable to be sent to the East African nation thousands of miles away for processing and settlement.

The government, after arguing that Brexit would lead to tighter borders, says the plan is needed to deter record numbers of migrants from making the perilous Channel crossing from northern France.

More than 10,000 migrants have crossed since the start of the year. On Tuesday, 444 people were detected coming from France in 11 small boats, the Ministry of Defence said.

Britain's Home Secretary Priti Patel gesturing as she gives a statement concerning the government's plan to send migrants and asylum seekers who cross the Channel to Rwanda. Picture: PRU / AFP

The ECHR, ruling in favour of an Iraqi claimant, said his expulsion should wait until London’s High Court has taken a final decision on the policy’s legality at a hearing next month.

For Britain’s opposition Labour party, home affairs spokeswoman Yvette Cooper said the government only had itself to blame for what the Daily Mirror newspaper called a “cruel farce”.

“They have pushed ahead with a policy they knew was unworkable, unethical, and incredibly expensive because they just wanted a row and someone else to blame,” she said.

The legal challenges had highlighted concern over human rights in Rwanda. But the government in Kigali insists it is a safe country.

“We are not deterred by these developments. Rwanda remains fully committed to making this partnership work,” government spokeswoman Yolande Makolo told AFP.

“Rwanda stands ready to receive the migrants when they do arrive and offer them safety and opportunity in our country.”

Britain's Home Secretary Priti Patel (R) reacting as Britain's opposition Labour party's shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper speaks. Picture: PRU / AFP

Cabinet member Therese Coffey said the government was “surprised and disappointed” at the ruling late Tuesday, but echoed interior minister Priti Patel in vowing that preparations would proceed for the next flight.

“And we will continue to prepare and try and overturn any future legal challenges as well,” Coffey told Sky News.

Speaking to the House of Commons, Patel confirmed preparations for the next flight “have begun”, warning “our capacity to help those in need is severely compromised by those who come here illegally.”

“This government will not be deterred from doing the right thing”, says warned, adding it will not allow the “usual suspects” or “mobs” to prevent the asylum seekers being sent to Rwanda.

"Our capacity to help those in need is severely compromised by those who come here illegally" says Priti Patel - adding "it's not fair on British taxpayers who have to foot the bill".https://t.co/v78XcA2QmN

📺 Sky 501, Virgin 602, Freeview 233 and YouTube pic.twitter.com/jw2mDhHotk

— Sky News (@SkyNews) June 15, 2022

The ECHR is unrelated to the European Union, which Britain left in January 2020. But Tory backbenchers, fresh from rebelling in large numbers against Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s leadership, said the ruling infringed on British sovereignty.

The convention has been used frequently by human rights lawyers to frustrate Johnson and Patel’s hard line policy against illegal migrants.

Coffey said she was “not aware of any decisions or even hints” in the government about withdrawing from the convention.

But last month, in the “Queen’s Speech” opening a new session of parliament, the government committed to replacing the 1998 act with a new bill of rights.