Rwanda takes legal action against UK over cancellation of migration deal

The Rwandan government has taken legal action against the UK, demanding it pay money it owes under a scrapped migration deal between the two countries.

Rwanda has filed a lawsuit with the Netherlands’ Permanent Court of Arbitration, saying the UK has failed to fulfill its commitment under the deal to send some asylum seekers to Rwanda.

Under a deal signed by the former Conservative government, Britain agreed to pay Rwanda to host asylum seekers and support its economy.

But after Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer canceled the deal in 2024, the Home Office said “predetermined future payments of £220 million will not have to be made” to Rwanda.

A Home Office spokesman said: “The previous government’s Rwanda policy wasted huge amounts of taxpayers’ time and money.

“We will vigorously defend our position and protect the British taxpayer.”

The Rwandan government has not yet responded to the BBC’s request for comment. But the country’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs pointed out to us an article Rwandan newspaper New Times reported on the arbitration proceedings.

The article stated that arbitration “involves the performance of specific commitments under a treaty.”

The previous Conservative government spent around £700 million on Rwanda policy aimed at stopping migrants crossing the English Channel in small boats.

Only four volunteers had arrived in Rwanda when the deal came into force, and Sir Keir said the program was “dead and buried” shortly after Labor won the 2024 election.

The deal includes a break clause that states “either party may terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to the other party.”

The £700 million includes a £290 million payment to Rwanda.

In December 2024, the Home Office said a further £100m would be paid under the treaty, or £50m each in the 2025-26 and 2026-27 financial years.

In addition, the Home Office agreed to pay £120 million to transfer 300 people to Rwanda.

The New Times article quoted a government adviser as saying that Rwanda “had engaged in diplomatic engagement before initiating arbitration.”

“Rwanda seeks to legally determine the respective rights and obligations of the parties to the treaty through arbitration in accordance with international law,” Michael Butera, chief technical adviser to Rwanda’s justice minister, told the newspaper.

In the treaty signed by Rwanda and the UK, the two countries agreed that any disputes that cannot be resolved between them would be referred to the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA).

The Permanent Court of Arbitration, headquartered in The Hague, Netherlands, is a forum for resolving international disputes between states.

It’s a process similar to arbitration that companies often agree to as an alternative to potentially disruptive and lengthy court battles.

If the countries involved are unable to resolve the dispute, the PCA has the power to issue a final and binding award.

Rwanda launched arbitration proceedings under the Asylum Partnership Agreement in November, According to the PCA websitewhich lists the case’s status as pending.

The PCA has yet to say how and when it will deal with Rwanda’s complaint.

Arbitral institutions often set a timetable to give parties clarity on when arguments need to be made, and cases can take years to resolve.

Conservative shadow home secretary Chris Philp said the legal action was “yet another disastrous consequence of Labour’s decision to scrap the Rwanda program before it even started”.

Philp said: “This legal action means British taxpayers are now facing a huge bill as a result of Labour’s weakness and incompetence.”

He said Labor was “too weak to deliver this critical policy and it is the British taxpayer who pays the price”.

The British government has previously said it is studying what funds can be recovered if the scheme is cancelled.

But the Rwandan government said it was “under no obligation” to return any money.