Taiwan Signals Openness to Renew Ties with Honduras as Election Unfolds 
U.S. Repatriation Flight Carrying 266 Venezuelan Migrants Lands in Caracas 
Drones Spotted Near Zelenskiy’s Flight Path in Ireland Trigger Security Alert 
U.S. Defense Chief Pete Hegseth Defends Controversial Second Strike on Suspected Drug-Smuggling Vessel 
Maduro Confirms “Respectful” Call With Trump, Signals Openness to Diplomatic Dialogue 
Trump’s Name Appears on U.S. Institute of Peace Ahead of Rwanda–Congo Deal Signing 
UN General Assembly Demands Russia Return Ukrainian Children Amid Ongoing Conflict 
Israel Receives Body of Deceased Hostage as Rafah Crossing Reopening Hinges on Final Returns 
Australia and Japan Strengthen Defence Cooperation Amid Rising Regional Tensions 
Trump Administration Halts Immigration, Green Card, and Citizenship Processing for 19 Countries 
Hong Kong Faces Low Turnout in “Patriots-Only” Election Amid Public Grief After Deadly Fire 
U.S. Justice Department Orders Intensified Probe Into Antifa and Domestic Extremist Groups 
Cuba Reaffirms Anti-Drug Cooperation as Tensions Rise in the Caribbean 
Trump Claims He Will Void Biden Documents Signed with Autopen 
China’s Expanding Maritime Military Presence Alarms Taiwan and Japan 
U.S. Expected to Expand Travel Ban to More Than 30 Countries 
Lawyers representing migrants claiming asylum in the United Kingdom told a court that the British government’s plan to deport them to Rwanda is unlawful. The lawyers cited safety issues with the East African country.
The lawyers representing a group of asylum seekers told the London Court of Appeal on Monday that the plan to deport migrants to Rwanda is unlawful, citing safety issues. The lawyers said that the government’s argument that Rwanda is a “safe third country” is flawed due to the fact that Rwanda is an authoritarian, one-party country that did not tolerate opposition and murdered political opponents.
“There will only be any form of deterrent effect if a third country to which asylum seekers are removed is one to which they would not wish to go,” said one of the lawyers, Raza Husain, adding that the government failed to strike a balance between deterring migrants and adhering to the country’s human rights obligations.
The lawyers representing the British government said the migrant deal with Rwanda is “subject to an exacting set of monitoring arrangements,” including by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, who has already intervened in the appeal. The lawyers said in court filings that proof of Rwanda’s asylum system was not relevant as it has no bearing on how migrants claiming asylum would be dealt with under the deal.
Rwanda has said that migrants who would be sent to the country will be treated with respect and dignity and that the deal with the UK will provide them with better opportunities. One of the three judges hearing the case, Lord Chief Justice Ian Burnett, said that the main issue of the deal would be the safety of Rwanda.
This comes as Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is seeking to reduce the number of migrants arriving in the country in small boats seeking asylum. Sunak’s government wants to send thousands of migrants to Rwanda as part of the deal that was agreed upon last year.
Friday last week, the government said it would seek measures to limit the ability of the courts to block its plans to deport illegal migrants as part of the changes to the proposed legislation that is set to be brought to parliament in the coming days.
“To speed up removals, amendments will make clear that the UK’s domestic courts cannot apply any interim measure to stop someone being removed if they bring forward a legal challenge aside from…where they are at risk of serious and irreversible harm,” said the interior ministry in a statement.
