The first flight scheduled to transport asylum seekers from Britain to Rwanda was refused to take off at the last minute on Tuesday, wrote, among other things. BBC.

Seven people were supposed to be sent to the East African country, but the flight was canceled after the European Court of Human Rights dropped its feet.

The plane was late Tuesday at a military airfield in Wiltshire, ready to take off. It is not clear when the flights will take place.

According to the news agency Sky Newstwo passengers due to be sent to Rwanda had their departures delayed from the UK the previous Tuesday evening after a roundtrip.

The CHR wrote in a ruling that at least one of the asylum seekers, an Iraqi man, should be allowed to stay in the UK, as he could be in danger if he were sent to Rwanda. The UK is a signatory country to the court, which is separate from the EU.

Initially, 130 asylum seekers will be sent on the first flight. But that number was eventually reduced to seven, before Tuesday’s court decision.

Won’t be hindered

The UK government is disappointed, but will not be “stopped from doing the right thing”, Home Secretary Priti Patel said.

In a statement, he said the plan would help destroy the people-smuggling business model and prevent loss of life, while ensuring the people who really need it are protected.

– It is surprising that the European Court of Human Rights has intervened despite previous success in our domestic courts, said Patel.

– We will not be deterred from doing the right thing and carrying out plans to control our country’s borders. Our lawyers are reviewing all decisions made in relation to this flight, and preparations for the next flight begin now.

Object of criticism

Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s government, which has pledged to tighten borders after Brexit, has been pressured by the large numbers of migrants crossing the English Channel from northern France.

More than 10,000 have crossed the Channel since the New Year.

The agreement with Rwanda to send asylum seekers there expired in April, with the aim of scaring migrants and refugees from crossing the channel. In exchange, Rwanda received several million pounds in development aid.

It has been heavily criticized by human rights groups and the United Nations. Critics say it is illegal and inhumane to send people to distant countries they do not want to live in.

Additionally, they referred to the human rights situation in Rwanda, where President Paul Kagame has ruled with an iron fist for nearly three decades.

Human Rights Institute it also documents widespread human rights abuses and accuses security forces of arbitrarily imprisoning people and torturing them systematically and in the most brutal way.

The government in Rwanda rejected the criticism.

Decision in July?

On Friday, a British judge ruled that Rwanda’s policies should be thoroughly reviewed, but sending certain asylum seekers to Rwanda while a review is underway is not an offense.

The ECHR said on Tuesday that deportations would have to wait until a British court makes a final decision on whether or not the practice is legal. It will happen in July.

This practice is not unique in the UK. Politicians in Denmark and Austria are considering similar plans, while Australia has operated an asylum center in the Pacific nation of Nauru since 2012.