{"id":727075,"date":"2026-01-28T20:35:10","date_gmt":"2026-01-28T20:35:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/727075\/"},"modified":"2026-01-28T20:35:10","modified_gmt":"2026-01-28T20:35:10","slug":"rwanda-sues-the-uk-over-controversial-migrant-deal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/727075\/","title":{"rendered":"Rwanda sues the UK over controversial migrant deal"},"content":{"rendered":"

KIGALI, Rwanda — Rwanda has said it is suing the United Kingdom to seek payments over an aborted, controversial migrant deal<\/a> under which the East African nation was to host deported asylum seekers from the European country.<\/p>\n

Rwanda announced on Tuesday that it had filed proceedings with the Hague-based Permanent Court of Arbitration.<\/p>\n

The migrant deal entered into force on April 25, 2024. In July 2024, shortly after taking office, the UK\u2019s new Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced that the deal was \u201cdead and buried.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cHe did so without prior notice to Rwanda, contrary to the spirit of the partnership that had always characterized the agreement,\u201d the Rwandan government said in a statement.<\/p>\n

Under the deal, signed with former Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, Britain agreed to pay Rwanda to take in asylum seekers who had arrived in the UK illegally.<\/p>\n

Only four people came to Rwanda voluntarily. Sunak\u2019s successor, Starmer, rejected the controversial plan as soon as his Labour government came to power later that month.<\/p>\n

In 2023, the UK Supreme Court found the deal between Rwanda and the UK to be \u201cunlawful,\u201d ruling that it violated both UK law and international law and ordering it to be scrapped.<\/p>\n

Some legal experts have questioned whether parties to an unlawful contract can seek financial remedies.<\/p>\n

Jonathan Musangwa, a Rwandan international law expert, argues that Rwanda still has a chance, as Britain cannot solely rely on its domestic law to justify its failure to perform a treaty.<\/p>\n

\u201cA domestic judgment may prevent the government from continuing to implement the scheme internally, but it does not by itself terminate the treaty or erase obligations that already exist between the states,\u201d Musangwa told The Associated Press.<\/p>\n

He said the question to be examined is whether the state then lawfully terminated or suspended the agreement in accordance with its terms or with the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.<\/p>\n

\u201cIf it did not, an arbitral tribunal may still find an internationally wrongful act and consider questions of responsibility and reparation, even though domestic courts found otherwise,” he said.<\/p>\n

In the arbitral proceedings, Rwanda alleges the UK breached the treaty\u2019s financial arrangements and Article 18, and violated Article 19 by refusing to resettle vulnerable refugees.<\/p>\n

Previously, UK Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said the failed plan\u2019s costs included \u00a3290m in payments to Rwanda.<\/p>\n

In November 2024, the UK requested that Rwanda forgo two payments of \u00a350m each that were due in April 2025 and April 2026, saying it was doing so in anticipation of the formal termination of the treaty.<\/p>\n

Rwanda indicated it was prepared to accept these arrangements should the treaty be terminated, provided that new financial terms would be negotiated and agreed.<\/p>\n

\u201cDiscussions between Rwanda and the United Kingdom did not, however, ultimately take place, and the amounts remain due and payable under the treaty,\u201d Rwanda said.<\/p>\n

The UK, however, has made it clear that it has no intention of making any further payments under the agreement.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"KIGALI, Rwanda — Rwanda has said it is suing the United Kingdom to seek payments over an aborted,…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":727076,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,4],"tags":[216411,3907,5108,748,30,393,4179,4884,40,8614,19905,1144,38780,285,712,16,15,1764,263],"class_list":{"0":"post-727075","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-uk","8":"category-united-kingdom","9":"tag-216411","10":"tag-article","11":"tag-asylum","12":"tag-britain","13":"tag-courts","14":"tag-england","15":"tag-general-news","16":"tag-great-britain","17":"tag-immigration","18":"tag-international-agreements","19":"tag-lawsuits","20":"tag-northern-ireland","21":"tag-political-refugees","22":"tag-politics","23":"tag-scotland","24":"tag-uk","25":"tag-united-kingdom","26":"tag-wales","27":"tag-world-news"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@uk\/115974643710316112","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/727075","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=727075"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/727075\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/727076"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=727075"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=727075"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=727075"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}