Government hopes that asylum seekers who use small boats to land in the UK could be sent to Rwanda were dealt a blow after the Supreme Court raised doubts over the East African country’s ability to honour international laws.
But last night Dr Jean de Dieu Zikamabahari, dean of Kigali University’s school of law, said: “British lawyers are welcome if they occupy a purely observational role, but they are not needed.”
Speaking from his home in Kigal, he added: “The claim that Rwandan courts are not independent, and cannot properly deal with asylum cases, is completely wrong.
“Recently, for instance, there was a case where a refugee from Burundi was denied refugee status by the committee responsible for adjudicating such matters. That person appealed to the High Court and the committee’s decision was overturned.
This is verifiable evidence that we take such matters very seriously. The allegation that we are incapable of handling refugees matters has no foundation.”
Of particular concern was the issue of refoulement – the returning of asylum seekers to unsafe countries.Two Supreme Court judges ruled that there were grounds to believe that asylum seekers sent to Rwanda would be returned to countries where they faced persecution and inhumane treatment.
One judge disagreed, and the final judgment left the door open for a different outcome if it could be shown that there was, in fact, no risk.
Rwanda has benefited from training by British barristers since it began to rebuild its legal system following the genocide in 1994.
In 2004 it formally adopted English Common law as part of a hybrid legal system and in 2008, when the UK was contributing a quarter of the country’s annual budget, it chose to join the Commonwealth despite having been a Belgian colony.
Project Umubanu, a now defunct Conservative Party initiative, saw barristers including former Home Secretary Suella Braverman sent to Rwanda and Sierra Leone repeatedly to train members of the legal profession.
Dr Zikamabahari revealed that a team of British lawyers had visited Rwanda just four weeks ago.
Instead of training lawyers the taskforce, which included representatives from the institute of Legal Practice and Development (ILPD),was specifically tasked with ensuring that judges and members of the asylum committee were fully abreast with correct procedures.
“It was arranged through the High Commission and I believe they left satisfied that due diligence was being followed,” he said.
“I have been teaching our judges since 2010 and I dispute claims that refugees are being returned to unsafe countries.”
His views were echoed by Rwanda’s asylum lawyers, including Advocate Zziwa Herbert , founding partner of Kigali-based Stabit Advocates.
“There is no institutional problem in the handling of these cases,” he said.“We take these matters very seriously, and I have had no experience of sending refugees back to unsafe nations.”
Last night Home Office sources confirmed that a group of so-called “technical experts” visited Rwanda last month, in collaboration with the institute of Legal Practice and Development (ILPD), to deliver a training course aimed at asylum decision-makers.
This focussed on applying refugee law in asylum interviews and decision-making and best practice in assessing credibility and utilising country of origin information.
It compliments a programme already being run by the Government of Rwanda which includes lawyers, decision-makers and members of the judiciary to help ensure the successful delivery of the Migration and Economic Development Partnership.
