When making a statement to the House of Commons in April about the new plan to offshore asylum seekers to Rwanda, the home secretary Priti Patel accused the opposition of being “xenophobic” because of their concerns about human rights abuses in the country. The irony of this made me laugh. Instead of the UK parliament, I felt like I was watching the House of Representatives in the United States, as Patel flagrantly used distraction and misleading information to divert criticism from her plan.
As a person of colour, the ability to deal with racism and bigotry is part of my DNA—but listening to the home secretary and prime minister speak on this policy, I’ve never felt so hated as an individual. The party’s hostile environment policies are the most xenophobic the country has seen for decades. I have pored over the memorandum of understanding with Rwanda, as I do over all documents that I worry might affect me and others in my situation. It seems incredibly rushed and gives limited detail about how the arrangement is intended to work.
Would a single male LGBTQIA+ asylum seeker, like me, be sent to Rwanda? Will people seeking asylum in the UK via boat or lorry be transferred there by force? The government has said that the purpose of the policy is to “disrupt the business model of people-smuggling gangs.” But Home Office officials have also suggested that families are less likely to be sent to Rwanda, raising concerns—even from the architect of the hostile environment herself, Theresa May—that this will increase the trafficking of women and children. Will those awaiting a UK asylum decision in Rwanda be protected by British laws? There are so many unanswered questions.
What we do know for sure is that the policy is migrant offshoring, similar to the Australian systems on Nauru and Papua New Guinea. The Australian government funded, staffed and supported the processing of asylum claims, and those accepted as refugees were not given settlement in Australia, but in Papua New Guinea and Nauru. In the UK government’s plan, those granted refugee status will be settled in Rwanda, not the UK. In 2016 there were reports of child abuse, sexual assault and self-harm in detention centres in Nauru. How can the UK government ensure that this will not happen in offshore detention in Rwanda, 6,000 miles away?
The prime minister has described Rwanda as one of the safest countries in the world. But just last year the UK’s ambassador for human rights raised concerns to the UN about Rwanda’s failure to properly investigate allegations of human rights abuses. She also accused the country of failing to support victims of trafficking. Britain has itself accepted asylum seekers from Rwanda over the past decade because, although it is making strides in -economic growth, socially and politically the -nation still bears the scars of the recent past.
As an LGBTQIA+ man, I am worried that this policy will have horrendous effects on people like me and I am particularly concerned about transgender men and women. The Foreign Office’s own advice for visitors to Rwanda says: “homosexuality is not illegal in Rwanda but remains frowned on by many. LGBTQIA+ individuals can experience discrimination and abuse, including from local authorities. There are no specific anti-discrimination laws that protect LGBT individuals.” If the Foreign Office thinks LGBTQIA+ asylum seekers are at risk in Rwanda, how can the Home Office send us there? But no suggestion has yet been made that we have an exemption.
Let’s be clear: one of the UK government’s motives here is straightforward— to deport people who are already here, as the policy affects asylum seekers who have arrived since 1st January 2022. Its other aim is to stop people in need from building a life here. However, speaking personally, the policy would not have deterred me from coming to the UK as I was so desperate to escape the situation I was faced with at home—and others have even said that they would still have come, but would have hidden from the authorities on their arrival.
Don’t be fooled into thinking that the government’s aim is to stop people smugglers. The evidence from Australia shows offshoring doesn’t work—in reality, it is all about making positive headlines in the right-wing press. Remember this, because it will happen many times in your life: when people show you who they are, believe them the first time. Priti Patel and Boris Johnson have done so emphatically.
