Five justices on the Supreme Court heard the Home Secretary’s enchantment and are as a result of give their determination on Wednesday morning.

The Illegal Migration Act introduced into legislation the Government’s coverage of sending some asylum seekers to Rwanda.

However, the coverage introduced in April 2022 has been held up within the courts, with no deportation flights having taken place.

Speaking to Sky News throughout a go to to the island of Samos within the Aegean Sea on November 4, Home Secretary Suella Braverman stated it was “impossible to give a specific timeline” on when deportation flights might take off ought to judges give the Rwanda plan the inexperienced mild.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has set stopping small boats of asylum seekers from arriving in Britain as certainly one of his 5 pledges to the citizens.

But because the yr began, nearly 26,700 migrants have arrived through the English Channel, in keeping with UK Government figures from earlier this month.

During the three-day Supreme Court listening to, Sir James Eadie KC, for the Home Office, stated the coverage to take away folks to “a country less attractive” than the UK, “but nevertheless safe”, is lawful.

The Government has beforehand argued {that a} memorandum of understanding agreed between the 2 international locations supplies assurances that guarantee everybody despatched there may have a “safe and effective” refugee standing dedication process.

However, Raza Husain KC, for a number of of the asylum seekers prone to deportation to Rwanda,later described the nation’s asylum system as “woefully deficient… marked by acute unfairness and arbitrariness”.

The UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, intervened within the Supreme Court listening to, with its barrister Angus McCullough KC telling the courtroom the assurances have been “no sufficient answer” to “basic and fundamental defects” within the Rwandan system.

Lords Reed, Hodge, Lloyd-Jones, Briggs and Sales are set handy down their ruling in a brief televised listening to.