Four Rwandans were granted refugee status in Britain due to “well-founded” fears of persecution, while the government argued in court and parliament that the East African country was a safe place to send asylum seekers.
An investigation by the Observer and the campaign group Led by Donkeys is revealing for the first time details of the Home Office’s decisions on Rwandans granted asylum in the past four months, claiming they were in danger from the regime.
The documents raise new questions about Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s claim that Rwanda is “unequivocally” safe for asylum seekers.
They are being unveiled ahead of this week’s debate in the House of Lords on the proposed new Rwanda law, which aims to prevent legal problems over the transport of asylum seekers to the African state.
The Conservative government wants to send all asylum seekers entering Britain in small boats across the Channel to Rwanda, arguing this would act as a deterrent. The Supreme Court ruled last year that Rwanda was unsafe, prompting Sunak to introduce new legislation that, he says, will address those concerns.
The investigation also uncovered details of a dossier compiled by a Western intelligence agency accusing Rwanda of orchestrating a dirty tricks campaign to defame and undermine critics, including those in Britain. It is further alleged that a London PR firm set up social media accounts to target a British author, but the company has denied this.
One of the Rwandans was granted asylum by the Interior Ministry on October 12, the day after the government concluded a Supreme Court case arguing the country was safe.
The refugee was a supporter of an opposition party led by Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, which campaigns for justice for colleagues who have been murdered or disappeared. The Rwandan also witnessed alleged atrocities committed by President Paul Kagame’s forces in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).
He and his wife were granted asylum by the Ministry of Home Affairs, stating in a letter: “We accept that you have a well-founded fear of persecution and therefore cannot return to your country Rwanda, and we have recognized that you are a refugee under the Refugee Convention Act 1951.”
The refugee, who still fears for his safety, said: “Britain must stop pretending this is a safe place. Find another excuse to send people to Rwanda, but don’t say it’s ‘safe’ because that’s just insulting to people like me.”
Another Rwandan refugee who spoke on the condition of anonymity said he sought refuge in Britain because he feared he would be targeted by the regime because of a family member’s suspected ties to the opposition.
A decision letter from the Home Office, dated October 17, 2023, acknowledged he had a “well-founded fear of persecution”. The Rwandan said refugees sent to his country would be safe if they kept their heads down and did not criticize the government, but if they spoke out they would get into trouble.
He said: “If that were to happen in Rwanda, you are walking a very fine line. Anything can happen to you. In Rwanda it doesn’t really take much. Even the mere presumption of sympathizing with the opposition is enough. People have died for much, much less, they have been imprisoned for much, much less.”
Another asylum seeker from the African state was a woman who was forced by the regime to work for the Rwandan intelligence service. According to information from the Greater Manchester Immigration Aid Unit, an organization that supports people subject to immigration control, she was granted asylum on November 24.
All four cases were granted asylum upon request by the Ministry of the Interior, without having to go to court.
Ali Abdulkarim, deputy leader of the opposition Rwanda National Congress party and living in London, said: “The fact that these Rwandans are still being granted asylum in Britain shows what the Rwanda bill is. It is politically motivated. There may be an appearance of order, or a rule of law [in Rwanda]but it is a dictatorship and there is no security for the people who live there.”
The details of the four cases obtained by the Observer and Led By Donkeys join six Rwandans who were granted asylum in Britain between April 2022, when the policy was first announced, and September 2023, according to Home Office figures.
In November, the Supreme Court ruled that the government’s original Rwanda plan was unlawful because refugees risked being sent back to their home countries. Concerns were also raised about Rwanda’s poor human rights record.
The judgment included a reference to Rwandan police who shot and killed 12 refugees during a protest against food ration cuts in 2018. The judgment noted that Rwanda has “made great progress economically and socially” and is a key partner of Britain .
Related: ‘Well-camouflaged dictatorship’: Rwandans fear for safety as dirty tricks campaign undermines critics
Britain signed a new treaty with Rwanda last month to ensure people sent there are not returned to their home countries. It also says asylum seekers transferred to the country will be monitored by an independent commission. The new bill on the security of Rwanda (asylum and immigration) states that Rwanda is safe for the purpose of removing individuals into the country and that it will comply with the new treaty.
A Home Office spokesperson said: “People of many different nationalities are claiming asylum in Britain. This includes nationals of some of our closest European neighbors and other safe countries around the world.
“As part of our response to the Supreme Court’s ruling, we have signed a treaty with Rwanda making it clear that persons relocated to Rwanda under the partnership will not be returned to an unsafe country.”
According to the Ministry of the Interior, Rwanda has a good track record in receiving asylum seekers and caring for refugees. The Supreme Court recognizes that changes can be made to make the partnership with Rwanda work. A home office spokesperson said the department did not comment on specific cases.
Rwanda’s High Commission did not respond to a request for comment.