Anti-immigration Rwanda bill is an almost inconceivable attack on human rights – Christine Jardine

The Rwanda Bill will disapply sections of the UK’s Human Rights Act, with Rwandan ministers stopping the UK Government from going even further because they want to stay within international law

On December 10, 1948, a fledgling United Nations asserted a doctrine which proved to be a watershed moment in creating a new, rules-based international order. In the aftermath of the Second World War and the Holocaust, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights reflected the international community’s desire to safeguard future generations from the horror they had witnessed.

On its 75th birthday this week, the 30 articles produced by a committee chaired by the indomitable Eleanor Roosevelt seem as pertinent now as they did then. Indeed the freedoms the Declaration set out to protect, life, liberty the right to freedom of expression and religion feel under as much threat across the globe as when it was conceived. And perhaps for the first time, parliamentarians in this country need to ask ourselves whether we are upholding the principles our predecessors worked so hard to establish as we consider some of the legislation before us.

These past few weeks, the government introduced a plan for removing asylum seekers to Rwanda which sails as close to the edge of international law as it is possible to imagine. The horror of terrified refugees, exploited by people-traffickers, risking, and often losing, their lives as they try to cross the freezing Channel in overcrowded boats is surely something we all want to end. But it should not be at the cost of our international reputation or adherence to the rule of law.

Small boat crossings of the English Channel by migrants must be stopped but human rights should not be compromised (Picture: Sameer Al-Doumy/AFP via Getty Images)

Rwanda wants to stay within law

In a statement to the Commons, we were told that the Bill, being rushed through before Christmas, will disapply sections of our own Human Rights Act. We were even told that the Bill’s limitations – which are opposed by the right wing of the Conservative party and provoked the immigration minister’s resignation – are at the insistence of the Rwandan government which wishes to stay within international law.

Twenty-four hours later, MPs debated the growth in Islamophobia which, coupled with a surge in anti-semitism, has hit this country following the October 7 Hamas attack and the resultant Israeli operations in Gaza. I have several times called for action to defend human rights in the cases of the Uyghur Muslims, the Hong Kong Chinese and in Myanmar. I never dreamed I would have to call for their protection here.

The spectacle of a women and equalities minister saying we would no longer recognise lawful certification of gender held by citizens 50 countries, including some of our closest allies, only added to my concern. That any citizen of this country should feel fear because of their religion, ethnicity or gender goes against everything I have ever believed and held dear about our culture.

That anyone in our government should even contemplate, as several have, that we leave the European Convention of Human Rights seems inconceivable. We were instrumental in its establishment.

As I travel south this week, I am aware that the Rwanda Bill will come before us again for a second reading. There will no doubt be splits in the government between those reasonable Conservatives who feel it goes too far and those who somehow, inexplicably, feel justified in calling for us to cross to the wrong side of international law.

I shall be on the side of those precious human rights.

Christine Jardine is the Scottish Liberal Democrat MP for Edinburgh West