Britain, Rwanda Clash In Court Over £100m Migrant Deal

Britain and Rwanda faced off at an international arbitration court on Wednesday, with Kigali demanding more than £100 million it says London still owes following the cancellation of a migrant deportation agreement.

The dispute is being heard at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, where both sides presented arguments before a panel of judges over financial obligations tied to the scrapped deal.

Representing Rwanda, Justice Minister Emmanuel Ugirashebuja said Kigali regretted taking legal action but had no choice after what he described as Britain’s refusal to honour its commitments. He argued that Rwanda had been deprived of substantial funds and was seeking to recover money it believes is legally owed.

The disagreement stems from a 2022 agreement signed under former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, which aimed to send migrants arriving in the UK through irregular routes to Rwanda for processing and resettlement. The policy, however, faced strong legal challenges and political opposition, culminating in it being ruled unlawful by the UK Supreme Court.

When Keir Starmer took office in July 2024, he scrapped the plan, describing it as ineffective.

Home Secretary Yvette Cooper also criticised the scheme as a major misuse of public funds.

During its lifespan, only four migrants were relocated to Rwanda, all on a voluntary basis.

According to the UK government, about £290 million had already been paid to Rwanda before the deal was terminated.

However, Kigali argues that two additional annual payments of £50 million each remain outstanding. Rwanda maintains that cancelling the agreement does not remove Britain’s obligation to settle amounts that had already been agreed upon.

Beyond the disputed payments, Rwanda is also seeking around £6 million in compensation, saying Britain failed to uphold a separate commitment to house vulnerable refugees, many of whom were fleeing conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Kigali says it had to cover the cost of accommodating those individuals.

Rwanda is further requesting a formal apology from the British government, arguing that London withdrew from the agreement for domestic political reasons rather than legal ones. It insists the move damaged trust and left it unfairly burdened.

Britain has rejected the claims, describing Rwanda’s case as legally weak.

London argues that Kigali’s actions are politically motivated, pointing to tensions between the two countries after the UK reduced aid over allegations that Rwanda supported the M23 rebel group in eastern Congo.

British officials say Rwanda reversed an earlier commitment to waive certain payments shortly after the aid cuts were announced.

The legal proceedings began with Rwanda presenting its case, while British representatives are expected to respond before both sides deliver final arguments.

A ruling from the arbitration panel is likely to take several months.

Analysts say the timing of the case reflects growing international scrutiny of Rwanda’s role in regional conflicts, as well as its efforts to reinforce its strategic importance to Western partners on migration and peacekeeping issues.