header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
31 May 2024 / Dr Graham Zellick CBE KC FAcSS
Issue: 8073 / Categories: Opinion , Constitutional law , Public , Immigration & asylum , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Rwanda & constitutional law

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
Long after it is repealed, the Safety of Rwanda Act will illustrate the fragility & vulnerability of fundamental constitutional principles, writes Graham Zellick KC

We read frequently of the concern of presidents and prime ministers, especially as their political lives are drawing to a close, over their legacy, the enduring contributions for which they will be remembered by posterity. I shall leave it for the political commentators and constitutional historians to reflect on Rishi Sunak’s legacy, but I confidently predict that his name will forever be associated with the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024, even long after it has been repealed (and, with a general election scheduled for 4 July, it is highly likely to be repealed by an incoming Labour government before the first flight has taken off).

This is not because of his efforts—heroic or desperate, depending on your point of view—to see his policy of removing illegal migrants and asylum seekers to Rwanda (to ‘stop the boats’, in his

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll