Northern Ireland 'will become a magnet for illegal migrants' after court ruled people CAN'T be deported to Rwanda from the province due to Rishi Sunak's deal with EU
Fears have been raised that Northern Ireland could become a 'magnet' for illegal immigration after a bombshell court ruling.
The High Court in Belfast decided yesterday that parts of the Illegal Migration Act cannot apply in the province because of post-Brexit agreements with the EU.
The intervention could mean it is impossible for the Home Office to deport migrants to Rwanda if they travel to Northern Ireland - although the government has insisted it will appeal.
The DUP insisted the move underlines the problems with Rishi Sunak's Windsor Framework deal, suggesting illegal immigrants will head there to dodge being sent to the African state.
But in a round of interviews this morning, Defence Secretary Grant Shapps insisted Northern Ireland would not be an 'exception to the rule' in the wider UK.
![](https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2024/05/14/08/84834401-13415419-image-m-11_1715672172392.jpg)
Migrants pictured on a boat attempting to cross the English Channel near Dunkirk, France in April
![Rishi Sunak said the judgment 'changes nothing about our operational plans to send illegal migrants to Rwanda this July or the lawfulness of our Safety of Rwanda Act'](https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2024/05/14/08/84834411-13415419-image-a-10_1715672170533.jpg)
Rishi Sunak said the judgment 'changes nothing about our operational plans to send illegal migrants to Rwanda this July or the lawfulness of our Safety of Rwanda Act'
The row comes amid signs the Rwanda scheme is already having a deterrent effect, with Ireland complaining that migrants are crossing the border to avoid being deported to the African state.
The post-Brexit framework includes a stipulation that there can be no diminution of the rights provisions contained within Northern Ireland's Good Friday peace agreement of 1998.
The Illegal Migration Act provides new powers for the Government to detain and remove asylum seekers it deems to have arrived illegally in the UK. Central to the new laws is the scheme to send asylum seekers to Rwanda.
Downing Street suggested the court was wrong to 'extend' post-Brexit rules to cover issues such as illegal migration.
Mr Sunak said: 'I have been consistently clear that the commitments in the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement should be interpreted as they were always intended, and not expanded to cover issues like illegal migration. We will take all steps to defend that position, including through appeal.
'This judgment changes nothing about our operational plans to send illegal migrants to Rwanda this July or the lawfulness of our Safety of Rwanda Act.
'We continue to work to get regular flights off to Rwanda in the coming weeks and nothing will distract us from that or delivering to the timetable I set out. We must start the flights to stop the boats.'
The PM's official spokesman said the ruling would have no impact on the first flights to Rwanda planned for this summer as the initial 'cohort' of deportees would be detained under different legislation.
'We continue to work on the timetable that the Prime Minister had previously set out,' he said.
'We've consistently been clear that the commitment to the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement should be interpreted as they were always intended and not expanded to cover issues like illegal migration.'
A government source said: 'It shows again that the courts are desperate to frustrate this plan, but in the PM's view it is politicians not the courts who are accountable to the public for addressing concerns on illegal migration. We will not be knocked off course.'
But DUP leader Gavin Robinson said the party had warned that the Windsor Framework would block the Rwanda plan in the province.
'It is imperative that immigration policy applies equally across every part of the United Kingdom,' he said.
'As Unionists, we are clear that our national parliament should have the ability to make decisions on immigration that are applicable on a national basis.
'If that were not the case, it would not only be a constitutional affront but would make Northern Ireland a magnet for asylum seekers seeking to escape enforcement.'
Labour peer Baroness Hoey told GB News: 'I presume it will go to the Supreme Court, but I would be very surprised if the Supreme Court takes a different view. Because everyone who understood it and read about Article Two of the protocol knew that this could not apply.
'Northern Ireland is going to be a magnet for people to come over and I just would warn any government who's thinking of putting in checks on people, they are entering into a very dangerous territory.'
Solicitor Sinead Marmion, who represented a 16-year-old Iranian asylum seeker in the case, said the judgment was 'hugely significant' and would prevent the Rwanda scheme applying in Northern Ireland.
'This is a huge thorn in the Government's side and it has completely put a spanner in the works,' she added.