THE High Court has refused to grant an injunction to halt next week’s deportation flight to Rwanda, to the dismay of asylum seekers and campaigners.

The injunction would have granted interim relief preventing the government from removing people to Rwanda until legal challenges against the policy have been heard by British courts.

Care4Calais, one of the groups which launched the application, said it was “deeply disappointed” and have appealed the decision.

“We are deeply concerned for the welfare of the people who may be forcibly deported to Rwanda, a fate that could profoundly harm their mental health and future lives,” the group said.

Mr Justice Swift rejected the application on the basis that each case should be considered on an individual basis and there was therefore no need for a general injunction. Shortly after the judgment was concluded, the judge granted the claimants permission to appeal, suggesting Court of Appeal judges would hear the case on Monday.

Four asylum-seekers along with charities Care4Calais and Detention Action and the PCS union, which represents Border Force staff, applied for an urgent interim injunction preventing any flights to Rwanda from leaving until their judicial review had been heard. 

Their lawyers argued at the High Court today that the deal was “unsafe,” and that the Home Office’s conclusion that Rwanda is a safe country, was irrational.

The court was also told that the Home Office had misled refugees over the involvement of the United Nations refugee agency (UNHCR) in the Rwanda deal. It emerged that refugees had been told by the department via letters that UNHCR was “closely involved” in the scheme.

In a surprise intervention at the court, UNHCR lawyer Laura Dubinksy QC said the body “in no way endorses the UK-Rwandan arrangement” and was concerned by “inaccuracies” by the Home Office. 

Home Office lawyers had pressed for the application to be dismissed, claiming the campaigners had brought “no serious issue to be tried.”

The court heard that the department had intended to deport 37 people to Rwanda on Tuesday. However, as a result of the case, six asylum seekers had their removal directions cancelled, bringing the number down to 31.

The legal action came amid claims that the Home Office has been seeking to rapidly remove asylum-seekers to Rwanda, including potential victims of trafficking and torture, without allowing them sufficient time to access adequate legal support 

Care4Calais founder Clare Moseley says she believes that 70 per cent of the 100 people who the Home Office wants to deport to Rwanda are potential victims of trafficking and torture. 

“There was a guy who was tortured in Syria, they burnt his feet and tortured him for fun,” she told the Morning Star. “A man from Iran who was tortured so badly he has now lost control of his bowels. I’m sure you can imagine what they did to him.” 

Another campaigner supporting asylum-seekers, who preferred not to be named, said he had spoken to three Syrians with tickets to Rwanda who had been sold to Libyan militias on their journey to Europe by people smugglers. 

The three were then detained and forced to work without pay on a farm until their families paid a ransom. 

Announcing the Rwanda deal, the Home Office committed to undertaking “initial screenings” to identify individuals’ vulnerabilities, such as whether someone is a victim of torture, trafficking or has underlying health issues. 

But charity Medical Justice said the screening questions “do not elicit necessary information from the asylum-seeker for it to be able to make a comprehensive assessment of their potential vulnerabilities.”

Campaigners and lawyers have also raised concerns about access to legal advice. Asylum-seekers who’ve been given notices of intent have just seven days to challenge the decision. 

“The Home Office is literally trying to deny people their rights of representation as much as possible to try and rush through and force through a legally dubious scheme,” Movement for Justice campaigner Karen Doyle told the Morning Star. 

Although all detainees are entitled to 30 minutes of free legal advice through the Detained Advice Scheme (DDAS) delays have meant that men have often run out of time, Ms Doyle said.

In one case, a Kurdish asylum seeker was told by a DDAS scheme solicitor that he would take on his case but that he needed to sign some documents first. But the documents never arrived, after which time seven days had passed and he was then given a ticket to Rwanda.

Medical Justice director Emma Ginn said that some of their clients were not able to get a lawyer before the end of the seven-day period, while others had no access to translation services despite the notice of intent only being provided in English.

“One man who got in touch with Medical Justice regarding his medical condition didn’t know he was to be deported to Rwanda – one of our caseworkers had to break that news to him,” she said.

Law Society vice president Lubna Shuja said she was very concerned by reports from lawyers that their clients have not had adequate access to legal advice.

“We also understand notices have been issued at such speed that it’s not clear if or how the Home Office could have properly considered the basis of each person’s claim and individual circumstances,” she said.“

For instance whether they may be a victim of torture and/or trafficking, have disabilities or other protected characteristics which might make their removal to Rwanda particularly unsafe.”

Charity Asylum Aid chief executive Kerry Smith said: “We are seeing vulnerable people locked up on arrival in the UK with no information, no understanding of what is happening to them and only given seven days to access legal advice and make their case for not being removed to Rwanda. 

“You would get longer than that to challenge a parking ticket.”

The charity, which provides legal representation to asylum-seekers, has sought a second injunction to stop flights to Rwanda on the basis that the government’s “rapid” process for sending asylum-seekers to the African nation is unlawful. The case is due to be heard in the High Court on Monday.

A Home Office spokesperson said: “Nobody will be relocated if it is unsafe or inappropriate for them. 

“Victims of trafficking and modern slavery will have a chance to seek support via the National Referral Mechanism, and all individuals in immigration removal centres have access to the legal support they need.”