Sunak intends to ignore European judges blocking Rwanda plan

Rishi Sunak and his wife Akshata Murthy arrive in Manchester ahead of the Conservative Party conference. Photo: Stephane Rousseau/PA Wire < p>Rishi Sunak is preparing to use new legal powers to override injunctions from Strasbourg judges if the Supreme Court gives the go-ahead to the Rwanda policy in November, The Telegraph understands.

Allies expect the Prime Minister to act in defiance of further attempts by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) to cancel deportation flights through emergency orders if the government wins its case.

Suella Braverman, the Home Secretary, as well as is assumed to stand for any future. injunctions blocking flights should be ignored.

Last June, the first flight to smuggle illegal migrants into Rwanda was blocked at the 11th hour by a temporary Rule 39 injunction issued by an unnamed ECHR judge.

While ministers are confident of winning the case, they are likely to face fresh appeals in Strasbourg, which could lead to new orders being issued under the rule 39.

Do you support the Rwanda migrant plan? Poll

However, Mr Sunak is understood to be willing to use powers in the new Irregular Migration Act to defy such orders.

A Government source said: “The Government will have a choice.” at this point whether to continue the flight.

“Perhaps Strasbourg is wary of a very political situation at this moment. But if they did, then the government has a choice: comply or not and suspend flights until the matter is reviewed. The most likely outcome is that we will continue without waiting for the Strasbourg conclusion.”

The source said it would be “very difficult” politically for ministers not to use the new powers they have specifically given themselves. passage of the Small Courts Bill.

The news comes at a time of tension in the Cabinet over immigration policy and the European Convention on Human Rights.

In a speech in Washington last week, Ms Braverman appeared to suggest the possibility of Britain leaving the ECHR. She said: «I reject the idea that a country cannot be expected to respect human rights unless it has joined an international human rights body.»

Other ministers criticized the intervention, accusing it of trying to force Mr Sunak to take a tougher stance. One government source said the Home Secretary is «behind the scenes stoking the ECHR issue» and is «waging a shadow campaign» with right-wing MPs.

Suella Braverman on immigration

However, an associate of Mr Sunak told The Telegraph that how to deal with another Rule 39 order and whether it should be ignored was the “next debate” and “urgent question”, not the broader question of whether Britain should remain in the ECHR.

Ignoring the interim order would still prove highly controversial. Although Ms Braverman fought for the right to be included in the Small Boats Bill and is understood to be pushing for its use, some Cabinet ministers are believed to be reluctant to take such a step.

Victoria Prentice, Attorney General , is believed to be among those who would be «uncomfortable» in defying the injunction.

A government spokesman said: «We are confident in our case and continue to defend our partnership with Rwanda.» in the courts. We will not prejudge the Supreme Court's decision.»

Although the High Court upheld Rwanda's policy, Court of Appeal judges ruled in June that a plan to send asylum seekers to the African country could violate their human rights.

p>The judges ruled that Rwanda had not provided sufficient guarantees to prove it was a “safe third country”. By a majority of two to one, they said there was a real risk that asylum seekers who moved to Rwanda would be wrongly returned to their home countries, where they could face torture or inhuman treatment in violation of the ECHR.

In July, the government received permission to appeal the Court of Appeal decision to the Supreme Court.