Britain and Rwanda agreed last month that Rwanda will receive and accommodate citizens of different countries who have sought asylum in Britain. Those being transferred to Rwanda are in detention centers in Britain.
So, in principle, citizens of any country can be sent to Rwanda. The largest numbers of asylum seekers come to Britain from sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East.
In the past, the authorities have indicated that some of those sent to Rwanda could be free and have 14 days to appeal the decision.
Currently, about a hundred asylum seekers arriving across the English Channel have been notified of their deportation to Rwanda.
At least Sudanese, Albanians and Afghans are among those asylum seekers in detention centers.
Britain and Rwanda signed a € 143 million agreement
Britain and Rwanda in central Africa agreed on transfers of asylum seekers in mid-April.
Under the agreement, Britain will pay Rwanda around € 143 million to receive and accommodate asylum seekers from Britain.
Under the arrangement, Britain can send anyone to Rwanda who entered the country illegally later this year.
Rwanda announced last week that it will receive the first asylum seekers to be transported from Britain in the coming weeks.
Board spokesman Alain Mukurarinda said Britain had announced that the first group to be sent from Britain would have around 50 people. According to Mukurarinda, they may be transported to Rwanda before the end of May.
Transfers are considered contrary to international law
The project has been much criticized. In the UK, several aid organizations have filed lawsuits against the project.
An expert interviewed by in early May made it absolutely clear that the transfer of asylum seekers from Britain to Rwanda was against international law.
The UN Refugee Convention obliges asylum seekers not to be sent to countries where their rights cannot be guaranteed. Rwanda, at the tail end of human rights statistics, is such a country.
Opponents see the plan to send up to tens of thousands of asylum seekers to poor Rwanda in the coming years to be inhumane.
Britain has justified the project by curbing illegal entry and smuggling.
You are still coming across the canal
In Britain, aid organizations have reported that many those sent to Rwanda are in poor physical and mental condition. They may be traumatized and confused about what is being done to them.
The Mail on Sunday said on Sunday that only ten asylum seekers have withdrawn their applications since the plan to send them to Rwanda was announced.
Deportation to Africa was supposed to act as a deterrent, but there are no signs of the deterrent effect based on the number of people crossing the channel.
Hundreds of asylum seekers have crossed the canal since the plan was announced in mid-April.
Last year, more than 28,000 migrants and asylum seekers came to Britain from the English Channel.
Denmark also plans to outsource asylum seekers to Rwanda
Recently, Rwanda has been in the headlines mainly due to firing from the Democratic Republic of Congo into the Rwandan border region.
According to the UN, there were 127,000 refugees in Rwanda at the end of last year, most of them Congolese.
Britain is not the first country to start relocating asylum seekers abroad. Australia was the first country to outsource the processing of asylum applications and the accommodation of asylum seekers.
Australia relocated more than 4,000 people over eight years to miserable conditions on the island of Nauru and Papua New Guinea. According to the UN, Australia violated the Refugee Convention.
In addition, Israel has specifically turned asylum seekers to Rwanda and Uganda. Denmark is also preparing to transfer asylum seekers to Rwanda, but no agreement has yet been reached.