I thank the noble and learned Lord for answering the question, but I am not sure that answers the point. Suppose the position were that the UK said, “You haven’t implemented it properly”; the effect of this Act would be nevertheless that a Minister and every single deciding body would have to decide that Rwanda was a safe country. I am not quite sure how Article 22 responds to the suggestion that I think the noble Lord, Lord German, makes in his amendment that judicial review should be available—albeit, as the noble Lord, Lord Howard of Lympne, said, it would be the decision of the Secretary of State as to whether it was a safe country. Could the noble and learned Lord address that suggestion?
Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Falconer of Thoroton
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 12 February 2024.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
836 c62 
Session
2023-24
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-03-18 14:36:41 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2024-02-12/24021220000026
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2024-02-12/24021220000026
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2024-02-12/24021220000026