Rwanda-UK dispute: Justice minister makes case for Rwanda as arbitration hearing opens

When the new UK Prime Minister declared the “Rwanda scheme” “dead and buried” on his first full day in office, Rwanda was not formally notified, but instead, learned of the decision through media reports The comments were made by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Rwanda Emmanuel Ugirashebuja on Wednesday, March 18, during the opening session of arbitration proceedings regarding the Migration and Economic Development Partnership (MEDP), an unimplemented asylum agreement in which Rwanda accuses the UK of not honouring its commitments. The dispute is currently being examined at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague. In his opening remarks at the session, Ugirashebuja said the UK’s conduct left Rwanda with no option but to seek legal redress. ALSO READ: Rwanda accuses UK of breach of trust, demands £50m for migration deal “Rwanda regrets that it has been necessary to commence this arbitration. At all times, Rwanda has sought to perform its obligations under the MEDP in good faith, in the spirit of partnership that characterised cooperation on illegal migration,” he said. He blamed the UK for failing to honour key commitments. “The United Kingdom’s intransigence on these issues has left Rwanda with no choice but to vindicate its rights and secure the substantial sums of money of which it has been deprived. The arbitration case centres on disagreements over the MEDP, a bilateral framework designed to address irregular migration while promoting economic development. Ugirashebuja emphasised that Rwanda entered the partnership in good faith and took concrete steps to fulfil its obligations. One of the key points in the case is the Economic Transformation and Integration Fund (ETIF), established to support inclusive economic growth and improve conditions for refugees and host communities in Rwanda. Under a binding exchange of diplomatic notes agreed in June 2024, referred to as the 2024 Finance Note, the UK committed to paying £50 million in April 2025 and another £50 million in April 2026. “These funds were intended to support sustainable and inclusive economic growth within Rwanda and improve the conditions of both refugees and host communities,” Ugirashebuja said. Rwanda argues that following a change of government after the July 2024 elections, the UK sought to withdraw from its obligations, including the agreed payments. “This led to several exchanges between the parties, including key Notes Verbale in November, which this Tribunal will be called upon to interpret,” he noted. He stressed that under international law, obligations accrued while a treaty is in force remain binding until it is properly terminated. “The United Kingdom did not give notice to terminate the treaty until December 2025, and the termination only took effect recently. These obligations must be honoured,” he said. Rwanda highlights its efforts Rwanda maintains that it had already taken extensive steps to implement the partnership. Following the announcement of the agreement in April 2022, Kigali initiated constitutional, legislative, and administrative reforms to facilitate its execution. These included establishing an appeals tribunal for asylum cases, creating at least 12 ministerial and administrative structures, and preparing reception facilities for incoming refugees. “Rwanda incurred significant costs in preparing for the implementation of the partnership,” Ugirashebuja said. He added that the MEDP was designed as a mutually beneficial arrangement. “Rwanda assisted the United Kingdom in addressing illegal migration across the Channel, while the United Kingdom supported Rwanda in strengthening its capacity to host and integrate refugees,” he said. Disagreement over refugee resettlement Beyond financial obligations, Rwanda also accuses the UK of failing to meet commitments related to the resettlement of vulnerable refugees. According to Ugirashebuja, Rwanda invited a Joint Committee of both countries in March 2025 to finalise arrangements for relocating refugees to the UK. However, he said the UK declined to engage, citing its intention to terminate the agreement. “This amounted to a clear refusal to take steps to negotiate the resettlement of refugees under the agreement,” he said. Rwanda’s legal position Ugirashebuja described Rwanda’s case as straightforward, arguing that while discussions may have taken place regarding the UK’s proposal to withdraw, Rwanda never consented to waive its entitlements. He said Kigali made this clear by rejecting the language in particular draft diplomatic communications that would have implied agreement. “The United Kingdom may have wished Rwanda to forgo significant sums of money, but Rwanda did not provide such consent,” he said. Rwanda is seeking compensation, which the minister described as modest, less than 10 percent of the annual budget allocated by the UN refugee agency for Rwanda, or, alternatively, a formal apology. Commitment to migration solutions Despite the dispute, Rwanda says it remains committed to contributing to global migration solutions. “Rwanda has enormous faith in this Tribunal to reach the correct legal outcome. Whatever the result, Rwanda remains committed to providing safety, dignity, and opportunity to refugees and migrants,” Ugirashebuja said. He added that Rwanda views refugees as contributors to society when given the opportunity. “Rwanda firmly believes that refugees can make meaningful social, cultural, and economic contributions if they are supported to integrate,” he said.

News

Rwanda-UK dispute: Justice minister makes case for Rwanda as arbitration hearing opens