Namibia rejected UK migrants deal
Analyst condemns asylum scheme
As Rwanda prepares to welcome asylum-seekers from the United Kingdom, Namibia says it will not be coerced into doing the same.
Namibia has made it empathetically clear that it will not accept migrants from the United Kingdom (UK) in the wake of the European country scrambling to send those seeking greener pastures on its soil to other countries.
The scheme, originally announced in a speech by British prime minister Boris Johnson in April 2022, is an immigration policy that will see those who have been identified as illegal immigrants or asylum-seekers being relocated to an African country for processing, asylum or resettlement. In return, a country like Rwanda, which has agreed to host illegal immigrants from the UK, received £240 million (N$5.75 billion).
Penda Naanda, executive director of the Namibian ministry of international relations, told Namibian Sun that the country was approached by the UK to be part of the asylum deal, but Namibia rejected the request.
International media has reported that other African countries like Morocco, Tunisia and The Gambia also declined the offer.
“It’s not a new thing. We are not accepting migrants from the UK, [even if] it’s just one. Our agenda as a country and our asylum policy is very clear. Do you want to bring those who are crossing the Mediterranean Sea from Afghanistan and Syria here? To do what?” Naanda wanted to know.
‘Won’t have them imposed on us’
The UK on Tuesday passed the ‘Safety of Rwanda’ bill to send asylum-seekers to that country. This is despite judges during an earlier court case finding that the East African country might not be a safe option as asylum-seekers may once again end up in the very countries they ran from.
The bill was passed as at least five migrants died while trying to cross the English Channel from France to the UK on a boat.
Naanda went on to explain that there are various types of migrants - from those seeking refuge to those looking for jobs and any other mission they might have.
“We have refugees here in this country from countries like [the Democratic Republic of the] Congo, where things are much worse. Migrants are coming to look for something,” he said.
“We are not going to have people imposed on us. Why would we take people who were going on a boat to the UK to find jobs and economic benefits? A country cannot be told to take migrants.”
‘Racist to the core’
Political analyst Rui Tyitende said the Namibian government should be applauded for its stance. He further condemned the UK’s deportation scheme as racist and reminiscent of the ‘bloody British Empire’.
“If it is true that Namibia said no to the British request to host asylum-seekers, we should applaud the government for such a decisive and morally correct step. The entire scheme of the UK is racist to the core.
“This is the same country that had a government-funded programme to host and pay for the Ukrainians fleeing the war. But it is reluctant to do the same for immigrants from across the world fleeing for the same reasons from their countries of origin. This is quite simple. They are anti-black, anti-African and anti-anything that is not white,” he fumed.
Reconsider
The UK, seemingly desperate to shirk the increasing burden of migrants flocking there from war-torn countries, has approached several African nations - including Namibia - to take these migrants off of its hands.
Last year, Al Jazeera reported that the first flight taking refugees to Rwanda was stopped at literally the last minute by the European Court of Human Rights.
Meanwhile, on Wednesday, the United Nations - through its refugee and human rights offices, called on the UK government to reconsider its plan to transfer asylum-seekers to Rwanda and instead to take practical measures to address irregular flows of refugees and migrants, based on international cooperation and respect for international human rights law.
[email protected]
The scheme, originally announced in a speech by British prime minister Boris Johnson in April 2022, is an immigration policy that will see those who have been identified as illegal immigrants or asylum-seekers being relocated to an African country for processing, asylum or resettlement. In return, a country like Rwanda, which has agreed to host illegal immigrants from the UK, received £240 million (N$5.75 billion).
Penda Naanda, executive director of the Namibian ministry of international relations, told Namibian Sun that the country was approached by the UK to be part of the asylum deal, but Namibia rejected the request.
International media has reported that other African countries like Morocco, Tunisia and The Gambia also declined the offer.
“It’s not a new thing. We are not accepting migrants from the UK, [even if] it’s just one. Our agenda as a country and our asylum policy is very clear. Do you want to bring those who are crossing the Mediterranean Sea from Afghanistan and Syria here? To do what?” Naanda wanted to know.
‘Won’t have them imposed on us’
The UK on Tuesday passed the ‘Safety of Rwanda’ bill to send asylum-seekers to that country. This is despite judges during an earlier court case finding that the East African country might not be a safe option as asylum-seekers may once again end up in the very countries they ran from.
The bill was passed as at least five migrants died while trying to cross the English Channel from France to the UK on a boat.
Naanda went on to explain that there are various types of migrants - from those seeking refuge to those looking for jobs and any other mission they might have.
“We have refugees here in this country from countries like [the Democratic Republic of the] Congo, where things are much worse. Migrants are coming to look for something,” he said.
“We are not going to have people imposed on us. Why would we take people who were going on a boat to the UK to find jobs and economic benefits? A country cannot be told to take migrants.”
‘Racist to the core’
Political analyst Rui Tyitende said the Namibian government should be applauded for its stance. He further condemned the UK’s deportation scheme as racist and reminiscent of the ‘bloody British Empire’.
“If it is true that Namibia said no to the British request to host asylum-seekers, we should applaud the government for such a decisive and morally correct step. The entire scheme of the UK is racist to the core.
“This is the same country that had a government-funded programme to host and pay for the Ukrainians fleeing the war. But it is reluctant to do the same for immigrants from across the world fleeing for the same reasons from their countries of origin. This is quite simple. They are anti-black, anti-African and anti-anything that is not white,” he fumed.
Reconsider
The UK, seemingly desperate to shirk the increasing burden of migrants flocking there from war-torn countries, has approached several African nations - including Namibia - to take these migrants off of its hands.
Last year, Al Jazeera reported that the first flight taking refugees to Rwanda was stopped at literally the last minute by the European Court of Human Rights.
Meanwhile, on Wednesday, the United Nations - through its refugee and human rights offices, called on the UK government to reconsider its plan to transfer asylum-seekers to Rwanda and instead to take practical measures to address irregular flows of refugees and migrants, based on international cooperation and respect for international human rights law.
[email protected]
Comments
Namibian Sun
No comments have been left on this article