Live Breaking News & Updates on Chiefjustice hrishikesh roy

Stay informed with the latest breaking news from Chiefjustice hrishikesh roy on our comprehensive webpage. Get up-to-the-minute updates on local events, politics, business, entertainment, and more. Our dedicated team of journalists delivers timely and reliable news, ensuring you're always in the know. Discover firsthand accounts, expert analysis, and exclusive interviews, all in one convenient destination. Don't miss a beat — visit our webpage for real-time breaking news in Chiefjustice hrishikesh roy and stay connected to the pulse of your community

BBC News Now

other question, i respect the court, but i fundamentally disagree with their conclusions. i believe, and their conclusions. i believe, and the lord chiefjustice made he agrees, the people of thema moscow have showed us that is no risk. rwanda is a safe country —— the people of rwanda. we will go to the supreme court. the policy of this government is simple. it is your government is simple. it is your government and it is not criminal gangs who should decide who comes here. it is a simple point of view, it is our country who should decide, not criminal gangs. i will do what

People , Question , Chiefjustice , Court , Conclusions , Thema-moscow-have , Country , Risk , Who-0n-rwanda , Government , Policy , Supreme-court

BBC News

inwood is outside court. for viewers joining for viewersjoining us, some are put thejudge has said. this for viewersjoining us, some are put the judge has said.— the judge has said. this was a split decision, the judge has said. this was a split decision. two _ the judge has said. this was a split decision, two judges _ the judge has said. this was a split decision, two judges took - the judge has said. this was a split decision, two judges took one i decision, two judges took one view, onejudge took the decision, two judges took one view, one judge took the other hand the question at the heart of this is whether rwanda is a safe third country. two of those judges came to the conclusion that it was not and that the asylum system in rwanda was not able to give people their affair rides had they been sent there, whereas the other chiefjustice about the procedures were in place. all of them said the rwandan government was acting in good faith in doing this and that is something in doing this and that is something in the statement the rwandan government has also emphasised, but it was decided by majority, 2—1, but if people are sent to rwanda was a significant risk that people might be sent on or back to the country of origin. be sent on or back to the country of

Some , View , Judge , Judges , Us , Two , Split-decision , Viewers , Viewersjoining , One-i-decision , Thejudge , Viewersjoining-us

BBC News Now

course — matter of public importance. of course also, because there has been the lord _ course also, because there has been the lord chiefjustice going one way, _ the lord chiefjustice going one way, the — the lord chiefjustice going one way, the master of the roles going the other, — way, the master of the roles going the other, and the supreme court will want — the other, and the supreme court will want to be the final arbiter of this decision. watch this space because — this decision. watch this space because i_ this decision. watch this space because i imagine there will be another— because i imagine there will be another important case on this matter— another important case on this matter shortly.— another important case on this matter shortly. catherine, do you auree matter shortly. catherine, do you agree with _ matter shortly. catherine, do you agree with it _ matter shortly. catherine, do you agree with it and _ matter shortly. catherine, do you agree with it and can _ matter shortly. catherine, do you agree with it and can you - matter shortly. catherine, do you agree with it and can you see - matter shortly. catherine, do you agree with it and can you see thisj agree with it and can you see this law ever coming into force? the government can sleep saying it is one of their key planks, how they want to stop the boats. i one of their key planks, how they want to stop the boats.— want to stop the boats. i think it is a misguided _ want to stop the boats. i think it is a misguided policy, _ want to stop the boats. i think it is a misguided policy, and - want to stop the boats. i think it is a misguided policy, and if- want to stop the boats. i think it is a misguided policy, and if it. is a misguided policy, and if it came is in force, it would be unenforceable. it is ill—fated, a respected of what the judiciary do. if there is an appeal and it goes to the supreme court, i would find it difficult to imagine the supreme court coming to a different view based on the weight of evidence. pope on the principles in

Decision , Dark-matter , Supreme-court , Course , Spinning-objects-in-space , Lord , Way , Other , Roles , One-way , Importance , Master

Verified Live

human rights act, these deportations can take place and that is the key bit of— can take place and that is the key bit of the — can take place and that is the key bit of the building needs to be retained _ bit of the building needs to be retained. if needs be we will have to use _ retained. if needs be we will have to use the — retained. if needs be we will have to use the parliament act to get the bill through the lords, to use the parliament act to get the billthrough the lords, i to use the parliament act to get the bill through the lords, i hope it does _ bill through the lords, i hope it does not — bill through the lords, i hope it does not come to that. because... all of— does not come to that. because... all of this — does not come to that. because... all of this is — does not come to that. because... all of this is taking time in the small boats keep arriving and it keeps being promised things will change and they do not. thea;r keeps being promised things will change and they do not.- keeps being promised things will change and they do not. they do not because in truth _ change and they do not. they do not because in truth we _ change and they do not. they do not because in truth we are _ change and they do not. they do not because in truth we are faced - change and they do not. they do not because in truth we are faced with i change and they do not. they do not because in truth we are faced with a | because in truth we are faced with a very determined opposition from labour— very determined opposition from labour and the liberal democrats but alsom _ labour and the liberal democrats but alsom if_ labour and the liberal democrats but also... �* . ., ., , labour and the liberal democrats but also... �* ,, labour and the liberal democrats but also... �* _ , also... a uk court has stymied this, not ou also... a uk court has stymied this, not you uk — also... a uk court has stymied this, not you uk opposition. _ also... a uk court has stymied this, not you uk opposition. we - also... a uk court has stymied this, not you uk opposition. we have - not you uk opposition. we have roblems not you uk opposition. we have problems getting _ not you uk opposition. we have problems getting it _ not you uk opposition. we have problems getting it through - problems getting it through parliament and we have to take this through— parliament and we have to take this through house of lords unamended, but with— through house of lords unamended, but with the courts as icy we have a clearly _ but with the courts as icy we have a clearly set — but with the courts as icy we have a clearly set out route and we will set this — clearly set out route and we will set this out, this was deemed legal in the _ set this out, this was deemed legal in the high— set this out, this was deemed legal in the high court in december and there— in the high court in december and there is— in the high court in december and there is good reason i hope for a there is good reason i hope fora slick— there is good reason i hope for a slick decision today with the lord chief— slick decision today with the lord chiefjustice agreeing with the government that we will succeed in the supreme court. the bottom—line is that— the supreme court. the bottom—line is that we _ the supreme court. the bottom—line is that we have to do whatever it

Bill , Place , Bit , Deportations , Parliament-act , Needs , The-lords , Building , Billthrough , Human-rights-act , Things , All

BBC News Now

the plan aimed to deter migrants from entering britain from crossing the channel in small boats. here is our home editor. off's flagship but controversial rwanda policy had a new roadblock today with the appeal court including the east african country is not safonov for the uk to send asylum is there. at the lord chiefjustice, lord burnett, announced it had been a split decision. he thinks rwanda is safe but his colleagues did not. deficiencies in the asylum system and rwanda are such that there are substantial grounds for believing that there is a real risk that persons sent to remand it will be returned to their home countries where they face persecution or other inhumane treatment, when in fact they have a good claim for asylum. in that sense, rwanda is not a safe third country. the government will be disappointed by the majority judgment, a blow for the home secretary, who has expressed are personal enthusiasm for getting flights to rwanda started

Uk , Plan , Boats , Channel , Migrants , Home-editor , Asylum , Appeal-court , Burnett , Lord , East-african-country , Rwanda-policy

Verified Live

were the best efforts of the rwandan government there was no guarantee the system would not deport people back to their home countries. of course the place they have tried to get away from. it was a split decision and the lord chiefjustice sided with the government. the end result of all of this is that the government's rwanda policy, a key pillar of its strategy has been ruled unlawful.— pillar of its strategy has been ruled unlawful. ~ . ., ,, , ruled unlawful. what happens next? the government _ ruled unlawful. what happens next? the government have _ ruled unlawful. what happens next? the government have until- ruled unlawful. what happens next? the government have until the - ruled unlawful. what happens next? the government have until the 6th | ruled unlawful. what happens next? | the government have until the 6th of july to launch an appeal which they have said they will do. both of whom say they are going to take this to the uk's supreme court. that is the final arbiter on this. they hope they will get a different decision and we should say that this has already been to the high court which said it was legal. the court of appeal is say it was not that by split decision. it is not certain what decision the supreme court will

Australian-government , People , Course , Rwanda , Lord , Place , System , Efforts , Split-decision , The-end , Home-countries , Chiefjustice

Verified Live

treatment. it is therefore simply incorrect to say that the court of appeal has found conditions in rwanda make it unsafe for individuals. the court of appeal has ruled, instead, that there is a risk of reform and to other countries from rwanda. the lord chiefjustice took a different view, agreeing with the high court, he held that there was no real risk of individuals being sent to unsafe countries. he cited the strong assurance given by the rwandan government, the fact that rwanda does not have returns agreements with those countries, under powerful protections provided by monitoring arrangements that would be in place. the result is at the high court's decision that rwanda was a safe third country for the purposes of asylum relocation is reversed. we have a strong

Court-of-appeal , Risk , Rwanda , Individuals , Conditions , Treatment , Chiefjustice , Countries , View , High-court , Reform , Government

Verified Live

of understanding to more people were routinely— of understanding to more people were routinely targeted and moved contest only from _ routinely targeted and moved contest only from rwanda, making traffic and buzz _ only from rwanda, making traffic and buzz the _ only from rwanda, making traffic and buzz. the judgment also said rwanda only buzz. the judgment also said rwanda onlv has— buzz. the judgment also said rwanda only has one committee that takes the decisions, and only one eligibility office are preparing cases — eligibility office are preparing cases. so, the idea that the government is going to deliver on its pledges, even the lord chief justice — its pledges, even the lord chief justice, he finds that the scheme could _ justice, he finds that the scheme could be — justice, he finds that the scheme could be lawful, has said it only is on the _ could be lawful, has said it only is on the basis — could be lawful, has said it only is on the basis that the scheme is a small. _ on the basis that the scheme is a small. just — on the basis that the scheme is a small, just 100 people. the home secretary— small, just 100 people. the home secretary talks today i can about the thousands of people being sent, the thousands of people being sent, the lord _ the thousands of people being sent, the lord chiefjustice says of the talk of— the lord chiefjustice says of the talk of the wonder within a few years— talk of the wonder within a few years being a destination for thousands of asylum seekers is political— thousands of asylum seekers is political hyperbole. that thousands of asylum seekers is political hyperbole.— thousands of asylum seekers is political hyperbole. that is yvette coo er, political hyperbole. that is yvette c00per. the _ political hyperbole. that is yvette cooper, the opposition _ political hyperbole. that is yvette cooper, the opposition shadow i political hyperbole. that is yvette - cooper, the opposition shadow home secretary responding to the statement on the latest twist and turn and the government's efforts to push through plans to send asylum seekers who arrive in the uk on boards to rwanda.

Rwanda , People , Judgment , Cases , Traffic , Buzz , Contest , Office , Eligibility-office , Decisions , Idea , Understanding

Verified Live

but controversial rwanda policy had a new roadblock today, with the appeal court including the east african country is not safe enough for the uk to send asylum—seekers there. but the lord chiefjustice, lord burnett, announced it had been a split decision. he thinks rwanda is safe, but his two colleagues did not. deficiencies in the asylum system in rwanda are such that there are substantial grounds for believing that there is a real risk that persons sent to remand it will be returned to their home countries, where they face persecution or other inhumane treatment, when in fact, they have a good claim for asylum. in that sense, rwanda is not a safe third country. the government will be disappointed by today's majorityjudgment — a blow for the home secretary, who's expressed her personal enthusiasm for getting flights to rwanda started as soon as possible. but that's not the end of the legaljourney — the matter will almost certainly now move to the supreme court for a final hearing later this year. the government believes its rwanda deal is the answer to the small

Rwanda , Safe , Asylum-system , Uk , Asylum-seekers , Split-decision , Appeal-court , Chiefjustice , Colleagues , East-african-country , Rwanda-policy , Roadblock

BBC News at Six

enough safeguards to prove that it is a "safe third country". the prime minister, rishi sunak, said he "fundamentally disagrees" with the ruling and said the government will challenge it in the supreme court. more than 11,000 people have crossed the channel in small boats since the start of the year. the home office says it currently spends almost £7 million a day on hotel accommodation to house asylum seekers. here's our home editor mark easton. the government's controversial rwanda policy and asylum strategy have been dealt a significant blow today with the appeal court concluding the east african country is not safe enough for the uk to send asylum seekers there. but the lord chiefjustice, lord burnett, announced it had been a split decision. he thought rwanda was safe, but his two colleagues did not. the deficiencies in the asylum system in rwanda are such that there are substantial grounds for believing that there is a real risk that persons sent to rwanda will be returned to their home countries where they face persecution or other inhumane

People , Rishi-sunak , Government , Channel , Home-office , Boats , Supreme-court , Ruling , Safe-third-country , Safeguards , Fundamentally , 11000