Distributing mobility: Regressive ‘safe third country’ agreements and racialised difference

This paper examines the legal consequences of the Migration and Economic Development Partnership (MEDP) agreement between the United Kingdom (UK) and Rwanda. Drawing on courtroom observations and interviews in Rwanda and the UK alongside the legal texts, this paper argues that both the MEDP and the judicial review of its legality, relied on a deep racialisation of Rwanda. Recognising such racialisation demands a greater sensitivity to the distributive consequences of the decision. In establishing the principle of non-refoulement as the single constraint on the MEDP, the case of AAA (Syria) and others leaves open the possibility of future regressive ‘safe third country agreements’ in which economically and geo- politically powerful states shift their international legal obligations under the 1951 Refugee Convention onto less powerful states. In addition, the MEDP and the resultant legal change, has pushed Rwanda towards individualised refugee determination processes and the UK towards increasingly exclusionary immigration legislation. Overall, these legal changes leave people seeking refuge in both the UK and Rwanda more vulnerable.