Is Jenrick right about Sunak's Rwanda plan? Tory rebels' claims, fact-checked

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

57% : While a legal challenge under international law remains entirely possible, the new bill appears to be constructed in such a way Rwanda flights stand a good chance of taking place before a judgment has the effect of stopping them.
55% : Professor Elliott said: "The Bill reveals an astounding level of hypocrisy in the sense that it is premised on a policy that presupposes that Rwanda will honour its obligations in international law while demonstrating that the UK is prepared to breach its own obligations.
49% : However, while the potential for challenges in the UK courts may have considerably narrowed, the question remains as to whether fresh challenges can be brought under international law, in particular to the Strasbourg court.
46% : As Mark Elliott, professor of public law at Cambridge University, put it: "Under this belt-and-braces exercise... it would be impermissible for courts to deal with cases concerning the safety of Rwanda, and if they did, they would be forced to deem Rwanda safe even if the evidence was overwhelmingly to the contrary.
44% : Professor David Cantor, director of the Refugee Law Initiative at the University of London, said: "While the Bill purports to give ministers the discretion to ignore [ECHR] interim measures, any acts by the UK which breach our international obligations under the ECHR or other treaties are still unlawful as a matter of international law.
41% : It will require international courts such as the ECHR to hear cases in full - a process that can take many months - before they can bring pressure to bear on the UK Government for any breach of international law.
40% : Claim: Rwanda will not accept a scheme based on legislation that could be considered to break international lawOne key aim of the new treaty signed between London and Kigali is to meet the Supreme Court's concerns that Rwanda's track record on non-refoulement - a key concept in international law, whereby an asylum seeker cannot be sent to any destination where they might be at risk of danger or persecution - was poor.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.