Britain and Rwanda have continued to attempt to justify their highly controversial migration agreement against a tidal wave of criticism.
On Thursday the two countries announced a deal to send some people arriving in the U.K. as stowaways on trucks or in small boats to the East African country to have their asylum claims processed.
British Home Secretary Priti Patel and Vincent Biruta, the Rwandan Minister of Foreign Affairs have written a joint article for the British newspaper, The Times, arguing their case.
In it, they said this "momentous association will set another worldwide norm" and give lawful, protected, deliberate and controlled ways for individuals to better their lives, escape abuse, oppression or struggle and appreciate new open doors.
Talking from London on Saturday, UNHCR senior legitimate official Larry Bottinick said he felt there were "more others conscious ways" to bargain the issue.
He said he had seen a comparable plan being attempted when he worked in Israel which had not worked.
"They were sending, on a willful premise Eritreans to Rwanda, Sudanese to Uganda and, you know, individuals continued on from Rwanda soon."
"So it doesn't prevent carrying it advances it."
"Individuals went to South Sudan, Sudan to Libya and those that made due back to Europe. So it was more perilous and more work for individuals dealers than the Channel will at any point be."
During his Easter Sunday message, Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby additionally condemned the arrangement, saying there are "genuine moral inquiries regarding sending refuge searchers abroad."
He said "sub-contracting out our obligations to exiles - - even to a country that looks to get along admirably, similar to Rwanda-, can't bear upping to God's investigation.