The UK government’s Safety of Rwanda Act, which allows for the deportation of asylum seekers to Rwanda, has raised concerns due to its dubious effectiveness and questionable ethical implications. Despite the asserted deterrent effect, evidence suggests otherwise. The policy has also been criticized for being costly, lacking transparency, and potentially violating international humanitarian laws. Although immigration is a significant concern, the legislation fails to address the broader issue of legal migration and relies on speculative measures to appease public sentiment. Ultimately, the Safety of Rwanda Act exemplifies a weak and politically driven approach to tackling a complex humanitarian challenge.