Downing Street repeatedly blocked attempts by Suella Braverman to “insure” the Government against legal challenges, the Daily Express has learned.
The former Home Secretary proposed plans for UK asylum officials to be based in Kigali to process asylum claims.
This, sources said, would have prevented the Rwanda deportation scheme from being grounded over “refoulement” fears.
Lord Reed, delivering the bombshell Supreme Court ruling on Wednesday morning, said the “changes needed to eliminate the risk of refoulement may be delivered in the future, but they have not been shown to be in place now”.
READ MORE: Supreme Court judges branded ‘enemies of the people’ after blocking Rwanda plan
An ally of Braverman blasted the Government’s failure to get the flights off the ground, declaring: “The stupidity of this is the predictability of it all.
“Suella repeatedly proposed a plan when she first came in as Home Secretary to have the option to carry out UK asylum offshoring in Rwanda, which would have insured against this loss in the courts.
“But it was blocked by the magical thinkers in Number 10. They played roulette with the British public and just blindly banked on winning in the court.”
Home Secretary James Cleverly has revealed the UK is finalising a new deal with Rwanda to give judges “the certainty that” they demand.
LIVE BLOG: Rishi Sunak confirms Rwanda fightback with ‘new deal’ now in motion
Former Home Secretary Dame Priti Patel also claimed ministers had the opportunity to address issues related to refoulement prior to the Supreme Court’s judgment.
She said: “(The Supreme Court’s) judgment was clear on this issue today, but it’s not new, it has been raised earlier this year in the Court of Appeal.
“If I may say so, ministers have had the opportunity to address some of these practical measures and means thus far prior to today’s judgment.
“So, can I please urge the Home Secretary to take every necessary step and measure to work with the government of Rwanda on the practical and operational delivery of this policy … to give all those assurances.”
She said the deal with Rwanda is “integral to making sure that we can break that model … of stopping the evil trade of people smuggling”.
Home Secretary James Cleverly said: “Just as she has suggested … we are already working to address the issues that were raised by judges in lower courts to ensure that we can prove what they need to see, which is that we will remove the risk of refoulement.”
Downing Street said it could take more than 40 sitting days in Parliament for a new treaty with Rwanda to be approved if there are initial objections from MPs.
Explaining the process for a new deal, the Prime Minister’s official spokesman said: “My understanding is that once the treaty has been laid in Parliament, the Government cannot ratify it for 21 sitting days.
“If Parliament objects during that time by agreeing a motion on the floor of the House, there will be a further 21 sitting days before ratification.”
The spokesman said he did not know whether an objection motion could force a vote on the treaty.
But an ally of former Home Secretary Suella Braverman disputed this claim, suggesting it could take “months” before to pass the Commons before it is hit with fresh legal challenges.
Mrs Braverman also referred in her letter to “a document with clear terms to which you agreed in October 2022 during your second leadership campaign” which she is thought to be prepared to release in order to inflict maximum damage upon the PM.