'Did Starmer represent Rudakubana's father in asylum case?'
Government source alleges the rumours against the Prime Minister are true
Does Starmer play a part in the Southport Stabbing?
This has been the subject of intense public scrutiny and fevered debate. Questions remained to be answered as to when the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary came to know of the ricin and the Al-Qaeda training manual that complicate the Axel Rudakubana case. The public are also looking for someone to blame for the double-speak surrounding Axel Rudakubana’s identity — a shy, Welsh, choir boy, and a Christian who loves Doctor Who.
Eventually came the accusation that Keir Starmer — a talented barrister and human rights lawyer before becoming Prime Minster — had represented the Rudakubana family in their asylum case from Rwanda to the United Kingdom in the early 2000s.
It is already known that Sir Keir Starmer specialised in human rights and international and criminal law. He has engaged in both ‘defence’ and ‘prosecution’ roles as a barrister, and, over the course of his legal career, he has been a case lawyer for Liberty, a legal advisor for Amnesty International, helped to conduct cases in the European Court of Human Rights, and between 2002 and 2008 he was a member of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development’s Office death penalty advisory panel.
He has worked upon dozens of asylum appeals in his time, particularly those who have claimed refugee status on account of war and persecution. It was, therefore, not outside the realm of possibility that Starmer could have represented refugees fleeing the Rwandan genocide, as Axel Rudakubana’s parents said to have done.
But the connection seemed far-fetched and the rumour become subsumed in the news cycle. It was not until November that the rumour resurfaced. I became aware of a disclosure made by a whistleblower inside a senior office of the the British government about the Prime Minister and his personal connection to the Rudakubana case.
I can reveal the following to the British public:
A source within a senior office of the British Government has stated that, yes, Prime Minister Keir Starmer had encountered the Rudakubana family before the events which took place in Southport on 29 July 2024.
He is said to have had a role in the family’s asylum case.
Whilst I know which office, I do not disclose this knowledge to protect the source in question. But, in order to present this allegation to the public, I have spent six weeks in deep research attempting to corroborate this allegation.
What I have discovered is that the truth is not easy to substantiate.
What evidence is there that Keir Starmer had a role in the Rudakubana’s asylum case?
The following document was shared on social media, and boosted by several prominent figures of the right-wing political class, as evidence of the Prime Minister representing Alphonse Rudakubana — Axel Rudakubana’s father — in an asylum case.
One need only conduct a short glance at this document to see that the Claimant “M” being instructed by Mr Keir Starmer Q.C. is a “42 year old Hutu woman from Rwanda.”
The case as a whole addresses not the asylum claims themselves but the destitution in which each asylum seeker found themselves whilst in the UK. In addition, the Hutu women would not be Axel Rudakubana’s mother due to her age — she would be 45 years-old at Axel’s birth which is improbable.
Axel Rudakubana’s mother — Laetitia Muzayire — has also expressed sympathies with the Tutsis in a Facebook post in 2017. The post reads, “Our families, Our friends | Our Kids, Our People | Forever in Our Hearts | Tutsi Genocide 1994”, suggesting she herself is of Tutsi origin.
All of this is to say, that this particular legal document does NOT link Keir Starmer and to Alphonse Rudakubana.
Who is Alphonse Rudakubana?
Alphonse Rudakubana — Axel Rudakubana’s father —reports settling in the United Kingdom in 2002. In an interview in the Liverpool Echo dated 19 June 2015, he discusses the history of his karate training and places himself in his ‘native Rwanda’ in 1996.
Keir Starmer is alleged to have represented Alphonse Rudakubana in his asylum case in the early 2000s.
Much has been theorised about whether Alphonse Rudakubana is a refugee or a warlord. Some assert he was a perpetuator in the Rwandan genocide whilst others speculate that he was a diplomat or spy. I could list the great number of speculations and rumours percolating the internet about the identity of this man — all of which I am aware — but there is nothing tangible to them, and nothing fruitful would be gained in listing them here. These are separate allegations I will deal with in another essay.
Providing the details of this article can be relied upon, Alphonse Rudakubana is confirmed as living in Rwanda after the civil war (1990-94), the Rwandan genocide (1994), and during the First Congo War (1996-97). He would have been eighteen at the time of the genocide.
He reports studying karate in Rwanda for three years, and taking his first belts there before moving to the UK in 2002. This means, at an approximation, he places himself in Rwanda (at least) between 1996-1999/2000.
This would leave 2-3 year unaccounted for before he arrives in the United Kingdom.
The birth of his first born child is registered in Cardiff, March 2004. This is the most concrete evidence that Alphonse Rudakubana was in the United Kingdom by 2004.
Timeline
October 1975 —Alphonse Rudakubana born
1990-4 — Rwandan Civil War
April 1994 — Rwandan Genocide
1996-1999/2000 — Alphonse Rudakubana states he is living in Rwanda and studying karate
1996-7 — First Congo War
1999-2003 — Known Rwandan war criminals seek asylum in the UK
2001 — Genocide trials begin in Rwanda
2002 — Alphonse Rudakubana reports being in the UK
2002-5 — UK Home Office hearing regular asylum requests from Rwandans claiming to be victims of the genocide**
2002-3 — Known Rwandan war criminals joined by family members in the UK
March 2004 — First child born in Cardiff
January 2006 — UK exposed as harbouring Rwandan war criminals by the Sunday Times
August 2006 — Axel Rudakubana is born in Cardiff
2007-8 — Those known to be accused of war crimes in Rwanda are issued extradition orders
2009 — Appeals against extradition orders upheld and those accused are released
2013 — Rudakubana family move to Southport
December 2015 — International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda ended its term
December 2018 — known date by which Alphonse Rudakubana had obtained ‘British nationality’ status
I have searched all available UK asylum cases granted, rejected, and appealed between 2001-present that originate from Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of Congo (to which many refugees and war criminals fled), and Kenya (to which Rudakubana’s mother has a tenuous link). There is no mention of a ‘Rudakubana’ or a ‘Muzayire’ in any these applications. I have reviewed those appeals which were anonymised and none bear a solid resemblance to what is known about Alphonse Rudakubana or Laetitia Muzayire.
There is only one another individual with the surname Rudakubana in the UK — a female who shows up on the electoral register in Middlesex. There is no public birth or immigration on her but she appears, at first pass, to have no personal connection to the Rudakubana’s in Southport.
There is only one case featuring a Rwanda applicant upon which Keir Starmer worked — Q, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, 13 February 2003 — and has already been ruled out. (See earlier in essay.)
The name ‘Rudakubana’ appears in no public criminal proceedings records, rulings, or case law files in the United Kingdom before the charges read against Axel Rudakubana in August 2024.
I have also search what public digital records exist in Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo in relation to migration, as well as worldwide immigration and family records available through various ancestry site, and the names ‘Alphonse Rudakubana’ and ‘Laetitia Muzayire’ do not appear.
I have used an eclectic set of public sources, including social media, ancestry sites, British national archives, the Electoral Register, national legal deposits, documentation from Rwanda genocide trials, birth and death records from both Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo, and asylum case rulings.
After six weeks of extensive research, I have been unable to find any substantial documentation upon the Rudakubana family.
I have been unable to find a birth certificate for Alphonse Rudakubana
I have been unable to find a birth certificate for Laetitia Muzayire
It does not appear that Alphonse Rudakubana is married to Axel Rudakubana’s mother, Laetitia Muzayire (if they are married, I have been unable to find a certificate)
Laetitia’s name appears on the birth certificate of Axel Rudakubana and the certificate of his elder sibling
Alphonse’s name does not appear on the birth certificate (although this is not unusual in the United Kingdom)
I have been unable to find either Alphonse Rudakubana or Laetitia Muzayire in worldwide public immigration records
I have been unable to establish any kind of family tree for Axel Rudakubana — paternal or maternal — beyond his mother and elder sibling
The only thing that can be know for sure about Alphonse Rudakubana is his month and year of birth, his address in Banks, that has obtained British citizenship by December 2018, that he practiced karate, and runs a private bookkeeping and auditing business, “Redknapp Ltd” (since 2018). He had filed to close the business in October 2024, but has since removed this application on 31st December 2024.
As a result of being unable to trace the family’s history, I have been unable to confirm or deny the allegation that a connection exists between Keir Starmer and the Rudakubana family at this time.
I am not insensible to the suspicious nature of this apparent blackhole.
Some have suggested that Axel Rudakubana’s father changed his name to ‘Rudakubana’ when fleeing Rwanda. Whilst not outside the realm of possibility, I would prefer to deal first in that which is known, and account for its eccentricities, before wading into the unknown.
There are reasonable explanations for this poverty of information. Rwanda and the neighbouring Democratic Republic of Congo have less comprehensive and less accessible files than the UK. The UK had not standardised its legal deposits until 2001. The asylum applications and documents for the Rudakubana family could predate 2001. Most of these documents are not electronically available.
This is not to say that the documents corroborating this allegation do not exist. Nor is it to say that this documentation does exist. It says only that I cannot confirm the time or circumstance under which Alphonse Rudakubana or Laetitia Muzayire entered the United Kingdom or claimed asylum.
The next stage of my investigation will be to visit the archives to retrieve hardcopies of such documents.
If there are no documents here, or the documents have been restricted, redacted, or withdrawn, then there is due cause to become suspicious of the role of the British Government in the asylum case of this family.
Could Keir Starmer be involved with the family in some other capacity?
It is a possibility I have yet to rule out.
Keir Starmer could be involved with the family in some other capacity, such as gaining approval for citizenship or resisting extradition orders.
Aspects of Alphose Rudakubana’s timeline do marry with Starmer’s own timeline and specialisms.
Starmer’s professional interest in preserving the human rights of those facing trial and those in inhumane prison conditions. He has petitioned against death penalty verdicts — as a part of the Death Penalty Project — and advocated for judicial and death penalty reform in both Caribbean and African nations.
“…as a barrister Keir Starmer QC helped the Project bring a series of successful strategic appeals in the Caribbean leading to the abolition of the mandatory death sentence in a number of countries, before assisting in Uganda where they succeeded in a mass appeal for 419 prisoners.”
Keir Starmer has several books and academic papers published on the topic of human rights, including; Three Pillars of Liberty: Political Rights and Freedoms in the UK (1996) and European Human Rights Law (1999)
His academic and legal work has been quoted by others giving legal counsel and pursuing law reform in human rights matters, the death penalty, and genocide, including the Rwandan genocide.
In 2008, Keir Starmer became the new head of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and held these positions until 2013.
Whilst head of the CPS and DPP, Keir Starmer was criticised by Alun Jones Q.C. for failing to secure extradition orders for those in the UK sheltering from prosecution for crimes committed during the Rwandan genocide.
Timeline*
1985 — Keir Starmer graduates with a Bachelors in Law from the University of Leeds
1986 — Keir Starmer gains a postgraduate degree in Civil Law from St Edmund Hall, Oxford
1987 — Keir Starmer becomes a barrister at the Middle Temple, London
1987-90—Keir Starmer is a case lawyer for Liberty, an advocacy group in the United Kingdom that works to protect civil liberties, promote human rights, and challenge laws which are perceived to be unjust
1990 — Keir Starmer moves to the Doughty Street Chamers to specialise in human rights issues
1994 — Rwanda genocide
1999-2003 —Known Rwandan war criminals seek asylum in the UK
2000 — Over 100,000 genocide suspects awaiting trial in Rwanda
2001 — Genocide trials begin in Rwanda
9 April 2002 – Keir Starmer is appointed to the Queen’s Council, making him a member of the inner bar and a senior lawyer
2002 — Kier Starmer becomes joint head of the Doughty Street Chambers
2002 —Kier Starmer is a member of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development’s Office death penalty advisory panel
2002 — Alphonse Rudakubana reports being in the UK
2002-3 — Known Rwandan war criminals joined by family members in the UK
2002-5 — UK Home Office hearing regular asylum requests from Rwandans claiming to be victims of the genocide**
January 2006 — UK exposed as harbouring Rwandan war criminals by the Sunday Times
August 2006 — Axel Rudakubana born in Cardiff
2007-8 — Those known to be accused of war crimes in Rwanda are issued extradition orders
2008 — Keir Starmer ceased to be a member of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development’s office death penalty advisory panel
July 2008 — Kier Starmer is named the new head of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP)
1 November 2008 — Kier Starmer takes office as CPS and DPP
2009 — Keir Starmer becomes a bencher at the Middle Temple, London
April 2009 — Appeals against extradition orders upheld and those accused are released
2013 — Rudakubana family move to Southport, UK
2013 — Keir Stamer steps down as CPS and DDP
7 May 2015 — Keir Starmer becomes an MP
*Order of events may vary slightly where exact dates are not available.
**Claims for asylum and refugee status for Rwanda genocide victims likely preceded 2002 but these records are not readily available in public archives.
It is possible that, when Alphonse Rudakubana applied for citizenship, it became necessary to prove that he would be subject to danger or death if he returned to Rwanda. Keir Starmer could have been employed as a representative, advisor, or intervener in his capacity as a human rights barrister.
It is also possible that, if an extradition order had been issued to Alphonse Rudakubana during the 2007-8, Starmer could have sat on or advised upon his case as a member of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office death penalty advisory panel.
My reading of the available evidence
In light of my research, my feeling is that if a strong link existed between Keir Starmer and Alphonse Rudakubana, it would have already been exposed with accompanying evidence. News of that kind does not remain secret for long, wafted as secrets are along governmental corridors by whispers. I think it is possible that a link exists between the Rudakubana’s and Keir Starmer prior to 29th July 2024, but that link is either indirect or superficial to the Southport attack.
If Alphonse Rudakubana is a genuine refugee from Rwanda, and Keir Starmer had been involved in some capacity in the decision-making process, Starmer cannot reasonably have been expected to predict that Alphonse would go on to have a child — who had not yet been conceived — and that that child would go on to be accused of the murder of three small girls and attempted murder of eleven others.
This does not delegitimise the argument that, “This would not have happened had Axel Rudakubana’s parents not been given asylum to the UK.” There a valid concerns about the type of people being granted asylum to the UK, along with the level and style of crime being committed by both first and second immigrants in the UK. It is only to say that, it would not be a career-ending revelation for Starmer.
If Alphose Rudakubana does have a deadly or dubious past, this is far more grave. For Starmer, if had he been involved in the decision to grant asylum or citizenship, would knowingly have granted safe-harbour to a dangerous individual and introduced a potential threat into the United Kingdom.
This would necessitate the further interrogation of why the government at the time — Tony Blair’s Labour Government — thought it permissible to invite such a person into our neighbourhoods, and why subsequent governments — namely the last 14-year tenure of the Conservative Party — had not kept tabs upon this individual and his family.
Of course, if security services had been charged with keeping a weather eye on the Rudakubana family, then the Southport massacre would speak of irretrievable operational failures — for they either failed in pick upon Axel Rudakubana’s alleged terrorist activities, or failed to act.
This would be a scandal of epic magnitude within in its own right.
I understand this news will be disappointing for some who had pinned their hopes that the sum total of this scandal lies with this link. It is not. The truth is frustrating and predictable, and already in the public domain.
I encourage people not to become caught up in theories which require dozens of contingencies when the available alternatives are significant in their own right and are in need of less skill and diligence to carry out. For all the while public attention is directed towards Keir Starmer’s legal past, that which is to be known in the present is being neglected.
Whilst, for myself, I have demoted this line of enquiry in my priorities in this investigation, the words of this government whistleblower stay with me. I would not expect them to risk their livelihood for a lie.
Vigilance remains vital.
