Albanian incomers to UK (not serious post)

A virtual pub for off topic, light hearted pub related banter and discussion. No trainers
1nvest
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3382
Joined: May 31st, 2019, 7:55 pm

Re: Albanian incomers to UK (not serious post)

Post by 1nvest »

didds wrote:
Beerpig wrote: It seems to me the situation is only going to get worse because the more illegal migrants that make it across the channel.
This is not a dig at BP...

Can somebody from a legal perspective, not some DM knee jerk understanding, confirm or deny what exactly an "illegal immigrant" is.

I often see all these arrivals blanket described as "illegal".

I also see multiple claims that they are not illegal, as everybody under international law has the right to claim asylum - and that doesn't make them illegal at that point of arrival/claim of asylum.

Im not interested in rants about "them lot coming over here" etc please - that doesn't further my understanding. I also understand that under the Dublin protocol the UK had the "right to return" arrivals from whence they came - but that was lost when Brexit occurred, so doesn't apply now.

cheers

didds
How many have licence to sail/boat into international waters? Such as a International Certificate of Competency (ICC) and/or the International Sailing License and Credentials (SLC). Don't know maritime law but incompetents/unlicensed boating into international waters and through major shipping lanes putting themselves and others at risk I suspect would have some law to deter/penalise such. Twist that to if instead they were jumping into light aircraft and flying without licence through major international airline flight paths.

Unlicensed to sail, and without permission to cross UK borders = illegal.
UK granting asylum should be discretionary, not a obligation. Refusal for instance if the individual has a criminal record or ongoing case potentially resulting in a criminal record, such as having endangered life by unlicensed sailing through major shipping lanes and/or having entered the UK without permission.

UK laws are being gamed. Such as nearly no illegal migrants are deported. In turn the UK should play that game, dispatch them to say the Falklands or Pitcairn or other British Overseas Territories. Gibraltar might be a good choice as the tendency would be for them to re-enter back into the EU from whence they came.

mc2fool
Lemon Half
Posts: 6209
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:24 am

Re: Albanian incomers to UK (not serious post)

Post by mc2fool »

didds wrote:
Beerpig wrote: It seems to me the situation is only going to get worse because the more illegal migrants that make it across the channel.
This is not a dig at BP...

Can somebody from a legal perspective, not some DM knee jerk understanding, confirm or deny what exactly an "illegal immigrant" is.

I often see all these arrivals blanket described as "illegal".

I also see multiple claims that they are not illegal, as everybody under international law has the right to claim asylum - and that doesn't make them illegal at that point of arrival/claim of asylum.

Im not interested in rants about "them lot coming over here" etc please - that doesn't further my understanding. I also understand that under the Dublin protocol thye UK had the "right to return" arrivals from whence they came - but that was lost when Brexit occurred, so doesn't apply now.

cheers

didds
The answer seems to be they weren't illegal and they shouldn't be illegal according to the 1951 Refugee Convention, which we (the UK, under Churchill) not only signed but had a major role in creating, however the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 (NABA) has, in effect, made them so, in contradiction to our treaty obligations. Some relevant sources:

Pre NABA 2022, from https://www.lancaster.ac.uk/law/blog/th ... lum-seeker

"When people talk about asylum seekers coming to the UK ‘illegally’, what they really mean is asylum seekers arriving via informal and unofficial routes, such as crossing the Channel via small boat. However, asylum seekers are legally allowed to come to the UK even when making an ‘illegal entry’. As, although it would be illegal for migrants who are not seeking asylum to enter by such means, asylum seekers are entitled to come to the UK via whatever means possible, provided they inform the authorities of their presence upon their arrival and have good reason for seeking asylum. Asylum seekers cannot therefore come to the UK ‘illegally’; illegality may only ever occur if they do not report their presence to the authorities and remain in the UK as undocumented migrants. "

Also pre NABA 2022 see https://fullfact.org/immigration/can-re ... illegally/ which basically says the same.

However, post NABA 2022, from https://righttoremain.org.uk/toolkit/en ... m/#illegal

"Under section 40 of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 (NABA), it is difficult for a person to arrive in the UK without a visa. As there is no such thing as an ‘asylum visa’, this law will apply to almost all asylum seekers entering the UK. From 28 July 2022 onwards, anybody who enters the UK (without a visa) and claims asylum will be going against this law.
:
A person who successfully applies for an unrelated visa (for example, a tourist visa) can enter the UK lawfully and claim asylum without breaching section 40 of NABA. However, it would be impossible to secure a tourist visa without being dishonest on the application form by stating that you intend to travel to the UK for a holiday, when your real intention would be to enter the UK to claim asylum. This could be seen as deception when applying for a visa. ... This means that it is now almost impossible to enter the UK to claim asylum. This goes directly against international law...
"

Some definitions of asylum seeker vs refugee vs migrant may be useful here. The first two are legal terms and, basically, an asylum seeker is someone that is seeking refugee status and a refugee is someone who has been granted refugee status. "There is no internationally accepted legal definition of a migrant. Like most agencies and organizations, we at Amnesty International understand migrants to be people staying outside their country of origin, who are not asylum seekers or refugees."

More verbose explanation at https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/r ... -migrants/

didds
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4547
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:04 pm

Re: Albanian incomers to UK (not serious post)

Post by didds »

roger4 wrote:Beerpig is correct, the UK Asylum system is not fit for purpose. It treats ALL migrants as potential political refugees rather than taking the view that political refugees would take refuge in the first "safe" country they come to.
can you quote the appropriate international treaty etc that says that?

genuine query.

Im really trying to split out the daily wail claims from the truth and finding it difficult to do so.

cheers :-)

didds

didds
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4547
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:04 pm

Re: Albanian incomers to UK (not serious post)

Post by didds »

OK - so it seems that an international treaty that the UK is a signatory to says such asylum seekers are not tilleagal.

but that a UK law breaks that signatory agreement ?

What a mess.

next question: I read that it is not possible to apply outside of the UK for asylum eg through a consulate? Is that true?

I take from that that if so, it would mean that the UK has gamed the position.

didds

mc2fool
Lemon Half
Posts: 6209
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:24 am

Re: Albanian incomers to UK (not serious post)

Post by mc2fool »

didds wrote:
roger4 wrote:Beerpig is correct, the UK Asylum system is not fit for purpose. It treats ALL migrants as potential political refugees rather than taking the view that political refugees would take refuge in the first "safe" country they come to.
can you quote the appropriate international treaty etc that says that?

genuine query.

Im really trying to split out the daily wail claims from the truth and finding it difficult to do so.

cheers :-)

didds
"What was claimed: Under the Geneva Convention refugees should seek refuge in the first safe country they come to.

Our verdict: Incorrect. The UN Refugee Convention does not make this requirement of refugees, and UK case law supports this interpretation. Refugees can legitimately make a claim for asylum in the UK after passing through other “safe” countries.
"

https://fullfact.org/immigration/refuge ... e-country/

mc2fool
Lemon Half
Posts: 6209
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:24 am

Re: Albanian incomers to UK (not serious post)

Post by mc2fool »

didds wrote:OK - so it seems that an international treaty that the UK is a signatory to says such asylum seekers are not tilleagal.

but that a UK law breaks that signatory agreement ?

What a mess.
Indeed.

"Although the Convention is "legally binding", there is no body that monitors compliance. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has supervisory responsibilities but cannot enforce the Convention, and there is no formal mechanism for individuals to file complaints. The Convention specifies that complaints should be referred to the International Court of Justice. It appears that no nation has ever done this.

An individual may lodge a complaint with the UN Human Rights Committee under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights or with the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, but no one has ever done so in regard to violations of the Convention. Nations may levy international sanctions against violators, but no nation has ever done so.

At present, the only real consequences of violation are 1) public shaming in the press, and 2) verbal condemnation of the violator by the UN and by other nations. To date, those have not proven to be significant deterrents.
"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conventio ... compliance
didds wrote:next question: I read that it is not possible to apply outside of the UK for asylum eg through a consulate? Is that true?

I take from that that if so, it would mean that the UK has gamed the position.
Yup. you've got it.

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 16601
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm

Re: Albanian incomers to UK (not serious post)

Post by Lootman »

mc2fool wrote:
didds wrote:OK - so it seems that an international treaty that the UK is a signatory to says such asylum seekers are not illegal.

but that a UK law breaks that signatory agreement ?

What a mess.
Indeed.

"Although the Convention is "legally binding", there is no body that monitors compliance. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has supervisory responsibilities but cannot enforce the Convention, and there is no formal mechanism for individuals to file complaints. The Convention specifies that complaints should be referred to the International Court of Justice. It appears that no nation has ever done this.

An individual may lodge a complaint with the UN Human Rights Committee under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights or with the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, but no one has ever done so in regard to violations of the Convention. Nations may levy international sanctions against violators, but no nation has ever done so.

At present, the only real consequences of violation are 1) public shaming in the press, and 2) verbal condemnation of the violator by the UN and by other nations. To date, those have not proven to be significant deterrents.
"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conventio ... compliance
Isn't it true of any UN "law" that nations can and do routinely ignore them when it suits them? This includes ignoring the ICJ as well.

No doubt the worst offenders are Russia, America and China, but it is understandable if the UK does the same in this and other situations.

As for the term "illegals", that is commonly used in America to describe anyone without formal permission to visit or reside. It is more a popular term than a legal one, and some prefer to use the term "undocumented aliens".

didds
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4547
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:04 pm

Re: Albanian incomers to UK (not serious post)

Post by didds »

So thinking out loud in summary then to get things straight in my head

* There is no requirement including under UK or international law to claim asylum in any first safe country
* The UK has removed most if not all options to apply for asylum outside of the UK
* It is not under international treaty illegal to arrive in a country to claim asylum
* The UK broke its own international treaty signed agreement by unilaterally declaring arrivals illegal if not holding a suitable prearranged visa
* When part of the EU, under the Dublin protocol, such arrivals coiuld be returned to the country they left from. leaving the EU means this protocol is no longer available to the UK.

* QED the UK has deliberately created a position to make such people illegal and with no way to place the onus on any other state as it had before.

Got it.

mc2fool
Lemon Half
Posts: 6209
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:24 am

Re: Albanian incomers to UK (not serious post)

Post by mc2fool »

didds wrote:So thinking out loud in summary then to get things straight in my head

* There is no requirement including under UK or international law to claim asylum in any first safe country
* The UK has removed most if not all options to apply for asylum outside of the UK
* It is not under international treaty illegal to arrive in a country to claim asylum
* The UK broke its own international treaty signed agreement by unilaterally declaring arrivals illegal if not holding a suitable prearranged visa
* When part of the EU, under the Dublin protocol, such arrivals coiuld be returned to the country they left from. leaving the EU means this protocol is no longer available to the UK.

* QED the UK has deliberately created a position to make such people illegal and with no way to place the onus on any other state as it had before.

Got it.
Yes, you have. ;) The only very slight modification I'd make (which I know you understand already) is that there is no such thing as "UN law" or in fact "international law" in the sense of rules that are unilaterally imposed on any country; the term actually denotes treaties that countries have voluntarily signed up to and consent to abide by. So, your third one should read "It is not illegal to arrive in a country that is a signatory to the Refugee Convention to claim asylum".
Lootman wrote:As for the term "illegals", that is commonly used in America to describe anyone without formal permission to visit or reside. It is more a popular term than a legal one, and some prefer to use the term "undocumented aliens".
While I'm sure that many in the US use "illegals" in a blanket manner, as the great majority of undocumented migrants into the US are from Mexico etc and do not and do not intend to inform the authorities of their presence on arrival and request asylum, then those would, indeed, be illegal migrants.

I must admit I always felt a little put out, when I lived in the US, at being legally classed as an "alien" (documented in my case, I hasten to add!). Felt like I should walk around going "bleep bleep" or something. :shock: One small mercy was that the requirement for "aliens" to annually report to a post office was dropped the year I arrived -- although I didn't discover that until I turned up at my local post office to do so and was told, you don't have to do that any more....

Rhyd6
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1176
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:01 pm

Re: Albanian incomers to UK (not serious post)

Post by Rhyd6 »

Some of the choices made for the hotels used to house the migrants seem a little off beat to say the least. The one in Snowdonia is a lovely hotel but to say that it's in the rear end of nowhere is putting it mildly. They've closed all the facilities and there's literally nothing for them to do. There's a very small shop and that's it. Just to add fuel to the fire they've sacked most of the staff which has caused huge resentment. Imagine being fired just before Christmas when there are literally no other jobs around, added to which you have over 200 plus randy young men and it's just asking for trouble. Put in a pinch of Welsh awkwardness, a great dollop of resentment and the refusal to speak any English even though the migrants may have the basics and I can see trouble ahead. Somone really didn't think this through.

R6

servodude
Lemon Half
Posts: 7250
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am

Re: Albanian incomers to UK (not serious post)

Post by servodude »

mc2fool wrote:One small mercy was that the requirement for "aliens" to annually report to a post office was dropped the year I arrived -- although I didn't discover that until I turned up at my local post office to do so and was told, you don't have to do that any more....
A close German friend, on moving to Glasgow, took himself to Maryhill Police Station to introduce and register himself (as was the expectation in Germany).
They were initially confused, then interested (because they couldn't find him on any "list") and eventually dismissed him after they worked out what was happening with a laugh and amused "... and dinnae come back!"

didds
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4547
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:04 pm

Re: Albanian incomers to UK (not serious post)

Post by didds »

Rhyd6 wrote:Some of the choices made for the hotels used to house the migrants seem a little off beat to say the least. The one in Snowdonia is a lovely hotel but to say that it's in the rear end of nowhere is putting it mildly. They've closed all the facilities and there's literally nothing for them to do. There's a very small shop and that's it. Just to add fuel to the fire they've sacked most of the staff which has caused huge resentment. Imagine being fired just before Christmas when there are literally no other jobs around, added to which you have over 200 plus randy young men and it's just asking for trouble. Put in a pinch of Welsh awkwardness, a great dollop of resentment and the refusal to speak any English even though the migrants may have the basics and I can see trouble ahead. Somone really didn't think this through.

R6

I put that mainly down to the fact that Braverman just stopped general provisions - so that when the news broke aboot the overcrowding at Manston, the home office was forced into desperate measures to find somewhere, anywhere. So rather than maybe having somewhere that had been planned and appropriate, we now see the Manston overspill being farmed out to whatever was available - whether its places miles from anywhere, or 4 and 5 star hotels.

A total lack of the six Ps.

Another example of how this government (or if you prefer, string of governments since 2015 certainly), has stuffed one thing up after another, increasingly apparently cluel4ess with a rabbit in the headlights appearance acting now on synaptic knee jerk solutions. Between the mess that is Brexit, austerities 1 and 2 (with 3 looming), disastrous PPE and track and trace contracts and profligate use of revenues allied to throwing in the towel in attempts to retrieve fraudulent abuses, these migrant issues are botha direct result and merely in the huge bicket of sh1te the Tories have created.

I heartily recommend reading "A Decade in Tory" by Russel Jones.

didds

Clitheroekid
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2659
Joined: November 6th, 2016, 9:58 pm

Re: Albanian incomers to UK (not serious post)

Post by Clitheroekid »

I think it's rather unfair to criticise the Home Office for the overcrowding at Manston.

The sole cause of the problem is quite simply the much larger number of people arriving on boats. It's absurdly unreasonable to expect the Home Office to spend millions of pounds of public money on accommodation for unwelcome (I'll avoid the word `illegal'!) migrants just on the off chance that three or four times as many will turn up as had been expected.

If, as many of the migrants claim, they are desperate to escape persecution they would be grateful just to be on UK soil at all, even if they did have, for a period of time, to live in pretty poor conditions.

The Home Office can't just construct new accommodation for them overnight, and if they have to suffer some relative hardship while they await more suitable accommodation (and any such hardship is pretty insignificant in comparison to what they allege has been previously endured) then they should just have to put up with it.

servodude
Lemon Half
Posts: 7250
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am

Re: Albanian incomers to UK (not serious post)

Post by servodude »

Clitheroekid wrote:The sole cause of the problem is quite simply the much larger number of people arriving on boats


Anyone saying there's a sole cause to anything should set of alarm bells.
If it were only down to the boats it suggests the time taken to process cases has no effect? There's not a growing backlog of people who are not being processed?

If the boats stopped overnight the processing centers would still be over capacity for years and the government would lose a useful smokescreen for distracting people from other issues

It's complicated and interesting https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/re ... s/sn01403/
-sd

didds
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4547
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:04 pm

Re: Albanian incomers to UK (not serious post)

Post by didds »

Clitheroekid wrote:I think it's rather unfair to criticise the Home Office for the overcrowding at Manston.
I'll have to respectfully disagree. It IS the HO's responsibility, and Braverman as HS has ultimate responsibility (such as that exists in modern parliamentary circles of course.)

Manston has a capacity of 1600, and the length of stay there should be 24 hours [google is my friend :-) ]

I don't believe that a perfectly operating system suddenly was faced with 2.5 times the level of migrants arriving overnight to swell that number to 4000, or 30 times to turn that turnaround into 30 days (or more). There are suggestions that Braverman just stopped any efforts to keep apace with the situation, which is why when it all kicked off the HO had no option but to then use whatever resources were immediately available to move people on due to a lack of planning - hence migrants being placed in tiny towns with limited resources in Snowdonia, or 4 and 5 start hotels (Daily Wail rants etc)


YMMV. But thats my take.

Post Reply

Return to “Beerpig's Snug”