oldtimerdiscopants
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Aug 2018
- Messages
- 1,616
Because they have been processed in France? And you calling me naive is unworthy of even a chortle.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Sajid Javid
- Thread starter urban genie
- Start date
Because they have been processed in France? And you calling me naive is unworthy of even a chortle.
why should France take them? They will say that the only obligations that apply are those that the people you want to deport should have applied for asylum in the first safe country they came into. Can we prove that was France? Doubtful as they seldom have papers. Our view would be the same - first safe country they should apply. You have to know where that was. This was always going to eventually be the problem because as an island on the extremes of Europe once they get here they know we need to find out where they came through. You are over simplifylng a problem with your naive answers.
Because they came from France. So they have to. France could choose to return them to a previous safe country if they'd come through there too, that's up to them. But that's how it works.
Because they have been processed in France? And you calling me naive is unworthy of even a chortle.
Not necessarily. They could have been processed in a previous country.
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
Er, they are meant to claim asylum in the first safe country. Both the Geneva Convention and the Dublin Regulation allow for deportation back to where they've come from if they could have claimed it there. In this instance, they've decided not to claim in any one of several European countries in order to try and do so here. It's not an a la carte menu. So the answer to your question in this instance is very much France.
The Dublin system enables deportation back only in certain circumstances such as when the migrants were processed and have had fingerprints taken so there is a reliable record of where they have come from so then can be deported back to. As far as I know I think it applies to migrants not refugee's - so if someone comes as a refugee the legal process of deciding whteher they are a migrant or not still has to be gone through. You can't just turn boats round at the beach.
oldtimerdiscopants
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Aug 2018
- Messages
- 1,616
Not necessarily. They could have been processed in a previous country.
They could have mate but counteracting the "Let them all in" gang with facts isn't that effective.
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
Not necessarily. They could have been processed in a previous country.
which is why the French would be daft not to only take back those they are obliged to that they processed and we can prove it.
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
They could have mate but counteracting the "Let them all in" gang with facts isn't that effective.
who said let them all in? People are just schooling you on international law and how it applies to refugee's and migrants.
The Dublin system enables deportation back only in certain circumstances such as when the migrants were processed and have had fingerprints taken so there is a reliable record of where they have come from so then can be deported back to. As far as I know I think it applies to migrants not refugee's - so if someone comes as a refugee the legal process of deciding whteher they are a migrant or not still has to be gone through. You can't just turn boats round at the beach.
It requires ALL migrants to be processed and fingerprinted. If they haven't got those (some try and destroy their papers) then they are simply illegal migrants and can absolutely be returned from where they've come from. If you get a boat over to France and get stopped in the channel with no papers, that doesn't mean you get to stay in France, they send you back to the UK. Likewise, both that and the Geneva Convention establish the principle of requesting asylum at the first safe country. You cannot just wander through until you find one you like.
oldtimerdiscopants
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Aug 2018
- Messages
- 1,616
who said let them all in? People are just schooling you on international law and how it applies to refugee's and migrants.
I am not being schooled, do you know what a Visa and the word NO!! means?
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
It requires ALL migrants to be processed and fingerprinted. If they haven't got those (some try and destroy their papers) then they are simply illegal migrants and can absolutely be returned from where they've come from. If you get a boat over to France and get stopped in the channel with no papers, that doesn't mean you get to stay in France, they send you back to the UK. Likewise, both that and the Geneva Convention establish the principle of requesting asylum at the first safe country. You cannot just wander through until you find one you like.
so if thats the case whats the fuss why do we have migrant centres with two and a half thousand people in them at any given time? Surely the simple obvious thing to do is "send the buggers back " ( copyright Peter Kay lol ) and have none of them in the UK.