English Channel migrant crossing crisis #2

[monga]

Except you're wrong, quite bold to hold onto your wrong opinion even when faced with facts.

Anyway, in June 2022 when the man in the article came to the UK the Sudan government were killing protesters after a period of unrest.

Eight reported killed at protests against military rule in Sudan

Protesters are calling for a return to civilian rule and justice for those killed in a violent crackdown in 2019.

www.google.com

Why was he protesting? Over what? He had a successful dentistry business in a safe part of town yet made his way to the UK to be a dentist
---
The EU seem to be going against the ECHR on the daily

Drifting migrant boat in Mediterranean supplied with fuel but no rescue, NGO says

A merchant ship has supplied fuel and water to a boat with around 400 migrants on board which is in distress between Greece and Malta but Maltese authorities have ordered it not to conduct a rescue, German NGO Sea-Watch International said on Monday.

www.reuters.com

 

[Merpedy]

Why was he protesting? Over what?

This is likely information few select people are privy to, doesn’t include you or me or anyone on this thread. And even if it did include someone here, they likely couldn’t share it to begin with

you work awfully hard to say that all refugees are economic migrants but then hide behind “some of them are legitimate though” only to then go back to the first point whenever a case - with limited information - is mentioned
---

The EU seem to be going against the ECHR on the daily

This is purely about countries refusing to rescue because they don’t want to deal with the refugees, no? Not sure where EU policy comes in

having had another brief look, the article below does actually mention a bunch of cases on rescuing:

Briefing: the duty of refugee sea rescue in international law - Free Movement

In the absence of safe and legal routes to sanctuary countries in which they can rebuild their lives, refugees often resort to travel by unsafe means. The

freemovement.org.uk

Also not entirely sure how the EU as an institution would be held accountable, it would be the individual States

 

[monga]

This is likely information few select people are privy to, doesn’t include you or me or anyone on this thread. And even if it did include someone here, they likely couldn’t share it to begin with

you work awfully hard to say that all refugees are economic migrants but then hide behind “some of them are legitimate though” only to then go back to the first point whenever a case - with limited information - is mentioned

Not hiding behind anything! The woman that had her claim dismissed many times still blames the government ? What’s the excuse there? Taxpayers are still paying for her appeals while she insists on clinging on to the hope of a career in the UK, surely there’s a reason why she’s been turned down for asylum numerous times it seems people want to stay in the UK regardless of entitlement.
---
So this guy claims asylum because he didn’t want to pay tax in his own country???

 

[Merpedy]

So this guy claims asylum because he didn’t want to pay tax in his own country???

Born in Saudi Arabia to a Somali family, at 18 he decided to escape the middle eastern nation's punitive Kafala system which requires workers from immigrant families to give up a percentage of their earnings and tried to settle back in his family's homeland.

He arrived in Somalia hoping it would be his long-term home, but soon realised he couldn't stay there.
"I grew up in a peaceful country, I never saw a gun in my life. On my third day [in Somalia], a gang put a gun to my head because my hair was too long for them. They took my phone, smashed it on the ground and gave me a tool to shave my head," he said.

Firstly, on the Kafala system. It appears that there's a chance he would not be subject to such strict control but we enjoy learning about the different systems which are often more complicated than "they made us pay tax". It may also explain why he didn't wish to go back to a country he describes as safe:

Under that system, some 10 million migrant workers’ legal status are tied to their employer—facilitating abuse and exploitation including forced labor, trafficking, and slavery-like conditions.

Saudi Arabia has one of the most restrictive kafala systems in the region as it retains all of the abusive elements.

The measure of whether Saudi Arabia is truly abolishing the kafala system hinges on ending five key elements that give employers control over migrant workers’ lives:

• Requiring a migrant worker have an employer act as their sponsor to enter the country.
• The power employers have to secure and renew migrant workers’ residency and work permits—and their ability to cancel these at any time.
• Requiring workers obtain their employers’ consent to leave or change jobs.
• The crime of “absconding,” under which employers can report a worker missing, meaning the worker automatically becomes undocumented and can be arrested, imprisoned and deported.
• Requiring migrants obtain their employer’s consent to leave the country in the form of an exit permit.

Workers have little power to complain about or escape abuse when their employer controls their entry and exit from the country, residency, and ability to change jobs. Far too many employers exploit this control by taking workers’ passports, forcing them to work excessive hours and deny them wages. Migrant domestic workers in particular, can be confined to their employers’ homes and may be subject to physical and sexual abuse.

What Will it Take for Saudi Arabia to Abolish Abusive Sponsorship System? | Human Rights Watch (hrw.org)

Secondly, on gang crime as a basis of a claim:
The majority of information from Google comes up with the US because the Central American asylum cases are often based on that
MS-13 (unhcr.org) - this has a whole list of cases that were accepted/denied

Considerations in regard to Eligibility for International Protection in the Context of Gangs and other Groups involved in Crim (refworld.org)

As reflected in some of the recent jurisprudential developments referred to in this Note, the necessary causal link can, under certain circumstances, be established. UNHCR’s perspective is that the interpretation of the 1951 Convention grounds needs to be inclusive and flexible enough to encompass emerging groups and respond to new risks of persecution. Young people, in particular, who live in communities with a pervasive and powerful gang presence but who seek to resist gangs may constitute a particular social group for the purposes of the 1951 Convention. Additionally, people fleeing gang-related violence may have a well-founded fear of persecution on account of their political opinion, especially where criminal and political activities heavily overlap. In the absence of effective State protection, individuals may also fear persecution at the hands of gangs which pursue religious or ethnic ideologies through violent means.

We don't know enough about the man's asylum claim but it is possible that there's a successful claim for asylum there. At the same time, if the claim is not successful it needs to be processed. It's all good throwing up all these asylum claims that you don't think should be successful, but what is the solution? Surely, it is to process them and deal with the failed asylum seeker accordingly?

 

[Blueblue123]

Wait! I think I've got it.

Someone who comes here seeking asylum and has no obvious plans to contribute to society = economic migrant, drain on our society BAD

Someone who comes here seeking asylum and explicitly states they want to work and contribute to our understaffed NHS (or other sector) = economic migrant, should have used a work visa BAD

Someone who comes here on a work visa = economic migrant, should stay and contribute to their country of origin and not drain our resources BAD

Someone who comes here and commits crime = economic migrant who needs deporting who's responsible for the downfall of society BAD

Someone who comes here legally = economic migrant who we have no space for BAD

Someone who comes here illegally = economic migrant who should be deported BAD

 

[monga]

Firstly, on the Kafala system. It appears that there's a chance he would not be subject to such strict control but we enjoy learning about the different systems which are often more complicated than "they made us pay tax". It may also explain why he didn't wish to go back to a country he describes as safe:





What Will it Take for Saudi Arabia to Abolish Abusive Sponsorship System? | Human Rights Watch (hrw.org)

Secondly, on gang crime as a basis of a claim:
The majority of information from Google comes up with the US because the Central American asylum cases are often based on that
MS-13 (unhcr.org) - this has a whole list of cases that were accepted/denied

Considerations in regard to Eligibility for International Protection in the Context of Gangs and other Groups involved in Crim (refworld.org)


We don't know enough about the man's asylum claim but it is possible that there's a successful claim for asylum there. At the same time, if the claim is not successful it needs to be processed. It's all good throwing up all these asylum claims that you don't think should be successful, but what is the solution? Surely, it is to process them and deal with the failed asylum seeker accordingly?

Thought that’s what they did with the woman that’s intent on staying Does the same system exist in Dubai? surely that’s closer than Somalia and UK , the rest of his family seems happy enough to pay it if he’s the only one decided to leave, even having his uncle send him the traffiking cash from Saudi.
---
What about the economic migrants that come but have no right to stay it’s still adding to the massive taxpayer funded bills to pay for these people, even funding their numerous appeals .
The government need to be paying our own health pros a decent wage and incentives not bringing in economic migrants happy to settle for less wages and suppressing those homegrown professionals fighting for more money.
---

 

[monga]

Absolute joke! I believe this was another figment of my imagination and ridiculed by some on here, this is what walks amongst us and intel do absolutely nothing , coming to a hotel near you …

Almost 20 suspected terrorists crossed Channel on boats last year

EXCLUSIVE: Nineteen suspected terrorists have arrived in Britain via small boats across the Channel, security sources have told the Mail.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[CheshireTea]

Absolute joke! I believe this was another figment of my imagination and ridiculed by some on here, this is what walks amongst us and intel do absolutely nothing , coming to a hotel near you …

Almost 20 suspected terrorists crossed Channel on boats last year

EXCLUSIVE: Nineteen suspected terrorists have arrived in Britain via small boats across the Channel, security sources have told the Mail.

www.dailymail.co.uk

They don’t want to know, no doubt the supporters on this thread will find some nuts way to defend them

 

[Blueblue123]

Anyone with comprehension skills and half a brain cell would know that criminals have never been defended on this thread.

 

[Moth]

Anyone with comprehension skills and half a brain cell would know that criminals have never been defended on this thread.

Or indeed that anyone has ever denied that amongst the people claiming asylum in the UK there are some 'undesirables', criminal or otherwise. However some of us don't seek to use this fact as a reason to criminalise and exclude all asylum seekers from the UK. For me it just makes a stronger case to have an effective and efficient asylum system.

 

[monga]

Which no party seems to be able to do ! in the meantime……
---

They don’t want to know, no doubt the supporters on this thread will find some nuts way to defend them

They already have been defended, they didn’t destroy their ID they had to run for their lives so their gov didn’t get wind of their escape thank god for fingerprints eh! Although I suspect it’s already too late.

 

[Blueblue123]

Absolute joke! I believe this was another figment of my imagination and ridiculed by some on here, this is what walks amongst us and intel do absolutely nothing , coming to a hotel near you …

Almost 20 suspected terrorists crossed Channel on boats last year

EXCLUSIVE: Nineteen suspected terrorists have arrived in Britain via small boats across the Channel, security sources have told the Mail.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Which only proves what me, Moth and Merpedy have said a bajillion times. Create legal routes which automatically deter and filter criminals at the point of entry.

 

[monga]

What legal routes would deter them if it’s still a case of undocumented individuals allowed into a country ? The ongoing murder investigations in my own province is being held up because they can’t prove who the undocumented murderer is and his criminal background (if any ) it struck me as very odd that this guy had someone accompany him north to try and get him on a plane they also had a car waiting when they arrived here, and somewhere to stay, all very organised for some poor asylum seeker that can’t speak English, wouldn’t you say

 

[Blueblue123]

What legal routes would deter them if it’s still a case of undocumented individuals allowed into a country ?

How would they LEGALLY get here without documents or firsthand checks?

 

[monga]

How would they LEGALLY get here without documents or firsthand checks?

But you’re contradicting yourself here ,when others have said this you and others have pointed out that not all those fleeing can access documentation as proof , so in effect there really is no solution unless people without genuine documentation are left behind?

 

[Blueblue123]

But you’re contradicting yourself here ,when others have said this you and others have pointed out that not all those fleeing can access documentation as proof , so in effect there really is no solution unless people without genuine documentation are left behind?

And if they come here legally and go through a proper process, the UK will DOCUMENT their arrival, where they are and what they do, no?

If they have a legal route then there will be an OFFICIAL trail of the process they used to come here, no?

Undocumented means when someone has no right to remain. If they use a legal route the UK will surely give them a DOCUMENT which explains their status, no?

 

[monga]

And if they come here legally and go through a proper process, the UK will DOCUMENT their arrival, where they are and what they do, no?

If they have a legal route then there will be an OFFICIAL trail of the process they used to come here, no?

Undocumented means when someone has no right to remain. If they use a legal route the UK will surely give them a DOCUMENT which explains their status, no?

How is that any different to arriving and unable to prove who you are or your background? Do you think the authorities monitor every citizen? They would only be giving these people an identity on their own terms
There is no easy solution no matter what way it’s looked at, but one thing is clear something has to give we can’t go on as we are.

 

[Blueblue123]

How is that any different to arriving and unable to prove who you are or your background? Do you think the authorities monitor every citizen? They would only be giving these people an identity on their own terms
There is no easy solution no matter what way it’s looked at, but one thing is clear something has to give we can’t go on as we are.

And that is where the checks will come in. The article you linked doesn't say anything about the men not having documents but whether that was or wasn't the case, they arrived illegally on a small boat and the links to terrorist groups were uncovered through fingerprinting. A legal route would have discovered that at their point of entry before they crossed the UK's official border.

 

[monga]

And that is where the checks will come in. The article you linked doesn't say anything about the men not having documents but whether that was or wasn't the case, they arrived illegally on a small boat and the links to terrorist groups were uncovered through fingerprinting. A legal route would have discovered that at their point of entry before they crossed the UK's official border.

It said they were only identified through fingerprints! Why didn’t the other EU countries identify them before they reached the UK ?…Or maybe false documents as it states “true identity “?

 

[Merpedy]

Why didn’t the other EU countries identify them

It sounds like they did, hence the active investigation - hence why we are using “suspect” and not confirmed too

The problem for the EU when it comes to controlling this is free movement. It’s why they have the Dublin Regs but those haven’t been working too well

As for arrest, there’s probably some legal things going on. You also have to consider that the country these people were in were also risking their own security to have them walking around