Saturday, Jun 01, 2002
Saturday, Jun 01, 2002 |
| International | ||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | International
By Hasan Suroor
The plan, which has been widely denounced as "ill-thought-out'' and "unworkable'', envisages deportation of ``failed" asylum seekers — those whose applications have been rejected — either to their native country or to a "safe third country'' through which they might have passed on their way to Britain. They would not be allowed to stay in Britain in order to appeal against the rejection of their application. While they would continue to have the right to appeal, they would be able to do it from the country to which they have been deported. The French Ambassador in London was quick to raise his eyebrows saying there was no bilateral agreement on France accepting failed refugees from Britain, and the latter "cannot decide this'' unilaterally. Other European countries were also expected to object to any attempt by Britain to "dump" its burden on them. Continental Europe has consistently maintained that it is Britain's liberal asylum regime that is responsible for its attraction to refugees, and, in the absence of a uniform E.U.-wide policy, they cannot do anything about people passing through their borders to reach Britain. Groups working for refugees said the move was in breach of international human rights norms and threatened to challenge its legality. "This is a dangerous and unworkable proposal'', a spokesman for the Refugee Council said, arguing that denying failed asylum seeker the right to stay in Britain during the appeal was unjust. The proposal was also criticised by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees who said asylum seekers "must be allowed to remain in the country when they are going to have an appeal.'' An official of the Immigration Advisory Service called it a "panic reaction'' to the growing asylum applications. "Like all panic reactions, it is not going to work. It is being done to deflect attention from asylum figures,'' he said referring to a marked rise in the number of asylum applications this year so far. The Home Secretary, David Blunkett, who has drawn flak for his aggressive rhetoric on the issue, was unfazed arguing that Britain would not allow its asylum system to be "abused". "At present, an individual can make a wholly unfounded asylum or human rights claim (and) then stay in Britain while the appeals process occurs. This is at the taxpayers' expense and can be sometimes for months. The Government is no longer prepared to tolerate such abuse of the system. We will return these people to their country of origin as soon as we have rejected their claim,'' he said. Officials were quoted as saying that once the proposals were formalised, the Government would reach agreements with other European countries making it possible for them to take back failed asylum seekers. "We are not looking for a fight, we are looking for a solution. But I have got a Bill before Parliament and I am determined to take these powers,'' Mr. Blunkett said. If the proposal goes through Parliament, several thousand "failed" refugees would be repatriated every year.
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | Home |
Copyright © 2002, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|