Family to be deported from Sheffield

[panchobar]

Whatever I want to call them?

 

I'm merely pointing out that refugees are supposed to claim asylum in the first safe country they reach.

 

I'm sure you are delighted to learn their MP and City of Sanctuary are appealing the decision to deport.

 

I'm not delighted either way but do agree with the decision to deport them back to Poland where they came from, if they had come from a war torn country my opinion may well be different.

 

It's odd how people like you are sure about other peoples thoughts having never met them or conversed with them before.:loopy:.

[Cyclone]

Havent you got that the wrong way round?

 

Asulum seekers are people who claim asylum whose refugee status is undetermined.

A refugee is a person whose asylum claim has been accepted.

 

Surely a refugee is someone displaced from their home country.

 

Anyway, the Dublin Agreement

 

One of the principal aims of the Dublin Regulation is to prevent an applicant from submitting applications in multiple Member States. Another aim is to reduce the number of "orbiting" asylum seekers, who are shuttled from member state to member state. The country that the asylum seeker first applies for asylum is responsible for either accepting or rejecting asylum, and the seeker may not restart the process in another jurisdiction.

 

If someone claims asylum in the UK, then we become responsible, the actions that matter are apparently claiming asylum or having finger prints taken...

 

Have we got any actual details about the case being discussed here? News report perhaps?

 

---------- Post added 18-08-2016 at 09:31 ----------

 

http://www.itv.com/news/calendar/2016-08-17/family-living-in-sheffield-living-in-fear-of-deportation/

 

Is this it?

 

Presumably, if granted asylum in Poland, they will then become Polish citizens and be free to come back to the UK to live (assuming we haven't left the EU by then)...

 

---------- Post added 18-08-2016 at 09:36 ----------

 

To be clear, this family are not/were not refugee's. He was a member of staff in the Iraqi embassy in Poland. He should (according to the rules) have applied for asylum in Poland.

[Santo]

I'm not delighted either way but do agree with the decision to deport them back to Poland where they came from, if they had come from a war torn country my opinion may well be different.

 

It's odd how people like you are sure about other peoples thoughts having never met them or conversed with them before.:loopy:.

 

It's odd that you replied to my post to another user saying 'whatever YOU want to call them.'

 

I don't want to call them anything really. But people who say 'send them back to where they came from' generally aren't delighted when they're allowed to stay.

 

I think I read you bang on, mate.

 

---------- Post added 18-08-2016 at 13:59 ----------

 

Surely a refugee is someone displaced from their home country.

 

Anyway, the Dublin Agreement

 

 

 

If someone claims asylum in the UK, then we become responsible, the actions that matter are apparently claiming asylum or having finger prints taken...

 

Have we got any actual details about the case being discussed here? News report perhaps?

 

---------- Post added 18-08-2016 at 09:31 ----------

 

http://www.itv.com/news/calendar/2016-08-17/family-living-in-sheffield-living-in-fear-of-deportation/

 

Is this it?

 

Presumably, if granted asylum in Poland, they will then become Polish citizens and be free to come back to the UK to live (assuming we haven't left the EU by then)...

 

---------- Post added 18-08-2016 at 09:36 ----------

 

To be clear, this family are not/were not refugee's. He was a member of staff in the Iraqi embassy in Poland. He should (according to the rules) have applied for asylum in Poland.

 

Seems I was right about him feeling threatened in Poland. From your article:

 

"I will be not safe in Poland. They will follow me and they will kill me and they will kill my family as well. There are many doctors and professors killed in Iraq."

 

Though it's a garbled paragraph it seems he's unsafe in both Poland and Iraq? So he wants to stay here.

 

The same article states:

 

"But asylum rules say he must claim from the first safe country he arrived in."

 

Which from Tiggers posts is utter nonsense....

Edited August 18, 2016 by Santo

[Vaati]

And the bickering and personal attacks have been removed. This is to cease.

[BHRemovals]

the whole asylum policy is a mess.

[999tigger]

Surely a refugee is someone displaced from their home country.

 

Anyway, the Dublin Agreement

 

 

 

If someone claims asylum in the UK, then we become responsible, the actions that matter are apparently claiming asylum or having finger prints taken...

 

Have we got any actual details about the case being discussed here? News report perhaps?

 

---------- Post added 18-08-2016 at 09:31 ----------

 

http://www.itv.com/news/calendar/2016-08-17/family-living-in-sheffield-living-in-fear-of-deportation/

 

Is this it?

 

Presumably, if granted asylum in Poland, they will then become Polish citizens and be free to come back to the UK to live (assuming we haven't left the EU by then)...

 

---------- Post added 18-08-2016 at 09:36 ----------

 

To be clear, this family are not/were not refugee's. He was a member of staff in the Iraqi embassy in Poland. He should (according to the rules) have applied for asylum in Poland.

 

Why are you trying to explain what a refugee is to me?

They dont get the official status as a refugee until its been confirmed via their application for asylum. Thats the whole point of seeking asylum because if successful, then they are granted rights as a refugee inder the 1951 Convention. the definition for refugee is contained in article 1. I never said it wasnt someone who was displaced, but thats what the asylum claim seeks to establish.

 

 

Someone who is in

fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.

 

http://www.unhcr.org/uk/3b66c2aa10

 

Why are you trying to explain the Dublin rules to me? When ive already explained how they work at least twice.

 

Why are you telling me about the case when I already posted that link back at post #11

?

 

If they are granted asylum in Poland they could in theory become EU citizens and seek to return to the UK, but that would be a long process and may take 5+ years. Their objection would be staying in Poland because they say they have a fear of being persecuted plus he has a little girl settled here.

 

 

Its hard to comment on the case because we dont know what the argument by immigration was about why they needed to be returned other than they believe the correct place was Poland. It could be them trying to assert the Dublin rules, but their application is very patchy. perhaps Poland is on the ok list, whereas thousands have not been returned to Italy and Greece.

 

---------- Post added 18-08-2016 at 20:33 ----------

 

 

Which from Tiggers posts is utter nonsense....

 

Administrative regulations called the Dublin rules its an adminstrative agreement between countries. Thats where the first safe country comes from.

 

The rules have been more or less abandoned. If you think about it that would mean virtually all asylum claims would be in Italy- North African route or Greece- Syria and Middle East.

It would overwhelm those countries. Certain court cases prevented asulum seekers being returned to Italy and Greece on human rights grounds.The rules simply havent worked, hence the EU having an agreement with Turkey and also planning on controversial quotas. Apparently this has much reduced the flow of refugees.

 

This is a very readable short article on why Dublin is being abandoned and why it didnt work.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/d08dc262-bed1-11e5-9fdb-87b8d15baec2.html#axzz4HiKU9eRc

 

Actual asylum claims can be made anywhere as long as the individuals havent previously been registered or made a claim elsewhere, because then the claim has to be made there.

 

The rules governing refugees do not make the refugees claim in any particular country i.e the first safe country, that means they can apply where they like. Thats why you get the admin rules saying one thing and the actual convention saying another.

 

You can read about the convention here

 

http://www.unhcr.org/uk/about-us/background/4ec262df9/1951-convention-relating-status-refugees-its-1967-protocol.html

[Santo]

Administrative regulations called the Dublin rules its an adminstrative agreement between countries. Thats where the first safe country comes from.

 

The rules have been more or less abandoned. If you think about it that would mean virtually all asylum claims would be in Italy- North African route or Greece- Syria and Middle East.

It would overwhelm those countries. Certain court cases prevented asulum seekers being returned to Italy and Greece on human rights grounds.The rules simply havent worked, hence the EU having an agreement with Turkey and also planning on controversial quotas. Apparently this has much reduced the flow of refugees.

 

This is a very readable short article on why Dublin is being abandoned and why it didnt work.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/d08dc262-bed1-11e5-9fdb-87b8d15baec2.html#axzz4HiKU9eRc

 

Actual asylum claims can be made anywhere as long as the individuals havent previously been registered or made a claim elsewhere, because then the claim has to be made there.

 

The rules governing refugees do not make the refugees claim in any particular country i.e the first safe country, that means they can apply where they like. Thats why you get the admin rules saying one thing and the actual convention saying another.

 

You can read about the convention here

 

http://www.unhcr.org/uk/about-us/background/4ec262df9/1951-convention-relating-status-refugees-its-1967-protocol.html

 

I'm quite confused about the plight of Mr Al-Dallal now.

 

From what I can gather he was some sort of official in Iraq and he spoke out against corruption. Of who or what is unreported but he got shot. In 2009 he moved/fled to Poland (not sure why Poland) and began working in the Iraqi Embassy there. In 2013 his contract ended and fearing being sent back to Iraq he came here instead. He says in Poland he was called a traitor by elements of Iraqi intelligence.

 

Now, his application to remain here has failed and after the UK Home Office spoke to the Polish equivalent he has been granted leave to stay in Poland and is being deported there this week, pending last minute appeals. However, Mr Al-Dallal feels he will be unsafe in Poland and/or he will be returned to Iraq from Poland.

 

So what would have happened if Poland didn't accept him back? Would the UK deport him and his family to Iraq? His daughter is 6, so I'm guessing was born in Poland. Did that play a part in him being accepted back into Poland?

[Cyclone]

999Tiger - what made you think that I was trying to explain only to you? Rather than just discussing?

[Jomie]

It's odd that this family consider the UK as safe when MI5 have the current terrorist threat level at severe. Compare this to Poland where it is considered "not directly threatened." He also describes his daughter as "British" by dint of living here for the past two or three years. Even being born in the UK does not automatically confer British nationality.

From the limited information it would seem that the family were sufficiently settled in Poland for him to have employment, a home and a family. He came to the UK when his contract was terminated. As an intelligent and qualified person he has perhaps arrived on these shores thinking that he has a better chance of employment, particularly as this country has a larger population of Arabs/Muslims. They appear to be a nice and intelligent family; if they are returned to Poland they will no doubt be of value to that country and could become citizens if they wish.

[Cyclone]

By safe he means from North Korea agents... The general threat level isn't really relevant to a specific threat to his family.

 

His employment was with the government he has sought asylum from... Did you read the article?

 

I'm very confused as to what the Arab and Muslim populations have to do with a North Korean family. Perhaps you've really not read the article and are leaping to wild conclusions instead?