Open%20borders%20The%20case%20against%20immigration%20controls%20-%20Teresa%20Hayter

Recommendations

Info

Refugees: Tightening the Screw 75 Perhaps in recognition of the ineffectiveness of deterrence, governments also endeavour to stop escape at source. Their main instrument is the requirement of visas. Visas are imposed when conditions in certain countries and areas deteriorate and cause people to flee. Sweden and then Norway imposed visas on Chileans in the late 1980s. Denmark imposed visas on Romanians in 1989. Belgium imposed visas on the main ‘refugee-producing’ countries in 1986. France has imposed visa requirements on all non-EU nationals apart from the Swiss, and in 1991 it imposed in addition transit visa requirements on eleven ‘refugee-producing countries’: Albania, Angola, Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Ghana, Haiti, Nigeria, Pakistan, Somalia, Sri Lanka and Zaire. Britain placed visa restrictions on Sri Lankans in 1985 after the persecution of Tamils intensified. It then extended the requirement to India, Bangladesh, Ghana, Nigeria and Pakistan. From 1989, after 4,000 Kurds had applied for asylum on arrival in Britain, Britain required visas for Turkish nationals. Visas were imposed for Sierra Leone and Ivory Coast (Côte d’Ivoire) in 1994, and for Colombia in 1997, again as a result of the increase in refugees from those countries. In August 1999 the British government threatened to reintroduce visas for the Czech Republic, an aspirant EU member, when asylum applications rose from 55 in January 1999 to 150 in June; Lord Bassam, Home Office minister, said many of them were Roma gypsies who, although they might well face discrimination at home, did not fill the criteria for refugees. After 56 Kosovars arrived at London’s Heathrow airport as transit passengers in March 1998 and tried to claim asylum there, a new category of transit visa was imposed, the direct airline transit visa (DATV); these are now applied to 14 other countries, including Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Somalia, Sri Lanka and Ethiopia. European Union members are now attempting to coordinate their visa policies. Having imposed visa requirements, governments enlisted airlines and shipping companies to help them enforce them, imposing fines if they failed to do so, under carriers’ liability legislation (see below). The British government employs airport liaison officers as a further aid to the detection of people who lack proper documents, and other European countries are following their example. The result is that it is now virtually impossible for refugees to travel legally to seek asylum in Europe. Article 31 of the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees says the following: The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of Article 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence. This article is being flouted by governments, which penalise refugees who arrive with false documents, for example by using this as a ‘reason’ for locking them up, and which publicly vilify refugees for being ‘illegal’.
76 Open Borders European governments, moreover, find it difficult to deport people whose claims they have rejected, often after years of delayed appeals and sometimes after they have spent months in detention. This may be because the asylum seekers’ governments will not provide them with papers, or perhaps because the longer they stay, the more compassionate reasons there are for not deporting them, or sometimes presumably because the difficulty and expense of finding and deporting them is too great. In Britain it is estimated that less than a third of asylum seekers whose claims have been turned down have left. Amnesty International says that between 1992 and 1995, 54,000 asylum seekers in Britain reached the end of the legal process, but in the same period fewer than 8,000 were deported. The Home Office estimates that there are at least 30,000 ‘illegals’ who should have left the country but who have disappeared; others put the number at 100,000. In Germany and the Netherlands officials say, with chagrin, that the great majority of failed asylum seekers cannot be deported. LEGISLATION AND LEGAL PROCESSES IN BRITAIN In 1987 the British Conservative Party’s general election manifesto said that tackling the ‘problem’ of ‘fraudulent’ asylum seekers was one of its main priorities. Conservative governments introduced three new bills aimed mainly at asylum seekers: the Immigration (Carriers’ Liability) Act in 1987, the Asylum and Immigration Appeals Act in 1993 and the Asylum and Immigration Act in 1996. The Carriers’ Liability Act made airlines and shipping companies act in effect as an arm of British immigration control, imposing fines of £1,000 (increased to £2,000 in 1991) for each passenger carried without the required documentation. By 1999 £75 million had been levied in such charges, although according to the Home Office only £62 million had been collected. The 1993 Asylum and Immigration Appeals Act extended the right of appeal to all asylum seekers but subjected what it called ‘vexatious or frivolous cases’, and the cases of people who had travelled through third countries, to ‘fast-track procedures’ with short time scales and no appeal to the Immigration Appeals Tribunal if appeal to an adjudicator failed (see p. 90). Ministers claimed that, by speeding up procedures in cases which were found to be without foundation, they would improve the situation for ‘genuine refugees’, who had ‘nothing to fear’ from the new measures. The act was followed by an unprecedented increase in rates of refusal, from 14 per cent in the six months before the act to 72 per cent after it, while the granting of Exceptional Leave to Remain (ELR; temporary status on compassionate grounds) fell from 76 per cent to 22 per cent of decisions. Thus, while the Home Office claimed that it treated all applications on their merits, 2,365 Sri Lankans were granted ELR in the six months before the act and only 55 in the six months after it, even though the situation in Sri Lanka had not improved. Michael Howard, the home secretary, was reported in the
Page 2 and 3:
OPEN BORDERS The Case Against Immig
Page 4 and 5:
CONTENTS Preface to the First Editi
Page 6 and 7:
PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION This b
Page 8 and 9:
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION The f
Page 10 and 11:
Preface to the Second Edition xi Th
Page 12 and 13:
Preface to the Second Edition xiii
Page 14 and 15:
Preface to the Second Edition xv An
Page 16 and 17:
Preface to the Second Edition xvii
Page 18 and 19:
Preface to the Second Edition xix o
Page 20 and 21:
Preface to the Second Edition xxi a
Page 22 and 23:
Preface to the Second Edition xxiii
Page 24 and 25:
Preface to the Second Edition xxv r
Page 26 and 27:
INTRODUCTION Human beings have migr
Page 28 and 29:
Introduction 3 an orgy of ‘libera
Page 30 and 31:
Introduction 5 of people coming fro
Page 32 and 33:
Introduction 7 merely led to demand
Page 34 and 35:
Migration, and Migratory Myths 9 fo
Page 36 and 37:
Migration, and Migratory Myths 11 I
Page 38 and 39:
Migration, and Migratory Myths 13 o
Page 40 and 41:
Migration, and Migratory Myths 15 p
Page 42 and 43:
Migration, and Migratory Myths 17 i
Page 44 and 45:
Migration, and Migratory Myths 19 T
Page 46 and 47:
2 BORDER CONTROLS RACISM Many, prob
Page 48 and 49:
Border Controls 23 Mrs Thatcher’s
Page 50 and 51: Border Controls 25 some 80,000 Prot
Page 52 and 53: Border Controls 27 be a blessing fo
Page 54 and 55: Border Controls 29 abilities or ski
Page 56 and 57: Border Controls 31 streets for fear
Page 58 and 59: Border Controls 33 MP for Dover had
Page 60 and 61: Border Controls 35 black people and
Page 62 and 63: Border Controls 37 efforts to contr
Page 64 and 65: Border Controls 39 more crucially,
Page 66 and 67: Border Controls 41 But Labour’s i
Page 68 and 69: Border Controls 43 Sir Edward Boyle
Page 70 and 71: Border Controls 45 when asked about
Page 72 and 73: Border Controls 47 Even, it was arg
Page 74 and 75: Border Controls 49 whelmingly as yo
Page 76 and 77: Border Controls 51 admission of stu
Page 78 and 79: Border Controls 53 middle class the
Page 80 and 81: Border Controls 55 the guestworker
Page 82 and 83: Border Controls 57 entitled only th
Page 84 and 85: Border Controls 59 detention centre
Page 86 and 87: Border Controls 61 Any Colombian, R
Page 88 and 89: Border Controls 63 The most substan
Page 90 and 91: Refugees: Tightening the Screw 65 l
Page 92 and 93: Refugees: Tightening the Screw 67 s
Page 94 and 95: Refugees: Tightening the Screw 69 d
Page 96 and 97: Refugees: Tightening the Screw 71 a
Page 98 and 99: Refugees: Tightening the Screw 73 o
Page 102 and 103: Refugees: Tightening the Screw 77 G
Page 104 and 105: Refugees: Tightening the Screw 79 a
Page 106 and 107: Refugees: Tightening the Screw 81 I
Page 108 and 109: Refugees: Tightening the Screw 83 I
Page 110 and 111: Refugees: Tightening the Screw 85 d
Page 112 and 113: Refugees: Tightening the Screw 87 h
Page 114 and 115: Refugees: Tightening the Screw 89 t
Page 116 and 117: Refugees: Tightening the Screw 91 i
Page 120 and 121: Refugees: Tightening the Screw 95 E
Page 122 and 123: Refugees: Tightening the Screw 97 5
Page 126 and 127: Refugees: Tightening the Screw 101
Page 150 and 151:
Refugees: Tightening the Screw 125
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Resistance 135 had made. Abdul then
Page 162 and 163:
Resistance 137 movement against rac
Page 164 and 165:
Resistance 139 1994 by Sir William
Page 166 and 167:
Resistance 141 In the 1950s and 196
Page 168 and 169:
Resistance 143 have been many organ
Page 170 and 171:
Resistance 145 victory and, some ar
Page 172 and 173:
Resistance 147 • The arguments wh
Page 174 and 175:
5 RE-OPEN THE BORDERS IMMIGRATION C
Page 176 and 177:
Re-open the Borders 151 comparable
Page 178 and 179:
Re-open the Borders 153 countries a
Page 180 and 181:
Re-open the Borders 155 Hensman wro
Page 182 and 183:
Re-open the Borders 157 maintain th
Page 184 and 185:
Re-open the Borders 159 levels of i
Page 186 and 187:
Re-open the Borders 161 IMMIGRATION
Page 188 and 189:
Re-open the Borders 163 over £5,00
Page 190 and 191:
Re-open the Borders 165 and the maf
Page 192 and 193:
Re-open the Borders 167 goods and s
Page 194 and 195:
Re-open the Borders 169 Subsequentl
Page 196 and 197:
Re-open the Borders 171 public assi
Page 198 and 199:
APPENDIX: MANIFESTO OF THE NO ONE I
Page 200 and 201:
Appendix 175 state. Under immigrati
Page 202 and 203:
Appendix 177 tions - that is the tr
Page 204 and 205:
Appendix 179 Second, we are critica
Page 206 and 207:
Appendix 181 and that both have a s
Page 208 and 209:
Appendix 183 In France the sans-pap
Page 210 and 211:
Bibliography 185 Cohen, S. (1988),
Page 212 and 213:
Bibliography 187 Kindleberger, C. P
Page 214 and 215:
ORGANISATIONS AND CAMPAIGNS Amnesty
Page 216 and 217:
Organisations and Campaigns 191 Imm
Page 218 and 219:
INDEX Abbott, Diane MP 85, 111 acco
Page 220 and 221:
Index 195 demonstrations/protests 2
Page 222 and 223:
Index 197 International Covenant on
Page 224 and 225:
Index 199 racist violence 24, 25, 2
Page 226:
Index 201 Women Against Rape (WAR)/
show all

Open%20borders%20The%20case%20against%20immigration%20controls%20-%20Teresa%20Hayter

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?