10 March 2004 @ 03:28 pm
 
I'm Scottish, I'm proud to be Scottish. I love my nation and much as I bad-mouth our sports teams I support them wholeheartedly.

Sometimes however I read something that makes me ashamed of my nation. these men are dying in the same city I am currently in and the City Council is doing nothing about it.

To my horror I wasn't even aware of this until [livejournal.com profile] mirabehn posted it on her journal.
 
 
( Post a new comment )
[identity profile] rileysaplank.livejournal.com on March 10th, 2004 10:44 am (UTC)
I didn't realise that this was happening either, Sho. From their story it seems pretty clear that if they are sent back to Iran, they will be executed, so I cannot even begin to understand why their claim for asylum has been turned down, as I thought that was one of the qualifying areas for getting asylum in this country.

Andy

LoatF
[identity profile] whiskyinmind.livejournal.com on March 10th, 2004 11:27 am (UTC)
As far as I'm aware that is one of the primary criteria. I'll hold my hands up and say I don't know enough about the asylum laws to make an informed statement but I had always believed that if it was shown a person was facing a life-threatening situation in their native country then they would be likely to be granted asylum.

I should learn more about this, it's an important issue especially in this day and age and my ignorance of the law is no excuse for apathy.

I'm a member of Amnesty International for crying out loud, I have been since I was 14, and although I know this goes on, it doesn't always ring true for me until something like this makes it hit home.

I owe it to myself to know what's going on. Ignorance is no excuse.
[identity profile] rileysaplank.livejournal.com on March 10th, 2004 11:36 am (UTC)
At least you've got an excuse, I studied English Law at Uni (Though I never covered asylum law, so I suppose that is as much an excuse as yours, and to be honest the laws of asylum were something that never really interested me much.

I think that if I'd been more pro-active in my degree I'd have probably studied human rights issues within the law, but that's mainly governed from Europe now, which was one of the main reasons I didn't as Europen Union Law didn't interest me that much (an area that I did study and found rather boring, though Human rights within the European Union wasn't covered on the syllabus), and I feel I've gone off topic now so am going to shut up.

Andy

LoatF
(Anonymous) on March 10th, 2004 03:04 pm (UTC)
While on the subject of immigration law, the legal limit on the amount of legal aid that can be granted to an asylum seeker is about to be cut to 5 hours (as of April)- i.e. utterly useless. This means they aren't getting good lawyers any more as all the Law firms are closign the relevant departments.
[identity profile] smhwpf.livejournal.com on March 10th, 2004 02:12 pm (UTC)
I think that Asylum policy is one of the things Westminster hangs onto, so this is a British shame rather than a specifically Scottish one.

It is incomprehensible. Many campaigners talk of a 'culture of disbelief' in the immigration service, and it can be very difficult for asylum seekers - especially those whose knowledge of English may be quite weak - to prove their case for asylum. There's even been cases where people have been tortured, and where there's medical evidence that they've been tortured, but who get turned down for asylum as they cant demonstrate to the satsifaction of the powers that be that they would be in danger of persecution if they returned. If having been tortured doesn't constitute a 'well-founded fear of persecution', I don't know what does. And you'd think that, when a wrong decision to refuse asylum could have such dreadful consequences, asylum seekers would be given the benefit of the doubt. And you'd think that there'd be some little measure of humanity, of willingness to admit you've got it wrong in the system - I mean, if someone is willing to starve themselves to death rather than be deported, doesn't that show that they've got more at stake than claiming our oh-so-generous benefits?

But no. The greater fear seems to be of mistakenly letting in a 'bogus' asylum seeker. And, sadly, shamefully, this seems to have the support of public opinion. Rags like the Mail and the Sun stir up hatred and suspicion of asylum seekers, but they also reflect it. Most people's knee-jerk instinct seems to be assume that someone coming to this country is probably a cheat. I really don't understand what people are afraid of. Suppose some people do get in who aren't really suffering from persecution? What of it? Are they really going to hurt us so badly? If they're willing to travel half way round the world to make a better life for themselves, they're probably the sort of person that's going to work hard for themselves. But fear seems to win the day every time. And I think this fear and suspicion of outsiders is not just a British thing, it seems to be common to humanity, one of our less attractive traits. (Actually, the Native Americans were very welcoming to the white men, which isn't a very good example for my argument.) And I really don't know how this attitude can be overcome.
(Reply) (Link)