More deaths in the channel.

[motorbiking]

Show us these prosections for entering UK and claiming asylum.

It’s a summary offence so will not typically be reported.

S24 has been tested. I posted the case law, if you remember denso argued it wasn’t, it was and has been upheld ever since.

Here is an article on the so called “criminalisation of asylum seekers”.

Evidence from courtwatching: documenting the criminalisation of people seeking asylum in the UK

blogs.law.ox.ac.uk

 

[denso13]

Well, well, well,

"As others have argued, including elsewhere on this blog, this is a manufactured ‘crisis’ of the British government’s own making."

"With no other means of reaching the UK (contrary to the government’s narrative, access to so-called ‘safe and legal routes’ is extremely limited), irregular journeys by sea have become, for most, the default option."

 

[denso13]

Interesting, so people aren't prosecuted for just arriving in a boat.

"As with many border control policies, there is a distinct gap between the legislation and its enforcement in practice. The CPS has accepted that imprisoning c. 50,000 people a year under Section 24 - as the NABA enables - would not be in the public interest. Instead, for now, charges are only brought against cases with ‘aggravating factors’."

 

[denso13]

S24 has been tested. I posted the case law

Two cases of facilitation and two of attempting to enter the UK. Irrelevant to the question.

 

[motorbiking]

Facilitation is s25.

Here are some more s24 prosecutions.

I spent a day watching asylum seekers being sent to prison

Asylum seekers are being imprisoned for entering the UK illegally – when there is no legal way of getting in

www.opendemocracy.net

There were other asylum seekers in front of James that day.

Another Sudanese man, aged 24, had also been charged with the same section 24 offence of “illegal entry”. He has been in prison on remand since July 2022, and the nine-month sentence the judge handed down (of which only half needs to be served in custody) has therefore already been exceeded by many months.

James’s sentencing remarks in this case are so charged they could have been lifted from a Home Office press release: “You are just one of thousands who, in the last year or so, have attempted to gain illegal entry into the United Kingdom while trying to navigate the English Channel in a small, unseaworthy, overcrowded boat. In doing so, you put yourself and others in danger, and forced the coastguard to commit considerable time and resources to come and rescue you.

“This is a prevalent offence generating widespread and considerable public concern – particularly considering the unprecedented pressure attempts to circumvent immigration controls in this way is placing on already stretched public resources. Any attempt to evade immigration control has a capacity to undermine a nation’s security.

“This is a method of illegal entry that is generating substantial profits for organised criminal gangs. In such circumstances, sentences need to carry an element of deterrent.”

 

[denso13]

"There is no entry clearance visa these people could have applied for, from outside the UK, in order to enter the country and claim asylum. But in order to lodge an asylum claim, they must be in the UK. It’s a Catch-22."

A few months in jail, for a very few of them, won't deter anyone. They must get to the UK to claim asylum.

 

[motorbiking]

So you understand that these people are being prosecuted and convicted for the offence of illegal entry. Good.

Next you’ll be recognising the court of appeal case that tested it against the refugee convention.

So we are on common ground that those who enter the U.K. illegally for whatever reason are illegals.

 

[denso13]

So we are on common ground that those who enter the U.K. illegally for whatever reason are illegals.

Irrelevant. Either way, it makes absolutely no difference to the situation.

 

[motorbiking]

I’ll take that as a yes then.

 

[denso13]

So we are on common ground that those who enter the U.K. illegally for whatever reason are illegals.

I think it's fair to say illegality is illegal and legality is legal, yes.

 

[Roy Bloom]

Facilitation is s25.

Here are some more s24 prosecutions.

I spent a day watching asylum seekers being sent to prison

Asylum seekers are being imprisoned for entering the UK illegally – when there is no legal way of getting in

www.opendemocracy.net

There were other asylum seekers in front of James that day.

Another Sudanese man, aged 24, had also been charged with the same section 24 offence of “illegal entry”. He has been in prison on remand since July 2022, and the nine-month sentence the judge handed down (of which only half needs to be served in custody) has therefore already been exceeded by many months.

James’s sentencing remarks in this case are so charged they could have been lifted from a Home Office press release: “You are just one of thousands who, in the last year or so, have attempted to gain illegal entry into the United Kingdom while trying to navigate the English Channel in a small, unseaworthy, overcrowded boat. In doing so, you put yourself and others in danger, and forced the coastguard to commit considerable time and resources to come and rescue you.

“This is a prevalent offence generating widespread and considerable public concern – particularly considering the unprecedented pressure attempts to circumvent immigration controls in this way is placing on already stretched public resources. Any attempt to evade immigration control has a capacity to undermine a nation’s security.

“This is a method of illegal entry that is generating substantial profits for organised criminal gangs. In such circumstances, sentences need to carry an element of deterrent.”

Then the UK is acting in contravention of the refugee convention, unless there is a good reason why the asylum seekers have forgone the protection of the convention, and illegal entry is not an action that causes a loss of that protection.
No wonder the courts are so full of appeals etc, and the sylum process is grinding to a halt., the UK is making rods for its own back.
The convention states:
• The right not to be punished for illegal entry into the territory of a contracting State (Article31);

https://www.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/legacy-pdf/4ec262df9.pdf

 

[motorbiking]

Other countries have similar laws. Lawfully upheld.

France Approves Flawed Asylum and Immigration Law

In France, asylum seekers are sleeping rough, and flawed procedures often leave unaccompanied migrant children adrift, homeless, and excluded from the care they need. But instead of addressing these challenges, or correcting flaws in existing laws, legislators have decided to push through a...

www.hrw.org

 

[Roy Bloom]

Other countries have similar laws. Lawfully upheld.

There is illegal entry, for nefarious reasons, and there's entry for the purpose of claiming asylum.
Claiming asylum is not illegal, and if the asylum seekers has to arrive in order to claim that asylum, they should not be penalised.
The convention is absolutely clear and unambiguous about it.

 

[motorbiking]

They could always claim asylum in the first safe country?

It’s quite obvious that the French bill is designed to avoid claimants who try to get to the U.K. from being able to claim in France, if they do not apply promptly.

Italy is a safe country
Turkey is a safe country
Greece is a safe country
France is a safe country.
Germany .. etc

Criminals can be denied protection.

 

[denso13]

they should not be penalised.

In the real world it makes no practical difference. Without legal routes they need to be in the UK to claim asylum.