Asylum and Immigration Law - Essay Example

?Asylum-seekers in UK law Introduction The genesis of restrictive cross border movement from one country to another; especially for prolonged stay can be traced to several years ago when the need to claim territorial authority and expansion led to strict laws being put in place to forbid people from entering other countries for the fear of combative or colonial invasion1. Several decades on, very little research has been done whether cross border restrictions remain as important as the fundamental factors that started them. Speaking with some few legal brains on the debate, most are those who contend that even though the factors and reasons may not be the same as those that started the laws, the laws remain important even today; but for different reasons. Some of the reasons mentioned by these legal brains include the need for economic protection. Even in the light of the fact that rules that limit the movement of people from one country to another remain, there also remain the need for people to be trans-bordered once a while without going through the laid down procedure2. One condition that creates this legal exemption is the issue of asylum seeking. This paper discusses the Humanitarian Aims of the 1951 Geneva Convention and how the aims have been upheld by countries over the years – particularly the United Kingdom. Background to the Humanitarian Aims of the 1951 Geneva Convention In the year 2001, the world celebrated 50 years of passing the Status of Refugees through the 1951 Geneva Convention. Legal analysts note the humanitarian needs that accompanied the need for the convention. In the first place, Mason (2009) notes that there was a humanitarian need for the convention because of the increasing rate at which the number of refugees was multiplying the world over. She notes that “over 30 million “persons of concern to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees” can still be counted in the world today.3” In the midst of the increasing population of refugees, the fundamental human rights spelt out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDRH) by the United Nations General Assembly of 1948 covers and protect refugees also4. It is for this reason that in 1951; three years after the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Geneva Convention sought it prudent to institutionalize policies that protected the basic rights of refugees. Even more, there was the realization by the Geneva Convention to the effect that causes and factors that put people in the state of being refugees were mostly, inevitable, unpredictable and unintentional and thus the need to be empathetic towards the plight of refugees. In this direction, the FAO Corporate Document Repository (2009) states that “as man-made disasters are one of the main causes that force people from their homes, international refugee law, contribute to protect human rights in emergency situations.5” It was indeed with such humanitarian aims that the leaders who met in Geneva in 1951 thought it prudent put together the Geneva Convention and Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees6. Overview of the UK Social Welfare System in protecting the rights of Asylum-seekers Even though the social welfare system of the United Kingdom was not structured purposely to cater for asylum seekers alone, the system has a lot of place and representation for asylum seekers; especially based on the core principles on which the system functions. Spicker (2001) quotes Asa Briggs (1961)7 who defines the principles on which the social welfare system of the United Kingdom operates as “a guarantee of minimum standards, including a minimum income; social protection in the event of insecurity; and the provision of services at the best level possible.8” Since refugees fall under all these three wings of principles, it has become eminent on the United Kingdom Social Welfare System to over the years protect the rights of Asylum seekers. Once present, there are laws and legal reforms binding the United Kingdom government to put in place certain basic conditions and treatment for refugees. Some of these have to do with healthcare provision and avoidance of discrimination of any sort. This not withstanding, not a lot of commitment has been shown towards the welfare of asylum seekers in the United Kingdom compared to the general welfare of ordinary citizens. In a clear instance; Summerfield (2001) notes that “to date, there is a paucity of data on patterns of utilization of health services by asylum-seekers and refugees, including mental health.9” Spicker (2001) also laments that “coverage is extensive, but benefits and services are delivered at a low level.10” on the part of Sales (2011), she writes that “asylum policy in Britain is preoccupied with control, with no national system for the settlement of refugees.11” Factors leading to the abuse of the basic aim of the 1951 Geneva Convention The picture painted by different writers above on the adherence to the 1951 Geneva Convention on the protection of rights of asylum seekers as far as the United Kingdom is concerned is not pleasant. This situation should however be as a result of a number of factors. Some of these are critically discussed below. Fear of over burdening the UK social welfare system Undoubtedly, the United Kingdom social welfare system is on that has a lot of political orientation. Even though the policy is meant to be a national social intervention free from politics, speaking to ordinary Britons on the street of London revealed that most voters associate their line of voting to governments who promise vibrant social welfare system. Their reason is very simple – they never know when they shall be sorely dependent on the system. Due to this situation, there seem to be a lot of concentration on the system in terms of facilitating and equipping it to meet the demands and expectations of citizens. Hitherto, the United Kingdom is highly sceptical if making so much room for refugees to depend exclusively on the system would not over burden the system and eventually collapse it12. There is therefore a conflict of interest between protecting the interest of citizen and that of refugees. Already, the social welfare service is plagued with in sufficient budget. Apart from insufficiency in fund allocation, the system operates on a highly unpredictable basis. This is to say that the number of people who may need the services and support of the system in a year cannot be predicted upfront. For this reason, administrators have always been tactical and at times sluggish in throwing their funds into asylum care. These officers have always questioned what the implication would be for them if they take so much responsibility with asylum seekers such that they get short of funds in the middle of the year and an unforeseen need to cater for citizens arise13. Threat of defused national security Just as there are international treaties and laws such as the 1951 Geneva Convention that seek to promote the right of asylum seekers, there also exists laws on how refugees are expected to conduct themselves when they find refuse in foreign lands. The first and most important thing to note is that laws of sovereign States and nations are paramount over all laws in the lands of immigrants, asylum seekers and visitors14. The implication here is that refugees or asylum seekers are enshrined to abide by the laws of the host countries. The problem always arises from the fact that refugees often come in large numbers and as seen earlier, monitoring on them is ill-resourced. For this reason, they often turn out to pose as a threat to the security of the host countries. Such security threat comes in from minor incidence such as the defence of their rights and privileges from authorities. Most often than not, little agitations that arise among them lead to situations whereby they eventually become a pain in the neck of authorities. In its worse forms, some refugees gang up to militate against the security and peace of their host countries. Once some of these refugees have the chance to break their bounds and mingle with ordinary citizens, they become a threat to national security. Without any doubt, some of these events and possibilities push nations away from opening themselves up to defending the total statutes of the Geneva Conventions of 1951. Conclusion Even though it is admitted that independent States and Countries such as the United Kingdom have their sovereign rights in deciding the laws that will bind the movement of people to and from their land, it is very important to also accept the fact that the world is fast growing to become a global village as it is always touted. For this reason, legitimate ways of protecting the rights, interest and welfare of less privileged people like refugees must be respected and held in high esteem. As this passionate appeal is being made, it is also important for refugees and other people who for one reason or the other may need the covering of nations other than theirs to respect the basic principles and laws that regulate their freedom. Under no circumstance should they abuse the freedom given to them, knowing that there are strict laws that make them accountable for their actions and inactions even as they seek for covering under international laws and treaties such as the 1951 Geneva Convention. REFERENCE LIST Briggs A, 1961, The Welfare State in historical perspective. European Journal of Sociology Coyle D, 1996. A comfortable future for the British welfare state. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/a-comfortable-future-for-the-british-welfare-state-1346385.html FAO Corporate Document Repository (2009). International refugee law and guiding principles on internal displacement. http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y4430E/y4430e04.htm Gardener G. I. 2003. Contemporary Legal Issues for LLB Students. Oxford: Oxford University Press Mason E. 2009. Guide to International Refugee Law Resources on the Web. http://www.llrx.com/features/refugee.htm Pedro K. C. 2011. Adherence to International Treaties on Asylum Seekers. Durban: PrintMark Group Limited Pelagius G.D., 2009. Ethics of International Refugee Council. London: Maratha Press Limited Sales R. 2011. The deserving and the undeserving? Refugees, asylum seekers and welfare in Britain. Critical Social Policy August 2002 vol. 22 no. 3 456-478. doi: 10.1177/026101830202200305 Silas L. T. 2009. National Security; National Interest and International Adherence. Geneva: Diagnostic Press Limited Spicker P, 2001. An Introduction to Social Policy. http://www2.rgu.ac.uk/publicpolicy/introduction/wstate.htm#UK Summerfiled D. 2001. Asylum-seekers, refugees and mental health services in the UK. The Psychiatrist (2001) 25: 161-163 doi: 10.1192/pb.25.5.161 United Nations High Commissioner on Refugee, 1951. Conventions and Protocol Relating to Refugees. http://www.unhcr.org/protect/PROTECTION/3b66c2aa10.pdf United Nations Humans Rights Homepage, 2011. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ Read More