It’s a common argument against the refugees coming across the Channel to the UK at the moment – why don’t they just stop in France?
The answer is obvious: They don’t feel safe there.
And the legal position is clear: The 1951 refugee convention acknowledges that refugees may enter countries through irregular routes and should not be penalised for this. The outcome of an asylum application cannot be pre-judged, irrespective of how that person reached the country. Asylum claims have to be determined according to the law and the circumstances of every individual case.
All of the above seems to have been lost on Sajid Javid, who seems to think it would be big and tough of him to refuse asylum to anybody who manages to cross the Channel safely.
Sajid Javid here, just casually suggesting his government would breach the Geneva Convention by deliberately refusing asylum to genuine refugees who have risked their lives to cross the Channel and seek sanctuary in the UK pic.twitter.com/KmRRviwQTo
— The Prole Star (@TheProleStar) January 2, 2019
The Prole Star is correct. It would be illegal to refuse asylum to anybody who arrives in the UK and demands it, based on the method of their arrival or the fact that they did not stop in another country instead. It is not up to him to make such a decision.
As Shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott pointed out: “It is not for Sajid Javid to claim that asylum seekers may not be genuine. He cannot know. We have a system for determining that.”
Can you imagine what would happen if Mr Javid went through with his racist idea?
Well, don’t worry – all you have to do is watch events in Israel, where the racist Likud government has announced that it intends to expel around 38,000 African refugees.
(I say racist because the hatred of people of other ethnicities is clear; Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said the expulsions are necessary to protect Israel’s “Jewish character”.)
Many of the people concerned say they came to Israel to seek asylum after fleeing persecution and conflict, but the authorities in that country regard them as “economic migrants”.
The BBC report of this outrage states that the group affected by this policy “includes people fleeing war-torn countries such as Syria, who are likely to be granted refugee status”.
But the Guardian‘s report on Sajid Javid’s racism includes a comment by immigration and asylum barrister Colin Yeo as follows: “Sending genuine refugees to face persecution in order to dissuade others from seeking to come here is plainly illegal.” If Israel is signed up to the same convention as the UK – and it is – then it is illegal in that country as well.
And the words of Yvette Cooper, quoted in the Guardian report, may also be applied to Israel: “Asylum claims have to be determined according to the law and the circumstances of every individual case, not as an arbitrary political decision supposedly to deter others.”
Sadly, it seems there is no penalty for non-compliance – other than bad publicity in the newspapers, and that depends on the political leanings of their owners.
Perhaps Mr Javid thinks a little bad publicity is worth risking. It seems likely he’ll be watching what happens in Israel with great interest.
Of course, if a general election is called in the meantime, there’s a chance his racist ideas will come to nothing.
Visit our JustGiving page to help Vox Political’s Mike Sivier fight anti-Semitism libels in court
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical
3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
So is France a racist country if these people ‘don’t feel safe there’?
Tories generally only support laws which suit them. Anything else they hold in contempt – that includes the majority of the people of Britain.
Mike, can you honestly state Britain is a safe country given the disgusting way poor, vulnerable, and/or disabled people have been treated since May 2010?
I suspect if those trying to get here knew the truth many of them would not bother.
The world’s gone mad you have idiots incharge and their soul goal is how to make monies from you then throw away after they finish with you
If they were French coming from France they would be refugees, they are neither French nor landed solely in France where there is no war and is a safe nation, whilst I admit the U.K. is vastly superior to France, as is shown by the migrants paying a small fortune for smugglers to take them on a hazardous journey out of France and into the U.K. but. To wrongly call them refugees and children just exacerbates the situation
How do you know what they are?
And, do you remember what the French did to the refugee settlement in that country? They torched it.
I think this guy has a problem as, if I am correct, wasn’t his father a refugee and, if so, is he ashamed of him? Sajid Javid seems to have more than one face but, then, of course, he is a Tory!
Wasn’t Sajid Javid’s father a refugee and, if so, is he ashamed of him? Seems to me Sajid Javid has two faces but then of course he is a Tory.