|
We expose the legal loopholes that allow foreign criminals to stay here after committing crimes. This article examines how serious offenders use ‘Human Rights’ legislation to remain in England. Q. What are the rules on deporting foreign criminals? A. The law is very clear. The UK Borders Act 2007 says that any foreigner who is jailed for more than 12 months must be deported. Immigrants who have been jailed for less than 12 months for any terror-related offence, many drugs offences, crime against the person or some types of theft or criminal damage, must also be removed from the country. There is no discretion for the Home Office under the law: in section 32 it says clearly that "the deportation of a foreign criminal is conducive to the public good". Q. How does the system work? A. Caseworkers in the Home Office's Criminal Casework Directorate (CCD) assess whether an offender meets criteria for automatic deportation - the process begins up to 18 months before the offender's earliest release date - or for deportation under other measures open to the Home Secretary. If the criminal does meet the criteria, the CCD is legally obliged to make a deportation order. The prison is notified and the inmate can be kept in detention beyond the end of their term while the CCD prepare paperwork. The criminal is given an opportunity to give representations why they should not be deported. A caseworker will make a decision, which may be referred to higher civil servants or even ministers for approval, on whether deportation should take place. Once the notice to deport is served, there is a 10 day period when the prisoner can appeal. Q. So how can a rapist and a killer get to stay? A. The 2007 Act gives the courts huge powers to intervene in deportations. It spells out the exceptions to the law and says there is an exception "where removal of the foreign criminal in pursuance of the deportation order would breach ... a person's Convention rights". The phrase "Convention rights" refers to the rights under the European Convention on Human Rights which the Human Rights Act enshrines in domestic law. What it means in practice is that the criminal can instruct a lawyer to lodge an appeal on human rights grounds, which will be heard by an immigration judge. If the judge can be convinced that sending them home would breach their human rights, the criminals stays. Q. Why is there a loophole that wide in a piece of legislation that is supposed to secure the borders? A. Simply put, because all legislation passed by Parliament must be "human rights compliant" - meaning that the 2007 Borders Act has to include the exception. Critics say there is no need for laws to be "gold plated" and that it makes it too easy for judges to defy the will of Parliament, that foreign criminals should be removed. Q. What human rights can they use to stay? A. A whole series of rights could be used. If they feared being killed by the state when home, their right to life might trump the need to deport. Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights guarantees the rights to "private and family life" and is used to argue that an offender cannot be separated from family members, particularly children, who live in Britain. The courts have even accepted the rights apply in cases where criminals have only a girlfriend here, for example. UK Border Agency figures show the number of deportation orders frustrated by human rights claims now runs at around 400 a year, while 68 per cent of cases blocked on human rights grounds rely on Article 8. Q. Shouldn't that have been considered by the civil servants when they were deciding whether to deport? A. It already is. But critics say that judges are far more lenient on foreign criminals than the Home Office, and that the courts go far further in respecting their "rights" than they need to. Q: Do the victims of the original crime have a say in the deportation process? A: No. The immigration proceedings are entirely separate from the criminal justice process. Victims and their relatives have no right for their views to be heard in the deportation cases - and many have no idea that someone they assumed would be removed from the country is back on the streets. The English Democrats manifesto states: Many of the customs and principles of English law are being undermined in the political quest for greater conformity with Continental ideas and practices. Law is being used as a tool for imposing dogma. One of the consequences of these changes is that the police are increasingly being made the enforcers of political doctrine and moving further away from their traditional role of upholding the delicate balance between Order and Liberty. The case of a rapist being allowed to remain here is just one instance of how political dogma and 'human rights' has perverted the justice system and denied justice to the victims. We believe that every victim of a criminal offence should have the right to address the court on the question of sentence and for the court to be required to bear the victim's views in mind when passing sentence. We also believe that all those immigrants who have been convicted of a criminal offence should be deported. These criminals should have no rights to remain in our country. This article was originally published online at the Telegraph.
 |
|
Foreign Criminals’ ‘Rights’ to Live Here
Written by Administrator
|
