Reply With QuoteThanks for the question.
I'll take a stab in the dark and guess that whatever news story you're referring to mentions African immigrants? If so, being in Italy illegally makes them illegal in France too.
This is a genuine question and not intended to raise ire, but how can people be crossing illegally from Italy to France? Both are in Schengen, there’s no border and free movement of people is one of the fundamental right the Eurocrats keep banking on about. So isn’t it just “crossing”, not “crossing illegally”?
Sent from my iPad using TZ-UK mobile app
Thanks for the question.
I'll take a stab in the dark and guess that whatever news story you're referring to mentions African immigrants? If so, being in Italy illegally makes them illegal in France too.
Both refugees and migrants are restricted to the first "safe" country they encounter and supposed to claim asylum or apply for residence in that country. They are not entitled to free movement even though for practical purposes many EU countries make no border checks.
Perhaps you could provide a link to the headline?
"Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it's enemy action."
'Populism, the last refuge of a Tory scoundrel'.
Which is just lovely if the first “safe” country happens to be the first bit of Europe within small boat range of the North African coast. Never mind the fact that it is already an overcrowded tiny island. And people complain about illegal immigrants in the UK...Originally Posted by Scepticalist
Lampedusa?
I wonder if there is a willingness to funnel them ever Northwards as well, which show some complicity in the likes of Greek and Italian policy. Potential refugee "I wish to claim asylum!" Border guard "Sorry can't hear you, now get on this train." I'm not that bothered tbh, we are all Jock Thomson's bairns to use an old phrase.
Given the geographical accessability to Europe for refugees it's not right that they should all remain in their first country of safety.
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
Furthermore, and without dwelling into politics, most refugees do not want to claim asylum.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
But then most migrants are not refugees either. It's all an unholy mess to be honest, with -as usual - all sides shouting from entrenched positions instead of facing reality in the middle ground.
Please define 'migrant' in the way you're using it. If you mean 'economic migrant', do you mean legal or illegal?
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
I think the difficulty here is pinpointing exactly what act or condition represents illegality in this context.Migrants crossing illegally from Italy to France
If someone turns up in another country without having entered through an immigration channel, say, at a port or airport, then regardless of their nationality or citizenship status, it's quite likely that they have committed an offence locally on their arrival. I believe that is the case in the UK – obtaining refugee status after the event is a defence to any prosecution of the offence.
That position would seem unlikely to apply to legal residents in one Schengen country, crossing a border into another – but if somebody from a non-Schengen country within the EU turns up other than through the immigration channel, then they have again probably committed a local offence if they don't make their arrival known. The example I'm thinking of is flying a small plane from the UK to France. As I understand it, you are supposed to notify the French authorities of your arrival, even if you are only spending a few hours before heading back to Blighty.
The opportunity to commit an offence seems even more likely to be the case if the individual concerned is from outside the EU (if that's what being a "migrant" describes) since there is quite possibly also a visa requirement that will presumably be unfulfilled. If that's right, the commission of such an offence would seem to be one of immigration into the "first" country where they arrive. Perhaps that is better expressed as "arriving illegally".
Having therefore committed that first offence and thereby probably thereby not being a "legal resident", it seems perfectly possible that then crossing from one Schengen country into another commits another offence in the second country, since the Schengen rules only benefit legal residents of Schengen countries. (I have to admit my research on that point is limited to a quick bit of googling.)
If I am right on that, it therefore seems possible to make a "crossing illegally from Italy to France" if you are not first legally resident or legally visiting Italy.
Without wishing to stoke controversy, you can see why immigration law is likely to be a growth business in Northern Ireland post-2019.
Exactly. There is virtually* no illegal crossing from Italy to France, or from any Schengen country to another for that matter, that hasn't started by an illegal entry into the Schengen zone.
*:
Bear in mind that none of the above exceptions would apply to anyone defined as a 'migrant", unless migrant has a specific meaning in the poster's use of it.Limited territorial validity visas (LTV)
This type of visa obtained allows you to travel only in the Schengen State that has issued the visa or in some other cases, in the certain Schengen States specifically mentioned when applying for the visa. Apart from these Schengen countries, this specific visa is invalid to any other Schengen country not specified prior. The holder of this type of visa cannot enter or transit through any other Schengen country that is not the first and final destination target. This type of visa is issued in very peculiar cases such as a humanitarian reason or under international obligation as an exception to the common USV system. This type of visa may apply for individuals who don’t possess a valid travel document yet have to travel to a Schengen area on an emergency of any kind.
National Visas
The national visa of “D” category is granted to the certain individuals who are to be studying, working or permanently residing in one of the Schengen countries. The national visa can be of a single entry, granted to the people who are in need of residing in the Schengen country for a certain period of time and for a sole purpose after which they shall return to their country. On the other hand a multi-entry national visa is also granted for certain individuals, allowing its holder to travel in and out of this Schengen country as he/she pleases and also travel throughout the whole Schengen Area without additional visa requirements.
In order to obtain a multi entry national visa, one must meet the certain criteria:
An international student program will grant a visa for a period of not more than one year.
An international student that is about to start a full course of studies in one of the Schengen countries. Again the visa is issued for a period of one year with the possibility of extending it.
A pedagogical work at a higher institution or research center in any of the Schengen countries, regarding the person and its close family members.
A professional who is traveling in any of the Schengen countries due to its expertise be it a sportsman, an artist or any other professional of its kind with the purpose of sharing its expertise.
Emergency cases as a medical condition that prevents the individual leave the Schengen Area at the designated time frame.
Under Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council that came into effect on 5 April 2010, a third-country national holding a valid long-stay visa issued by a Schengen state may travel and stay in the territory of other Schengen states no more than 90 days in any 180-day period.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Those are the rules we and the EU signed up to. However, I wouldn’t concern yourself too much. The vast majority queue up at the channel tunnel to come here or once they have status in mainland EU come here anyway. We are seen as a lot more friendly and conducive to their needs, housing, education, healthcare, benefits, employment whether that be legal or illegal.
Not a Daily Mail reader just my observations.
Would you really want to come to the UK for the weather, fine food and wine??????
Many want to come to the UK as they have extended family here, or English is their second language. Many thousands of migrants have settled in mainland Europe (Germany is a good example) and have become legal as part of the local governments response to the migrant crisis. Having worked in the Calais jungle prior to its destruction I think the term economic migrant is sometimes misused.
Are you sure the vast majority of asylum seekers arriving in Europe queue up at the channel tunnel?
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
Are you sure the vast majority of asylum seekers arriving in Europe queue up at the channel tunnel?
R
This only relates to asylum seekers. There other type of migrants.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...the-difference
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-e...-frozen-border
Here’s the headline. What puzzled me was that it didn’t say “illegal migrants” but “migrants crossing illlegally”. It’s not illegal to cross from Italy to France, but as others have pointed out it is if said migrants are there illegally.
Seems to me the headline should read “illegal migrants crossing from Italy to France......”. If they are illegal doesn’t matter where they are crossing, it’s illegal.
It's just the language - illegal immigration but are people illegal?
If I break the law what I do is illegal but I don't become illegal
That graphic does not relate to the statement above though.Are you sure the vast majority of asylum seekers arriving in Europe queue up at the channel tunnel?
R
The statement was 'the majority are queuing up at the channel tunnel'
That graphic only show which country is processing the asylum applications as they enter Europe.
It's to be expected that Hungary will process more applications in comparison to the UK and Ireland as they form the southernmost border of the EU.
The key information would be numbers of asylum seekers in each EU country once they are in the system.
I am not sure anyone has that info, even those in the EU and if they did they would would not share it.
I do believe that migration north is encouraged as the southern EU countries would not be able to cope if they all remained where they landed.
Furthermore there is nothing to stop migrants moving north to more affluent countries when they are in the system. As said above would you want to remain in a tent on a beach or would you chance your arm of a free flat in the UK?
Cheers
John
given that the vast majority landing in Italy are Not Refugees its not right that they land there in the first place
If you were Syrian for example, given the recent events in your home country, would you rather stay there or head somewhere else where there is a chance of finding a better life?
Good luck everybody. Have a good one.
The statement was 'The vast majority queue up at the channel tunnel to come here' and that was in response to my comment 'Given the geographical accessability to Europe for refugees it's not right that they should all remain in their first country of safety.
So they've come into various European countries but then they (the vast majority) queue up at the tunnel to get here? I don't believe that.
R
- - - Updated - - -
Then what are they?
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
I think it's safe to assume that for the sake of this discussion we're discussing illegal migrants as that was in the title of the thread. A legal migrant can have either limited rights or full rights to move within the EU depending on their situation.
The reason I asked is precisely because the title doesn’t say it’s about illegal migrants.
If that is what’s being discussed we’re flogging a dead horse as if an individual enters any Schengen country illegally, crossing any border towards another Schengen country will not allow him to benefit from the rights of an EU native or a legal migrant and therefore any additional border crossing will be as illegal as his initial entry into the Schengen zone
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Yes, this. What I was asking is, how is it illegal to cross from Italy to France? I think the answer is that it isn’t, except if the crosser is illegally Italy in the first place, which boils down to whatever EU country the crosser is in or whatever border he crosses, the person is an illegal migrant.
Somewhat misleading headline by the BBC since what it’s actually about is illegal migrants to Europe travelling about in Europe.
Sent from my iPad using TZ-UK mobile app
The vast majority don't have passports, let alone a visa.
Illegal migrants
That includes refugees. How are you differentiating between them?
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
Posting Permissions
