FeaturedUK

Asylum seeker’s 6-word verdict on Labour’s one in, one out deal | UK | News

Asylum seekers wanting to cross the English Channel in small boats say Labour’s new ‘one in, one out’ deterrent is not putting them off making the perilous journey. The “landmark” pilot scheme with France sees migrants in Britain returned across the Channel in exchange for London granting asylum to someone who has a legitimate family connection in the UK.

Some 26 migrants have been returned to France from the UK since the scheme started in August, with 18 coming the other way. Both the Conservatives and Reform UK have warned the returns deal does not go far enough. In northern France, asylum seekers hoping to reach the UK appear to be unconcerned.

In a six-word verdict on Labour’s “groundbreaking” deterrence scheme, Mali Ali, from Somalia, told The Sun: “Everyone will still try to come.”

The 22-year-old spoke to the newspaper from the New Jungle camp close to the town of Loon-Plage.

Ali Farah, 24, who is also from Somalia, has a sister in the UK and said the deterrence “hasn’t put ­anyone off”.

Safa Ali, a 35-year-old Iraqi former soldier, added “people will take their chance.”

According to The Sun, signs detailing the ‘one in, one out’ returns deal have been put up at the camp.

Reportedly issued by charity Refugee Legal Support, the advice includes: “Important! Only a very small number of people can be detained to be transferred under this scheme.”

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood last week said flights returning asylum seekers to France were “ramping up”.

She said: “We are sending out a clear message: if you come here illegally, you face being detained and removed, so think twice before making that journey.”

On Thursday, Britain’s border security commander Martin Hewitt admitted only 12 members of staff from the Home Office are working on the returns deal.

Almost 11,000 migrants have arrived since the scheme was launched and Mr Hewitt said he finds the numbers “frustrating and really challenging”.

But on a positive note, he told MPs sitting on the Commons home affairs select committee: “I am convinced that the plan, the sort of cross-spectrum plan that we have in place, is a plan that will deliver, but we need to keep pushing and delivering that plan.”

Source link

Related Posts

On April 12, 2021, a Knoxville police officer shot and killed an African American male student in a bathroom at Austin-East High School. The incident caused social unrest, and community members began demanding transparency about the shooting, including the release of the officer’s body camera video. On the evening of April 19, 2021, the Defendant and a group of protestors entered the Knoxville City-County Building during a Knox County Commission meeting. The Defendant activated the siren on a bullhorn and spoke through the bullhorn to demand release of the video. Uniformed police officers quickly escorted her and six other individuals out of the building and arrested them for disrupting the meeting. The court upheld defendants’ conviction for “disrupting a lawful meeting,” defined as “with the intent to prevent [a] gathering, … substantially obstruct[ing] or interfere[ing] with the meeting, procession, or gathering by physical action or verbal utterance.” Taken in the light most favorable to the State, the evidence shows that the Defendant posted on Facebook the day before the meeting and the day of the meeting that the protestors were going to “shut down” the meeting. During the meeting, the Defendant used a bullhorn to activate a siren for approximately twenty seconds. Witnesses at trial described the siren as “loud,” “high-pitched,” and “alarming.” Commissioner Jay called for “Officers,” and the Defendant stated through the bullhorn, “Knox County Commission, your meeting is over.” Commissioner Jay tried to bring the meeting back into order by banging his gavel, but the Defendant continued speaking through the bullhorn. Even when officers grabbed her and began escorting her out of the Large Assembly Room, she continued to disrupt the meeting by yelling for the officers to take their hands off her and by repeatedly calling them “murderers.” Commissioner Jay called a ten-minute recess during the incident, telling the jury that it was “virtually impossible” to continue the meeting during the Defendant’s disruption. The Defendant herself testified that the purpose of attending the meeting was to disrupt the Commission’s agenda and to force the Commission to prioritize its discussion on the school shooting. Although the duration of the disruption was about ninety seconds, the jury was able to view multiple videos of the incident and concluded that the Defendant substantially obstructed or interfered with the meeting. The evidence is sufficient to support the Defendant’s conviction. Defendant also claimed the statute was “unconstitutionally vague as applied to her because the statute does not state that it includes government meetings,” but the appellate court concluded that she had waived the argument by not raising it adequately below. Sean F. McDermott, Molly T. Martin, and Franklin Ammons, Assistant District Attorneys General, represent the state.

From State v. Every, decided by the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals…

1 of 83