DOCSLIB.ORG

Detention of Asylum Seekers Detention of Asylum Seekers Analysis of Norway’S International Obligations, Domestic Law and Practice

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Detention of Asylum Seekers Detention of Asylum Seekers Analysis of Norway’S International Obligations, Domestic Law and Practice Analysis of Norway’s international obligations, domestic law and practice Detention of Asylum Seekers Detention of Asylum Seekers Analysis of Norway’s international obligations, domestic law and practice © NOAS 2014 Norsk Organisasjon for Asylsøkere www.noas.no [email protected] Published with funds from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Table of contents FOREWORD ......................................................................................................................................................5 ABBREVIATIONS ..............................................................................................................................................6 1 INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................................................7 1.1 Summary of main findings and recommendations ..............................................................................7 1.2 Background ........................................................................................................................................... 13 1.3 The scope and structure of the study .................................................................................................. 15 1.4 Methodology .........................................................................................................................................17 1.5 Definition of terms .............................................................................................................................. 20 1.5.1 Asylum seeker ............................................................................................................................ 20 1.5.2 Arrest ......................................................................................................................................... 20 1.5.3 Detention ....................................................................................................................................21 2 INTERNATIONAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK ...................................................................................................23 2.1 Reception conditions and the freedom of movement ........................................................................23 2.2 Alternatives to detention ......................................................................................................................25 2.3 Immigration detention as a non-penal measure ............................................................................... 26 2.4 Non-penalisation for illegal entry or presence ....................................................................................28 2.4.1 Penalties .................................................................................................................................... 30 2.4.2 Illegal entry or presence ............................................................................................................ 30 2.4.3 Coming directly.......................................................................................................................... 30 2.4.4 Without delay ..............................................................................................................................32 2.4.5 Good cause .................................................................................................................................33 2.5 Access to asylum procedure from detention ......................................................................................33 2.6 Safeguards against arbitrary detention................................................................................................34 2.6.1 Permissible grounds ..................................................................................................................34 2.6.2 The principle of legal certainty ...................................................................................................37 2.6.3 The principles of necessity, proportionality and reasonableness ............................................37 2.6.3.1 Global human rights regime...........................................................................................38 2.6.3.2 European human rights regime .....................................................................................39 2.6.3.2.1 Immigration detention .....................................................................................39 2.6.3.2.2 Detention based on other grounds ................................................................42 2.6.3.3 EU law regime ................................................................................................................ 42 2.6.4 Permissible duration ................................................................................................................. 44 2.6.5 Procedural safeguards ................................................................................................................45 2.6.5.1 Reasons for arrest ...........................................................................................................45 2.6.5.2 Legal Assistance .............................................................................................................47 2.6.5.3 Review of detention ....................................................................................................... 48 2.7 Detention of children ...........................................................................................................................50 3 NORWEGIAN LAW AND PRACTICE ......................................................................................................... 53 3.1 Reception conditions and the freedom of movement ........................................................................53 3.1.1 Reception conditions generally .................................................................................................. 53 3.1.2 The freedom of movement ........................................................................................................54 3.1.3 Summary..................................................................................................................................... 55 3.2 Alternatives to detention ......................................................................................................................56 3.2.1 Summary.....................................................................................................................................57 3.3 Immigration detention as a non-penal measure ................................................................................57 3.3.1 The principle of separation ........................................................................................................58 3.3.2 Crimmigration ............................................................................................................................59 3.3.3 Summary....................................................................................................................................60 3.4 Non-penalisation for illegal entry or presence ...................................................................................60 3.4.1 Applicable domestic law ...........................................................................................................60 3.4.2 Domestic practice ..................................................................................................................... 62 3.4.2.1 Lack of knowledge of the international obligation ........................................................62 3.4.2.2 Misinterpretation of the term ‘coming directly’ ........................................................... 64 3.4.2.3 Misinterpretation of the term ‘without delay’ ................................................................65 3.4.3 Implications of penalisation ..................................................................................................... 68 3.4.4 Practice in the UK, Denmark and Finland ................................................................................68 3.4.5 Summary.................................................................................................................................... 70 3.5 Access to asylum procedure from detention ..................................................................................... 70 3.5.1 Summary.....................................................................................................................................71 3.6 Safeguards against arbitrary detention................................................................................................71 3.6.1 Permissible grounds ..................................................................................................................71 3.6.1.1 Crime prevention .............................................................................................................73 3.6.1.2 Summary .........................................................................................................................73 3.6.2 The principle of legal certainty ...................................................................................................74 3.6.2.1 Uncertainty in the standard of proof ..............................................................................74 3.6.2.2 Uncertainty in assessing the risk of absconding ...........................................................75 3.6.2.3 Uncertainty in applicable
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ANNUAL REPORT 2 014 COPY LAYOUT PRINT PHOTOS the Norwegian Newmarketing AS PJ-Trykk, Oslo Lars A
    ANNUAL REPORT 2 014 COPY LAYOUT PRINT PHOTOS The Norwegian Newmarketing AS PJ-trykk, Oslo Lars A. Lien Bureau for the Marte Garmann Investigation of Ruben Skarsvåg Police Affairs Anders Nordmeland Getty Images Politiforum iStock Photo Politihøgskolen A police officer should view control and investigation of his activities as a natural part of his professional engagement. CONTENTS FOREWORD Foreword 3 access by the accused. In its work on able for the first time to meet all of the the case, the Bureau has been criticised first-year students at the Police University 10 years since the Bureau was established 4 by lawyers and the media for imposing College. The Bureau held lectures for such radical measures. It has been students in Stavern, Oslo, Kongsvinger Approval of Overtime 10 pointed out that the Bureau uses “police and Bodø. In our view, it is important that methods”. The Bureau is an investigation police employees from the basic course Custody/Incidents involving Persons in Police Custody 11 agency, not a supervisory body. It is the onwards are aware of society’s need for Police Methodology and Methodological Development 14 responsibility of the Bureau to investigate control of the police’s use of its powers. and, when there are grounds for so doing, A police officer should view control Notification of Complaints 15 to prosecute employees of the police and investigation of his/her activities and prosecuting authority. In questions as a natural part of his/her professional “The police do not answer my enquiries” 16 regarding law enforcement, we act within engagement. the framework of the legislation adopted Misuse of Police Records 17 by the politicians and under the control The Bureau wishes to commemorate of the courts.
    [Show full text]
  • Nordic Startup Awards
    NORDIC STARTUP AWARDS FACT SHEET NORDIC STARTUP AWARDS A LETTER FROM THE CEO Dear Friends, We live in a time where entrepreneurship has an important role to play. You can say that we live in a startup era where new companies will impact society and legislation faster than ever before. The Nordic region with its tradition of high level innovation, creativity as well as a strong entrepreneurial spirit can and should play an important part in this new era. Collaboration has never been more important! We firmly believe that in the Nordic Startup scene, nationality is not important. But the ex- change of talent and technology is crucial. We want the Nordic startup- scene to be compa- rable to the scenes in London and Berlin, and we believe the best way to do this, is by closer co-operation between the Nordic countries. The awards stand to represent the entire startup ecosystem - from the startups themselves to the people behind them, and the organisations that work alongside to make the great “We firmly believe that in the things possible. Nordic Startup scene, nationality is not important. But the exchange of Kim Balle CEO and Co-Founder talent and technology is crucial.” KIM BALLE, CEO 2 NORDIC STARTUP AWARDS CONNECTING staKEHOLDERS IN THE NORDIC startup ECOSYstEM The aim is to inspire, stimulate and recognize entrepreneurship throughout the Nordic region, whilst connecting a community of startup enthusiasts, serial entrepreneurs and mentors from diverse and complementing backgrounds. 3 NORDIC STARTUP AWARDS 3 PARTICIPANT COUNTRIES EXECUTIVE Sweden SUMMARY Norway Iceland The Nordic Startup Awards is a unique series of events in the Nordic countries.
    [Show full text]
  • Lillestrøm Sentralarrest Besøksrapport 2015
    Sivilombudsmannens forebyggingsenhet mot tortur og umenneskelig behandling ved frihetsberøvelse BESØKSRAPPORT Lillestrøm sentralarrest 2. februar 2015 Innhold 1 Om Sivilombudsmannens forebyggingsmandat .............................................................................. 2 2 Sammendrag ................................................................................................................................... 2 3 Generell informasjon om arrester i Romerike politidistrikt ............................................................ 4 4 Gjennomføring av besøket .............................................................................................................. 5 5 Funn og anbefalinger ....................................................................................................................... 5 5.1 Generelt ............................................................................................................................... 5 5.2 Hendelser og tvangsbruk ..................................................................................................... 6 5.2.1 Alvorlige hendelser .......................................................................................................... 6 5.2.2 Bruk av tvangsmidler ....................................................................................................... 7 5.2.3 Visitasjon ......................................................................................................................... 7 5.2.4 Dublering ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Administrative and Statistical Areas English Version – SOSI Standard 4.0
    Administrative and statistical areas English version – SOSI standard 4.0 Administrative and statistical areas Norwegian Mapping Authority [email protected] Norwegian Mapping Authority June 2009 Page 1 of 191 Administrative and statistical areas English version – SOSI standard 4.0 1 Applications schema ......................................................................................................................7 1.1 Administrative units subclassification ....................................................................................7 1.1 Description ...................................................................................................................... 14 1.1.1 CityDistrict ................................................................................................................ 14 1.1.2 CityDistrictBoundary ................................................................................................ 14 1.1.3 SubArea ................................................................................................................... 14 1.1.4 BasicDistrictUnit ....................................................................................................... 15 1.1.5 SchoolDistrict ........................................................................................................... 16 1.1.6 <<DataType>> SchoolDistrictId ............................................................................... 17 1.1.7 SchoolDistrictBoundary ...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 97552124.Pdf (1.020Mb)
    Between a rock and a hard place: Undocumented migrants in Norway Amanda Haugen Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the Master Degree in Philosophy Department of Social Anthropology University of Bergen June 2012 Acknowledgement First of all I want to thank my informants for trusting and letting me be part of their lives. Thank you for sharing your experiences with me. Very special thanks to my supervisor, Tone Bringa, thank you very much for your supervising and your productive and detailed comments. I want to thank the initiators of the project “Provisions of Welfare to ‘Irregular Migrants” (PROVIR), especially Christine Jacobsen for her guidelines I want to thank my very good friend for her encouragement, her support and for putting up with me while I was conducting fieldwork and writing the paper. I would like to thank all my fellow students in the program, thank you for our conversations and feedbacks. I want to thank those who read my paper and gave me comments, thank you very much for that. Amanda Haugen Bergen, June 2012 i Table of Contents Chapter one .......................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1 Who are the undocumented migrants? ................................................................................... 1 Terminology ..........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Deportation Raises Serious Debate
    (Periodicals postage paid in Seattle, WA) TIME-DATED MATERIAL — DO NOT DELAY Travel Taste of Norway Let’s go to Dinner tonight: Homemade Land of the Vikings in Ingen vinter varer evig, Pennsylvania! ingen vår hopper over sin tur. fiskekaker Read more on page 9 – Hal Borland Read more on page 8 Norwegian American Weekly Vol. 122 No. 4 January 28, 2011 Established May 17, 1889 • Formerly Western Viking and Nordisk Tidene $1.50 per copy Norway.com News Find more at Deportation raises serious debate www.norway.com Rejected refugee News of Norway Marie Amelie Legatum Institute named Nor- way as the most prosperous deported to Russia, country in the world on its prosperity index, which ranks and media storm countries based on 89 factors raises questions in economy, entrepreneurship, governance, education, health, about Norway’s safety, personal freedom and asylum rules social capital. Denmark, Swe- den and Finland were named in the top 10. STAFF CO M PI L ATION (blog.norway.com/category/ Norwegian American Weekly news) On Jan. 24, Medina Salamova Business (known in Norway as Marie Ame- In the fourth quarter of 2010, lia) was ordered on to a flight to the number of bankruptcies in Russia, after losing her appeals to Norway was 1,035, which is a remain in Norway after spending a decline of 12.5 percent com- third of her life in the country. She pared with the same quarter in was accompanied onto the flight 2009. In 2010 as a whole, the by two police officers and her boy- number of bankruptcies went down by 11.5 percent compared friend Eivind Trædal.
    [Show full text]
  • GLASS BORDERS Johan Schimanski
    antiAtlas Journal #2 - Spring 2018 GLASS BORDERS Johan Schimanski Johan Schimanski is a literary scholar and border researcher who has participated in the EU and Norwegian research projects EUBORDERSCAPES and Border Aesthetics. He is Professor of Comparative Literature and Head of Research for the Department of Literature, Area Studies and European Languages at the University of Oslo. He is also part-time research Professor of Cultural Encounters at the University of Eastern Finland, as part of the Bordering, Mobilities and Cultural Encounters (BOMOCULT) research area. Together with members of the Border Aesthetics research project coordinated by UiT The Arctic University of Norway, he has recently published the collaborative book Border Aesthetics: Concepts and Intersections, Berghahn, 2017. Keywords: Literature, narratives, aesthetics, trauma, deportation, borders, research, migrations, unregistered migrants, borderscapes, in/visibility, internment. A photo taken by the author through the window of a plane taking off from Oslo (Gardermoen) airport in March 2017. The deportation holding facility (Politiets utlendingsinternat) at Trandum is partly visible in the lower left corner of the window. To quote this paper: Schimanski, Johan, "Glass Borders", antiAtlas Journal #2, Spring 2018, Online, URL: https://www.antiatlas-journal.net/02-glass-borders, last consultation on octobre 25, 2018 I. Borderscapes and borderscaping a. Divisions of the sensible 1 One of the strengths of the ‘borderscape’ concept, as it has been developed in recent work on borders and bordering (Brambilla 2015b, Brambilla et al. 2015, dell’Agnese and Amilhat Szary 2015, Rajaram and Grundy-Warr 2007, Schimanski 2015), is that it brings into the discussion of borders central aesthetic concerns: seeing and shaping.
    [Show full text]
  • SCHENGEN EVALUATION PHS Forskning 2020: 1
    STEIN ULRICH - MARTIN NØKLEBERG - HELENE O. I. GUNDHUS SCHENGEN EVALUATION SchengenNemporiatur evaluation simusa is qui a mechanism omnimendi for STEIN ULRICH - MARTIN NØKLEBERG - HELENE O. I. GUNDHUS assessingquiae pa the verrorro compliance molupta with tusapisti Schengen rulesomnienis and regulations et litiunt byestet all participatingommolor countries.eperatio etThis eos report as cuscite provides mporit a brief SCHENGEN EVALUATION introductionut autet ad to maximil the origin et andquostisitas framework of ateSchengen aut hillese evaluation. diataquias Since dolori the first – AN EDUCATIONAL EXPERIENCE mechanismcomnis molleceseque was set upaut inharci 1998 aut all Schengenipis dolorrum countries quatas have remporibusbeen evaluated THE EXAMPLE OF NORWAY moreaut than ium once.doluptur audam etur ma Thecomnihit study looks fuga. at Itatur, Schengen ommolup evaluation tati- as istan hita educational ex eum voluptur experience. secupta The -aim wastion to analysecullabo. if evaluationXimolla quaectatur, has improved theeiumenet quality of erro service, mi,.Ihicias raised sequis the level et of professionalismoptatin velestem and libusant improved ullaborae educa - tionalvolendae activities consequ in the idempor police ehenisor border guardmaximusdant service of parit,a Schengen ide solorio state. min- Thecipi study tisciatur uses sin Norway cust adas euman example quo andtoribus argues qui that aut Schengen arcipid istotateevaluation es has hadsamenda a very positiveapid moloria effect spicien on how imu -the policesant in quiandic
    [Show full text]
  • TRACKING the TRAFFICKER? -A Qualitative Study of the Investigation of Trafficking in Human
    TRACKING THE TRAFFICKER? -A Qualitative Study of the Investigation of Trafficking in Human Beings in Norway. Lone Charlotte Pettersen MASTER I POLITIVITENSKAP / MASTER IN POLICE SCIENCE 2012-2015 ABSTRACT Title: The investigation of human trafficking in Norway Student: Lone Charlotte Pettersen Supervisor: Dr Maren Eline Kleiven Supervisor at the Norwegian Police University College: Dr Bjørn Barland Submitted: June 2015 Trafficking in human beings (THB) is a vast global problem where the cynic eXploitation of fellow human beings is limited only by the eXploiter’s creativity and cruelty. This paper looks upon the phenomena of THB from a law enforcement perspective, thus defining and problematizing it as a crime against humanity and a crime against international and national laws. Consequently, understanding the compleXity of the crime enables the investigator and prosecutor to better conduct criminal investigations to uncover, prevent and prosecute the crime of THB. Norway is a recipient country, and to some eXtent also a transit country, which means that the victims of THB in Norway are mostly from foreign countries. However, the numbers on THB are not reliable when it comes to describing the reality of victims that have yet to be identified by Norwegian authorities. Thus, the majority of THB-cases reported, investigated and receiving convictions, are THB for sexual exploitation. Trafficking for other types of exploitation is widely under-reported. At the same time, research on the field of trafficking in Norway has focused mainly on seXual eXploitation. However, this paper does not distinguish between the different types of exploitation. Rather, it focuses on how the police investigate the phenomena in order to be able to prosecute the traffickers.
    [Show full text]
  • 104528/EU XXV. GP Eingelangt Am 23/05/16
    104528/EU XXV. GP Eingelangt am 23/05/16 Council of the European Union Brussels, 23 May 2016 (OR. en) 13340/05 DCL 1 SCH-EVAL 93 FRONT 170 COMIX 676 DECLASSIFICATION of document: ST 13340/05 RESTREINT UE dated: 20 October 2005 new status: Public Subject: Schengen evaluation of the Nordic countries - NORWAY: Report on air borders Delegations will find attached the declassified version of the above document. The text of this document is identical to the previous version. 13340/05 DCL 1 kal DGF 2A EN www.parlament.gv.at RESTREINT UE COUNCIL OF Brussels, 20 October 2005 THE EUROPEAN UNION 13340/05 RESTREINT UE SCH-EVAL 93 FRONT 170 COMIX 676 REPORT from : the Schengen Evaluation Committee to: the Schengen Evaluation Working Party Subject : Schengen evaluation of the Nordic countries - NORWAY: Report on air borders 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 4 2. General information .................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Strategy ............................................................................................................................. 4 2.2 Organisational structure .................................................................................................... 5 2.3 Operational effectiveness .................................................................................................. 7 2.4 Risk analysis, intelligence and data-flow
    [Show full text]
  • Folketellingen 1. Desember 1950 : F￸rste Hefte
    NORGES OFFISIELLE STATISTIKK XI. 145. FOLKETELLINGEN 1. DESEMBER 1950 Første hefte Folkemengde og areal i de ymse administrative inndelinger av landet Hussamlinger i herredene Population census Desember 1, 1950 First volume Population and area of the various administrative divisions of the country Agglomerations in rural municipalities STATISTISK SENTRALBYRÅ CENTRAL BUREAU OF STATISTICS OF NORWAY OSLO 1953 Disse heftene inneholder resultatene av Folketellingen 3. desember 1946: Første hefte. Folkemengde og areal i de forskjellige deler av landet. Bebodde øyer. Hus- samlinger. Annet » Trossamfunn. Tredje » Folkemengden etter kjønn, alder og ekteskapelig stilling, etter levevei og etter fødested i de enkelte herreder og byer. Fjerde » Folkemengde etter kjønn, alder og ekteskapelig stilling. Riket og fylkene. — Fremmede statsborgere. Femte » Boligstatistikk. Sjette » Yrkesstatistikk. Detaljerte oppgaver. These volumes contain the results of the population census of December 3, 1946: First volume. Population and area of the various sections of the country. Inhabited islands. Agglomerations in rural municipalities. Second » Religious affiliations. Third » Population by sex, age and marital status, by occupation and by place of birth; for rural and town municipalities. Fourth » Population by sex, age and marital status. The whole country and by counties. — Foreigners. Fifth » Housing statistics. Sixth >> Occupational statistics. Detailed data. Forord. I løpet av høsten 1951 og første halvår 1952 offentliggjorde Byrået en del foreløpige hovedtall for de fleste av de emner det var spurt om ved Folketellingen 1. desember 1950. Disse foreløpige tallene var beregnet på grunnlag av et utvalg på 2 prosent av folketellingslistene. Dette første hefte av Folketellingen 1950 inneholder de første endelige tall for folkemengde og areal i en del administrative inndelinger og for hussamlinger i herredene.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2011 Annual Report 2011
    Norwegian Helsinki Committee Annual Report 2011 Annual Report 2011 Norwegian Helsinki Committee Established in 1977 The Norwegian Helsinki Committee (NHC) is a non-governmental organisation that works to promote respect for human rights, nationally and internationally. Its work is based on the conviction that documentation and active promotion of human rights by civil society is needed for states to secure human rights, at home and in other countries. The work of the NHC is based on the Helsinki Declaration, which was signed by 35 European and North American states at the Conference for Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) in 1975. The declaration states that respect for human rights is a key factor in the development of peace and understanding between states. The main focal areas of the NHC are the countries of Europe, North America and Central Asia. The NHC works irrespective of ideology or political system in these countries and maintains political neutrality. How wE work Human rigHts monitoring and reporting Through monitoring and reporting on problematic human rights situations in specific countries, the NHC sheds light on violations of human rights. The NHC places particular emphasis on civil and political rights, including the fundamental freedoms of expression, belief, association and assembly. On-site research and close co-operation with key civil society actors are our main working methods. The NHC has expertise in election observation and has sent numerous observer missions to elections over the last two decades. support of democratic processes By sharing knowledge and with financial assistance, the NHC supports local initiatives for the promotion of an independent civil society and public institutions as well as a free media.
    [Show full text]