Members of the UK Parliament have passed a bill that would allow the government to stop refugees in the middle of the sea so that asylum seekers could not enter the UK. The controversial bill was approved by the Home Office in the House of Commons with 298 votes in favour, 231 against, and a majority of 67 votes. The bill to intensify measures against immigrants in the UK has been widely criticized.
Preventing asylum seekers from entering the UK
Under the Nationality and Borders Bill, the Home Secretary can revoke the citizenship of non-white citizens without prior notice. It can also prevent asylum seekers from entering the UK. The Home Secretary has said that the bill intensifying measures against immigrants in the UK will help the country control its borders and prevent the entry of illegal immigrants.
Conflict of new immigration laws with human rights
Anti-immigration bills have tightened the anti-immigration law in the UK, and asylum seekers have to apply for asylum abroad, especially refugees arriving in small boats via the UK-France waterway. They will face more problems. In response to the UK government’s bill in the House of Commons, the Parliament’s Joint Committee on Human Rights warned that the Conservative government bill conflicted with human rights law.
Some MPs criticize the new immigration law.
Criticizing the tightening of anti-immigration laws in the UK, Imran Hussain, the Asian representative of the Labor Party, asked PM Boris Johnson when he would consider deporting people like him.
Imran Hussain, a Labor MP, said: “Yet now the Home Secretary’s Nationality and Borders Bill means she can revoke our British citizenship and deport us for even the most minor wrongdoings.” “Given the Government and the Home Office’s horrific track record with the treatment of minorities, the hostile environment and the Windrush scandals, let me ask the Prime Minister the burning question that is now on the lips of everyone from a BAME background right across the country. When is he coming for me?”
Controversial clauses of the new immigration law
From Priti Patel’s point of view, the Nationality and Borders Bill are a comprehensive, rigorous, and, of course, fair plan to address the challenge of illegal immigration. She opposed the bill accused killers and rapists fired by rejecting the bill also dismissed. With the help of the account intensifying measures against immigrants in the UK, in the future, people who have entered the UK illegally will be severely prosecuted, and their work will be considered worse than those who have entered legally.
The plan also envisions migrants who intend to cross the English Channel crossing the UK’s waters by British forces. The UK government bill provides for an opportunity for migrants who have already entered the country to be transferred to another country by the time their asylum application is processed and for the deportation of refugees to be more accessible.
Conservative party members angry over criticism
Several members of the ruling Conservative Party in parliament angrily responded to the Muslim MP’s remarks and asked him to retract them. The PM of the UK Boris Johnson said in response to Bradford’s comments in the House of Representatives:
“He should withdraw it, what he said is shameful and, as he knows full well, the borders bill does nothing of the kind, It helps us to fight the evil gangs who are predating on people’s willingness to cross the Channel in un-seaworthy boats, and I would have thought a sensible Labour Party would support it.”
Imran Hussein told parliament that 70 years ago, my grandfather came to the UK with thousands of others to help build the country, and he worked seven days a week in difficult conditions. He added that with the bill intensifying measures against immigrants in the UK, the Home Office could revoke our citizenship rights with the slightest mistake.
Restrict the holding of demonstrations under the new law
Restricting protests and intensifying their punishment is another focus of the government-approved bill. According to human rights organizations, the British government bill will turn the country into a police state by leaving the law enforcement and security forces free.
With the passage of this bill in the UK Parliament, where the majority of seats are in the hands of the Conservative ruling party, the treatment of the demonstrators will be similar to that in countries that the UK government constantly criticizes. The new law in the UK, which significantly increases the power of the police, judges and prisoners, is the law of dictatorial countries. Still, there is no serious opposition to this cruel law.
Human rights organizations criticize the new laws.
Proponents of her case have been working to make the actual transcript of this statement available online. Frances Webber, the vice-chair of the Institute of Race Relations, said:
“This amendment sends the message that certain citizens, despite being born and brought up in the UK and having no other home, remain migrants in this country.”
Maya Foa, the director of Reprieve, said: “This clause would give Priti Patel unprecedented power to remove your citizenship in secret, without even having to tell you, and effectively deny you an appeal. Under this regime, this amendment would afford a person accused of speeding more rights than someone at risk of being deprived of their British nationality. This once again shows how little regard this government has for the rule of law.”
Human rights activists and immigrant advocates say the recent deaths of 27 men, women and children on the British-French route, instead of opening up legal avenues for people to join their families in the UK, could be exploited to pass stricter laws on immigrants. They say the United States, UK and their allies invaded Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Libya, wreaking havoc on millions of people in those countries, but are unwilling to help them even in proportion to their share of the displacement.
