asylum policy is a balancing act between two risks.
the Second horizontal in the cup is the risk that the protection given to a person who does not deserve it. Person, that gratitude, rather than that with problems like crime.
the Second horizontal in the cup is the risk that the protection is not given to the person who needs it. A person who therefore had to suffer or die.
Finland you turn this and deportation after Iraq killed Ali is a manifestation of the fact that between 2015 and 2017 Finland chose the risk sensitivity of the latter.
Whether Ali’s case unique?
it’s Not. I am myself acquainted with a few corresponding negative asylum decision. Maybe that has made dozens, maybe a hundred, maybe a thousand. Maybe part of the turn used is killed, maybe not. We’ll never know.
however, we Know that when the number of asylum seekers in many times, also the iraqis conversion decisions were multiplied.
also, we Know that the reason for this was not only the asylum seekers ‘ stories, the credibility of the possible weakening of the. Finland took a conscious objective to harmonise the asylum policies of other Nordic level.
It meant the line tightening. Asylum seekers ‘ legal rights to make the cuts, the processing of applications was accelerated and maalinjaus changes were.
the Target was achieved. More than 11 000 iraqis have been turned.
the Same errors increased.
In 2015, the administrative court returned negative decisions to the latest reading of 0.2 percent for the reason that the immigration office had made a clear error of, for example, in interpretation of the law. In 2017 the proportion was four per cent. Four per cent means hundreds of law interpretation errors.
consider: Ali, who was killed in Iraq, and which turned on the EIT just Finland condemned, not these false detected decisions among them. The lowest negative asylum decision to go there through the whole process.
so What was this story that none of the authority of the immigration agency of the supreme administrative court does not have sufficient grounds for asylum?
Ali was sunni, which did the foe shiiavirkamiehestä, which allegedly belongs to one of the country’s most dangerous shi’ite-aserymistä i.e. Badr-brigade.
a High-ranking police, who investigate for a living, corruption and human rights crimes. It is a dangerous occupation of Baghdad in a town like during the civil war.
the Man who first threatened to kill me and then tried to kill him twice before he escaped to Finland.
All of these issues immigration agency considered as fact. Why the Lowest is for these reasons, in spite of see to be in need of protection?
First: Because of persecution as a reason not brightly been the Lowest ethnic origin, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.
the Lowest of the persecution of the reason was personal. And Finland had just tightened up on their personal reasons given protection. Just before Ali arrived in Finland, Finland removed the aliens act, the act, according to which asylum seekers should be granted a residence permit for humanitarian protection on the basis.
Second: Just before the Lowest arrival of Finland stated that the Baghdad security situation had improved. The city was no longer considered so dangerous that the only there living was seen as a sufficiently strong reason for asylum. This is true. Baghdad was in December 2017 calmer than December 2015. However, it was not a safe place for Ali.
Third: Because the immigration agency made a mistake. The lowest story should have been enough for the protection of all. The lowest background could have equated to a stack group, if we had wanted to. Turning Alia Finland knowingly take the risk that the price Ali paid ultimately with his life.
the Lowest death are primarily responsible for her killer. At the same time it is possible that without the Finnish asylum policy changes, he would still be alive. The life and death decisive so there wasn’t a finger that pulled the trigger but also the fact that Finland tightened the asylum provisions of the terms.
the asylum policy really is a policy. First ponder together, how generously the security is to be issued. The rules are changed and interpreted this reflection with you.
the mindset is contrary to international protection with the idea. Idea that importance should be only for the whether someone is potentially in mortal danger or not. And for example, how expensive helping society use.
But as has been seen, the finns are strongly disagree.
add a topic:
Finland turned an iraqi man who was killed soon after his return – the European court of human rights condemned the Finnish human rights treaty violation
the interior minister Ohisalo court of human rights decision: “People can never get it to restore in mortal danger”
Subscribe Yle newsletters!
Get Overeating the best content straight to your inbox!
Proceed to order