Примеры использования Expulsion process на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
What is the role of private security firms in the expulsion process?
Court intervention in expulsion processes: Title V, Chapter I.
The filing of an appeal does not automatically halt the expulsion process.
The implementation of this expulsion process is negotiated between the expelling State and the alien subject to the expulsion order.
The importance of cooperation between the States involved in an expulsion process was underlined.
There was no reason to consider that during the expulsion process an alien should be deprived of certain economic, social and cultural rights, such as those mentioned by the Special Rapporteur in paragraph 17.
Every year it concludes that there is no systematic use of excessive force in the expulsion process.
In addition, the Minister of Immigration's role in the expulsion process is neither independent nor impartial.
Mr. Barrero claims a violation of article 14, paragraph 3(a),(c) and(d)for the lack of procedural guarantees during the expulsion process.
On the issues of arbitrary detention and expulsion process within articles 9, 13 and 14, counsel argues that the author was detained for five years, under mandatory and automatic terms, before his detention review.
The draft articles would then simply guarantee the protection of all applicable orrelevant human rights during the expulsion process.
Thus, even if the exercise of some of their rights was somehow limited,aliens did not cease to enjoy all their rights during the expulsion process, and any limitations on those rights must be restricted to what was necessary for the protection of the essential and legitimate interests of the State and must be subject to due process. .
At the present time, there are no bilateral ormultilateral agreements allowing transit States to participate in the expulsion process.
While it was a State's sovereign right not only to expel an alien whose presence was deemed undesirable or unacceptable, butalso to refuse the admission of aliens to its territory, the expulsion process must be conducted in accordance with the procedures laid down by the law of the country in question and with international legal standards protecting the rights of such persons.
The Commission must decide which core rights specifically linked to alien status must be respected without fail during the expulsion process.
A provision such as draft article 11, which protected expellees from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment,was vital because it was essential both to protect persons during the expulsion process and to ensure that they were not sent to a country where there was a serious risk of their being subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.
The Commission had made significant and welcome progress towards ensuring that the rights of individuals were a central consideration in the expulsion process.
A State may deprive the alien of travel documents during(1)the pendency of a request for a residence permit made after the alien has entered the State's territory;(2) the expulsion process, unless the alien agrees voluntarily to depart; or(3) the deportation process. .
Under the topic of expulsion of aliens, the relationship between expulsion and human rights was an issue of great importance requiring thorough consideration, including analysis of a broader range of legal literature on migration and human rights andan in-depth study of the case law of international bodies competent to review the observance of human rights by States in the expulsion process.
The general principle of respect for the dignity of any alien subject to expulsion is of particular importance in view of the fact that aliens are not infrequently subjected to humiliating treatment in the course of the expulsion process offensive to their dignity as human beings, without necessarily amounting to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.
It seemed essential, for example, to include a provision on the need to guarantee the right to recourse to a court of law so as to ensure that persons who had been expelled orwere being expelled benefited from procedural safeguards during the expulsion process.
The prohibition under draft article 15 of discrimination based on"status" is especially problematic, given that the decision toremove an alien and the amount of process and range of potential relief from removal afforded during the expulsion process very much depend on, for example, whether the alien has been admitted to the United States or is a lawful permanent resident.
The 1977 Declaration on the Human Rights of Individuals Who are not Nationals of the Country in which They Live did not contemplate that those rights could be taken away simply through the commencement of an expulsion process.
The point was made that better cooperation between the States concerned, including the State ofnationality of the alien, would not only facilitate the expulsion process but also limit the duration of detention.
In 2012, the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants and the Special Rapporteur on violence against women sent a communication concerning alleged mass deportations of migrants andserious violations of their human rights in the expulsion process.
The title of draft article 19 should be changed to"Detention of an alien subject to expulsion" and a new paragraph 1 should be inserted,to read as follows:"Detention may only be used if it is necessary to prepare and/or carry out the expulsion process, in particular where there is a risk of absconding or where the alien avoids or hampers expulsion. .
From the discussion within the Commission, it remained unclear whether the issue ofdeportation would be considered, for the purpose of the draft articles, as being part of the expulsion process or not.
The formulation"alien[s] subject to expulsion" used throughout the draft articles is sufficiently broad in meaning to cover,according to context, any alien facing any phase of the expulsion process.
Indicate the steps taken to ensure the prosecution of perpetrators of violence and discrimination against disadvantaged groups of women,including as regards the reported abuses perpetrated by Angolan security forces during the expulsion process of migrant women.
The Commission concluded that the cases involving the separation of families and children from their parents did not violate international law because of insufficient proof of a pattern of frequent instances of forcible family separation orinadequate protection of children in connection with the detention and expulsion processes.