Примеры использования Expulsion should на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
The competent authority reviewing the decision of expulsion should ideally be a court.
In this case, expulsion should preferably be to the State of dominant nationality.
In the same vein, Martini wrote: it appears to us impossible,practically speaking, to list accurately the cases where expulsion should be invoked.
Expulsion should be based on legitimate grounds, such as public order and national security.
The Umpire, while recognizing the existence of"a general power to expel foreigners, at least for cause," indicated that"expulsion should only be resorted to in extreme instances.
Expulsion should be based on legitimate grounds, as defined in the domestic law of the expelling State.
The complainant maintains that the execution of the order of expulsion should be deemed to constitute at least cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment on the part of the Swedish authorities.
The expulsion should be carried out in conformity with international human rights law governing the property rights and other economic interests of aliens.
According to another view,the proposed draft article A on disguised expulsion should be deleted and replaced by a provision setting out the conditions to be met for the expulsion of an alien.
With regard to his third report, the Special Rapporteur observed that it was not desirable to deal with the issue of dual nationals inconnection with draft article 4, as protection from expulsion should be provided in respect of any State of which a person was a national.
Aliens detained pending expulsion should normally be accommodated in facilities specifically designed for that purpose.
It was not desirable to deal with the issue of dual nationals inconnection with draft article 4, as protection from expulsion should be provided in respect of any State of which a person was a national.
Furthermore, expulsion should be carried out only after due consultation and exchange of information with the expellee's home country.
In the Paquet Case,the Umpire emphasized the requirement that there be a valid ground for an expulsion by stating that expulsion should only be resorted to for reasons related to the preservation of public order or for"considerations of a high political character.
All cases of expulsion should be decided upon on an individual basis and States should ensure that no collective expulsions take place.
In 1975 the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe adopted a recommendation providing that the principle of legality with respect to the grounds for an expulsion should also apply to measures taken against aliens unlawfully present in the territory of a State.
It was also suggested that an expulsion should be carried out only after due consultation and exchange of information with the home country of the individual expelled.
The UNHCR Sub-Committee of the Whole on International Protection has provided a restrictive interpretation of the concepts of"national security" and"public order" and emphasized that expulsion should only be resorted to when it is the only means for protecting the legitimate interest of the State.
According to another view,the grounds for expulsion should be limited to public order and national security, at least as a matter of progressive development.
Support was expressed for clarifying that paragraph 3 only applied to aliens who were nationals of a State engaged in an armed conflict with the expelling State,and that collective expulsion should be limited to aliens who were, collectively, clearly engaged in activities hostile to the expelling State.
The point was made that any expulsion should be based on legitimate grounds, as defined in domestic law, which must not be contrary to international law.
The Special Rapporteur has no objection to the request that"the commentary to article 5 should make clear that the grounds for expulsion should be considered at the time of the decision rather than the time of removal", and suggests that the Commission consider that request favourably.
It was stated that expulsion should be based on legitimate grounds, such as public order and national security, as defined in the domestic laws of the expelling State.
Bearing in mind the proposals made andthe various views expressed, it might be stipulated that expulsion should take place"in a context of respect for the relevant rules of international law, in particular the fundamental rights of the human person, and the present draft articles.
In addition, one State noted that expulsion should be based on legitimate grounds such as public safety and national security, as defined in the domestic law, while another maintained that it should be possible to expel aliens not lawfully present for that reason alone.
The United Kingdom fully agrees that mass expulsion should be prohibited, but domestic legislation specifically allows the deportation/removal of family members.
The Assembly believes that forced expulsion should only be used as a last resort, that it should be reserved for persons who put up clear and continued resistance and that it can be avoided if genuine efforts are made to provide deportees with personal and supervised assistance in preparing for their departure.
The commentaries to the articles on both disguised expulsion and collective expulsion should also distinguish those types of unlawful expulsion from a government policy of intolerance towards aliens that forced them to leave the State in question en masse.
Draft article B1 stated the requirement that expulsion should take place only pursuant to a decision reached in accordance with law, while draft article C1 listed several procedural rights, most of which had their source not only in national laws but also in treaty law.
It was maintained that, in the twenty-first century, collective expulsions should be treated as prima facie prohibited.