Vacation to Europe

It really depands on the officer

Tim,

I really think it depends on the officers. There is a small chance that your asylee status would be in jeopardy. One view among the staff of the INS general counsel\'s office is that the use of national passport constitutes reavailing of protection. But this is not an unanimous view. The problems can arise during readmission or any adjustment interview. I personally do not think they will occur. But there is just the risk of getting a real stickler officer.
 
Schengen Visa (Advice from former Asylee--GC Holder)

Attention Asylees:
Visa-free entry into Schengen area with RTD is granted through Germany. Once in Germany(usually Frankfurt but same thru any city) travel by train to any European capital. One is technically required to obtain visa for other schengen countries but once legal entry is done thru Germany there isn\'t much they can do about it. If you wish to test this, try to obtain visa at German consulate. It will be refused as RTD holders are exempt.FYI Visa-free entry into Switzerland also possible.
Anonymous.
 
No Title

I agree on most of what you said. But I don\'t think asylee status would be in jeopardy whatsoever. The worst trouble would be a lawsuit. You said some people at INS general counsel\'s office think that the use of national passport constitutes reavailing of protection. Do you have some documentation for us on this? Just curious.
 
No Title

Also please define "use of national passport". To get a visa? or to buy a can of beer?
 
meaning of protection

Below is my opinion.

The law refers to protection. What does passports do? They give you protection when you travel. If you are in country X and have entered on a country Y passport voluntarily, then you have obtained protection from country Y. Officials at country X record you as a national of that country. If you get into trouble (getting arrested, hospitalized for serious illness or die), country X is required by international law to notify country Y immediately. Diplomats from country Y will offer help to you (a form of protection?) by among other things, visiting you in jail/hospital, referring you to local attorney and taking care of any remains. If something happens in country x and foreigners need to be evacuated, then guess what, you are sent to a plane flown in by country y. That is protection. Since you have used the passport voluntarily and without coercion, a case can be made that you now desire protection from country Y. When you applied for asylum, you claimed in effect that you do not want/cannot get protection from you country, but you just did that.
 
lawsuits

You said "The worst trouble would be a lawsuit". You implied that it is easy to beat the government in court. Think again. Go to the websites for the circuit courts of appeal and search recent cases. You will see how many lawsuits against the INS are actually successful. The chances are almost as low as getting accepted to Harvard Medical School.
 
No Title

I think you raised issues worth considering here.

I am not an expert on those issues but I do have lots of doubts and questions about what you said. First of all, what international law requires the government of Country X to notify officials from Country Y if you\'re in any trouble? Can you point out some specific agreement? I know that in U.S. everybody on its land is ruled by its law, no matter if you\'re a citizen or an alien. The government of your nationality can\'t interfere with the U.S. law.

About evacuation, will anybody be forced out of a country when evacuation occurs? That sounds like deportation to me. And in U.S. when somebody is in the procedure of deportation, the subject under deportation can leave and go to any country he can. The U.S. won\'t mind where he goes as long as he leaves the U.S. I think in Western European countries it should be similar.
 
one example

Article 36(a) of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 1963, 21 UST 77, TIAS 6820, 596 UNST 261, a multilateral treaty to which many, but not all, countries are party provides that consular officers shall be free to communicate with their nationals and to have access to them. Article 36(b) provides that the foreign authorities shall inform the consular officer or the arrest of a national "without delay". This is also codified in many bilateral agreements.
 
clarify

What do you mean by "I know that in U.S. everybody on its land is ruled by its law, no matter if you\'re a citizen or an alien. The government of your nationality can\'t interfere with the U.S. law"?
 
It is not unpredictable

It is that the odds are overwhelmingly against the person suing the government.
 
Can you just use the RTD?

Tim,

Is there a reason that you do not want to use the RTD? France is a party to the refugee convention and accepts RTDs. I got one stamped on my RTD two months ago.
 
Yeh

The strange thing is that the Germans require green card holders with a reentry permit to obtain a visa. Yet they give a break to asylees and refugees.
 
thinking out aloud

The wait for asylee adjustment is growing longer and longer. Just suppose that if and when top INS brass finally addresses this problem (and Congress is not willing to help), one simple way to reduce the wait is denying adjustment to people who have visited their countries, used the passports or applied for benefits, etc. They are really not afraid of their countries anymore and should not deserve one of the very limited number green cards. Remember, the law says that adjustment is AT SOLE THE DISCRETION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. Which means they can put in place whatever conditions their heart desires.
 
No Title

I applied with my RTD. The officer asked about my passport and I told him the truth. He refuses to issue me visa on my RTD. He asked for my passport and he told me he would issue the visa on my passport.
 
No Title

http://www.un.org/law/ilc/texts/consul.htm

Thanks for giving the information. I am still trying to understand it. So far 36(b) seems to talk about the right of the person who is arrested. It doesn\'t require the authority to notify the person\'s consular official. It talks about the person has the right to do so.

I think 36(a) also applies to the U.S. (U.S. signed this treaty?) I am in U.S right now. I\'m still a citizen of my home country and U.S. government knows that. I have the right to contact my consulate. My consulate has the right to contact me. Why is this not a problem for me? Why will it be a problem for me if I go to Europe?

Article 36

COMMUNICATION AND CONTACT WITH NATIONALS OF THE SENDING STATE
  

1. With a view to facilitating the exercise of consular functions relating

to nationals of the sending State:
  

(a) consular officers shall be free to communicate with nationals of the

sending State and to have access to them. Nationals of the sending

State shall have the same freedom with respect to communication with

and access to consular officers of the sending State;

(b) if he so requests, the competent authorities of the receiving State

shall, without delay, inform the consular post of the sending State

if, within its consular district, a national of that State is

arrested or committed to prison or to custody pending trial or is

detained in any other manner. Any communication addressed to the

consular post by the person arrested, in prison, custody or detention

shall also be forwarded by the said authorities without delay. The

said authorities shall inform the person concerned without delay of

his rights under this sub-paragraph;

(c) consular officers shall have the right to visit a national of the

sending State who is in prison, custody or detention, to converse and

correspond with him and to arrange for his legal representation. They

shall also have the right to visit any national of the sending State

who is in prison, custody or detention in their district in pursuance

of a judgment. Nevertheless, consular officers shall refrain from

taking action on behalf of a national who is in prison, custody or

detention if he expressly opposes such action.
  
 
No Title

All right. My understanding of the Article. The consulate and the national have the right to communicate with each other if they choose to. The middle country should not block or should actually facilitate this communication.

The middle country doesn\'t have obligations to force the communication.
 
No Title

If you are arrested in the U.S. Your spouse has the right to see you. You have the right to see him/her also. But the government can\'t force you to see him/her if you refuse to do so. The same thing happens with your home country government.
 
No Title

If you happen to know one, please post a document indicating that asylees should not use their national passport for traveling to third country. Maybe I can persuade the French visa officer to change his mind.
 
GC Holder

Hi Noid,

As I see you are a GC Holder, have you ever travelled back to your country with the Green Card?
I need to know if that is permitted.

Thanx
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top