-
@antipodean said in NZ justice system 2.0:
@Tim Absurd. It's as if the West hates itself. Why would you even consider allowing a person who commits a sexual assault to stay?
These are the ones we know about, sexual assault tends to be very underreported so chances are there's one or two he effectively got away with. What exactly does he have to do to get deported?
-
@Tim Indeed.
The law is pretty clearly not being applied evenly.
So, is the pedophile going to be executed if he's sent back to Afghanistan, or has he got a shit load of money that is somehow keeping him here?
There is some dodgy shit that surrounds some INZ decisions.
-
Not surprisingly...
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11844260
-
@Donsteppa said in NZ justice system 2.0:
Not surprisingly...
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11844260
Good on the Herald , immigrations decision making and consistency make Saanzars judiciary look good in comparison.
-
@jegga said in NZ justice system 2.0:
@Donsteppa said in NZ justice system 2.0:
Not surprisingly...
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11844260
Good on the Herald , immigrations decision making and consistency make Saanzars judiciary look good in comparison.
No-one makes SANZAR's judiciary look consistent... INZ on average make just over 2,000 decisions a day, if they were as inconsistent as SANZAR there'd be no room for anything else in the daily news cycle
-
@taniwharugby said in NZ justice system 2.0:
If you are not a NZ Citizen (not sure how the law would look at it if you emigrated to NZ and had dual citizenship, but if you emigrated too?) you get convicted of a crime that results in a custodial sentence, you should be on the next plane out of NZ.
Your policy is more hardline than Trumps.
-
@Donsteppa said in NZ justice system 2.0:
Deported without even serving the sentence too...
Like a French state sponsored terrorist? I'd rather they served their sentence..
-
The Herald's article, not surprisingly, contains a factual error about deportation liability. Specifically, it says "A deportation liability suspension can only be given to a person who has held a residence-class visa for two years or less and cannot exceed five years." That's not actually true - the liability can be suspended for anyone, regardless of how long after the grant of residence the offense was committed.
Also, they have missed that the guy was liable for deportation after the first conviction, which occurred within 6 months of arrival on his resident visa.
There is something missing from the Herald's article - how the guy obtained residence. I'd guess that it was as a refugee, in which case the INZ decision is in line with Immigration and Protection Tribunal (the appeal body for deportation decisions) decisions for similar circumstances. In particular, deporting people who run a high risk of being killed in their home country is very hard to get past IPT. Given that, if INZ believed that was the likely outcome at IPT, I can see why they wouldn't bother in the first place.
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback meh...Its what I think should happen, you arent a citizen, break the laws to the extent you need to be jailed, laters!
however I know it is rarely straight forward (ie the Rainbow Warrior example as mentioned above) and will always be reasons why you can do something this time, but not next....similarly I think there are instances where death penalty should be used, but certainly subjective again.
I recall a number of years back that MUslim Cleric in the UK with the hook, was not able to be deported back to Jordan (, or was it Egypt?) as he would be facing the Death penalty there.
-
@taniwharugby
I wasn't criticising you. Just illustrating how pathetic the opposition to Trump taking a hardline on deporting criminals is. -
@Baron-Silas-Greenback is there actually much real opposition to deporting criminals, anywhere?
Plenty of opposition to trump because he's a moron as per recent interview transcripts. Plenty of opposition to his immigration stance. Don't recall many people saying 'we must retain our foreign criminals'. If you're talking about illegal immigrants, where their only crime is being there, and there are a shit load of them already there, then that is quite a different kettle of fish to this situation. It's almost a problem too big for such a simple solution to work.
I'm all for getting rid of foreign crims here, if we can legally - as I'm sure most people are. -
@reprobate said in NZ justice system 2.0:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback is there actually much real opposition to deporting criminals, anywhere?
Plenty of opposition to trump because he's a moron as per recent interview transcripts. Plenty of opposition to his immigration stance. Don't recall many people saying 'we must retain our foreign criminals'. If you're talking about illegal immigrants, where their only crime is being there, and there are a shit load of them already there, then that is quite a different kettle of fish to this situation. It's almost a problem too big for such a simple solution to work.
I'm all for getting rid of foreign crims here, if we can legally - as I'm sure most people are.You need to investigate sanctuary cities and what Trumps policies on illegal immigrants actually is.
When you have ..then we can discuss it... because currently you are very uninformed -
@Baron-Silas-Greenback i don't understand the relevance of the link. The guy had been deported, 5 times?
That's not a failing of policy, but of implementation surely. -
@reprobate said in NZ justice system 2.0:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback i don't understand the relevance of the link. The guy had been deported, 5 times?
That's not a failing of policy, but of implementation surely.Wel you've read the link so I guess you are no longer "very uninformed" - apologies for sounding like a pompous ass
-
@reprobate said in NZ justice system 2.0:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback i don't understand the relevance of the link. The guy had been deported, 5 times?
That's not a failing of policy, but of implementation surely.Do yourself a favour and actually try and know what you are talking about before jumping in, I provided a link to give you a starting point.
The current stoush between Trump and the Sanctuary cities is all about deportation of convicted criminals.Trumps policy is that the LAW should be followed, the law is that felons should be deported. The sticking point is how to get hold of them, if local law enforcement in sanctuary cities get someone in custody on a minor charge, they refuse to hold on to that person until immigration officers can pick them up. They let them walk before immigration has a chance to get hold of them,the example I linked to is an exact example of this. It is like Tauranga police picking up a illegal immigrant with previous child molestation convictions in NZ and having served time.. and refusing to let Immigration NZ know about it.... so he walks out the door. If that sounds unbelievable .. it isnt.
Trump is not remotely interested in trying to deport illegals without convictions."On March 26, 2015, at the request of the San Francisco Sheriff's Department, United States Bureau of Prisons (BOP) had turned Sanchez over to San Francisco authorities for an outstanding drug warrant.[16] U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had issued a detainer for Sanchez requesting that he be kept in custody until immigration authorities could pick him up. As a sanctuary city, however, which limits cooperation with ICE only to cases where active charges against the immigrant are identified, San Francisco did not honor the detainer and released him, since they found no active warrant for his arrest.[17] San Francisco officials transported Sanchez to San Francisco County Jail on March 26, 2015, to face a 20-year-old felony charge of selling and possessing marijuana after Sanchez completed his latest prison term in San Bernardino County for entering in the country without the proper documents.[18] He was released from San Francisco County Jail on April 15, and had no outstanding warrants or judicial warrants, as confirmed by the San Francisco Sheriff's Department.[14]"
-
A new resident convicted twice for sex offending since his arrival in 2012 - including while on bail - should not have been exempted from deportation, says the Immigration Minister.
But although he cannot legally change the exemption, Michael Woodhouse has ordered changes to the deportation decision-making process to ensure he is "adequately informed about cases with certain risk factors".
In April the Herald revealed that a senior official at Immigration New Zealand had granted Sultan Ali Akbari a deportation liability suspension.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11875991
NZ justice system 2.0