ID card rollout begins

[Mark Lomas]

2008/9/29 Ian Batten <igb@batten.eu.org>:
>
> On 29 Sep 2008, at 19:48, ken wrote:
>
>> Ian Batten wrote:
>>
>>> So they arrived at the French border, presented a UK passport, and were
>>> refused entry?  How did the French border police know that they were
>>> Zimbabwean (presumably dual nationality)?
>>
>> No idea. Presumably because one of them is black and has an African
>> accent. Not that I suspect any immigration officials of racism. As noble as
>> the day is long they are.
>
> That was my first thought, but where does the process go after that?  I
> didn't think that within the EEA there was any discretion about passports:
> if you present a genuine EEA passport which genuinely refers to you, there's
> no room for manoeuvre.  Sure, a racist passport officer could deny that the
> passport is genuine, or deny that it relates to the bearer, but once that is
> established one way or the other by the issuing passport office, that should
> be the end of the matter.

I agree. Directive 2004/38/EC "on the right of citizens of the Union
and their family members
to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States"
is quite clear on the matter.

Article 5, Right of Entry

"1. Without prejudice to the provisions on travel documents applicable
to national border controls,
Member States shall grant Union citizens leave to enter their
territory with a valid identity card or
passport and shall grant family members who are not nationals of a
Member State leave to enter
their territory with a valid passport.

No entry visa or equivalent formality may be imposed on Union citizens."

> This isn't the same as rocking up at the French border clutching a
> Zimbabwean passport.  Then the passport officer probably has essentially
> limitless powers of discretion, and no matter how genuine the passport, the
> French state has no obligation to let you in.  Racist, probably, but a fact
> nonetheless.

Note that the section I quoted above would even apply to a Zimbabwean
passport if the holder has a European spouse.

> But I don't see how, once a UK passport has been vouched for
> by the UKPA, France has any discretion in admitting you, and I don't see how
> any sort of visa could change that (ie if the only grounds for refusal is
> ``that's not a passport'' or ``that's not your passport'', a visa won't
> affect the issue).  And another thing: what visa could you apply for, as a
> British citizen, that France could issue?
>
> I suspect there's some vital fact missing from your account that will
> clarify it, but I simply don't follow it...

My guess was that they wanted to stay for longer than three months.

Article 6, Right of residence for up to three months*

"1. Union citizens shall have the right of residence on the territory
of another Member State for a
period of up to three months without any conditions or any formalities
other than the requirement to
hold a valid identity card or passport."

I won't quote the full text, but in effect it allows the French
authorities to exclude the unemployed or those without health
insurance.

Note that Article 6 even applies to somebody who was born British, as
well as to Zimbabweans who take up British citizenship.

        Mark

* The European Commission has proposed changing this period to six
months, but this has not yet been agreed by member states.