Skip to main content
+answering an implied question
Source Link
J-J-J
  • 472
  • 2
  • 9

Singapore is not a party to major international refugee conventions, and there is no legal status for asylum seeker or refugees there. Hence, there is no public statistics provided by Singapore about asylum seekers, and it's the 1959 Immigration Act that applies to people in this kind of situation, like they were "standard" immigration candidates. So unless they are under another permanent status or unless they transit quickly and legally through Singapore, asylum seekers possibly risk imprisonment, fines, and caning - no matter the merit of their claims.

This situation makes refoulement more likely, even if non-refoulement is supposed to apply to all States, including those not part of refugee conventions. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR):

[...] unless and until the 1951 Convention is acceded to and there is a sound legal framework for granting international protection, there are currently insufficient safeguards against refoulement. In the absence of any national asylum systems or corresponding adjudication structures in Singapore, it is likely that some asylum-seekers may have been deported or refouled upon arrival in Singapore. During 2019-2020, UNHCR has recorded three incidents where individuals were denied entry and deported without being afforded the opportunity to have their international protection needs assessed

The UNHCR also points out various problems with this situation - including increased risk of human and child trafficking.

As you seem to imply that there is some sort of double standard regarding the denunciation of how migrants are treated in Western countries vs. the rest of the world, you should note that human rights organizations regularly(including Amnesty International) denounce the treatment of migrants in Singapore - as well as other human rights violations in general.

References

Singapore is not a party to major international refugee conventions, and there is no legal status for asylum seeker or refugees there. Hence, there is no public statistics provided by Singapore about asylum seekers, and it's the 1959 Immigration Act that applies to people in this kind of situation, like they were "standard" immigration candidates. So unless they are under another permanent status or unless they transit quickly and legally through Singapore, asylum seekers possibly risk imprisonment, fines, and caning - no matter the merit of their claims.

This situation makes refoulement more likely, even if non-refoulement is supposed to apply to all States, including those not part of refugee conventions. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR):

[...] unless and until the 1951 Convention is acceded to and there is a sound legal framework for granting international protection, there are currently insufficient safeguards against refoulement. In the absence of any national asylum systems or corresponding adjudication structures in Singapore, it is likely that some asylum-seekers may have been deported or refouled upon arrival in Singapore. During 2019-2020, UNHCR has recorded three incidents where individuals were denied entry and deported without being afforded the opportunity to have their international protection needs assessed

The UNHCR also points out various problems with this situation - including increased risk of human and child trafficking.

As you seem to imply that there is some sort of double standard regarding the denunciation of how migrants are treated in Western countries vs. the rest of the world, you should note that human rights organizations regularly denounce the treatment of migrants in Singapore - as well as other human rights violations in general.

References

Singapore is not a party to major international refugee conventions, and there is no legal status for asylum seeker or refugees there. Hence, there is no public statistics provided by Singapore about asylum seekers, and it's the 1959 Immigration Act that applies to people in this kind of situation, like they were "standard" immigration candidates. So unless they are under another permanent status or unless they transit quickly and legally through Singapore, asylum seekers possibly risk imprisonment, fines, and caning - no matter the merit of their claims.

This situation makes refoulement more likely, even if non-refoulement is supposed to apply to all States, including those not part of refugee conventions. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR):

[...] unless and until the 1951 Convention is acceded to and there is a sound legal framework for granting international protection, there are currently insufficient safeguards against refoulement. In the absence of any national asylum systems or corresponding adjudication structures in Singapore, it is likely that some asylum-seekers may have been deported or refouled upon arrival in Singapore. During 2019-2020, UNHCR has recorded three incidents where individuals were denied entry and deported without being afforded the opportunity to have their international protection needs assessed

The UNHCR also points out various problems with this situation - including increased risk of human and child trafficking.

As you seem to imply that there is some sort of double standard regarding the denunciation of how migrants are treated in Western countries vs. the rest of the world, you should note that human rights organizations (including Amnesty International) denounce the treatment of migrants in Singapore - as well as other human rights violations in general.

References

+answering an implied question
Source Link
J-J-J
  • 472
  • 2
  • 9

Singapore is not a party to major international refugee conventions, and there is no legal status for asylum seeker or refugees there. Hence, there is no public statistics provided by Singapore about asylum seekers, and it's the 1959 Immigration Act that applies to people in this kind of situation, like they were "standard" immigration candidates. So unless they are under another permanent status or unless they transit quickly and legally through Singapore, asylum seekers possibly risk imprisonment, fines, and caning - no matter the merit of their claims.

This situation makes refoulement more likely, even if non-refoulement is supposed to apply to all States, including those not part of refugee conventions. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR):

[...] unless and until the 1951 Convention is acceded to and there is a sound legal framework for granting international protection, there are currently insufficient safeguards against refoulement. In the absence of any national asylum systems or corresponding adjudication structures in Singapore, it is likely that some asylum-seekers may have been deported or refouled upon arrival in Singapore. During 2019-2020, UNHCR has recorded three incidents where individuals were denied entry and deported without being afforded the opportunity to have their international protection needs assessed

The UNHCR also points out various problems with this situation - including increased risk of human and child trafficking.

As you seem to imply that there is some sort of double standard regarding the denunciation of how migrants are treated in Western countries vs. the rest of the world, you should note that human rights organizations regularly denounce the treatment of migrants in Singapore - as well as other human rights violations in general.

References

Singapore is not a party to major international refugee conventions, and there is no legal status for asylum seeker or refugees there. Hence, there is no public statistics provided by Singapore about asylum seekers, and it's the 1959 Immigration Act that applies to people in this kind of situation, like they were "standard" immigration candidates. So unless they are under another permanent status or unless they transit quickly and legally through Singapore, asylum seekers possibly risk imprisonment, fines, and caning - no matter the merit of their claims.

This situation makes refoulement more likely, even if non-refoulement is supposed to apply to all States, including those not part of refugee conventions. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR):

[...] unless and until the 1951 Convention is acceded to and there is a sound legal framework for granting international protection, there are currently insufficient safeguards against refoulement. In the absence of any national asylum systems or corresponding adjudication structures in Singapore, it is likely that some asylum-seekers may have been deported or refouled upon arrival in Singapore. During 2019-2020, UNHCR has recorded three incidents where individuals were denied entry and deported without being afforded the opportunity to have their international protection needs assessed

The UNHCR also points out various problems with this situation - including increased risk of human and child trafficking.

References

Singapore is not a party to major international refugee conventions, and there is no legal status for asylum seeker or refugees there. Hence, there is no public statistics provided by Singapore about asylum seekers, and it's the 1959 Immigration Act that applies to people in this kind of situation, like they were "standard" immigration candidates. So unless they are under another permanent status or unless they transit quickly and legally through Singapore, asylum seekers possibly risk imprisonment, fines, and caning - no matter the merit of their claims.

This situation makes refoulement more likely, even if non-refoulement is supposed to apply to all States, including those not part of refugee conventions. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR):

[...] unless and until the 1951 Convention is acceded to and there is a sound legal framework for granting international protection, there are currently insufficient safeguards against refoulement. In the absence of any national asylum systems or corresponding adjudication structures in Singapore, it is likely that some asylum-seekers may have been deported or refouled upon arrival in Singapore. During 2019-2020, UNHCR has recorded three incidents where individuals were denied entry and deported without being afforded the opportunity to have their international protection needs assessed

The UNHCR also points out various problems with this situation - including increased risk of human and child trafficking.

As you seem to imply that there is some sort of double standard regarding the denunciation of how migrants are treated in Western countries vs. the rest of the world, you should note that human rights organizations regularly denounce the treatment of migrants in Singapore - as well as other human rights violations in general.

References

added 61 characters in body
Source Link
J-J-J
  • 472
  • 2
  • 9

Singapore is not a party to major international refugee conventions, and there is no legal status for asylum seeker or refugees there. Hence, there is no public statistics provided by Singapore about asylum seekers, and it's the 1959 Immigration Act that applies to people in this kind of situation, like they were "standard" immigration candidates. So unless they are under another permanent status or unless they transit quickly and legally through Singapore, asylum seekers possibly risk imprisonment, fines, and caning - no matter the merit of their claims.

This situation makes refoulement more likely, even if non-refoulement is supposed to apply to all States, including those not part of refugee conventions. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR):

[...] unless and until the 1951 Convention is acceded to and there is a sound legal framework for granting international protection, there are currently insufficient safeguards against refoulement. In the absence of any national asylum systems or corresponding adjudication structures in Singapore, it is likely that some asylum-seekers may have been deported or refouled upon arrival in Singapore. During 2019-2020, UNHCR has recorded three incidents where individuals were denied entry and deported without being afforded the opportunity to have their international protection needs assessed

The UNHCR also points out various problems with this situation - including increased risk of human and child trafficking.

References

Singapore is not a party to major international refugee conventions, and there is no legal status for asylum seeker or refugees there. Hence, there is no public statistics provided by Singapore about asylum seekers, and it's the 1959 Immigration Act that applies to people in this kind of situation, like they were "standard" immigration candidates. So unless they are under another permanent status, asylum seekers possibly risk imprisonment, fines, and caning - no matter the merit of their claims.

This situation makes refoulement more likely, even if non-refoulement is supposed to apply to all States, including those not part of refugee conventions. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR):

[...] unless and until the 1951 Convention is acceded to and there is a sound legal framework for granting international protection, there are currently insufficient safeguards against refoulement. In the absence of any national asylum systems or corresponding adjudication structures in Singapore, it is likely that some asylum-seekers may have been deported or refouled upon arrival in Singapore. During 2019-2020, UNHCR has recorded three incidents where individuals were denied entry and deported without being afforded the opportunity to have their international protection needs assessed

The UNHCR also points out various problems with this situation - including increased risk of human and child trafficking.

References

Singapore is not a party to major international refugee conventions, and there is no legal status for asylum seeker or refugees there. Hence, there is no public statistics provided by Singapore about asylum seekers, and it's the 1959 Immigration Act that applies to people in this kind of situation, like they were "standard" immigration candidates. So unless they are under another permanent status or unless they transit quickly and legally through Singapore, asylum seekers possibly risk imprisonment, fines, and caning - no matter the merit of their claims.

This situation makes refoulement more likely, even if non-refoulement is supposed to apply to all States, including those not part of refugee conventions. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR):

[...] unless and until the 1951 Convention is acceded to and there is a sound legal framework for granting international protection, there are currently insufficient safeguards against refoulement. In the absence of any national asylum systems or corresponding adjudication structures in Singapore, it is likely that some asylum-seekers may have been deported or refouled upon arrival in Singapore. During 2019-2020, UNHCR has recorded three incidents where individuals were denied entry and deported without being afforded the opportunity to have their international protection needs assessed

The UNHCR also points out various problems with this situation - including increased risk of human and child trafficking.

References

not useful
Source Link
J-J-J
  • 472
  • 2
  • 9
Loading
added 4 characters in body
Source Link
J-J-J
  • 472
  • 2
  • 9
Loading
Source Link
J-J-J
  • 472
  • 2
  • 9
Loading