Iraqi Asylum seekers

[rov1200]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8310572.stm

Now that Iraq has refused to take back Iraqi nationals who claimed asylum in Britain but were refused who should take responsibility for them as they can be classed as stateless? Can a government under international law refuse to take back its own citizens?

[rov1200]

Amskunit you must be an eternal optimist. They could have been held in Iraq and the paperwork forwarded on. But even then I don't give much hope they will be accepted. Other countries seem to act differently to the UK in accepting its own citizens back.

[anotheoldgit]

She said more than 2,500 people have chosen to return to Iraq under the Assisted Voluntary Return Programme in the past three years and that was expected to continue.

Could the c0ck up with documentation be down to the fact that perhaps they have not been assisted enough?

[buildersmate]

Once again, Mr Git, your lack of simple knowledge of how this process works beggars belief.
Failed Asylum Seekers and those still in processing as Asylum Seekers are encouraged to repatriate voluntarily. If they choose to do so, the transport arrangements are made, which include checking out that their country of repatriation will accept them. Many asylum seekers arrive with no documentation because they either destroy on arrival it because you believe it helps their chances or they did never have any. Part of the problem in many cases for UKBA is establishing the nationality and identity of some people. Only having got confirmation that the country will accept individuals does the flight actually happen.

Flights like the one to Iraq are happening from the UK every week to various countries. This one is a foul-up, which otherwise wouldn't have made news headlines at all.

I do recommend that you read around your subject before making ridiculous staements that imply that the individuals have changed their minds mid-flight because the financial carrots are not big enough.