The crime should be illegal entry...if one cannot verify their lawful presence through ID or travel documents...how did they get into the country? Any individual of average intelligence can validate themselves even without ID. The judge was clearly biased in his decision. This is a very dangerous precedent to set. Getting off an a technicality does not make this criminal innocent. When ISIS terrorists begin making their way to the US via Bahamas, only then may some realize just how stupid this decision was!
How can a man whose charges were dimissed because his identity could not be confirmed sue the government? What name appears on that lawsuit? These activists and judges are really showing their concern for the Bahamas...just let any unverifiable, undocumented persons into the population. As other countries in world move forward and become ever more conscience of the current era of terrorism, the Bahamas takes ten giant steps back. What a shame!
"Detention centres are for people awaiting a court date, but have not been charged yet."
You said it...now that they are required to be treated as criminals and charged they should be housed where the other criminals go to await being charged. I'm sure the detention center is not fun, but surely less harsh than fox hill and mothers and children are provided with better accommodations.
The immigration department website says that currently these persons are detained at CRDC, and are not under arrest. If they follow criminal procedures they should also house them at Fox Hill prison prior to being charged, and as they await repatriation.
I don't believe that illegal immigrants or persons in fox hill prison who performed illegal acts to improve their lives should be rewarded or treated as victims. There is no bias or hate in me toward anyone. I think your simple mindedness or your bias for Haitians, is what makes you believe your ridiculous statement.
The section of the constitution does indeed address reasonable detention of persons...nowhere does it provide for a 48 hour period maximum detention. In fact if you read further into chapter iii, 19(1)(g), you will see that illegal immigration is one of the exceptions. So again I ask, quote me that section of law. Do not confuse what is widely accepted as law unless you can prove it.
I would advise you do the same. The minister can in fact, sign off on deportation orders. Read the amended immigration act of 2012, and tell me your interpretation.
It takes a lot of ignorance and arrogance to believe that anyone who disagrees with you is racist. Could it simply be that our interpretation of the law differs. An entire profession was built around this fact.
My2cents says...
The crime should be illegal entry...if one cannot verify their lawful presence through ID or travel documents...how did they get into the country? Any individual of average intelligence can validate themselves even without ID. The judge was clearly biased in his decision. This is a very dangerous precedent to set. Getting off an a technicality does not make this criminal innocent. When ISIS terrorists begin making their way to the US via Bahamas, only then may some realize just how stupid this decision was!
On Demand for release of Haitian man
Posted 4 December 2015, 4:15 p.m. Suggest removal
My2cents says...
No I'm saying they are criminals, lock them up with the rest.
On Mitchell questions courts on immigration sentencing
Posted 3 December 2015, 9:35 p.m. Suggest removal
My2cents says...
How can a man whose charges were dimissed because his identity could not be confirmed sue the government? What name appears on that lawsuit? These activists and judges are really showing their concern for the Bahamas...just let any unverifiable, undocumented persons into the population. As other countries in world move forward and become ever more conscience of the current era of terrorism, the Bahamas takes ten giant steps back. What a shame!
On Demand for release of Haitian man
Posted 3 December 2015, 8:41 p.m. Suggest removal
My2cents says...
"Detention centres are for people awaiting a court date, but have not been charged yet."
You said it...now that they are required to be treated as criminals and charged they should be housed where the other criminals go to await being charged. I'm sure the detention center is not fun, but surely less harsh than fox hill and mothers and children are provided with better accommodations.
On Mitchell questions courts on immigration sentencing
Posted 2 December 2015, 8:36 p.m. Suggest removal
My2cents says...
The immigration department website says that currently these persons are detained at CRDC, and are not under arrest. If they follow criminal procedures they should also house them at Fox Hill prison prior to being charged, and as they await repatriation.
On Mitchell questions courts on immigration sentencing
Posted 2 December 2015, 1:46 p.m. Suggest removal
My2cents says...
I don't believe that illegal immigrants or persons in fox hill prison who performed illegal acts to improve their lives should be rewarded or treated as victims. There is no bias or hate in me toward anyone. I think your simple mindedness or your bias for Haitians, is what makes you believe your ridiculous statement.
On Immigration activists: Supreme Court ruling a game-changer
Posted 27 November 2015, 2:18 p.m. Suggest removal
My2cents says...
The section of the constitution does indeed address reasonable detention of persons...nowhere does it provide for a 48 hour period maximum detention. In fact if you read further into chapter iii, 19(1)(g), you will see that illegal immigration is one of the exceptions. So again I ask, quote me that section of law. Do not confuse what is widely accepted as law unless you can prove it.
On Immigration activists: Supreme Court ruling a game-changer
Posted 24 November 2015, 1:50 p.m. Suggest removal
My2cents says...
I would advise you do the same. The minister can in fact, sign off on deportation orders. Read the amended immigration act of 2012, and tell me your interpretation.
On Immigration activists: Supreme Court ruling a game-changer
Posted 24 November 2015, 1:40 p.m. Suggest removal
My2cents says...
Please quote that section of the constitution and I will readily look it up and concede, if that is the case.
On Immigration activists: Supreme Court ruling a game-changer
Posted 23 November 2015, 6:39 p.m. Suggest removal
My2cents says...
It takes a lot of ignorance and arrogance to believe that anyone who disagrees with you is racist. Could it simply be that our interpretation of the law differs. An entire profession was built around this fact.
On Immigration activists: Supreme Court ruling a game-changer
Posted 23 November 2015, 6:37 p.m. Suggest removal