Ssssssshhhhhh, don't mention Reform.

[Mottie]

A push back is only possible if the boat is not in distress…..and the action of pushing back a boat overloaded ith people may well be defined as a boat in distress, a point you wilfully avoid addressing

So, it’s in French waters, not in distress, it’s pushed back which then makes it 'in distress' so it’s taken to the nearest port. In France. Is that right?

 

[Notch7]

No point in breaking this out. Your argument can be summarised as:
Asylum seekers on a boat heading for the UK is innocent passage

That is not my argument.



Mu argument is this:
The British vessel entering French water to pick up migrants is not innocent passage

Your argument is dead in the water

 

[motorbiking]

That is not my argument.



Mu argument is this:
The British vessel entering French water to pick up migrants is not innocent passage

Your argument is dead in the water

your arguing with yourself. Nobody is proposing take backs.

 

[Notch7]

Nobody has said anyone is going the enter French waters and pick them up and take them back to France under UNCLOS.

You did.

 

[motorbiking]

You did.

nope - I have said they can be prevented from entering UK waters under UNCLOS.

SOLAS does not apply to a vessel not in distress.

 

[Notch7]

your arguing with yourself. Nobody is proposing take backs.

So now you are claiming that when migrant boats are in French water they are always in distress…..but when they are in British water they are not in distress and can be pushed back

Your bullsh1tting grift is in full flow

 

[Deleted member 323070]

If the migrants in French waters are in distress - SOLAS reg 33 applies.

Yes, and UK vessels can enter French water to administer assistance if they are the nearest vessel, unless they have been requested not to by the French. E.g if the French are coordinating the rescue or there are already sufficient rescue vessels available.

If the Migrants are not in distress and heading for UK territorial waters UNCLOS 19 and 25 apply, they can be prevented from entering.

On what basis?

Under Article 19 of the UNCLOS III it is defined “Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State.” Such passage shall take place in conformity with this Convention and with other rules of international law. The right of innocent passage of foreign ships through the territorial waters of a coastal state is one of the oldest and most universally recognized rules of public international law.
Article 19 defines Innocent Passage “Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State.”

It is obvious that a boat full of unarmed refugees present no danger to the peace, good order or security of the state.

 

[Notch7]

I have said they can be prevented from entering UK waters under UNCLOS.

So you mean these magical migrant boats which you have decided are in distress when in French water, but once they cross into U.K. water (or international water) suddenly they aren’t in distress anymore and can be pushed back


You really are making yerself look a right plonker Rodney

 

[Highway Man]

So amusing seeing Notch and Tom tit arguing with MBK who is a lawyer and sailor. Yet here they are acting like they know better. It really is arguing for the sake of it. The saddest part is that they clearly have no idea and are just googling every response hoping to god it is correct what they are reading. Clearly misunderstanding and misinterpreting what they are reading. Listen to the experts guys and save yourself the embarrassment

 

[Deleted member 323070]

No point in breaking this out. Your argument can be summarised as:
Asylum seekers on a boat heading for the UK is innocent passage. This is contrary to Article 19.

Nonsense! A boat full of unarmed refugees present no risk to the peace, good order or security of the state.

Article 19 defines Innocent Passage “Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State.”

They are also not asylum seekers until they claim asylum.

The status or circumstances of the refugees is irrelevant for their rescue.

You will see numerous prosecutions of people entering the UK illegally who do not claim asylum getting prosecuted for their crimes.

We are discussing asylum seekers, not illegal immigrants.
Illegal immigrants are unlikely to try and enter by boat. They are bound to be detected.

My only argument is that is can be done legally, not that there are willing volunteers.

It cannot. You have already recognised that is mired in legal complications.

 

[Deleted member 323070]

A vessel that is overloaded unsafe, is not in distress unless it issues a call and cannot be boarded under solas Reg 33 if it refuses assistance.

I'm glad we got that sorted, so a French vessel (nor any other vessel) can forcibly 'rescue' a boat that does not want to be rescued.

 

[Deleted member 323070]

So, it’s in French waters, not in distress, it’s pushed back which then makes it 'in distress' so it’s taken to the nearest port. In France. Is that right?

And those pushing back are charged with endangering life at sea.
Which is why no-one is prepared to risk it.

 

[Deleted member 323070]

nope - I have said they can be prevented from entering UK waters under UNCLOS.

SOLAS does not apply to a vessel not in distress.

Anyone trying it risks being charged with a criminal offence, which is why no-one has risked it.

 

[Deleted member 323070]

So amusing seeing Notch and Tom tit arguing with MBK who is a lawyer and sailor. Yet here they are acting like they know better. It really is arguing for the sake of it. The saddest part is that they clearly have no idea and are just googling every response hoping to god it is correct what they are reading. Clearly misunderstanding and misinterpreting what they are reading. Listen to the experts guys and save yourself the embarrassment

Get your head out of the clouds and come back down to earth.

 

[Notch7]

So, it’s in French waters, not in distress, it’s pushed back which then makes it 'in distress' so it’s taken to the nearest port. In France. Is that right?

No

In that situation a British vessel can’t enter French water