OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL
Edward Bogle - Solicitor General of Eutopia
==============================================
REPORT OF THE OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL ON PROPOSED IMMIGRATION LAW CHANGES
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DRAFT PROPOSAL
§1. People who want to move to Eutopia should be investigated by licensed invetsigators.
Only those who is needed in the Industry or in other sectors where Eutopia need more workers will be given an Citizenship.
§2. If an Immigrant get caught for some crimes within the first three years as a Eutopian Citizen his Citizenship will be recalled.
§3. The coastguard and customs should immeadietly send back illegal-immigrants to the country where they come from, those should never be allowed to come back to Eutopia again.
§4. People who are refuges according to international conventions that Eutopia have signed should be handled as the convention says.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments and Recommendations:
§ 1
The main thrust of this provision is acceptable on the whole. A number of institutional issues are presented, however. First concerns "licensed investigators." The implication of this statement is that these will be private citizens, licensed to investigate by the government. Alternatively, this could be seen as mandating the establishment of a new bureaucracy, charged with the investigation of potential immigrants. Either way, this must be made clear in the language of the act.
Following that, it must be made clear who will be deciding which persons are needed in which sectors of the economy. Again, this would seem to indicate the creation of a new bureaucracy for such a purpose. This provision, therefore needs revision for clarity's sake.
§ 2
This provision is a legal paradox, is discriminatory, and should be redacted. The problems it presents concern the absolute nature of citizenship. Citizens of Eutopia, by definition, are all equal before the law and should be treated such. The crime committed by a recent citizen and the scion of an old family should be treated no differently; to do so subverts the rule of law and the equality of mankind that we accept in a democratic state. One is either a citizen or not: we cannot categorize them into "good" or "bad" citizens, who can be treated differently without a principled basis for doing so.
A more appropriate way to effectuate your goals is to apply such a provision to applicants for citizenship only. Furthermore, if time is of the essence, it may be advisable to extend the period of application by more years. The current provision, however, cannot stand.
§ 3
This provision suffers from both over-broadness and specificity problems. First, the mandate that the coast guard "immediately" deport immigrants is overly specific. The coast guard should be accorded a reasonable time to deport those caught illegally in the country.
Second, disallowing those deported to every come back to Eutopia is overly broad. It would be better to detail those circumstances in which they might return. For example, might they later return as tourists? As foreign diplomats? More specificity about the terms of their deportation is in order. A better version of this section might read:
All immigrants, caught illegally entering Eutopia by the coast guard, customs, or other law enforcement bodies, shall, within a reasonable time, be deported to their country of origin. Such persons shall be denied permanent residency status or permanent citizenship should they later attempt to emigrate.
§ 4
Presumably, our government will always comport its conduct with international obligations. That assumption would render such a provision unnecessary. However, it might be useful to create a broad policy statement on immigration in such a way. For example, such provision might hold that:
All international conventions on the reception, restriction, treatment, or disposition of immigrants, refugees, displaced persons, or other transient groups shall comport with the international laws and treaties recognized and subscribed to by the government of Eutopia. To the extent that such acts violate those obligations, they shall be considered void.
The difficulty with such a provision is that it lacks the special authority to command power over subsequent Parliamentary legislation. It also raises balance of power issues, since the ministries are under the control of the executive, separated from Parliament by the Constitution, and the Parliament may not commandeer them in such a manner.
Therefore, although this provision states an admirable policy, it is my judgment that it is best removed from any suggested legislation because of the constitutional difficulties it presents as well as the ineffectiveness of such a statutorily enacted provision.
Edward Bogle, Esq.
Solicitor General of Eutopia