NationStates Jolt Archive

This is just an update on a thread I started last week. The mods are free to lock it at any time if they feel this is gravedigging.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27606454/

MADRID, Spain - Spain rejected a final appeal for asylum by a son of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden and put him on a plane bound for Egypt, the Interior Ministry and a lawyer for the man said Saturday.

Omar Osama bin Laden and his British wife left Spain on a commercial flight Saturday afternoon, the day after his final appeal for asylum was rejected, lawyer Bianca Sharma told The Associated Press. She would not say which airline they were on.

"We fought to the last minute," Sharma said. "We used up every legal avenue and it wasn't possible (to stay)."

The younger bin Laden, 27, flew to Spain on Monday and spent the week in a transit area at Madrid's Barajas Airport. He claimed he would not be safe if returned to an Arab country.

Sharma described her client as a "beautiful person" who had "nothing to do with fanatics or terrorists." She said his petition was denied for political reasons, and that after arriving in Egypt he would eventually be returned to Saudi Arabia, where he holds citizenship.

Interior Minister Alfredo Pérez Rubalcaba confirmed that bin Laden's son had been deported, saying his application for asylum did not meet any Spanish requirements. The Interior Ministry denied his bid for asylum on Wednesday, and turned back the appeal late Friday night.

The government says it usually seeks a recommendation from the U.N. refugee agency in asylum request cases, and that the agency had also recommended against asylum.

'Omar is very depressed'
Omar Osama bin Laden — one of the al-Qaida leader's 19 children — caused a tabloid storm last year after marrying a British woman, 52-year-old Jane Felix-Browne, who has since taken the name Zaina Alsabah.

In an interview with Spain's El Mundo newspaper before her husband's deportation, Felix-Browne said her husband was very upset about the possibility of being sent back.

"Omar is very depressed," she said. "He says it would be better to be dead."

The couple have been living in Cairo. The younger bin Laden has not renounced his father, but has said he wants to be an "ambassador for peace" between the Muslim world and the West.

Osama bin Laden is believed to be hiding in the Pakistan-Afghan border region.

The younger bin Laden moved to Afghanistan with his father in 1996 after living with him in Sudan, and trained at an al-Qaida camp. But Omar has said he has not seen his father since he left Afghanistan in 2000 and returned to his homeland of Saudi Arabia.

I think my government made the right decision, in compliance with our political asylum requirements and also in compliance with the UN's requirements.

I can understand Omar Osama bin Laden has nothing to do with his father's policies but right now, granting him asylum, anywhere in the EU, would place any EUnion country on the hot seat. Comments?

Cumments.

This thread has a wrong name, since it's got nothing to do with OBL. It has to do with his son, who, I presume, has little if any contact with his father. Less even than Scott in Austin Powers.

The only good side I find here is that Spain is a sidewall of a butthole anyway, and he deserves better than that.

Cumments.

This thread has a wrong name, since it's got nothing to do with OBL. It has to do with his son, who, I presume, has little if any contact with his father. Less even than Scott in Austin Powers.

The only good side I find here is that Spain is a sidewall of a butthole anyway, and he deserves better than that.

I will not allow you to insult my country. And the thread does not has the wrong name. That's why one needs to read it.

The only good side I find here is that Spain is a sidewall of a butthole anyway, and he deserves better than that.

He has an EU passport - he could live anywhere he wants anyway - why he applied for asylum eludes me.

Oh, and don't insult the people of Spain.

I will not allow you to insult my country. And the thread does not has the wrong name. That's why one needs to read it.
Ah, gomene komon etchi suru. Didn't notice you're from Spain, with that name of yours.

Anyway, there are a lot richer countries than Spain, can't imagine why such a cool guy would go there. UAE or SA seem like much better choices.

if he doesnt meet the requirements of asylum in spain then he needs to move on (which he has done)

but i dont have a problem with the idea that some country might want to allow him to stay. he is not his father and should not be penalized for being a bin laden.

I agree with Ashmoria.

I have one question though, which I guess there is no answer to at this time: If he and his wife had been living in Cairo, Egypt, why would it suddenly be bad for him to go back to an Arab nation? I wonder what happened that would have made him persona non grata.

Anyway, there are a lot richer countries than Spain, can't imagine why such a cool guy would go there. UAE or SA seem like much better choices.

Because Spain is awesome. I spent 4 days in Barcelona 6 years ago, it was exceedingly awesome.

Because Spain is awesome. I spent 4 days in Barcelona 6 years ago, it was exceedingly awesome.
Then I'll judge US by Lost Wages, UK by the Isle of Man, China by Hong Kong, Russia by Moscow, Japan by Kabe, and you by this post.

Then I'll judge US by Lost Wages, UK by the Isle of Man, China by Hong Kong, Russia by Moscow, Japan by Kabe, and you by this post.

Why not? You judged an entire country by the actions of it's government.

Then I'll judge US by Lost Wages, UK by the Isle of Man, China by Hong Kong, Russia by Moscow, Japan by Kabe, and you by this post.

If you like and I'll judge you as taking the Internet far too seriously by this post.

It looks to be a silly decision made by cowards.

I have one question though, which I guess there is no answer to at this time: If he and his wife had been living in Cairo, Egypt, why would it suddenly be bad for him to go back to an Arab nation? I wonder what happened that would have made him persona non grata.

He alleges that his life's in danger in the Arab world. Perhaps because he's a pacifist and doesn't agree with his father's agenda.

Why exactly did he even need to be granted asylum? Couldn't he have just lived in Spain like anyone else?

Ah, gomene komon etchi suru. Didn't notice you're from Spain, with that name of yours.

Anyway, there are a lot richer countries than Spain, can't imagine why such a cool guy would go there. UAE or SA seem like much better choices.

It's fine. Just don't judge the decision my country made without prior knowledge. Whatever your opinion of Spain, this man has an EU passport. He can settle anywhere in the EU. Why did he decide to apply for asylum in my country beats me.

He alleges that his life's in danger in the Arab world. Perhaps because he's a pacifist and doesn't agree with his father's agenda.

Is that why he was seeking asylum in the first place? Why not just settle in the UK since his wife is from there...?

Is that why he was seeking asylum in the first place? Why not just settle in the UK since his wife is from there...?

they denied his residency request.

He was refused entry to Egypt (http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2008/11/10/bin_ladens_son_seeks_refuge_in_qatar/), and is applying for asylum in Qatar now.

He has Saudi citizenship. It appears he never gained citizenship in Egypt, so they have every right to deny him entry. They were apparently only there for a few months anyway...and Neo B, they have been denied entry to Britain too. As in, HE has been denied entry and his wife decided not to abandon him.

The reason Spain shipped him back to Egypt was that generally, you get shipped back from whence you came, even if that is not your country of origin...then that place from whence you came has to ship you back from where you came before that, etc.

The big problem is, no one want this guy on their soil, because they'd have to go through the asylum seeking process. Under United Nations Conventions, asylum seekers must fear persecution for reasons of "race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion" in their home country. Omar would have to show that there was some threat to his safety, some past actions, or show that more likely than not, there is a future threat to his safety.

I have no doubt, however, that he is too much of a hot potato for any country to willingly take, and the decision to reject his application, in Spain, or any other country he may file one in, will be almost purely political in nature.

they denied his residency request.

He didn't even make it that far...they denied him a visa.

He's married to a British citizen, but that doesn't automatically grant him entry...he'd have to apply for residency from outside, and it is highly unlikely she could get him in...again, for political reasons.

Is that why he was seeking asylum in the first place? Why not just settle in the UK since his wife is from there...?

The UK also denied his request. I don't know the particulars. Probably, as Neesika posted, for political reasons.

He didn't even make it that far...they denied him a visa.

He's married to a British citizen, but that doesn't automatically grant him entry...he'd have to apply for residency from outside, and it is highly unlikely she could get him in...again, for political reasons.

True, but if he took it to the ECJ he would win - previous cases almost identical to this have sided with the individuals and not the Member States. However, I imagine he's looking for a more speedy resolution. (More speedy.... me fail English?)
Right of EU citizens (i.e his wife) and their family members (i.e him) to reside and move freely within the territory of the Member States.

He didn't even make it that far...they denied him a visa.

He's married to a British citizen, but that doesn't automatically grant him entry...he'd have to apply for residency from outside, and it is highly unlikely she could get him in...again, for political reasons.

Perhaps the UK wants to prevent something similar to what was happening in the US several years ago. Foreigners marrying US citizens just to gain citizenship status. Now you have to prove why you wish to move to the US, and just because you're married to an American doesn't suffice.

True, but if he took it to the ECJ he would win - previous cases almost identical to this have sided with the individuals and not the Member States. However, I imagine he's looking for a more speedy resolution. (More speedy.... me fail English?)
Right of EU citizens (i.e his wife) and their family members (i.e him) to reside and move freely within the territory of the Member States.

You're forgetting that marriage to an EU member does not automatically grant one with EU membership. Otherwise, there would be no 'illegal' Albanians :P

You can not, in the realm of immigration, ever factor out political motivations. Cases that would never normally be approved can find themselves right tracked by Ministers if there has been bad press...and cases that should be clear cut can be dismissed. There are no bright line rules when it comes to processing immigration applications...much depends on discretion.

So he's pretty much fucked?

Perhaps the UK wants to prevent something similar to what was happening in the US several years ago. Foreigners marrying US citizens just to gain citizenship status. Now you have to prove why you wish to move to the US, and just because you're married to an American doesn't suffice.

All Western nations have policies to prevent this sort of thing...because as has been pointed out, once you're in, you can start sponsoring family members to come.

When I did it (married a prospective immigrant) we were raided by immigration, interrogated separately about our personal habits, brands of toiletries, etc, and hounded for years. Fair enough, I actually did do it to get him in :P My friend who legitimately married her Albanian beau had to fight for two years to get him into the country. It's a rough process...they work from the assumption that the marriage is a sham (especially in regards to 'blacklisted countries'), even if officially they aren't supposed to.

So he's pretty much fucked?

Pretty much, when it comes to applying for political asylum in the EU. What I don't get is if his life and that of his wife is somehow threatened in the Arab world, why hasn't he presented any sustainable evidence to it? If it came to that, political asylum would've been granted immeidately by Spanish Immigration.

So he's pretty much fucked?

Depends on the country. If he came to Canada, or went to New Zealand, he could manage to stay for quite a while pending a refugee claim, even if the ultimate decision was to send him back. As well, if a country decided that he was an acceptable 'risk' for whatever political reason, then they could grant him asylum.

France will have him. *nod*

All Western nations have policies to prevent this sort of thing...because as has been pointed out, once you're in, you can start sponsoring family members to come.

When I did it (married a prospective immigrant) we were raided by immigration, interrogated separately about our personal habits, brands of toiletries, etc, and hounded for years. Fair enough, I actually did do it to get him in :P My friend who legitimately married her Albanian beau had to fight for two years to get him into the country. It's a rough process...they work from the assumption that the marriage is a sham (especially in regards to 'blacklisted countries'), even if officially they aren't supposed to.

Oh, I know. One of my co-workers has been battling with her case for 2 years. Her husband is Italian and they were married in Sardinia. She lived there for a year and since she was unable to work in her chosen field, she came back to Madrid and started the presentation of documents in order to come here. Immigration has given them hell in order for him to be able to come and live/work in Spain. His visa has been granted, but she suffered a lot.

Pretty much, when it comes to applying for political asylum in the EU. What I don't get is if his life and that of his wife is somehow threatened in the Arab world, why hasn't he presented any sustainable evidence to it? If it came to that, political asylum would've been granted immeidately by Spanish Immigration.

Asylum seekers rarely have hard evidence that they can present at their hearing...in fact, many asylum seekers can't even provide identification because they've destroyed it in order to get into the country in the first place. Some claims are easier to prove than others...coming from a country experiencing civil war, for example. The biggest hurdle is the requirement that the government of your nation of origin be unable or unwilling to protect you, or that you are unable or unwilling to seek help from that government for some legitimate reason.

He could probably make a good case for the likelihood of persecution, absent any previous attempts on his life etc...but he would be expected to seek protection from his own government, and absent proof that they would not, or would not be able to provide that protection, he'd be sent back.

France will have him. *nod*

I like how you make baseless assertions as though you have a clue about the subject.

Oh wait. I meant hate.

I like how you make baseless assertions as though you have a clue about the subject.

Oh wait. I meant hate.

and I love how you think every post I make is a serious one...

and I love how you think every post I make is a serious one...

You decide whether your post was serious or not after the fact.

You're forgetting that marriage to an EU member does not automatically grant one with EU membership.
I never said it did. Neither does the ECJ - if you look for the cases of "Chen" or "Carpenter" or even more recently "Metock" it gives an indication of the way the ECJ leans in these cases.
http://curia.europa.eu/jurisp/cgi-bin/form.pl?lang=en

I (and the court) was talking about third - country nationals. In this case the husband who is not an EU citizen (I'm taking it for this case to mean a citizen of an EU Member State) has not been granted the right to reside in an EU member state - fine. However, his wife who is an EU citizen has the right of family re-unification and if she takes the case to the ECJ, she will in all likelyhood win.

Otherwise, there would be no 'illegal' Albanians :P
They're "illegal" in the sense they entered a Member State illegally after not going through the proper Immigration procedure, but yeh I know what you mean :)

You can not, in the realm of immigration, ever factor out political motivations.
You can as soon as the decision was taken at this level. Applying to a Higher Court (like in the UK the Immigration and Asylum Tribunal or at the highest level, the ECJ) removes the political undertones of this - often governmental decisions like the above are overturned if there is flimsy evidence. Of course the battle will occur between her legal right to be with her family in her home country, and the State's case for national security which is not up to judicial interpretation.

There are no bright line rules when it comes to processing immigration applications...much depends on discretion.
There kinda are clear rules....! If the person is legally entitled to enter but is denied by politics, the political decision gets overturned by the Courts.

You decide whether your post was serious or not after the fact.

Good theory, didn't realize you could read my mind all the way in...I'm guessing Northwest territories of Canada while I'm in the South East part of the United States. Fascinating!

Oh, I know. One of my co-workers has been battling with her case for 2 years. Her husband is Italian and they were married in Sardinia. She lived there for a year and since she was unable to work in her chosen field, she came back to Madrid and started the presentation of documents in order to come here. Immigration has given them hell in order for him to be able to come and live/work in Spain. His visa has been granted, but she suffered a lot.

Where's she from as a matter of interest?

Where's she from as a matter of interest?

She's Spanish.

She's Spanish.

Hold on. She's Spanish and he's Italian. Something is wrong there - did he have employment lined up in Spain?

I never said it did. Neither does the ECJ - if you look for the cases of "Chen" or "Carpenter" or even more recently "Metock" it gives an indication of the way the ECJ leans in these cases.
http://curia.europa.eu/jurisp/cgi-bin/form.pl?lang=en

I (and the court) was talking about third - country nationals. In this case the husband who is not an EU citizen (I'm taking it for this case to mean a citizen of an EU Member State) has not been granted the right to reside in an EU member state - fine. However, his wife who is an EU citizen has the right of family re-unification and if she takes the case to the ECJ, she will in all likelyhood win.

The same right exists in Canada. It works better if you're trying to reunite with white family members though.

The problem is, this is not just a family reunification case. If Omar has a legitimate reason to fear for his safety, he can't sit it out waiting for her case to be heard. Generally, he would be required to wait at home, rather than risk prejudicing his case by being in another country illegally. His best bet seems to be to stay in Qatar, if they want to challenge this on a reunificaiton basis.

However, now that it's known he is looking for asylum, all a country has to do is refuse to allow him onto their soil. Once he lands, he has to be granted a hearing...if he is never allowed to land, he is owed nothing. Hot potato.

It's nice that you actually have a clue as to what you're talking about though...rather refreshing on this forum :D Thanks for the link, navigating Quicklaw for ECJ cases is fucking hellish.



They're "illegal" in the sense they entered a Member State illegally after not going through the proper Immigration procedure, but yeh I know what you mean :)
Then you also know that Albanians suddenly turn "Greek" when they enter Belgium :P That can be a fun thing to untangle when they're trying to gain legal status somewhere.

You can as soon as the decision was taken at this level. Applying to a Higher Court (like in the UK the Immigration and Asylum Tribunal or at the highest level, the ECJ) removes the political undertones of this - often governmental decisions like the above are overturned if there is flimsy evidence. Of course the battle will occur between her legal right to be with her family in her home country, and the State's case for national security which is not up to judicial interpretation. Oh there is still judicial interpretation, just not to the extent as you'd find in a common law jurisdiction. And the case for national security of course has political under and overtones.

Discretion, to the extent that it exists very strongly in Canada, can be positive and negative. Administrative tribunals adjudicate asylum hearings...not judges...judges come in only once there has been an application for judicial review of a case. You can always appeal to the Minister, or file a Humanitarian and Compassionate application if you've been denied...

I'm aware that in the EU, there is less flexibility, but also more certainty. Overall, there is more laxity in terms of status (as in, it's somewhat easier to be an 'illegal' in the EU), but more strictness in terms of gaining permanent residence and/or official asylum.



There kinda are clear rules....! If the person is legally entitled to enter but is denied by politics, the political decision gets overturned by the Courts.
I'm not talking about being legally entitled to enter...at that point, you have rights that you can then ask to have enforced.

If you are denied entry, you cannot launch an asylum application at all, which is where he's at right now.

She could make a case based on reunification, but again, if he is legitimately in danger, that isn't necessarily going to help.

Hold on. She's Spanish and he's Italian. Something is wrong there - did he have employment lined up in Spain?

Nope, because she moved to Italy and married him there. Then she was unable to get work there and moved back. She lived with him in both Rome and Sardinia for a year.

In all honesty I don't know what she's going to do, because he needs to be living in Spain for 2 full years before he can look for a job. A legal one, that is.

The same right exists in Canada. It works better if you're trying to reunite with white family members though.
Ah. I see.

The problem is, this is not just a family reunification case. If Omar has a legitimate reason to fear for his safety, he can't sit it out waiting for her case to be heard. Generally, he would be required to wait at home, rather than risk prejudicing his case by being in another country illegally. His best bet seems to be to stay in Qatar, if they want to challenge this on a reunificaiton basis.
True, I can see that as he's applying for political asylum it makes his own case a lot harder to accept. He is not fleeing war, torture or oppression - he is essentially looking to emigrate but has (IMO) gone about it arseways.

However, now that it's known he is looking for asylum, all a country has to do is refuse to allow him onto their soil. Once he lands, he has to be granted a hearing...if he is never allowed to land, he is owed nothing. Hot potato.
True.

It's nice that you actually have a clue as to what you're talking about though...rather refreshing on this forum :D
Thanks, you too :D Glad also to know that the stuff I'm currently doing isn't going to waste! :tongue:

Thanks for the link, navigating Quicklaw for ECJ cases is fucking hellish.
Quicklaw? Damn woman no! eurlex is best. That other one was a quick google search and only does post-1997. Here's the better link:
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/RECH_jurisprudence.do or just go to eurlex and case law.

Then you also know that Albanians suddenly turn "Greek" when they enter Belgium :P .....
<snip>
She could make a case based on reunification, but again, if he is legitimately in danger, that isn't necessarily going to help.

All true and all agreed :wink:

PM, I've been able to find the cases you referenced, but only a very truncated ruling (the ECJ is much more succinct than our upper courts tend to be)...where would the case from the lower court be?

Edit: nm, found the link. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm)

Is it bad (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:62000J0060:EN:HTML) that I love this shit?

Edit edit: ah, I see you anticipated my needs, fantastic! So are you studying immigration law, or simply working as an advocate? I'm planning on going into Immigration/Refugee law once I graduate in the spring.

Is it bad (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:62000J0060:EN:HTML) that I love this shit?

Nah, it's what you love, woman.

PM, I've been able to find the cases you referenced, but only a very truncated ruling...where would the case from the lower court be?

Edit: nm, found the link. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm)

Is it bad (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:62000J0060:EN:HTML) that I love this shit?

Ah you have them now. Sadly, no one really bothers to condense the rulings into easily digestible summaries - you do have to crawl through them. Some of the more recent ones from the UK in light on the Metock ruling (really recent) make for interesting rulings coming up. The area of EU citizenship seems to have gone into overdrive with everyone claiming some right being infringed by Member States' courts/governments.

It's cool - I've more work to do on this area anyway so the more practice I get on here the better :D

Edit 1:@ Neesika: Doing an LLM in International Law here in Edinburgh. *points left* (Asylum and Immigration, Human Rights, EU Criminal/Freedom, Security and Justice and also Fundamental Issues in International Law)

Edit 2: @ Nanatsu: The fact he has no work lined up makes more sense now. Sadly. Hope it goes well for them.

Ah you have them now. Sadly, no one really bothers to condense the rulings into easily digestible summaries - you do have to crawl through them. Some of the more recent ones from the UK in light on the Metock ruling (really recent) make for interesting rulings coming up. The area of EU citizenship seems to have gone into overdrive with everyone claiming some right being infringed by Member States' courts/governments.
That makes sense, considering the way the formation of the EU would in a sense homogenise immigration policies. There's also a strong push to integrate established human rights law across the board, especially in the context of the various UN conventions on point. Our own case law has gotten absolutely fascinating since the Charter was introduced in 1982 and the s.7 (right to life, liberty and security of the person) cases really started coming in. As well, ECJ rulings are not binding, but they are extremely persuasive, since they've got more Convention analysis under their belt than we do. Not to mention the right to appeal to the UNHCR as a last resort in asylum cases.

It's cool - I've more work to do on this area anyway so the more practice I get on here the better :D

Edit 1:@ Neesika: Doing an LLM in International Law here in Edinburgh. *points left* (Asylum and Immigration, Human Rights, EU Criminal/Freedom, Security and Justice and Fundamental Issues in International Law)
Wicked! I have to do two more years in Montreal to get my civil law degree...and I'm thinking more and more that I'd like to get involved in international law (immigration/refugee/security law/human rights) if I'm going to have the two degrees anyway.

That makes sense, considering the way the formation of the EU would in a sense homogenise immigration policies. There's also a strong push to integrate established human rights law across the board, especially in the context of the various UN conventions on point. Our own case law has gotten absolutely fascinating since the Charter was introduced in 1982 and the s.7 (right to life, liberty and security of the person) cases really started coming in.
True, I've referenced Canadian law a bit over here.

As well, ECJ rulings are not binding, but they are extremely persuasive,
Pretty much no one goes against the ECJ ruling- because they'd get their ass handed to them by the rest of the other members. Interestingly, Latvia (or maybe Lithuania) is looking to bring back the death penalty for certain crimes which is incompatible with their signing of the Charter on Fundamental Rights - which bans the death penalty outright (Art. 2). There have been quiet whispers of severe sanctions or (though extremely doubtful) even possible expulsion from the EU if they continue down that path, as it goes against a fundamental European right to life policy.


Wicked! I have to do two more years in Montreal to get my civil law degree...and I'm thinking more and more that I'd like to get involved in international law (immigration/refugee/security law/human rights) if I'm going to have the two degrees anyway.

Best Civil Law school in Canada - niiiiice. Stick to it.

Ahem. I guess we'll let the thread get back on track a bit :tongue: :$

True, I've referenced Canadian law a bit over here.


Pretty much no one goes against the ECJ ruling- because they'd get their ass handed to them by the rest of the other members. Interestingly, Latvia (or maybe Lithuania) is looking to bring back the death penalty for certain crimes which is incompatible with their signing of the Charter on Fundamental Rights - which bans the death penalty outright (Art. 2). There have been quiet whispers of severe sanctions or (though extremely doubtful) even possible expulsion from the EU if they continue down that path, as it goes against a fundamental European right to life policy. Interesting! I meant specifically that the ECJ is not binding here. Mostly I said that because any USian lawyers/wannabe lawyers tend to have difficulty with the notion of 'law outside of the US' being applicable in domestic courts, and often when I mention referencing law from outside Canada, they get confused. :D Just to clarify for any lurkers.




Best Civil Law school in Canada - niiiiice. Stick to it. Yeah, I'm excited and somewhat intimidated by McGill's reputation as the oldest law school in Canada...one of the few 'ivories' we can really boast of. I resent the fact that had I simply gone there in the first place I'd have had the two degrees in 3 1/2 years, and now it's going to take me 5, but ah well. GoG is in Montreal, and that makes it all worth it :D

Ahem. I guess we'll let the thread get back on track a bit :tongue: :$
Okay. At least until this thread hits the bottom of the first page, then I'm going to declare that international law IS the track :D

Interesting! I meant specifically that the ECJ is not binding here. Mostly I said that because any USian lawyers/wannabe lawyers tend to have difficulty with the notion of 'law outside of the US' being applicable in domestic courts, and often when I mention referencing law from outside Canada, they get confused. :D Just to clarify for any lurkers.
Ahhhh. Even clearer now. Of course. :wink:


Yeah, I'm excited and somewhat intimidated by McGill's reputation as the oldest law school in Canada...one of the few 'ivories' we can really boast of. I resent the fact that had I simply gone there in the first place I'd have had the two degrees in 3 1/2 years, and now it's going to take me 5, but ah well.
One or two over here went to McGill and now they're here - so don't take it as the be all and end all!

GoG is in Montreal, and that makes it all worth it :D
Naturally!

In general if you need anything about any of the stuff I mentioned above, or just someone else to bounce an idea off - feel free to drop me a TG. :p

Edit 2: @ Nanatsu: The fact he has no work lined up makes more sense now. Sadly. Hope it goes well for them.

What saddens me the most is that this man had an amazing job with the EU in Italy. He has to leave it now. Actually, he arrives tomorrow. I just hope this move improves their marriage and life-style. My co-worker had it tough in Italy.

What saddens me the most is that this man had an amazing job with the EU in Italy. He has to leave it now. Actually, he arrives tomorrow. I just hope this move improves their marriage and life-style. My co-worker had it tough in Italy.

Yeh, the Italians (like the British) are notoriously difficult when it comes to immigration. While I can understand the Spanish govt. point of view that he is not currently employed while in the state (and therefore could be considered to be a 'burden on the state') I find it ridiculous (but not surprising sadly) that he has to wait two years before he has the legal right to work in Spain.

Unless his employment records with the EU carry some weight with the Spanish officials....? :(

Yeh, the Italians (like the British) are notoriously difficult when it comes to immigration. While I can understand the Spanish govt. point of view that he is not currently employed while in the state (and therefore could be considered to be a 'burden on the state') I find it ridiculous (but not surprising sadly) that he has to wait two years before he has the legal right to work in Spain.

Spain is over-zelous with it's jobs.

Unless his employment records with the EU carry some weight with the Spanish officials....? :(

I was telling her that she should contact the EU offices here. He, perhaps, could do work for the Italian branch from here, or even the Spanish branch. I do think that his records would count no matter where he goes on the EU. We'll see. I hope they do not encounter big problems.

Why not? You judged an entire country by the actions of it's government.
Actually I didn't. I judge Spain by what Clarky says about it, and he says it's all about non-Brits doing bullsrun with subsidized bulls on subsidized streets and throwing subsidized tomatoes at each other.


Whatever your opinion of Spain, this man has an EU passport. He can settle anywhere in the EU. Why did he decide to apply for asylum in my country beats me.
Me too. Being a MAN, he should go to the Isle of MAN. No stop sign, speed limit, nobody gonna slow him down.

Cumments.

This thread has a wrong name, since it's got nothing to do with OBL. It has to do with his son, who, I presume, has little if any contact with his father. Less even than Scott in Austin Powers.

The only good side I find here is that Spain is a sidewall of a butthole anyway, and he deserves better than that.

Actually, when I was there, I found Spain to be quite a nice country.