The Citizenship Rights Of Asylum Seekers In Britain Essay

The Citizenship Rights Of Asylum Seekers In Britain - Essay Example â€Å"This suggests that there is a connection between someone’s nationality and the question of whether they pose a threat to our security. This has fed community unrest, marginalization and even violence against minority groups† (Asylum, n. d.). It is not easy for some nationalities to get citizenship in Britain even if they are refugees. â€Å"The system of immigration control in the UK splits people into two broad categories: those who have 'right of abode' in the UK and who can live, work and move in and out of the country as they wish, and those who require permission in order to enter and remain here† (Immigration - In England, 2010). 9/11 has changed a lot of laws with respect to the citizenship of refugees in Britain. Earlier, not much segregation was experienced by the refugees. Now it is difficult for people especially from the Muslim countries to get citizenship in Britain. It is a fact that current changes in laws with respect to citizenship in Brita in for asylum seekers are adversely affecting the refugees. At the same time, if a person have been given refugee status or humanitarian protection in the UK, and his initial permission to stay there will expire before the new system of 'earned citizenship' comes into force (scheduled for July 2011),he can still apply for settlement and British citizenship under the current rules (Asylum: Refugees' route to settlement, n. d). In other words, the tightening of the rules is intended for the refugees who may seek asylum in Britain in future.

Leveson Inquiry - Risk management analysis Coursework

Leveson Inquiry - Risk management analysis - Coursework Example The existence of the new entity was to be sanctioned by state, through the creation and ratification new laws. Conversely, the relevance of the DCMS in the recommendations that the Leveson Inquiry made is premised on the very nature, existence and functions of the DCMS. The DCMS is a department of the United Kingdom government, bearing the responsibility for sports and culture in England, and aspects of the media throughout the entire UK, with these aspects being primarily, broadcasting and the Internet. The aspect of a close relationship is seen in the fact that not only did the recommendations by Lord Justice Leveson qualify the future of press regulation, but the same also looked into the relationship between the press and the public, police and politicians, apart from just making a proscription on phone-hacking and other forms of illegal behaviour. This means that DCMS’s jurisdiction is wide enough to include creative industries (and thereby joining DCMS’s operation s with the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills), leisure and tourism. Since sports is also included in DCMS’s sphere of responsibility, the 2012 Olympic Games, the Paralympics Games and the building of the Digital Economy have fallen within this rubric. In respect to the foregoing, it is important to take to stock, the changes that the recommendations the Leveson Inquiry made, in order to determine the new framework that the DCMS will use to discharge its duties. One of the recommendations that the Leveson Inquiry made is that newspapers should continue to be self-regulated and that the government should have no power to determine what newspapers or newspaper outlets publish. Another recommendation that the Leveson Inquiry made is that there should be a new body taking charge over press standards and that this new body should be a creation of the media industry and that the industry in turn should have a new code of conduct. The Leveson Inquiry also made recommenda tion to the effect that the existence and operations of the newly contrived body or entity should be enshrined in the constitution (legislation). Lord Justice Leveson explained this recommendation as being necessitated by the need to have an independent and effective regulation on the newly formed body. The need for this overhaul according to Lord Justice Leveson is that the current system in which the press is voluntarily self-regulated through the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) has proved to be moribund. It is for this reason that the PCC itself readily agreed to enter a transitional phase, to pave way for the long-term replacement. As the Chairman of PCC, Lord Hunt himself conceded to the fact that there was a dire need for a stronger, tougher and more independent regulator with teeth. Lord Hunt had made it clear before the Leveson Inquiry on the willingness among publications for a new body and a fresh start which would ensue from a legally enforceable contract between the ne w body and publishers. In a closely related wavelength, the aspect of independence which the new regulatory body should have is underscored by the Free Speech Network (FSN) as a representation of editors