Was watching a news report, filed by CNN’s Tokyo corespondent Kyung Lah and reboradcast on SBS World News Australia, about Noriko Calderon, the 13 year old daughter of 2 Filipino illegal immigrants, who was forced to choose between staying in Japan, or following her parents who were deported earlier this month.
A news article in the Japan Times paints the picture of Noriko trying to resume her life as normal, or as much as it can be resumed to normality, at the very least.
The facts are interesting. Noriko’s parents, Arlan and Sarah Calderon, entered Japan in the early 90’s with fake passports. Both of them worked in Japan, somehow managing to evade authorities and living under the radar. In between Noriko Calderon was born in Japan, grew up in Japan, and for intents and purposes, is like any other Japanese girl. Until 2006, when Sarah Calderon was rounded up in a immigration raid, and the authorities realised they have a illegal family.
If there is one thing I really wonder, is how did they manage to actually get through life in Japan for so long undetected. The Iban's of Sarawak can't go to school because they don't have birth certificates, and illegal immigrants with no documents can.
The Calderon’s fought the case all the way up to Tokyo High Court, until the courts said no in Jan 2009, and the deportation order was upheld. Almost 3 years between the raid and the final decision of the Tokyo High Court. They sure bought a lot of time.
I will admit, the first thing that came to my mind reading this piece of news was “They should have gone to Sabah”. No really. Sabah is just a hop away from the Philippines, while in that same scale Japan is a galaxy far far away. All the Calderons needed to do was to work there for 5 years, earn enough money to pay off a ketua kampong (village head), and viola! Instant Bumiputera citizenship! Complete with rights that my family are denied, they and Noriko (I bet she would have been called Nurul) are considered sons of the land!
It is a sad case, but I seriously doubt that they would have had any better luck being in another country. Each nation in this world in entitled to decide who comes in and who does not. Some do it better than others. Some have their borders more porous than a membrane. Naturally any such discussion would be largely academic, but if I was to take a punt, I would say given the same facts, the Calderon family would have been deported anyway in many jurisdictions.
Naturally, I am just a Malaysian and half a law student, so I can’t say too much. Japan uses a Civil Law system, while Malaysia/Australia use the Common Law. But let’s assume a Australian jurisdiction. A Navorski family from Krakozhia enters Australia with fake passports. They work without a work permit. In between they have a child; let’s call her Nancy. Nancy goes to a typical suburban school, speaks only English, and for intents and purposes is an Australian. She can’t speak Krakozhian to save her life, and has little knowledge of her Krahozhian culture.
One day, 16 years after the illegal entry, Immigration authorities raid the word place of Mrs Navorski, and discover they have a illegal family on their hands, and they have been working illegally for the past 12 years. But statue, everything the Navorski family have done is completely illegal, and they deserve to be sent back to Krakozhia.
However, Nancy was born on Australian soil. To foreign parents who had no right to be in Australia, but still, on Australian soil. Australia practices lex soli, a slightly modified form of jus soli, where Australian citizenship is given to those born on Australian soil for the first 18 years of their lives, after which one has to decide to give it up or naturalise.
Prima facie, Nancy may have grounds for staying on in Australia. But can Mr and Mrs Navorski use her to right against their deportation order?
If the case of Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Teoh is any indication, no. Having a child in Australia is not a reason to waive the illegality of one’s entry and settlement. Even if Nancy’s parents tried to invoke the (amongst others) International Convention for the rights of the Child, specifically Article 9, which the Calderon’s did, it would highly unlikely for a Australian court to uphold the Convention, assuming that the precedent set by Chow Hung Ching v R is followed.
I personally think, in a Australian jurisdiction, Nancy would end up pretty much like Noriko’s sad situation. It is unfortunate, but if the courts said “Awwww. You poor family. Okay, you can stay in Australia despite your illegal entry because you have a child here”, Australia would be swamped with illegal immigrants desperately humping their wives to get a child so they can stay in Australia.
One has to see this matter from many different views. I personally do not like the waves of Indon’s, Bangla’s and Mainland Chinese waltzing into Malaysia, and this is coming from a guy who is considered a “immigrant” by many in the Malaysian political establishment, never mind my family has been in what is now known as “Malaysia” longer than some in the said establishment.
Also, Malaysia is a very diverse nation, with 4 different languages, 3 major races and a vortex of differences. 40% of Australia’s population was born overseas. As I have said, Japan is a extremely homogenous nation. If nations with multiculturalism have trouble with this, what about Japan, where multiculturalism is a alien concept, never mind illegal immigrants who want to stay on just because they have a daughter.
But I respect Noriko and the Calderon’s decision to leave her in Japan. She was born in Japan, grew up in Japan, and for intents and purposes is Japanese, even if her genetic makeup is not. Frankly, on a personal level, if the Malaysian government, high on the crack it supplies to the Mat Rempits, one day decide to give all ethnic Chinese in Malaysia a ultimatum: go back to China or be killed, I’d rather die than even contemplate going back to China. I may be a Sarawakian first, but I am more Malaysian than Chinese.
The Calderon’s fought the case all the way up to Tokyo High Court, until the courts said no in Jan 2009, and the deportation order was upheld. Almost 3 years between the raid and the final decision of the Tokyo High Court. They sure bought a lot of time.
I will admit, the first thing that came to my mind reading this piece of news was “They should have gone to Sabah”. No really. Sabah is just a hop away from the Philippines, while in that same scale Japan is a galaxy far far away. All the Calderons needed to do was to work there for 5 years, earn enough money to pay off a ketua kampong (village head), and viola! Instant Bumiputera citizenship! Complete with rights that my family are denied, they and Noriko (I bet she would have been called Nurul) are considered sons of the land!
It is a sad case, but I seriously doubt that they would have had any better luck being in another country. Each nation in this world in entitled to decide who comes in and who does not. Some do it better than others. Some have their borders more porous than a membrane. Naturally any such discussion would be largely academic, but if I was to take a punt, I would say given the same facts, the Calderon family would have been deported anyway in many jurisdictions.
Naturally, I am just a Malaysian and half a law student, so I can’t say too much. Japan uses a Civil Law system, while Malaysia/Australia use the Common Law. But let’s assume a Australian jurisdiction. A Navorski family from Krakozhia enters Australia with fake passports. They work without a work permit. In between they have a child; let’s call her Nancy. Nancy goes to a typical suburban school, speaks only English, and for intents and purposes is an Australian. She can’t speak Krakozhian to save her life, and has little knowledge of her Krahozhian culture.
One day, 16 years after the illegal entry, Immigration authorities raid the word place of Mrs Navorski, and discover they have a illegal family on their hands, and they have been working illegally for the past 12 years. But statue, everything the Navorski family have done is completely illegal, and they deserve to be sent back to Krakozhia.
However, Nancy was born on Australian soil. To foreign parents who had no right to be in Australia, but still, on Australian soil. Australia practices lex soli, a slightly modified form of jus soli, where Australian citizenship is given to those born on Australian soil for the first 18 years of their lives, after which one has to decide to give it up or naturalise.
Prima facie, Nancy may have grounds for staying on in Australia. But can Mr and Mrs Navorski use her to right against their deportation order?
If the case of Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Teoh is any indication, no. Having a child in Australia is not a reason to waive the illegality of one’s entry and settlement. Even if Nancy’s parents tried to invoke the (amongst others) International Convention for the rights of the Child, specifically Article 9, which the Calderon’s did, it would highly unlikely for a Australian court to uphold the Convention, assuming that the precedent set by Chow Hung Ching v R is followed.
I personally think, in a Australian jurisdiction, Nancy would end up pretty much like Noriko’s sad situation. It is unfortunate, but if the courts said “Awwww. You poor family. Okay, you can stay in Australia despite your illegal entry because you have a child here”, Australia would be swamped with illegal immigrants desperately humping their wives to get a child so they can stay in Australia.
One has to see this matter from many different views. I personally do not like the waves of Indon’s, Bangla’s and Mainland Chinese waltzing into Malaysia, and this is coming from a guy who is considered a “immigrant” by many in the Malaysian political establishment, never mind my family has been in what is now known as “Malaysia” longer than some in the said establishment.
Also, Malaysia is a very diverse nation, with 4 different languages, 3 major races and a vortex of differences. 40% of Australia’s population was born overseas. As I have said, Japan is a extremely homogenous nation. If nations with multiculturalism have trouble with this, what about Japan, where multiculturalism is a alien concept, never mind illegal immigrants who want to stay on just because they have a daughter.
But I respect Noriko and the Calderon’s decision to leave her in Japan. She was born in Japan, grew up in Japan, and for intents and purposes is Japanese, even if her genetic makeup is not. Frankly, on a personal level, if the Malaysian government, high on the crack it supplies to the Mat Rempits, one day decide to give all ethnic Chinese in Malaysia a ultimatum: go back to China or be killed, I’d rather die than even contemplate going back to China. I may be a Sarawakian first, but I am more Malaysian than Chinese.
What about Malaysia? I know, it is difficult to imagine, especially when one considers how easy it is for Indons to be classified as bumiputera’s, the police and more concerned breaking up political ceramah’s than catching snatch thieves who are now doing their “trade” with guns, but let’s (somehow) assume that the rule of law was upheld in Malaysia, and Nurul has parents who are illegal immigrants, and have been living here for 15 years. Would the parents be deported, or be allowed to stay on.
I would say that there is a possibility that Nurul’s parents would be given some form of residency in Malaysia under compassionate grounds. Certainly I can imagine the public outcry raising enough money to enable them to stay on under the MM2H program. And whether we like it or not, the fundamentals of Malaysia are oiled by migrant workers. Migrant workers, legal or otherwise, are very much largely dependent on modern Malaysia. Even a school block extension in my secondary school days were built by Indon’s on tourist visa’s.
Pulling teeth is easier than getting locals to work as toilet cleaners at KLIA, and that is taking into account that the main terminal buildings are pretty much dead with the bulk of the traffic channelled into the tin shack. There can’t be that much cleaning up after to do.
It is a very sad case for Norkio, but that is the law for you, in any legal system. To do justice to the majority, a minority have to suffer. It is unjust, but that is reality. And popular opinion, not to mention Norko herself, would prefer to have her parents able to stay on, but unfortunately, the law is there, and the law has to take into account any wider implications.
It probably doesn’t help that Japan is a Civil Law country. The Civil Codes do not give the courts too much discretion in making an exception to the rule. Coupled with a homogenous population and a culture where the law is seen as more as a punisher than a protector of rights, it is no surprise that many commentators see Japan having one of the highest rates of miscarriage of justice.
It is not too hard to see how Tsugumi Oba, whoever he may be, came out with the Death Note story idea. Certainly I wouldn’t mind a Death Note. Just minus the girl in goth.
It is not too hard to see how Tsugumi Oba, whoever he may be, came out with the Death Note story idea. Certainly I wouldn’t mind a Death Note. Just minus the girl in goth.
No comments:
Post a Comment