{"id":4676,"date":"2018-02-02T08:40:47","date_gmt":"2018-02-02T08:40:47","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2019-07-23T11:16:58","modified_gmt":"2019-07-23T11:16:58","slug":"marriage-immigration-law","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/free-law-essays\/general-law\/marriage-immigration-law.php","title":{"rendered":"Marriages of Convenience"},"content":{"rendered":"

Discuss the
\ntreatment of “marriages of convenience” in immigration law<\/h3>\n

Forced and
\narranged marriages in Asian tradition have created a furore in United Kingdom
\nover the years. Now marriages of convenience are creating an upheaval that
\ncannot be stopped. These two kinds of marriages, where plenty of money exchange
\nhands mainly are entered into for circumventing immigration laws. Marriages
\nhave started taking place for such ludicrous reasons like getting a health plan
\nfor the partner. Breaking of the marriage too is equally quick. Usually as
\nsoon as the real intention is fulfilled, marriages are annulled and according
\nto authorities, the bride and groom do not live together in most of these
\ncases. We even come across marriages by proxy. Both the parties have to sign a
\ncontract and this is accepted in countries like El Salvador and Israel. The
\nproblem arises when the spouse applies for a UK Visa. UK being keen on cutting
\ndown as many illegal entries as possible would definitely discourage such
\nmarriages.<\/p>\n

USA and other
\nEuropean countries too are facing a similar problem. In addition to these
\nmarriages, there are lesbian and gay partners. Once gay and lesbian marriages
\nare accepted, ignoring them becomes a matter of denial of human rights and
\nthese partners could not be refused immigration. At least a few of these
\nmarriages are made only for the simple reason that the other partner should
\ngain an entry to a more developed country. It is difficult to prove the sexual
\norientation of the partners, or if they are real partners at all.<\/p>\n

It is believed
\nthat at least 10,000 marriages per year in London are marriages of convenience.
\nA marriage of convenience could be a passport to reach another country, to
\nescape from the cultural pressures, family squabbles, There are films like The
\nWedding Banquet and Green Card, <\/em>and people are well aware of this
\nsituation. Mail order brides are available in all countries now and their
\nparents do not have much problem about the situation either. UK and other
\nWestern countries have to think of many changes in the Immigration laws to deal
\nwith this situation. It is not very easy to separate legal from the illegal
\nones. Immigration and naturalization of aliens who are married to UK citizens
\nhad been going on for a long time, before this desperate situation arose.<\/p>\n

There are also cases of feigning legitimate relationships when no such thing
\nexists. They keep up the pretence as long as their immigration situation is
\ncleared and go their own way afterwards. There are many examples of ‘one-sided’
\nmarriages. In USA, Immigration of Marriage Fraud Amendment Acts, 1986 has
\neffectively dealt with this matter to a large extent.<\/p>\n

UK Home office has brought many rules to follow while assessing such
\napplications. The careful assessment of marriage photographs and decide if they
\nare genuine is one way of doing it. Whether the consummation of the marriage
\nhas taken place or not? Are there any children? Is the wife pregnant? Whether
\nit is the first marriage or a subsequent marriage, especially for the sponsor?
\nNowadays almost all the Asian, especially Muslim marriages are looked at with
\nsuspicion that could be justified under the circumstances.<\/p>\n

People could be deported from UK on the ground that their presence is ‘not
\nconducive to the public good’ and marriage of convenience could be taken as one
\nof the grounds. Such a deported person can request for the order to be revoked,
\nthrough Home office, or British High Commission in his or her own country. The
\nusual practice is that the order is not revoked at least for three years. Under
\ncertain circumstances, people who have entered without proper permission, or
\nthose who have come under the blanket suspicion of having made the marriage of
\nconvenience, could be treated as illegal entrants. Such people might have
\nentered either by concealing many particulars, or by misleading the Immigration
\nofficers and by disclosing only partial information. Some people leave
\nvoluntarily and there is a provision of paying their fares to return to make it
\nas less painful as possible. It is just a pleasant gesture and this includes
\npeople who are caught in this muddle for no fault of theirs.<\/p>\n

The traditional registered marriages could be easily detected. Genuine
\nmarriages cannot be ignored as part of the Human Rights. Registered marriages
\nmake better impact on authorities. Authorities are looking for proof that the
\nmarriage was performed with the complete approval and co-operation of both the
\nparties and entered into voluntarily, without any ulterior motive or pressure.
\nAlso it should withstand the verification that it was conducted with open consent
\nof both the parties. Nowhere it should give the impression that the marriage
\nwas solely for the purpose of obtaining an entry into United Kingdom and if any
\nof these fail, definitely the request would not be entertained.<\/p>\n

There are many newly introduced rules now to discourage this evil. Both the
\npartners should have attained majority. One of the spouses should hold a legal
\npermission to stay in United Kingdom. A jobless or houseless spouse would not
\nbe able to offer much for the future life of the other person. Spouse’s income
\nand capability of financially looking after the other partner are crucial for
\nan application and none of these should look temporary, ungenuine and
\ndishonest. The education and employment history of the spouse residing in UK
\nwould be assessed. The capability of the spouse to support the alien partner
\nwould be weighed. Sometimes even after all the requirements are met,
\nImmigration officer might get a doubt, just at the unbelievable perfection of
\nthe whole thing and might refuse the permission. With their vast experiences of
\ndealing with hopeful UK citizens, they would have developed an acute
\nsensitivity and sometimes, without any reason, and they feel sure that
\nsomething is wrong somewhere and under those circumstances, they prefer to opt
\nfor more time, to ponder over things. Usually such cases end up in refusing the
\npermission. Sometimes, very strong humanitarian considerations tip the scale in
\nfavour of the alien. Even if there is a child, if neither parent is a British
\ncitizen or legally settled in UK, the child cannot get the British citizenship.<\/p>\n

Marriage of convenience is becoming a bigger problem among Asians
\nand Third world countries. People in their desire to come to developed Western
\ncountries, make the mistake of getting into any kind of marriage alliance and
\nget into trouble very often. It is not as easy as they think it is. Every
\nWestern country is discouraging this trend before it attains an enormous
\nthreatening form. This does not mean that the trend has fully stopped. It goes
\non in the face of discouraging laws and tightened immigration rules.<\/p>\n

Foreign spouses, especially after the
\nonslaught of terrorism, have been regarded with suspicion in all western
\ncountries for obvious reasons. Immigration authorities are also nervous that
\nterrorists might be using the marriage of convenience as one of their tools to
\nget access into the Western countries. There are enough reasons to be sure that
\nmany brides are willing to be part of the ongoing Jihad by helping the
\nterrorists to gain entry. With that in mind, UK law had taken many measures to
\ndiscourage the new and dangerous trend. Immigration authorities, while
\nconsidering the foreign spouse applications are expected to mainly consider if
\nthe couple had shared residence earlier or not, and if so, for how long;
\nwhether they speak the same language, whether they come from the same country;
\nis there any other common language other than English; the age difference
\nbetween the partners; their personal background; is it an impossible union or a
\nworkable one? How much personal knowledge of each other they had before the
\nmarriage? How many times have they married earlier and are any children
\ninvolved in the situation?<\/p>\n

They also assess the overall family
\nsituation of both the partners, like the length and nature of partners’
\nstays in the respective countries, both the partners’ family ties with United
\nKingdom and mainly the alien person’s country of birth. To
\nfulfill the condition of maintenance, the UK partner is supposed to show his
\nincome and expenditure statement, an adequate place of dwelling, etc.
\nStatements of income, self-employment income, public and private pensions
\nbenefit, sickness and even maternity benefit in some cases will be asked to be
\nsubmitted.<\/p>\n

Marriages are being
\nscrutinized by all Immigration authorities in great detail for considering the
\nfamily reunification request. The examination of the role of marriage
\nregistrars in immigration co0ntrol enforcement is important for several
\nreasons. First it is important in itself, not least as registrars have now
\nimposed on them a statutory duty to report so called ‘sham’ marriages, says Cohen, (2003, p.128).
\nClose relatives like cousins getting married to one another is viewed
\nsuspiciously, as forced or authoritatively arranged marriage could be detected.
\nDetails of even distant cousins, grandparents, siblings, uncles and aunts,
\nrelatives in various countries etc have been scrutinized. If partners could
\nprove beyond doubt that the marriage has taken place according to their own
\ndesire, without any pressure from any one, usually the request for family
\nreunification is granted. The primacy of the right to family life has not been
\napparent historically in UK immigration law governing marriage-related
\napplications.Marriage and child-rearing practices, concepts of the family and
\nfamily duties are all raised by family settlement applications, says Clayton,
\n(2004, p.206).<\/p>\n

UK does not recognize proxy marriages.
\nNor does it recognize telephone marriages. In some countries like Israel, after
\nsigning certain forms, telephone marriage between the sponsor in UK and the
\nother partner in Israel take place and are accepted under certain conditions.
\nBut they are unacceptable and regarded as marriages of convenience in UK.
\nCommonwealth citizens used to receive visa easily if the other partner is in
\nUK. This provision too has stopped recently.<\/p>\n

Today a lot of people are using this
\nkind of marriage to prevent from being deported from Britain. These bogus
\nmarriages have become a problem not just for the Home Department authorities,
\nbut also for the Family Courts. A marriage abuse team is given the authority of
\nfinding out facts behind such marriages, especially to find out if any money
\ntransactions have taken place between the partner and his sponsor. They make
\nlate calls to suspected houses to find out if the couple is living together.
\nThey ask questions separately to find out any discrepancy thereof. Other than
\nImmigration authorities, very few people knew about it earlier; but today, it
\nhas become a popular mode of finding an entry into UK. If marriages are proved
\nfalse, partners of such marriages could be immediately deported. There are
\nimprobable reports that men disguise themselves as women and get married to
\ngain the citizenship. Authorities also have come across many stories where
\nmoney changes hand for marrying an individual who is in need of a citizenship.
\nThere are also possibilities of professional brides, who get married under
\ndifferent names for money. Tightening up the laws has drawn many criticisms
\ntoo. The fact was that under this provision an increasing number of men were
\nrefused even when their marriage was known to the Home Office to be genuine.
\nThis was never intended by Parliament or even necessarily by the Home Secretary,
\nsays Juss, S (1993, p. 91).<\/p>\n

After suspecting this nexus, Government
\nhas given more power to the marriage registrars. Home office considers this an
\nawful problem that cannot be fully stopped. Sometimes, even though they are
\naware of the problems, they are unable to take any action depending only on
\nsuspicion. Government is trying hard to stop this deception. At the end of the
\nimmigration process, a traveler may eventually be granted leave to remain
\nindefinitely and in due course apply to the Home Office for naturalization as a
\nBritish Citizen. Alternatively, he or she may be removed as an irregular
\nmigrant or face deportation on the grounds of conducive to the public good,
\n(Blake and Hussain, 2003, 1.12, p. 22).<\/p>\n

Cases: On 10.10.2000, the case of Pin-Wah Jeff
\nChang vs Home Department of UK came up in front of Immigration Appeal
\nTribunal. The Appellant, a citizen of Malaysia, questioned the refusal of
\nright to remain in the United Kingdom as the spouse of an EEA national and
\ndenying him the right to appeal. There was a question if it was a valid
\nmarriage or a marriage of convenience. There was also a doubt if the
\nrelationship was a lawful one or not. They had to consider if the Appellant had
\nbeen denied any of the Community Rights. It was pointed out that it was a
\nmarriage of convenience to ignore the entry rules of UK, and the complaint was
\ndismissed.<\/p>\n

In case of R (Kimani) v Lambeth LBC
\n(2004), Kimani, Kenyan national who arrived at UK for asylum with her son,
\nmarried an Irish national, but permission was not given for her to stay in UK
\nwas rejected for contracting a marriage of convenience.<\/p>\n

Under Primary Purpose-Rule (in effect
\nfrom 1980 to 1997) British citizens, married to non-EU citizens had to prove
\nthat marriage was not for avoiding deportation. Onus is on the parties to
\nclarify the genuineness of it and this deters many. Labor Government modified
\nthese laws.<\/p>\n

The change in rules had an immediate
\neffect. In 1996, there were 1,960 applications for entry from Pakistan to
\nBritain from would be husbands. In 1998, after the law was changed there were
\n5,080,<\/p>\n

http:\/\/news.bbc.co.uk\/1\/hi\/uk\/392619.stm<\/p>\n

70% of Bangladeshi and Pakistani
\nmarriages in UK are arranged. Entry Clearance rules are tightened up to the
\nmaximum now. The minimum age of the bride to be allowed to UK was raised from
\n16 to 18 years. At this age, they cannot act as sponsors either and after entry
\na period of 12 month is compulsory and now it has been extended up to two
\nyears. British National Criminal Intelligence Service, An-Nisa Society,
\nAnti-Slavery International, Anti-Trafficing Programme, Apna Ghar, Asylum Aid,
\nBelgrave Baheno, Enfield Saheli, Institute of Race Relations are some
\nGovernment and Non Government organizations who are fighting these evils.<\/p>\n

Immigration has been a hot topic during
\nthe election campaign and in the last few years a number of people have been
\nconvicted in connection with bogus wedding scams linked to illegal immigration.
\nhttp:\/\/newswww.bbc.net.uk\/2\/hi\/uk_news\/4480729.stm<\/p>\n

BIBLIOGRAPHY:<\/h3>\n