Possible deportation.

dj you must be exhausted by watching out for threats to others all the time, and living in a country that needs so much putting right must be draining. I'm exhausted just trying to follow your posts on GN.

Amen to that, Alea and Rosequartz

I read that the young man in question had been involved in a sit in (illegal occupation) at Barnet library amongst other things and says;
“I spend a lot of my time campaigning against social cleansing in London, such as the replacement of affordable social housing with expensive private homes. Londoners on low incomes can no longer afford to live in the capital as a result of this gentrification. Because of these protests I am now being socially cleansed myself. It’s a dark time for human rights and non-violent protest.”

Is he perhaps one of that group that goes round trashing new artisan bakeries and cafes in areas of London like Hackney which used to be run down? This much decried "gentrification" can also revitalise an area making it a desirable place to live for young working Lndoners instead of no go areas with high rise slums.
I find his tone self righteous and offensive, "social cleansing" my foot!

I didn't know about the two cases you refer to, rosequartz but yes, I totally agree with you. Some deportations defy reason(and justice) and there are other cases where you wonder how on earth a person has got away with appealing against it.
If I am being honest, there is also something irritating about a young person from another country which until relatively recently had infintely less freedom for the individual under its Communist government, and then this person tries to lay down the law about the perceived wrongs in his adoptive country. In the same way that immigrants to this country, or even visitors can be quick to criticise and I think Hang on, you are a relative newcomer, before you rush to say how much better things are elsewhere, why did you come here in the first place.

It's the principle, roseq, that's what his lawyers are saying.
Just because he is a young Hungarian man who has been trying to stop people being evicted from houses in London does not make him any less deserving of human rights than any other person in the same situation.

What do you mean by anyone who deserves consideration?
The principle is the same, no matter who.

So you are not bothered about human rights, then, roseq.
That is very presumptuous of you durhamjen and extremely rude in fact.
You know nothing about me and what 'bothers' me or worries me.

Just because I am not interested or bothered about this particular young man does not mean that I am not bothered about human rights for anyone who deserves consideration.

The case of the Zimbabwean schoolgirl being deported at age 18 and dreading what she would face there was important to me.
The threatened deportation of the Australian mother with English husband and children was important to me. etc etc

You asked if this particular case was important to me, and no it is not.

My friend is Hungarian, came as a child in 1956. She went to school, learnt English, worked hard, went to college, got a job, married an Englishman, had children and didn't go on protests.

I would call what he is doing it 'biting the hand that feeds you'.

I would not go to Hungary and start protesting there.
I am sure there is plenty to protest about so perhaps he can carry on when he gets back.

So you are not bothered about human rights, then, roseq. Or maybe you do not think that Hungarians should have rights?
You will obviously be pleased when Cameron gets rid of the Human Rights Act so the rest of us do not have any, will you?
Of course, rich people will be able to exert their rights because they will be able to afford to go to the European court of human rights. Just not the rest of us.

So this is not important to you?
Not really, no

“My threatened removal from the UK for engaging in peaceful political protest has very serious implications for everyone who is engaged in legitimate and lawful protest.
No it hasn't.

'His lawyer has claimed'.

I'd rather wait to find out whether what his lawyer has claimed is true before leaping on the bandwagon to condemn 'this government'.

So this is not important to you?

"A political activist arrested but not charged during peaceful protests is facing illegal deportation from the UK, his lawyer has claimed.

It is thought to be the first case of its kind and has raised serious concerns that the right to peaceful protest, which is enshrined in English law, is being eroded."

It's the deportation that is illegal, not the man.

I have other things to worry about ..... than worrying about a fit young man, capable and able to run his own business and to go on demos, from another EU country which, as far as I know, will not torture or imprison him when he returns.

I think we need more information about this person and his 'self-employed' status before we start throwing our hands up in horror and finding it all very worrying...

Perhaps this is another of those pseudo questions we get in the press, -Is blank blank to be deported for dissent? Is the Duke of Edinburgh anti- football ? Did David Beckham go commando when he met Kate? Etc etc
The answer is invariably a resounding "No!" but lots of prejudices opinions get aired in the process.
If, as you say DJ he does not meet the criteria set by the Home Office for being allowed to stay, he faces deportation, if he does, he won't.
Heaven knows we have had to allow all sorts of convicted rapists and other violent convicted criminals stay in the UK Because of their "human rights" often with disastrous consequences.

My immediate thought was 'lots more lucrative work for the human rights lawyers'

Cynical moi? Of course not.

Presumably if he is self-employed and law-abiding he is paying tax, and has enough left after paying his dues to pay for a lawyer.

I doubt he will be deported if he is genuinely self employed.
No prejudice from me, but you and I are only reading what is in a newspaper
djen,we do not know the full truths of the matter.Perhaps this guy is a rabble rouser par excellence, and if for any reason he IS sent home, it's only to his own country, not to some war torn hell hole.

Perhaps you should read that paragraph you quoted again, Alea.
That is no reason to send him home. He has been working here, self-employed, for years. There is nothing illegal about that.
He has not broken any laws. He has not outstayed his visa.
Roses, your prejudice is showing. Where does it say he's on benefits?

This is a human rights issue, a 'first they came for the....' issue.
As it is the government has changed the law so they can deport people before they can object, and have to object from their home country. I thought Hungary was part of the EU. You will be saying next we should sent the French home, and the Germans and Spanish. Then perhaps the Irish?

Anyone who wears one of those silly scarves on their heads is always a 'serial protester' it's usually the only thing that they work hard at.

It says he is self employed......doing what I wonder? He has plenty of time to attend protests here and there. If he is on benefits he should be sent back to Hungary.Either way, I Wouldn't lose any sleep over it.

I imagine the grounds for deportation lie in this final paragraph rather than a conspiracy to stop dissent.

A Home Office spokesman said it did not comment on individual cases, but added: “EU nationals who have been in the country for longer than three months have to be working, studying, self-employed or self-sufficient in order to have a right to stay. If they are not, or don’t have a genuine prospect of doing so, the Home Office expects them to return home