Blind Pakistan cricketers denied visas to Britain

[Ram]

You can't start taking disabilities into account when giving out visas. If preferential treatment in visa applications was given to people with various disabilities or handicaps - how long would it take for a whole lot of fraud to open up in that area and people to try and exploit it?

Hmmm, I hear you, but if they're start denying visas to sports delegations officiallly sanctioned by that Govt. (albeit, a crappy one), how in the world do they expect to have bilateral and multilateral sports tournaments to happen?

[DomainK]

You can't start taking disabilities into account when giving out visas. If preferential treatment in visa applications was given to people with various disabilities or handicaps - how long would it take for a whole lot of fraud to open up in that area and people to try and exploit it?

Yup. If they are ready to die to blow a bomb, they would willingly give up their eyes a few days before blowing up.

Hmmm' date=' I hear you, but if they're start denying visas to sports delegations officiallly sanctioned by that Govt. (albeit, a crappy one), how in the world do they expect to have bilateral and multilateral sports tournaments to happen?[/quote'] Agree. The fact that the British government allowed the tournament in the first place is an indirect agreement that they would welcome the participating teams to enter their land as long as they fulfill the formalities. The immigration officer's only job then would be to ensure that the formalities are taken care of.

[yoda]

You can't start taking disabilities into account when giving out visas. If preferential treatment in visa applications was given to people with various disabilities or handicaps - how long would it take for a whole lot of fraud to open up in that area and people to try and exploit it?

It is not about given away free visas to the blind. It is about being considerate and cutting them some slack. Ofc there is a lot of subjectivity there and people have to use common sense. No one is saying let in some blind-acting terrorists.

[Mamu]

I don't think an immigration officer can get away with this kind of ****. If he is stopping a team from playing a tournament' date=' he will have to answer to someone.[/quote'] That is the point -- you could be denied for any reason -- there are no rules against it. The Officer might say -- "I dont think you guys will return back to this country and hence we deny you the visa". Nothing could be done about it. Having said that -- usually when a high profile visit is on the cards -- it is taken up through diplomatic channels -- just to ensure there are no hiccups. Especially a country like Pakis should take the matter -- higher up - considering the great reputation they enjoy world over.

[DomainK]

It is not about given away free visas to the blind. It is about being considerate and cutting them some slack. Ofc there is a lot of subjectivity there and people have to use common sense. No one is saying let in some blind-acting terrorists.

But doesn't cutting some slack defeat the very purpose of stopping the wrong guys? The blind may be treated better, helped and the process may be made simpler for them and if something is found unsatisfying, the no should be curt. But the possibility that one of them might have a wrong intention can not be underestimated.

[Mr. Wicket]

Hmmm' date=' I hear you, but if they're start denying visas to sports delegations officiallly sanctioned by that Govt. (albeit, a crappy one), how in the world do they expect to have bilateral and multilateral sports tournaments to happen?[/quote'] Depends on the governments sanctioning things. If it was a major sporting body sanctioned by a significant government it would be one case. Here we are talking about a minor body here (Pakistan Blind Cricket Council, NOT the PCB) sponsored by a corrupt and volatile government that has been accused of aiding and abetting terrorism and responsible for creating rogue terrorist groups. Different strokes for different folks.

[yoda]

But doesn't cutting some slack defeat the very purpose of stopping the wrong guys? The blind may be treated better' date=' helped and the process may be made simpler for them and if something is found unsatisfying, the no should be curt. But the possibility that one of them might have a wrong intention can not be underestimated.[/quote'] No, cutting slack doesn't mean going easy on their paperwork. It is cutting out the extra curricular crap like "Prove to me that you will return to your country", etc. This is something no one can prove. BTW, any and all checking should be done when folks apply for visa. Rejecting these hapless folks once they arrive (if they have a valid visa and return ticket) is absurd, more so if they are blind. To have these guys train, overcome obstacles in their lives, only to have their dreams shattered cause some immigration official decided to screw them is POS.

[Mr. Wicket]

No' date=' cutting slack doesn't mean going easy on their paperwork. It is cutting out the extra curricular crap like "Prove to me that you will return to your country", etc. This is something no one can prove.[/quote'] It can be proved very easily. For pretty much any visa application, show proof of a paid return ticket. It is a STANDARD requirement for visa applications to the UK, Australia, any of the EU countries for a Schengen visa, China and a lot of other countries. If you ever apply for a visa to these places, you need to show a full ticket to go with an itinerary and proof of funds. Just about everyone I know who has travelled to the UK (myself included on multiple occasions) has followed this procedure. Obviously these people didn't, otherwise they wouldn't be handing affidavits promising to return.

[yoda]

OK. I misunderstood. I thought they were denied entry after they came in with the valid Visa. Now if they were missing some paperwork, they could have been asked to provide the missing paperwork (whatever was missing) instead of asking them to **** off. But if the criteria is to prove that you are financially well off which would indicate that you will return, now, not everyone is going to be able to prove that. That is where they could cut some slack.

[Mr. Wicket]

The OP says: "The team were due to play four matches on a tour of the UK, on the invitation of Blind Cricket England and Wales, but the UK border agency told the BBC that they didn't have sufficient evidence to be sure the players would return to Pakistan on completion of the tour." Which I think clearly points to either the lack of a return ticket, or appropriate funds. And re. your point about " Now if they were missing some paperwork, they could have been asked to provide the missing paperwork (whatever was missing) instead of asking them to **** off." - this is standard procedure. I've applied for visas for a bunch of countries when travelling or relocating - on the occasions when I'm missing something (or countries have particularly weird requirements like academic enrollment proof, or birth certificates) the folks at the embassy/consul general will ALWAYS say what's missing and needed first before they will take the app. If they stress something is required and that documentation isn't provided, then the visa apps will get turned down. I don't see why people are vilifying the UK border agencies for sticking to what are standard rules for anyone and everyone.

[nballa]

its because the last time a pakistan team toured UK none of them returned back. they feel its a right of birth of every paki that they be granted UK citizenship. lets put it this way the more no of visas denied the less number of UK pakis the world has to deal with. ps:- no disrespect to the blind whatsoever.

[Mr. Wicket]

I think the last time a Pakistan team toured UK - forget having problems returning to their own country, I thought they had problems just leaving the dressing room for the field...