No clarity on 'fence jumper' policy
Page 7
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE HOME OFFICE was unwilling to explain last week how a driver could prove that any stowaway found in their trailer was a "fence jumper", which would mean they were not liable for a fine.
The apparent loophole in the law that governs civil penalty procedures against truck drivers and operators transporting illegal immigrants into the UK can be found in step-by-step instructions for ports from the Home Office.
The paragraph in question, which CM has been unable to find anywhere else and which has surprised transport lawyers, states: "Fence jumpers' are those who have bypassed the UK-juxtaposed control point to conceal themselves in a vehicle in the ferry lanes. For the purposes of the legislation, such persons are not clandestine entrants because they have not passed the control hidden in a vehicle and a civil penalty cannot be imposed in such circumstances."
The operator John English attempted to use the 'fence jumper' defence when three stowaways hid in the trailer of his driver, Jonathan Muggleton, in Calais (CM 17 April. 'Too much emphasis on lists, say drivers').
The Home Office even went as far as acknowledging this in a letter to English's MR but claimed: -There is no evidence to support this allegation."
When CM pressed the Home Office to explain how an operator could prove an illegal immigrant was a 'fence jumper' and not a 'clandestine entrant', it would not answer.
Instead, a spokeswoman would only say: "We are getting too much into the legalities of that question. The UK control zone extends from the UK border agency passport control point up to and including the berths where vehicles wait to embark."