By Hari Dahal (Kantipur)
KATHMANDU, NEPAL - Nepal Metropolitan Police Crime Division (MPCD) has busted two individuals notorious for their involvement in producing forged American visas and duping people. Police said the two had duped a significant number of people with forged American visas, fake job offers and illegal documents. They were running a big racket under the name of Channel Educational Foundation in the capital. Acting on an initial tip-off by the American embassy, a team from MPCD arrested Shankar Dahal, 34, a permanent resident of Dharan, Sunsari and his Philipino wife Kristina Patrinio, 22, on the charge of forgery and embezzlement.
Police investigations showed that the two had returned from Dubai a year ago and started running the racket.Police said they were arrested after the US embassy expressed particular concern and shared information about the big racket taking place in the capital. Selling people American dreams with pledges of attractive jobs in the US the two had conned under-graduate students and other semi-skilled people with counterfeits of American visas and other essential documents. Superintendent of Police Devendra Subedi said they targeted and victimized college-level students and people who were desperate to go abroad. Our preliminary investigation showed that they had already victimized at least seven persons and they were in contact with another 40,” SP subedi said, adding that a detail investigation report going beyond the racket is still awaited as some of those involved are on the run.Police said Bhola Dahal, who had been working as a public relations officer at the illegal educational center, Bikash Thapa and Bhola Raut are also on the run.
Earlier on April 15, Dahal was arrested by police on the charge of kidnapping and freed on bail. They used to tell their victims that the visas were issued by the American embassy in Nepal. “Their victims were so confident they would land in the US with the forged documents that they hesitated to contact police,” SP Subedi said. Channel Education Foundation operated out of Lazimpat, put out advertisements in newspapers and used to take over Rs 0.7 million per person for documentation.After learning about the police investigation, they closed down and then re-opened as another office, named Horizon, at Tangal in Bhatbhateni, police said. They are in police custody at Hanumandhoka.
Sunday, June 29, 2008
More than 3,000 illegal immigrants face UK boot in visa scam
By James Millbank
More than 3,000 illegal immigrants face being deported after cops smashed an £11million visa racket.
The huge scam was exposed when police raided a bogus computer college in west London. The school churned out fake diplomas to help Indians get UK work visas.
Insiders say at least 3,000 people paid more than £3,000 each to join. Cops seized computers, documents and forged visa stamps in the raid in Southall - and later arrested three people. A source said: "It was a massive success." The fake qualifications tricked the Home Office into granting visas under the UK's Highly Skilled Migrant Programme.
Whitehall insiders fear the scam had been going on for 18 months - and netted crooks at least £11million. A source said: "Most of the 'students' can hardly speak a word of English and range from the elderly to the very young."
More than 3,000 illegal immigrants face being deported after cops smashed an £11million visa racket.
The huge scam was exposed when police raided a bogus computer college in west London. The school churned out fake diplomas to help Indians get UK work visas.
Insiders say at least 3,000 people paid more than £3,000 each to join. Cops seized computers, documents and forged visa stamps in the raid in Southall - and later arrested three people. A source said: "It was a massive success." The fake qualifications tricked the Home Office into granting visas under the UK's Highly Skilled Migrant Programme.
Whitehall insiders fear the scam had been going on for 18 months - and netted crooks at least £11million. A source said: "Most of the 'students' can hardly speak a word of English and range from the elderly to the very young."
Saturday, June 28, 2008
Couple arrested for issuing fake US visas in Nepal
KATHMANDU, June 28 - Nepalese police on Saturday arrested two persons on charges of running a fake US visa trade. 
The police nabbed Shankar Dahal, a resident of Sunsari district, and his Filipino wife Christina Patiniyo charging them with issuing fake US visas through a consultancy called ‘Channel Education Foundation’ at Lazimpat in the capital.
According to the Metropolitan Crime Division, the couple was arrested following a tip-off from the US embassy in Nepal.
The police recovered various fake documents including fake letter pads, copies of fake visas, contract letters and bills.
The crime division claimed that the company was charging Rs 700,000 for fake visas.
Another three accomplices of Dahal, Bikash Thapa, Bhola Raut and Bhola Dahal , residents of Dharan, are still at large.
The police nabbed Shankar Dahal, a resident of Sunsari district, and his Filipino wife Christina Patiniyo charging them with issuing fake US visas through a consultancy called ‘Channel Education Foundation’ at Lazimpat in the capital.
According to the Metropolitan Crime Division, the couple was arrested following a tip-off from the US embassy in Nepal.
The police recovered various fake documents including fake letter pads, copies of fake visas, contract letters and bills.
The crime division claimed that the company was charging Rs 700,000 for fake visas.
Another three accomplices of Dahal, Bikash Thapa, Bhola Raut and Bhola Dahal , residents of Dharan, are still at large.
British rickshaw adventurers facing Indian jail threat after trek
By Nick Meo
Ten British adventurers are facing the prospect of being locked up as illegal aliens at the end of a 2,800 mile rickshaw journey from Katmandu in Nepal to Madras in southern India.
The ten were taking part in a 15-day trip organised by a Bristol-based company called the Rickshaw Run which promises "adventures on three wheels" for charity fundraisers.
But they got more adventure than they had bargained for after discovering they could not leave India because they did not have an entry stamp in their passports.
Douglas Bell, 26, a publisher from Newcastle, said that at first the group had thought their problem was a bit of a joke but in the last couple of days have become increasingly worried.
Ten British adventurers are facing the prospect of being locked up as illegal aliens at the end of a 2,800 mile rickshaw journey from Katmandu in Nepal to Madras in southern India.
The ten were taking part in a 15-day trip organised by a Bristol-based company called the Rickshaw Run which promises "adventures on three wheels" for charity fundraisers.
But they got more adventure than they had bargained for after discovering they could not leave India because they did not have an entry stamp in their passports.
Douglas Bell, 26, a publisher from Newcastle, said that at first the group had thought their problem was a bit of a joke but in the last couple of days have become increasingly worried.
Jail facing fourth suit on immigration issue
By Tracy M. Neal Staff Writer
BENTONVILLE - A Rogers attorney filed the fourth lawsuit concerning whether the Benton County Jail can incarcerate someone on an immigration hold without showing any authority for the hold.
Ken Swindle filed the suit Wednesday against the Benton County Sheriff's Office in U. S. District Court in Fayetteville on behalf of Maria Vasquez-Laso.
The suit claims Vasquez-Laso was arrested Tuesday on unknown charges. Swindle claims he asked about her arrest and was first told there were no immigration issues and his client was only being held on state charges.
Swindle went to the jail Wednesday and requested any documents related to his client's incarceration. Swindle claims jail officials would not release any documentation.
Swindle claims jail officials are mistaken in their belief that they can hold individuals on immigration holds with no obligation to show their authority to do so.
Swindle claims Vasquez-Laso is being held in the county jail in violation of the U. S. Constitution.
The suit requests that the court order Vasquez-Laso's immediate release.
Swindle has filed three other similar suits. Those suits have been dismissed. Neither Swindle nor jail officials could be reached for comment.
BENTONVILLE - A Rogers attorney filed the fourth lawsuit concerning whether the Benton County Jail can incarcerate someone on an immigration hold without showing any authority for the hold.
Ken Swindle filed the suit Wednesday against the Benton County Sheriff's Office in U. S. District Court in Fayetteville on behalf of Maria Vasquez-Laso.
The suit claims Vasquez-Laso was arrested Tuesday on unknown charges. Swindle claims he asked about her arrest and was first told there were no immigration issues and his client was only being held on state charges.
Swindle went to the jail Wednesday and requested any documents related to his client's incarceration. Swindle claims jail officials would not release any documentation.
Swindle claims jail officials are mistaken in their belief that they can hold individuals on immigration holds with no obligation to show their authority to do so.
Swindle claims Vasquez-Laso is being held in the county jail in violation of the U. S. Constitution.
The suit requests that the court order Vasquez-Laso's immediate release.
Swindle has filed three other similar suits. Those suits have been dismissed. Neither Swindle nor jail officials could be reached for comment.
Conference will address needs of Nepali women
By ADAM SMITH
Bidya RanjeetWhile the population of Nepali women in the United States is tiny, they still face many challenges such as domestic abuse, according to Bidya Ranjeet, the president of the Nepali Women's Global Network.
That's why the group is hosting a day-long conference on August 9 at the University of Connecticut in Storrs to advocate for Nepali women living in the United States and in Nepal.
"It's similar issues that all women face," said Ranjeet, "issues of domestic violence [and] discrimination in the work place."
But, she said, the problem is exacerbated because Nepali traditions prevent many women from speaking up.
"In short, we are socialized not to talk about our personal issues," said Ranjeet, who came to the United States over two decades ago to study higher education at the University of Connecticut.
She said that family pressures keep some women in abusive relationships because it’s taboo to get divorced.
"Some people are not willing to leave their spouses, even though they are able to — because it's like, 'What are people going to say?' Even their parents are not willing to see them separated because in their culture it's not what is good for you, it's ‘what will people say?’" she said. "So, they kind of accept it and live in that situation. I had one case where it took a long time for this woman to finally get a divorce. She's doing very well now, but she almost died. She couldn't move her eyes because of how much he beat her."
The details of the conference are still being finalized, said Ranjeet, but she expects more than 100 advocates of the Nepali community, researchers and academics to attend the day-long event. She expects the cost of the conference, which will include dinner and lunch, to be $50 per ticket.
"We're trying to open up a dialogue on issues pertaining to women," she said. "We want to increase access to resources for women."
Estimates put the number of Nepali-immigrants in America at around 12,000, according to the 2000 U.S. Census.
The Nepali Global Women's Network aims to help both women who have immigrated to the United States and those in Nepal. It offers several scholarship programs for women, including three annual scholarships worth $300 each for nurses in Nepal. The nonprofit also offers scholarships for Nepali women to study in the United States and essay-writing awards.
Ranjeet, who directs student support services at UConn's Center for Academic Programs, was previously a teacher in Katmandu, where she also founded a grade school. She said her interest in helping Nepali women stems from her upbringing — her mother was a nurse and her father a politician.
"I grew up in an environment fighting for equality," she said.
Bidya RanjeetWhile the population of Nepali women in the United States is tiny, they still face many challenges such as domestic abuse, according to Bidya Ranjeet, the president of the Nepali Women's Global Network.
That's why the group is hosting a day-long conference on August 9 at the University of Connecticut in Storrs to advocate for Nepali women living in the United States and in Nepal.
"It's similar issues that all women face," said Ranjeet, "issues of domestic violence [and] discrimination in the work place."
But, she said, the problem is exacerbated because Nepali traditions prevent many women from speaking up.
"In short, we are socialized not to talk about our personal issues," said Ranjeet, who came to the United States over two decades ago to study higher education at the University of Connecticut.
She said that family pressures keep some women in abusive relationships because it’s taboo to get divorced.
"Some people are not willing to leave their spouses, even though they are able to — because it's like, 'What are people going to say?' Even their parents are not willing to see them separated because in their culture it's not what is good for you, it's ‘what will people say?’" she said. "So, they kind of accept it and live in that situation. I had one case where it took a long time for this woman to finally get a divorce. She's doing very well now, but she almost died. She couldn't move her eyes because of how much he beat her."
The details of the conference are still being finalized, said Ranjeet, but she expects more than 100 advocates of the Nepali community, researchers and academics to attend the day-long event. She expects the cost of the conference, which will include dinner and lunch, to be $50 per ticket.
"We're trying to open up a dialogue on issues pertaining to women," she said. "We want to increase access to resources for women."
Estimates put the number of Nepali-immigrants in America at around 12,000, according to the 2000 U.S. Census.
The Nepali Global Women's Network aims to help both women who have immigrated to the United States and those in Nepal. It offers several scholarship programs for women, including three annual scholarships worth $300 each for nurses in Nepal. The nonprofit also offers scholarships for Nepali women to study in the United States and essay-writing awards.
Ranjeet, who directs student support services at UConn's Center for Academic Programs, was previously a teacher in Katmandu, where she also founded a grade school. She said her interest in helping Nepali women stems from her upbringing — her mother was a nurse and her father a politician.
"I grew up in an environment fighting for equality," she said.
Six catering workers seized in raid
By Ryan Crighton
A raid by immigration officials found that six workers at an Aberdeen restaurant were illegal immigrants.
Officers from the UK Border Agency and Grampian Police raided the Oriental Palace in Great Northern Road at 8pm on Tuesday.
After checking the documents of staff, they found that five men and one woman, all from China, were not permitted to be in the country.
They were all arrested for immigration offences, and steps are now being taken to remove them from the UK.
However, officials are having difficulty tracking down the owners of the restaurant, who could now face a fine of £60,000 — £10,000 for each illegal worker employed.
Phil Taylor, regional director of the UK Border Agency in Scotland and Northern Ireland, said: “The UK Border Agency is carrying out operations like this one in Aberdeen throughout Scotland every week.
“We are determined to deal with that threat of immigration-related crime, and we will step in and identify those employers who are breaking immigration laws and remove those people who do not have the right to be in the UK.”
Staff at the restaurant said last night it would be closed for “a few days”, but did not comment any further.
The raid follows a similar operation last month when restaurants and takeaways in Bridge Street, Belmont Street and Market Street were targeted.
As a result, six men were arrested for offences against immigration legislation, including Nepalese, Bangladeshi and Indian citizens.
An Australian-style points-based system for managing migration has recently been introduced in Britain, ensuring that only those with the skills the UK needs are allowed to work.
On-the-spot fines of up to £10,000 per illegal employee have also been introduced for employers who don’t make the correct right-to-work checks, and those businesses hit with fines will be named on the UK Border Agency’s website.
Anyone who suspects that illegal workers are being employed at a business anywhere in Scotland should contact Crimestoppers on 0800 555111.
A raid by immigration officials found that six workers at an Aberdeen restaurant were illegal immigrants.
Officers from the UK Border Agency and Grampian Police raided the Oriental Palace in Great Northern Road at 8pm on Tuesday.
After checking the documents of staff, they found that five men and one woman, all from China, were not permitted to be in the country.
They were all arrested for immigration offences, and steps are now being taken to remove them from the UK.
However, officials are having difficulty tracking down the owners of the restaurant, who could now face a fine of £60,000 — £10,000 for each illegal worker employed.
Phil Taylor, regional director of the UK Border Agency in Scotland and Northern Ireland, said: “The UK Border Agency is carrying out operations like this one in Aberdeen throughout Scotland every week.
“We are determined to deal with that threat of immigration-related crime, and we will step in and identify those employers who are breaking immigration laws and remove those people who do not have the right to be in the UK.”
Staff at the restaurant said last night it would be closed for “a few days”, but did not comment any further.
The raid follows a similar operation last month when restaurants and takeaways in Bridge Street, Belmont Street and Market Street were targeted.
As a result, six men were arrested for offences against immigration legislation, including Nepalese, Bangladeshi and Indian citizens.
An Australian-style points-based system for managing migration has recently been introduced in Britain, ensuring that only those with the skills the UK needs are allowed to work.
On-the-spot fines of up to £10,000 per illegal employee have also been introduced for employers who don’t make the correct right-to-work checks, and those businesses hit with fines will be named on the UK Border Agency’s website.
Anyone who suspects that illegal workers are being employed at a business anywhere in Scotland should contact Crimestoppers on 0800 555111.
Praising Gurkhas is not enough
By Harry Phibbs
Everybody loves the Gurkhas. The Lib Dems, the Daily Mail. Price Harry has paid tribute to their bravery and skill currently being shown fighting against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Grassroots campaigners across Britain speak up in appreciation. This is no surprise. The tradition service to the crown from the Gurkhas is long – for the last couple of centuries Britain's military strength has been enhanced by recruiting forces from a Gorkha district of Nepal. The Gorkha district, and its inhabitants the Gorkhas – or Gurkhas as we call them – has prompted much admiration from the British. Gurkhas have served alongside British troops since 1815 – winning 26 Victoria Crosses. Not that things were always sweetness and light. In the Gurkha war from 1814-1816 they fought against the British East India Company and, having failed to defeat them, the British reached an accomodation with them.
But there is a disconnection between the sentiment of goodwill for them and a willingness to treat them decently. Gurkhas who left the army before 1997 are not allowed to stay in the UK. Recently the Labour MP Robert Wareing tabled an early day motion declaring: "This House recognises the valour and excellent service provided by Gurkha troops operating alongside British forces in military conflicts throughout the 20th century and since; and believes that on retirement they should be granted full British citizenship should they wish it." Yesterday, Nick Clegg raised the issue with the prime minister. The rule that Gurkhas who left service before 1997 are not eligible for British citizenship, with its entitlement to live in the UK, is because that was the date of the handover of Hong Kong to China – since then the regiment has been based in Britain while before that it was based in Hong Kong.
It is difficult to make sense of the decision in terms of immigration. Labour MP Kate Hoey has pointed to the fact that around 2,000 immigrants every day are given National Insurance numbers, which allow them to live and work in the UK. Yet it is estimated that only between 7,000 and 10,000 more Gurkha veterans would settle in Britain if the laws change. The total number eligible to live here if the rules were changed would be 43,000, but it is predicted that most would choose to remain in Nepal.
There is a much wider argument about whether or not there is too much immigration to this country. One argument for tighter control is that immigration is a burden on public resources. There is little likelihood that the Gurkhas would be. It is much more likely that with their spirit of enterprise and hard work they would be an economic boon.
In 2004 the then home secretary David Blunkett said: "We have put together the best package to enable discharged Gurkhas to apply for settlement and citizenship. I hope this decision makes our gratitude clear." No doubt his spin-doctors felt they were being very clever using the term "discharged" to disguise their betrayal.
The Gurkhas have saved a lot of British and reassure fighting two world wars and many other beside. Apart from giving them the right to live in the country they have fought for, the government should make another gesture. The should reintroduce the Royal Tournament, which last took place in 1999 and offered such a magnificent reminder of the contribution the Gurkhas have made and still make.
Everybody loves the Gurkhas. The Lib Dems, the Daily Mail. Price Harry has paid tribute to their bravery and skill currently being shown fighting against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Grassroots campaigners across Britain speak up in appreciation. This is no surprise. The tradition service to the crown from the Gurkhas is long – for the last couple of centuries Britain's military strength has been enhanced by recruiting forces from a Gorkha district of Nepal. The Gorkha district, and its inhabitants the Gorkhas – or Gurkhas as we call them – has prompted much admiration from the British. Gurkhas have served alongside British troops since 1815 – winning 26 Victoria Crosses. Not that things were always sweetness and light. In the Gurkha war from 1814-1816 they fought against the British East India Company and, having failed to defeat them, the British reached an accomodation with them.
But there is a disconnection between the sentiment of goodwill for them and a willingness to treat them decently. Gurkhas who left the army before 1997 are not allowed to stay in the UK. Recently the Labour MP Robert Wareing tabled an early day motion declaring: "This House recognises the valour and excellent service provided by Gurkha troops operating alongside British forces in military conflicts throughout the 20th century and since; and believes that on retirement they should be granted full British citizenship should they wish it." Yesterday, Nick Clegg raised the issue with the prime minister. The rule that Gurkhas who left service before 1997 are not eligible for British citizenship, with its entitlement to live in the UK, is because that was the date of the handover of Hong Kong to China – since then the regiment has been based in Britain while before that it was based in Hong Kong.
It is difficult to make sense of the decision in terms of immigration. Labour MP Kate Hoey has pointed to the fact that around 2,000 immigrants every day are given National Insurance numbers, which allow them to live and work in the UK. Yet it is estimated that only between 7,000 and 10,000 more Gurkha veterans would settle in Britain if the laws change. The total number eligible to live here if the rules were changed would be 43,000, but it is predicted that most would choose to remain in Nepal.
There is a much wider argument about whether or not there is too much immigration to this country. One argument for tighter control is that immigration is a burden on public resources. There is little likelihood that the Gurkhas would be. It is much more likely that with their spirit of enterprise and hard work they would be an economic boon.
In 2004 the then home secretary David Blunkett said: "We have put together the best package to enable discharged Gurkhas to apply for settlement and citizenship. I hope this decision makes our gratitude clear." No doubt his spin-doctors felt they were being very clever using the term "discharged" to disguise their betrayal.
The Gurkhas have saved a lot of British and reassure fighting two world wars and many other beside. Apart from giving them the right to live in the country they have fought for, the government should make another gesture. The should reintroduce the Royal Tournament, which last took place in 1999 and offered such a magnificent reminder of the contribution the Gurkhas have made and still make.
Nepal’s Generosity To Refugees
Hira Bahadur Thapa
Although the Government of Nepal has not yet acceded to the 1951 UN Convention on Status of Refugees and its subsequent Protocol, it has been quite generous to the refugees from whichever country they are from. There are glaring examples to prove Nepal’s generous behaviour meted out to the refugees. The simple reason why Nepal treats the refugees so kindly is nothing but purely humanitarian. It knows that there is no legal obligation on its part to provide humanitarian care like food and shelter to refugees as it is not a party to the refugees-related international convention. Its position on the current convention on refugees is not a factor deciding the type of treatment the refugees should be given. This is why we have hosted not only refugees from China who entered Nepal a long time ago but also Bhutanese refugees who have been sheltered since the early Nineties after being expelled from Bhutan.
Protracted negotiation
No other negotiations have been more protracted than that of the Bhutanese refugees who were compelled to leave their homeland by their government. About 100,000 of them have been in Nepal since 1991. The host government’s tireless efforts to repatriate them to their place of origin have borne no fruit. In the course of the last almost 18 years, Nepal has been engaged with all sincerity in finding a negotiated and durable solution to the vexed issue of the refugees from Bhutan. Unless there is reciprocal flexibility from the other side, it is near impossible to bring about an acceptable solution to the problem of refugees. While Nepal could have prevented the inflow of the Bhutanese refugees once they started to cross into our territory, the then government decided to let them enter only on the grounds of humanitarian concerns.
The reluctance of the country of origin of the Bhutanese refugees to be serious in taking their citizens back was clearly visible in the approach of the concerned government to the many rounds of negotiations held so far. There were as many as 15 rounds of ministerial level negotiations between Nepal and Bhutan. At each stage of the negotiations, the Bhutanese side hardly presented a flexible position, which very much obstructed the progress, especially in the repatriation of the refugees. As talks seemed no where to a satisfactory conclusion, members of the international community floated the idea of resettlement of the Bhutanese refugees in some of the western countries, including Australia. This option of third country resettlement is undoubtedly less than a comprehensive solution to the refugee problem. The most durable solution of the problem lies in the repatriation of the refugees to their own country.
The growing frustration among the Bhutanese refugees for having been forced to stay in the country of asylum for long years and not seeing any rays of hope to go back to their motherland must have led them to voluntarily accept the option of third country settlement. The host government is too heavily burdened with the sheltering of now more than 100,000 Bhutanese refugees. They have been staying in camps in eastern Nepal for more than a decade-and-a-half. Under such unavoidable circumstances, the Nepal government, once approached by all the members of the donor community for giving consent to the solution of the refugee problem through third country settlement, gave its nod in view of the welfare of the refugees.
Nepal has accepted this temporary solution not because it does not believe in repatriation as the only comprehensive resolution of the refugee problem. It has on the other hand agreed to the call of the international community and of those bilateral donors, in particular, with the conviction that resettlement may ease the burden on Nepal while the refugees also have a better quality of life if settled outside the country of asylum. The key point here is the voluntary decision of the refugees themselves to seek a better future in the developed countries of the west which are willing to get them resettled.
The United States of America has agreed to take the highest number of Bhutanese refugees. There are other countries like Norway, Denmark and Australia showing willingness to accept the Bhutanese refugees in their territories. The US has declared it will resettle as many as 60,000 of the Bhutanese refugees in the country. The process of resettlement has begun, and so far a few hundred refugees have already left the refugee camps for the US. Some other countries are also preparing to take them. The US government is to complete the resettlement of 60,000 refugees in the next five years.
The option of third country resettlement can never be a durable solution to the complex problem of refugees. Despite this, the Nepal government, as a host, did not object to this with the understanding that members of the international community will continue exerting due pressure on the Bhutanese government to agree to take back its citizens.
The refugees in volunteering to go to a third country for resettlement in no way forfeit their right to repatriation. Nothing bars them from being repatriated to their country of origin even when they have been resettled. It behooves on the part of the countries resettling the refugees to impress upon the country of origin that it should not in any way get encouraged to force its citizens to flee their own country. To ensure this, the country that expelled its countrymen must be made to follow repatriation.
Urban refugees
What concerns a country like Nepal at the moment is that the government’s generosity to the refugees is being misused by some. One of the irrevocable evidences of this is the undesirable tendency on the part of some foreigners to use Nepal’s territory as a jumping ground to seek third country resettlement in the west. It is believed that there are some foreign nationals trying to be listed as urban refugees in Nepal who seem to take advantage of the liberal immigration policy of the government. There is no denying the fact that the concept of so-called urban refugees is completely unacceptable to the government of Nepal.
Certainly in the name of giving humanitarian consideration to the plight of genuine refugees, Nepal cannot afford to turn a deaf ear to such a problem. Against this background, the government should also be serious enough in dealing with the refugees who try to misuse their shelter by participating in political demonstrations, which unfortunately has attracted the attention of the western press.
Although the Government of Nepal has not yet acceded to the 1951 UN Convention on Status of Refugees and its subsequent Protocol, it has been quite generous to the refugees from whichever country they are from. There are glaring examples to prove Nepal’s generous behaviour meted out to the refugees. The simple reason why Nepal treats the refugees so kindly is nothing but purely humanitarian. It knows that there is no legal obligation on its part to provide humanitarian care like food and shelter to refugees as it is not a party to the refugees-related international convention. Its position on the current convention on refugees is not a factor deciding the type of treatment the refugees should be given. This is why we have hosted not only refugees from China who entered Nepal a long time ago but also Bhutanese refugees who have been sheltered since the early Nineties after being expelled from Bhutan.
Protracted negotiation
No other negotiations have been more protracted than that of the Bhutanese refugees who were compelled to leave their homeland by their government. About 100,000 of them have been in Nepal since 1991. The host government’s tireless efforts to repatriate them to their place of origin have borne no fruit. In the course of the last almost 18 years, Nepal has been engaged with all sincerity in finding a negotiated and durable solution to the vexed issue of the refugees from Bhutan. Unless there is reciprocal flexibility from the other side, it is near impossible to bring about an acceptable solution to the problem of refugees. While Nepal could have prevented the inflow of the Bhutanese refugees once they started to cross into our territory, the then government decided to let them enter only on the grounds of humanitarian concerns.
The reluctance of the country of origin of the Bhutanese refugees to be serious in taking their citizens back was clearly visible in the approach of the concerned government to the many rounds of negotiations held so far. There were as many as 15 rounds of ministerial level negotiations between Nepal and Bhutan. At each stage of the negotiations, the Bhutanese side hardly presented a flexible position, which very much obstructed the progress, especially in the repatriation of the refugees. As talks seemed no where to a satisfactory conclusion, members of the international community floated the idea of resettlement of the Bhutanese refugees in some of the western countries, including Australia. This option of third country resettlement is undoubtedly less than a comprehensive solution to the refugee problem. The most durable solution of the problem lies in the repatriation of the refugees to their own country.
The growing frustration among the Bhutanese refugees for having been forced to stay in the country of asylum for long years and not seeing any rays of hope to go back to their motherland must have led them to voluntarily accept the option of third country settlement. The host government is too heavily burdened with the sheltering of now more than 100,000 Bhutanese refugees. They have been staying in camps in eastern Nepal for more than a decade-and-a-half. Under such unavoidable circumstances, the Nepal government, once approached by all the members of the donor community for giving consent to the solution of the refugee problem through third country settlement, gave its nod in view of the welfare of the refugees.
Nepal has accepted this temporary solution not because it does not believe in repatriation as the only comprehensive resolution of the refugee problem. It has on the other hand agreed to the call of the international community and of those bilateral donors, in particular, with the conviction that resettlement may ease the burden on Nepal while the refugees also have a better quality of life if settled outside the country of asylum. The key point here is the voluntary decision of the refugees themselves to seek a better future in the developed countries of the west which are willing to get them resettled.
The United States of America has agreed to take the highest number of Bhutanese refugees. There are other countries like Norway, Denmark and Australia showing willingness to accept the Bhutanese refugees in their territories. The US has declared it will resettle as many as 60,000 of the Bhutanese refugees in the country. The process of resettlement has begun, and so far a few hundred refugees have already left the refugee camps for the US. Some other countries are also preparing to take them. The US government is to complete the resettlement of 60,000 refugees in the next five years.
The option of third country resettlement can never be a durable solution to the complex problem of refugees. Despite this, the Nepal government, as a host, did not object to this with the understanding that members of the international community will continue exerting due pressure on the Bhutanese government to agree to take back its citizens.
The refugees in volunteering to go to a third country for resettlement in no way forfeit their right to repatriation. Nothing bars them from being repatriated to their country of origin even when they have been resettled. It behooves on the part of the countries resettling the refugees to impress upon the country of origin that it should not in any way get encouraged to force its citizens to flee their own country. To ensure this, the country that expelled its countrymen must be made to follow repatriation.
Urban refugees
What concerns a country like Nepal at the moment is that the government’s generosity to the refugees is being misused by some. One of the irrevocable evidences of this is the undesirable tendency on the part of some foreigners to use Nepal’s territory as a jumping ground to seek third country resettlement in the west. It is believed that there are some foreign nationals trying to be listed as urban refugees in Nepal who seem to take advantage of the liberal immigration policy of the government. There is no denying the fact that the concept of so-called urban refugees is completely unacceptable to the government of Nepal.
Certainly in the name of giving humanitarian consideration to the plight of genuine refugees, Nepal cannot afford to turn a deaf ear to such a problem. Against this background, the government should also be serious enough in dealing with the refugees who try to misuse their shelter by participating in political demonstrations, which unfortunately has attracted the attention of the western press.
Member States of the United Nations
Member States of the United Nations
Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
Angola
Antigua and Barbuda
Armenia
Azerbaijan
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Belize
Benin
Bhutan
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Burkina Faso
Burundi
Cambodia
Cameroon
Cape Verde
Central African Republic
Chad
China
Colombia
Comoros
Congo
Côte d'Ivoire
Cuba
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Djibouti
Dominica
Dominican Republic
East Timor
Ecuador
Egypt
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Fiji
Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
Gabon
Georgia
Ghana
Grenada
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Guyana
Haiti
India
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Jamaica
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Kiribati
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Laos
Lebanon
Lesotho
Liberia
Libya
Madagascar
Malawi
Maldives
Mali
Marshall Islands
Mauritania
Mauritius
Micronesia
Moldova
Mongolia
Morocco
Mozambique
Myanmar
Namibia
Nauru
Nepal
Niger
Nigeria
North Korea
Northern Marianas
Oman
Pakistan
Palau
Papua New Guinea
Peru
Philippines
Qatar
Russia
Rwanda
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
Samoa
São Tomé e Príncipe
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Serbia and Montenegro
Seychelles
Sierra Leone
Solomon Islands
Somalia
South Africa
Sri Lanka
Sudan
Suriname
Swaziland
Syria
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Thailand
The Bahamas
The Gambia
Togo
Tonga
Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
Turkmenistan
Tuvalu
Uganda
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
Uzbekistan
Vanuatu
Vietnam
Yemen
Yugoslavia
Zambia
Zimbabwe
Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
Angola
Antigua and Barbuda
Armenia
Azerbaijan
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Belize
Benin
Bhutan
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Burkina Faso
Burundi
Cambodia
Cameroon
Cape Verde
Central African Republic
Chad
China
Colombia
Comoros
Congo
Côte d'Ivoire
Cuba
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Djibouti
Dominica
Dominican Republic
East Timor
Ecuador
Egypt
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Fiji
Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
Gabon
Georgia
Ghana
Grenada
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Guyana
Haiti
India
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Jamaica
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Kiribati
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Laos
Lebanon
Lesotho
Liberia
Libya
Madagascar
Malawi
Maldives
Mali
Marshall Islands
Mauritania
Mauritius
Micronesia
Moldova
Mongolia
Morocco
Mozambique
Myanmar
Namibia
Nauru
Nepal
Niger
Nigeria
North Korea
Northern Marianas
Oman
Pakistan
Palau
Papua New Guinea
Peru
Philippines
Qatar
Russia
Rwanda
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
Samoa
São Tomé e Príncipe
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Serbia and Montenegro
Seychelles
Sierra Leone
Solomon Islands
Somalia
South Africa
Sri Lanka
Sudan
Suriname
Swaziland
Syria
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Thailand
The Bahamas
The Gambia
Togo
Tonga
Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
Turkmenistan
Tuvalu
Uganda
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
Uzbekistan
Vanuatu
Vietnam
Yemen
Yugoslavia
Zambia
Zimbabwe
Which countries do I need a visa for?
Here is a guide of visa requirements for UK passport holders. Please note that visa restrictions change regularly so it is extremely important that you check with your travel agent or preferably direct with the embassy.
Country
Visa required?
Validity of visa / tourist card
Flights Hotels
Afghanistan
Entry prohibited for UK passport holders
Flights Hotels
Argentina
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Australia
Visa required (3 Months to 1 year) Buy online
Flights Hotels
Bangladesh
Visa obtained on arrival for up to a 90 days
Flights Hotels
Barbados
-
Up to 6 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
Belize
-
Up to 6 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
Bhutan
Pre-arranged travel itinerary compulsory
Flights Hotels
Bolivia
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Botswana
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Brazil
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Brunei
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Cambodia
-
On arrival 1 month $US20, 3 months $US30
Flights Hotels
Canada
-
Up to 6 months - decided on arrival.
Flights Hotels
Chile
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
China
Must enter within 3 mths of obtaining visa
Flights Hotels
Colombia
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Cook Islands
-
Up to 31 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Costa Rica
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Cuba
Tourist card obtained prior to departure
Flights Hotels
Dominican Rep.
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Ecuador
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Egypt
Or 7 day visa can be obtained on arrival
Flights Hotels
El Salvador
-
Up to 3 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
Fiji
-
Up to 4 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
Greece
-
Up to 3 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
Guatemala
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Honduras
-
Up to 30 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Hong Kong
-
Up to 6 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
India
Up to 4 months, multiple entry possible
Flights Hotels
Indonesia
-
Up to 30 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Jamaica
-
Up to 6 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
Japan
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Kenya
-
Can be obtained on arrival
Flights Hotels
Korea
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Laos
15 day visa can be obtained on arrival
Flights Hotels
Madagascar
90 day visa can be obtained on arrival
Flights Hotels
Malawi
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Malaysia
-
Up to 2 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
Maldives
30 day visa can be issued on arrival
Flights Hotels
Mexico
-
Up to 180 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Mongolia
Pre arranged travel itinerary compulsory
Flights Hotels
Morocco
-
Up to 3 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
Myanmar
Pre arranged travel itinerary compulsory
Flights Hotels
Namibia
-
Up to 3 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
Nepal
Obtained on arrival, 30 days $30.
Flights Hotels
New Zealand
-
Up to 6 months without a visa. If working, a 1 year working visa is required. Buy visa online
Flights Hotels
Paraguay
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Peru
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Philippines
-
Up to 59 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Tahiti
-
Up to 3 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
Qatar
Sponsor required
Flights Hotels
Russia
Pre arranged travel itinerary compulsory
Flights Hotels
Western Samoa
-
Up to 30 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Singapore
-
Up to 14 days without visa (extendable)
Flights Hotels
South Africa
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Sri Lanka
30 day visa available on arrival
Flights Hotels
Surinam
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Taiwan
15 and 30 day visas available on arrival
Flights Hotels
Tanzania
-
Can be obtained on arrival
Flights Hotels
Thailand
-
Up to 30 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Tonga
-
Up to 30 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Uganda
Single / multiple entry obtainable on arrival
Flights Hotels
U.A.E
-
Up to 60 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Uruguay
-
Up to 3 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
U.S.A
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Venezuela
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Vietnam
Passport photo also required on arrival
Flights Hotels
Zambia
Or arranged on arrival with 3 photos
Flights Hotels
Zimbabwe
-
Up to 3 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you need a Visa?
Several factors determine whether a visa is waived:
the nationality of the foreign national;
the holding of a residence document in France or another country adhering to the Schengen Agreement;
the length of stay; and which part of the territory of the French Republic the foreign national is to visit.As far as visas are concerned, legislation divides the territory of the French Republic into the following three sections, where different regulations apply:
the European territory of France, which is part of the Schengen area; the territory of Overseas Departments (Réunion, Martinique, Guadeloupe and French Guiana); Overseas territorial communities: French Polynesia, New Caledonia, Mayotte, French Southern and Antarctic Territories.
1. The European territory of France
The European territory of France is part of the Schengen area. The Schengen area includes the territory of the following European Union countries and associated countries: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Norway, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and Sweden.
1.1. Short stays (under 90 days in the Schengen area)
A short stay is a stay in the Schengen area under 90 days or multiple stays totalling less than 90 days in a period of six months.
For short stays, European regulations determine the list of countries from which citizens are not required to have a visa to enter the Schengen area.
A visa is waived for:
citizens of the following countries: Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Bermuda, Brazil, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Holy See, Honduras, Israel, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Monaco, Nicaragua, New Zealand, Panama, Paraguay, San Marino, Singapore, South Korea, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela; holders of passports from the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China and the Special Administrative Region of Macao of the People’s Republic of China; holders of a valid residence document in France; holders of a residence document issued by a country which adheres to the Schengen Agreement; holders of a travel document issued by a country which adheres to the Schengen Agreement.
1.2. Long stays (over 90 days in France)
Citizens of the following countries are not required to have a long-stay visa: Member States of the European Union and the European Economic Area (EEA), Switzerland, Monaco and Andorra.
2. Overseas Departments (DOM) Réunion French Guiana, Guadeloupe and Martinique (the three French Departments of the Americas)
2.1. Short stays
A short stay is a stay under 90 days in an Overseas Department.
A visa is waived for:
citizens of the following countries: Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Bermuda, Bolivia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Holy See, Honduras, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Monaco, Nicaragua, New Zealand, Panama, Paraguay, San Marino, Singapore, South Korea, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela; holders of passports from the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China and the Macao Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China; holders of a valid residence document in France.
2.1. Long stays
Citizens of the following countries are not required to have a long-stay visa: Member States of the European Union and the European Economic Area (EEA), Switzerland, Monaco and Andorra.
3. Other territories of the French Republic located overseasThey include:
French Polynesia New Caledonia Wallis and Futuna Saint Pierre and Miquelon Mayotte French Southern and Antarctic Territories
3.1. Short stays
A short stay is a stay under 90 days.
A visa is waived for the citizens of the following countries: Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Bermuda, Bolivie, Brunei, Bermuda, Bolivia, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Holy See, Honduras, Hong Kong, Japan, Macao, Malaysia, Mexico, Monaco, Nicaragua, New Zealand, Panama, Paraguay, San Marino, Singapore, South Korea, United States, Uruguay.
3.2. Long stays
Citizens of the following countries are not required to have a long-stay visa: Member States of the European Union and the European Economic Area (EEA), Switzerland, Monaco and Andorra.
Visa nationals are those who require a visa for every entry to the UK, though some may be able to “Transit Without Visa”. Those who require visas for transit as well are listed below under Direct Airside transit. Read our Transit (INF 20) guidance for more information.
Afghanistan
Gambia
Nigeria
Albania
Georgia
Oman
Algeria
Ghana
Pakistan
Angola
Guinea
Peru
Armenia
Guinea Bissau
Palestinian Authority
Azerbaijan
Guyana
Philippines
Bahrain
Haiti
Qatar
Bangladesh
India
Russia
Belarus
Indonesia
Rwanda
Benin
Iran
Sao Tome & Principe
Bhutan
Iraq
Saudi Arabia
Bosnia-Herzegovina
Ivory Coast
Senegal
Burkina Faso
Jamaica
Serbia
Burma (Myanmar)
Jordan
Sierra Leone
Burundi
Kazakhstan
Somalia
Cambodia
Kenya
Sri Lanka
Cameroon
Korea (Dem. People's Rep)
Sudan
Cape Verde
Kosovo
Surinam
Central African Republic
Kuwait
Syria
Chad
Kyrgyzstan
Taiwan
China, People's Rep.of
Laos
Tajikistan
Colombia
Lebanon
Tanzania
Comoros
Liberia
Thailand
Congo, Democratic Republic of
Libya
Togo
Congo, Republic of
Macedonia
Tunisia
Cuba
Madagascar
Turkey
Cyprus, northern part of
Malawi
Turkmenistan
Djibouti
Mali
Uganda
Dominican Republic
Mauritania
Ukraine
Ecuador
Moldova
United Arab Emirates
Egypt
Mongolia
Uzbekistan
Equatorial Guinea
Montenegro
Vatican City (service & emergency passports only)
Eritrea
Morocco
Vietnam
Ethiopia
Mozambique
Yemen
Fiji
Nepal
Zambia
Gabon
Niger
Zimbabwe
Country
Visa required?
Validity of visa / tourist card
Flights Hotels
Afghanistan
Entry prohibited for UK passport holders
Flights Hotels
Argentina
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Australia
Visa required (3 Months to 1 year) Buy online
Flights Hotels
Bangladesh
Visa obtained on arrival for up to a 90 days
Flights Hotels
Barbados
-
Up to 6 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
Belize
-
Up to 6 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
Bhutan
Pre-arranged travel itinerary compulsory
Flights Hotels
Bolivia
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Botswana
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Brazil
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Brunei
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Cambodia
-
On arrival 1 month $US20, 3 months $US30
Flights Hotels
Canada
-
Up to 6 months - decided on arrival.
Flights Hotels
Chile
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
China
Must enter within 3 mths of obtaining visa
Flights Hotels
Colombia
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Cook Islands
-
Up to 31 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Costa Rica
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Cuba
Tourist card obtained prior to departure
Flights Hotels
Dominican Rep.
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Ecuador
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Egypt
Or 7 day visa can be obtained on arrival
Flights Hotels
El Salvador
-
Up to 3 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
Fiji
-
Up to 4 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
Greece
-
Up to 3 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
Guatemala
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Honduras
-
Up to 30 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Hong Kong
-
Up to 6 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
India
Up to 4 months, multiple entry possible
Flights Hotels
Indonesia
-
Up to 30 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Jamaica
-
Up to 6 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
Japan
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Kenya
-
Can be obtained on arrival
Flights Hotels
Korea
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Laos
15 day visa can be obtained on arrival
Flights Hotels
Madagascar
90 day visa can be obtained on arrival
Flights Hotels
Malawi
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Malaysia
-
Up to 2 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
Maldives
30 day visa can be issued on arrival
Flights Hotels
Mexico
-
Up to 180 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Mongolia
Pre arranged travel itinerary compulsory
Flights Hotels
Morocco
-
Up to 3 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
Myanmar
Pre arranged travel itinerary compulsory
Flights Hotels
Namibia
-
Up to 3 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
Nepal
Obtained on arrival, 30 days $30.
Flights Hotels
New Zealand
-
Up to 6 months without a visa. If working, a 1 year working visa is required. Buy visa online
Flights Hotels
Paraguay
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Peru
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Philippines
-
Up to 59 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Tahiti
-
Up to 3 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
Qatar
Sponsor required
Flights Hotels
Russia
Pre arranged travel itinerary compulsory
Flights Hotels
Western Samoa
-
Up to 30 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Singapore
-
Up to 14 days without visa (extendable)
Flights Hotels
South Africa
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Sri Lanka
30 day visa available on arrival
Flights Hotels
Surinam
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Taiwan
15 and 30 day visas available on arrival
Flights Hotels
Tanzania
-
Can be obtained on arrival
Flights Hotels
Thailand
-
Up to 30 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Tonga
-
Up to 30 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Uganda
Single / multiple entry obtainable on arrival
Flights Hotels
U.A.E
-
Up to 60 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Uruguay
-
Up to 3 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
U.S.A
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Venezuela
-
Up to 90 days without a visa
Flights Hotels
Vietnam
Passport photo also required on arrival
Flights Hotels
Zambia
Or arranged on arrival with 3 photos
Flights Hotels
Zimbabwe
-
Up to 3 months without a visa
Flights Hotels
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you need a Visa?
Several factors determine whether a visa is waived:
the nationality of the foreign national;
the holding of a residence document in France or another country adhering to the Schengen Agreement;
the length of stay; and which part of the territory of the French Republic the foreign national is to visit.As far as visas are concerned, legislation divides the territory of the French Republic into the following three sections, where different regulations apply:
the European territory of France, which is part of the Schengen area; the territory of Overseas Departments (Réunion, Martinique, Guadeloupe and French Guiana); Overseas territorial communities: French Polynesia, New Caledonia, Mayotte, French Southern and Antarctic Territories.
1. The European territory of France
The European territory of France is part of the Schengen area. The Schengen area includes the territory of the following European Union countries and associated countries: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Norway, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and Sweden.
1.1. Short stays (under 90 days in the Schengen area)
A short stay is a stay in the Schengen area under 90 days or multiple stays totalling less than 90 days in a period of six months.
For short stays, European regulations determine the list of countries from which citizens are not required to have a visa to enter the Schengen area.
A visa is waived for:
citizens of the following countries: Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Bermuda, Brazil, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Holy See, Honduras, Israel, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Monaco, Nicaragua, New Zealand, Panama, Paraguay, San Marino, Singapore, South Korea, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela; holders of passports from the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China and the Special Administrative Region of Macao of the People’s Republic of China; holders of a valid residence document in France; holders of a residence document issued by a country which adheres to the Schengen Agreement; holders of a travel document issued by a country which adheres to the Schengen Agreement.
1.2. Long stays (over 90 days in France)
Citizens of the following countries are not required to have a long-stay visa: Member States of the European Union and the European Economic Area (EEA), Switzerland, Monaco and Andorra.
2. Overseas Departments (DOM) Réunion French Guiana, Guadeloupe and Martinique (the three French Departments of the Americas)
2.1. Short stays
A short stay is a stay under 90 days in an Overseas Department.
A visa is waived for:
citizens of the following countries: Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Bermuda, Bolivia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Holy See, Honduras, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Monaco, Nicaragua, New Zealand, Panama, Paraguay, San Marino, Singapore, South Korea, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela; holders of passports from the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China and the Macao Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China; holders of a valid residence document in France.
2.1. Long stays
Citizens of the following countries are not required to have a long-stay visa: Member States of the European Union and the European Economic Area (EEA), Switzerland, Monaco and Andorra.
3. Other territories of the French Republic located overseasThey include:
French Polynesia New Caledonia Wallis and Futuna Saint Pierre and Miquelon Mayotte French Southern and Antarctic Territories
3.1. Short stays
A short stay is a stay under 90 days.
A visa is waived for the citizens of the following countries: Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Bermuda, Bolivie, Brunei, Bermuda, Bolivia, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Holy See, Honduras, Hong Kong, Japan, Macao, Malaysia, Mexico, Monaco, Nicaragua, New Zealand, Panama, Paraguay, San Marino, Singapore, South Korea, United States, Uruguay.
3.2. Long stays
Citizens of the following countries are not required to have a long-stay visa: Member States of the European Union and the European Economic Area (EEA), Switzerland, Monaco and Andorra.
---------------------------------------------------
Visa and Direct Airside Transit Visa (DATV) nationals
Visa nationals are those who require a visa for every entry to the UK, though some may be able to “Transit Without Visa”. Those who require visas for transit as well are listed below under Direct Airside transit. Read our Transit (INF 20) guidance for more information.
Afghanistan
Gambia
Nigeria
Albania
Georgia
Oman
Algeria
Ghana
Pakistan
Angola
Guinea
Peru
Armenia
Guinea Bissau
Palestinian Authority
Azerbaijan
Guyana
Philippines
Bahrain
Haiti
Qatar
Bangladesh
India
Russia
Belarus
Indonesia
Rwanda
Benin
Iran
Sao Tome & Principe
Bhutan
Iraq
Saudi Arabia
Bosnia-Herzegovina
Ivory Coast
Senegal
Burkina Faso
Jamaica
Serbia
Burma (Myanmar)
Jordan
Sierra Leone
Burundi
Kazakhstan
Somalia
Cambodia
Kenya
Sri Lanka
Cameroon
Korea (Dem. People's Rep)
Sudan
Cape Verde
Kosovo
Surinam
Central African Republic
Kuwait
Syria
Chad
Kyrgyzstan
Taiwan
China, People's Rep.of
Laos
Tajikistan
Colombia
Lebanon
Tanzania
Comoros
Liberia
Thailand
Congo, Democratic Republic of
Libya
Togo
Congo, Republic of
Macedonia
Tunisia
Cuba
Madagascar
Turkey
Cyprus, northern part of
Malawi
Turkmenistan
Djibouti
Mali
Uganda
Dominican Republic
Mauritania
Ukraine
Ecuador
Moldova
United Arab Emirates
Egypt
Mongolia
Uzbekistan
Equatorial Guinea
Montenegro
Vatican City (service & emergency passports only)
Eritrea
Morocco
Vietnam
Ethiopia
Mozambique
Yemen
Fiji
Nepal
Zambia
Gabon
Niger
Zimbabwe
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
