777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 11318 posts, RR: 17 Posted (6 years 9 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2436 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
MH is facing prosecution from the New Zealand Department of Labour for allowing Illegal passengers into New Zealand. A source has said that MH has had a massive history of flying asylum seekers to New Zealand over an eight year period. This included Algerian refugee Ahmed Zaoui in 2002. If found quilty MH faces a fine of upto NZ$20,000.
Ryanair!!! From Singapore, joined Mar 2002, 4652 posts, RR: 27 Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 2302 times:
Not just for AKL... I was the subject of interrogation and intense baggage search on one such flight on MAS flying into SYD.
I was asked to take everything out of my luggage, empty my wallets and all my cards taken away. I was questioned about every single card about what it was used for (err... Haagen Dazs discount card?). After wards all my cards were taken away to be swiped to see if it was stolen.
There was another passenger behind me who was subjected to the same treatment but he landed in hot soup because he had 2 wallets, one for local use in Malaysia, and another one for travel. He was whisked away into a separate room.
The ordeal lasted for 40 mins at the customs area. I was insulted for several reasons.....
- I was holding a Singapore passport (but this red passport is very valuable in the black market)
- I was holding a military ID and given the strong military links between Australia and Singapore, it meant nothing.
Towards the end, a very apologetic immigration agent told me they were on a look out for illegal immigrants on MAS flights. Additionally she told me that it was normal for inspections like these to happen on MAS flights from KUL. While that made me feel better, I started wondering what made thgem single me out?
Welcome to my starry one world alliance, a team in the sky!
9MMAR From Malaysia, joined Jul 2006, 2099 posts, RR: 20 Reply 2, posted (6 years 9 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2120 times:
I am so sorry for you Ryanair!!! The reason they insulted you were irrational. I mean, one was insulted for holding a Singapore passport?
Several questions popped up pertaining to the prosecution:
- Can an airline be blamed for bringing a passenger whom later on caught for being an asylum seeker? I mean, at the time he performed the journey, he must have had a valid travelling documents and such, and pay whatever amount the ticket costs.
- Has any airline ever refuse a potential passenger just because they thought the passenger is an asylum seeker?
- How would an airline differentiate a normal passenger with a passenger who later on turned out to be an asylum seeker?
The thread starter mentioned "allowing Illegal passengers into New Zealand". I am not cleared about this as the link provided is not the link to the specific news. Does it mean MH flew in passengers without any valid travelling document who later on turned out to be an asylum seeker in New Zealand? MH done that?
One more thing, all passengers are subject to immigration clearance and such. Does it mean, the asylum seeker passengers were caught during this procedure at the airport before entering the country, or the asylum seeker passengers were caught after they cleared immigration and left the airport? If it was the latter, why wouldn't the immigration department be blamed for releasing the passengers?
KEno From Malaysia, joined Feb 2004, 1841 posts, RR: 31 Reply 3, posted (6 years 9 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2063 times:
Quoting 9MMAR (Reply 2): If it was the latter, why wouldn't the immigration department be blamed for releasing the passengers?
I would have thought along similiar lines considering the immigration department would have background information on local and foreign travellers, what the airline knows is quite limited. Also, doesn't the immigration have the final say on who goes on the plane during security check?
Sentiasa Melepasi Jangkaan bersama Penerbangan Malaysia
Ex_SQer From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1435 posts, RR: 6 Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1954 times:
Quoting 9MMAR (Reply 2): Several questions popped up pertaining to the prosecution:
- Can an airline be blamed for bringing a passenger whom later on caught for being an asylum seeker? I mean, at the time he performed the journey, he must have had a valid travelling documents and such, and pay whatever amount the ticket costs.
- Has any airline ever refuse a potential passenger just because they thought the passenger is an asylum seeker?
- How would an airline differentiate a normal passenger with a passenger who later on turned out to be an asylum seeker?
When a passenger checks in, the station staff have to ensure that the passenger's documents are valid for entry into his/her destination country. The airline can be blamed (and fined) if they were neglient on this front, and the onus is on them to prove that the passenger had valid documents at the time of check-in. It is not uncommon for airlines to refuse carriage to paxs who they think may be asylum seekers. They do this through a mixture of profiling (dirty word, I know), which in turn stems from an understanding of the modus operandi of asylum seekers, and also by having trained professional document fraud staff on hand.
Sometimes, airlines will go to extreme measures such as photocopying travel docs of suspicious paxs or even taking those docs away and holding them with the F/As for handover to station staff at arrival. This is so that they can prove that the pax had valid docs at check-in.
Here is an example of what I used to face on a regular basis every few weeks. I often had groups of up to 30 Chinese men (rarely any women in the groups), each holding four separate tickets: CAN-BKK on China Southern, BKK-SIN-KUL on SQ, KUL-EZE on MH, and EZE to some other country in South America. They have valid docs for all destinations. But, their passports are mostly recently issued with few entry and stamps or visas. Some of them are even wearing the same shirts as the one on their passport photos. You know that they are probably going to be smuggled from their destination country in South America to the US or Canada as indentured labor, but if their docs are in order, you have no choice but to allow them to travel. I could only photocopy their docs (passports and tickets) and pray that they don't get sent back.
777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 11318 posts, RR: 17 Reply 5, posted (6 years 9 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1825 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting 9MMAR (Reply 2): - Can an airline be blamed for bringing a passenger whom later on caught for being an asylum seeker? I mean, at the time he performed the journey, he must have had a valid travelling documents and such, and pay whatever amount the ticket costs.
Yes an Airline can, because its the airlines check-in staff who have to check all the required forms etc. MHs check-in staff havn't been doing their jobs correctly in this respect.
Quoting 9MMAR (Reply 2): The thread starter mentioned "allowing Illegal passengers into New Zealand". I am not cleared about this as the link provided is not the link to the specific news. Does it mean MH flew in passengers without any valid travelling document who later on turned out to be an asylum seeker in New Zealand? MH done that?
When the passengers arrive in the country and the Customs Service notices that not all the correct forms are there because the airline hasn't checked them in correctly then the passengers are ever sent back home or handed over to the police
777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 11318 posts, RR: 17 Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1460 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting Socal (Reply 6): Quoting 777ER (Thread starter):
This included Algerian refugee Ahmed Zaoui in 2002
What happened to this guy? Was he deported? Why would New Zealand take in refugee's from Alegeria?
He arrived here on a false passport. The departing country didn't pick it up, only the New Zealand customs picked it up. He caused heaps of problems and fighted every deportation order that was issued against him. In the end he won. He caused the country to basically turn against each other. He arrived illegially, so he should have been kicked out of the country.
Sponsor Message: 
From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 11318 posts, 
From Singapore, joined Mar 2002, 4652 posts, 
From Malaysia, joined Jul 2006, 2099 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1435 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
