Liberty, one of the UK's leading human rights and civil liberties organisations, has expressed a number of concerns about the extension of what is essentially a criminal penalty or deterrent into an area of public law.

In a paper on the second reading in the house of commons of the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants etc.) Bill, Liberty outlined it’s concerns:

The first, and most obvious, point is that the proposal to tag asylum seekers
and other migrants suggests that they, like criminals and criminal suspects, cannot be
trusted to comply with the asylum process. Tagging asylum seekers as they enter the
United Kingdom will also suggest that there is something inherently criminal in
seeking refugee protection, and is also likely to be a breach of Article 31 of the
Refugee Convention.

Being tagged will also clearly identify the person as either a criminal or an
asylum seeker and expose them to at the very least discrimination, and at the worst
physical attack. The distortions of the media and some politicians
and others have already put asylum seekers and their children at risk of attack. Further
criminalisation and identification can only increase this risk.

The Clause also extends the power to create a criminal penalty to a range of
individuals who have had no training, or experience, in the relevant fields of criminal
justice or sentencing policy. As well as the Home Secretary and Justices of the Peace,
immigration officers, adjudicators, members of the Immigration Appeal Tribunal or
the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal will be able to order that asylum seekers and
other migrants are tagged, or tracked, and their movements around the country
restricted.

The use of tags is likely to lead to curfew orders, or asylum seekers or other
migrants being forbidden to leave or enter certain areas, as this the way systems like
Personal Identity Devices are best monitored. This will indicate to the general public
that asylum seekers and migrants are dangerous and, therefore, their movements must
be restricted. At the same time, it will make migrants aware that they are not
welcome.
Full report:
 http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/resources/policy-papers/2004/asylum-bill-second-reading-lords.pdf

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary of UNHCR’s principal concerns at second reading:

Electronic monitoring – Clause 15: UNHCR is concerned that there are no clear guidelines to ensure that a balance is struck between the government’s interests and the liberty of asylum seekers.

Furthermore, UNHCR is concerned that the widespread use of tagging will stigmatise and potentially mark asylum seekers out for abuse and attacks.
Full report:  http://www.unhcr.org.uk/15Dec03_second_reading_briefing.htm

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of course you're not criminals! We're just going to tag you anyway....

"The government is keen to have monitoring of all asylum seekers," said a Home Office insider. "They are sending a strong message ... this is something they will have to put up with if they want to come into our country.

What a fascinating justification! So it's a bit like initiation into a gang or something, where you can be one of us as long as we can beat the crap out of you / utterly remove your human dignity first?

You know what else might discourage foreigners from coming here? If, say, we made them wear some kind of badge when they were out and about. A lapel badge of some kind, or an armband to set them aside from ordinary decent people and make them realise there are some things they have to put up with if they want to live in the same country as us. I've heard some other folk tried this in their own countries to keep a track of undesirable elements, and by all accounts it was very effective.
 http://www.20six.co.uk/weblogEntry/1uih987p73y04

source:  http://www.asylumpolicy.info ~ an indispensable source