African American Women Writers Novelists, Poets, More

Kfc International Business - 1810 Words

Executive summary Kentucky Fried Chicken is the second largest fast food restaurant. KFC has focused on foreign markets since the 1960s. At first this report will detailed describe the history of the Kentucky Fried Chicken. And then next parts will analysis the international business of the Kentucky Fried Chicken. Finally the report will give some recommendations to the KFC. Background to Kentucky Fried Chicken Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC) was established in Louisville, Kentucky, United states as a chain of fast food restaurant by Colonel Harland Sanders in 1952. At first the Colonel started to implement the franchising business operation with the Chicken Secret Recipe by travel tower to tower. In 1960s because of the Colonel’s†¦show more content†¦In the last 1950s Colonel Sander started to expand KFC by the franchising operation. But when PepsiCo bought the KFC, PepsiCo made a new contract for the franchisees in order to control the franchised restaurants. In the meantime, PepsiCo spent a big cash flow on buying back the week franchised restaurants. However this operation needed higher levels of investment and KFC returned on assets slowly. The investors thought PepsiCo’s return on assets did not match returns delivered by Coca-Cola. Therefore PepsiCo sold back the franchised restaurants. Marketing This part will explain the marketing of KFC base on 4 P’S: production, pricing, promotion and placement. Production KFC dominated the chicken segment in US. During 1990s Boston Market absorbed a lot of customers form KFC because of its roasted chicken. The Boston market’s chicken was more health and its menu was more broaden which included ham, turkey, meat loaf, chicken pot pie, and deli sandwiches. So KFC introduced a new product called Rotisserie Gold in 1993. But the new product was not responded well by the customers because the customers did not like take whole chicken away. So in 1996 KFC reintroduced a roasted chicken which could be sold by piece. Pricing The pricing of KFC always was not expensive. The pricing of the product contained the taxes, excise duties, profits and the cost. Promotion Promotion is very important for theShow MoreRelatedKfc, A Spot Light And Taste Of Food Restaurants Essay1615 Words   |  7 Pageshypothesis that why people in Pakistan prefer KFC over Macdonald and we found that due togood quality and taste of food people prefer KFC .When KFC was introduced in Pakistan the prices was not affordable by people but now they have lower their prices. One reason was alsothe impressive packages due to which people prefer KFC over McDonald’s. While conductingour research we also came to know that KFC is more advertised this is one of the reasons that people prefer KFC over McDonald’s. We are going to discussRead MoreCase Study 1 - Kfc in India1152 Words   |  5 PagesCase Study 1 KFC in India – Ethical Issues 1. Since its entry into India in 1995, KFC has been facing protests by cultural and economic activists and farmers. What are the reasons for these protests and do you think these reasons are justified? Explain. No tolerance for ‘cruel multinationals’ was the main reason for the protests made by cultural and economic activists and farmers. Due to the economic liberalization policy of the Indian government during the early 1900’s, foreign fast food companiesRead MoreKfc - the Best Fast-Food Restaurant1114 Words   |  5 PagesXuà ¢n Luà ¢n: 100035 [pic] 1. Why is KFC famous? Kentucky Fried Chicken, better known as KFC, is the largest chicken restaurant KFC is an internationally fast food industry in the world. KFC began with Colonel Harland Sanders, in America in the year 1939. They have the main ambition to increase maintain the quality in fast food industry. Their aim is to capture the fast food market. Every day, more than 12 million customers are served at KFC restaurants in 109 countries and territoriesRead MoreKfc Strategies1502 Words   |  7 Pagesdescribe KFC’s international strategy? Which cross-border synergies can KFC reap and how locally responsive is the company? KFC’s international composition provides an exemplary mix of international entry strategies. The company enters a foreign market either by a greenfield entry by establishing a company-owned foreign subsidiary (21 %) or by a joint venture (10 %) (figure 10.2 in the book). However, in most of the cases, KFC expands it global franchise-network (69 %). In Latin America, KFC illustratesRead MoreAn Analysis Of Kfc s International Expansion Opportunities Essay1147 Words   |  5 Pages An Analysis Of KFC’s International Expansion Opportunities A Case Study of Ivey School Of Business Analysis By Carson McLaren December 5, 2016 BBB4M-1 Mr James Table of Contents Title Page 2. Table of Contents 3. Problem (Issues) Statement 4. Case Analysis 5. Analysis of Alternatives 6. Recommendations 7. Annotated Case Study Problem Identification Key Decisions Is International expansion the most effective way toRead MoreThe Competition Level Of Burger1238 Words   |  5 PagesCompany details: Lila’s burger shop has been operating the business for the past 20 years in Melbourne. This company has its popular product lines such as vegie burgers, beef burgers, chicken burgers, bacon and cheese burgers which use the locally produced raw materials and green organic vegetables as the fillings. The company has gained the popularity within Victoria and has attracted many interstates tourists as its fans. The company is positioned as the unique cuisine provider who can representRead MoreThe Competition Level Of Burger1488 Words   |  6 PagesLila’s burger shop has been operating the business for the past 20 years in Melbourne. This company has its popular product lines such as vegie burgers, beef burgers, chicken burgers, bacon and cheese burgers which use the locally produced raw materials and green organic vegetables as the fillings. The company has gained the popularity within Victoria and has attracted many interstates tourists as its fans. The company is positi oned as the unique cuisine provider who can represent the true AustralianRead MoreKFC SWOT in China962 Words   |  4 Pageshigh growth areas (i.e. China) By 2006, KFC had 1,700 restaurants in China, more than tripling in five years. Profit and sales figures saw increases of over 25 percent for some quarters, while comparable figures domestically were 1 and 2 percent. KFC significantly outsold McDonalds in China, and by 2006, KFC was opening a new Chinese outlet every 22 hours. Yum!s boss David Novak told Business Week (October 30, 2006) that he hoped to eventually have as many KFC restaurants in China as in the UnitedRead MoreKfc Case Study1509 Words   |  7 PagesKFC- Finger-lickin good Kentucky Fried Chicken Kentucky Fried Chicken is one of the well-known fast food restaurants in the world. The industry was founded by Colonel Sanders. The corporation is based in Louisville, Kentucky and now regarded as the most famous chicken restaurant chain. It can be noted that each day, nearly eight million customers avails the products and foods offered by this fast food chain.   KFC has more than 11, 000 branches in more than 80 nations and territories all overRead MoreKfc Kentucky Fried Chicken932 Words   |  4 PagesKFC is a multinational fast food chain company that has successfully established itself in the Latin American market. It has a long history, going back to where Colonel Harland Sanders created its distinct recipes. The KFC brand is well known in Latin America, which makes it a powerful marketing tool to use against competitors, but presently, is not conducting business in two countries of South America such as Paraguay and Uruguay. Currently, KFC is under massive attacks from animal organizations

Right, Duty and Obligation/Responsibility a Search for Ethical Free Essays

string(54) " in violation of the law or any attendant obligation\." 1 RIGHT, DUTY AND OBLIGATION/RESPONSIBILITY: A SEARCH FOR ETHICAL FUNDAMENTALS By Dr. Ani Casimir K. C 2 1) Introduction: Immanuel Kant gave philosophy four fundamental questions with which it is to concern itself and they are: (1) What can I know? ; (2) What is man? ; (3) What can I hope for, and, (4) Finally, what ought I to do. We will write a custom essay sample on Right, Duty and Obligation/Responsibility: a Search for Ethical or any similar topic only for you Order Now The latter—‘what ought I to do? ’ is the central subject of ethics,or what is variously called moral philosophy or philosophy of morality. With the concepts of ? right‘, ? uty‘ and obligation‘ and responsibility, we move into the science of ? oughts‘ that define the moral foundation of human society and the stability of its social fabric. The Kantian challenge here is that before we can build a morally strong and ethically virile social order the citizens should know the fundamentals of ? righteousness‘ or the values that build a right and moral citizenship who knows his rights, carries out his duties and compels the state, within the bounds of a good moral-legal order, to fulfil its obligations to the citizens. Before we can delve into the meaning of the terms– right, duty, obligation,and its allied responsibility, let us carry out a brief survey of what is meant by ethics or science of morality. 2) Ethics – A Brief View: A lot of people fail to appreciate the fact that back in antiquity, ethics did not constitute an independent study as such,but was part of a bigger course of study. For it was simply known in classical antiquity as the science of ? worth’ or ‘value’ so that what was popular was the study of ? axios’ and not ? ethos‘. Axios’ translates to a meaningful 3 expression ? to be worthy‘ root word for axiology – a more popular science than ethos – the root word for ethics. Ethics meant ? character or the custom‘ so that one can talk about individual character being good or bad and a society‘s custom could be worthy or not. Axiology as the science that propels society and guides her as to what is v aluable, worthy or honourable came from the Greek; it determines and properly classifies the subjects and disciplines which are worthy of being pursued, engaged in or discussed by citizens. From such discussions emerge values which are worthy of emulation by citizens and the state and are classified and codified accordingly. Over time such classifications and codifications became a study and was called ? ethics‘ – or ? worthy of character or valued behaviour. ‘ Professor Egbeka Aja also threw light upon the origins of the ethical science when he did a supportive expose in his book ? philosophy: An Introduction’: ‘Axiology is from the Greek: Axios meaning worthy, of philosophy and logos,meaning discourse. This is the branch that deals with values – both intrinsic and extrinsic values. Values are described as intrinsic when they are pursued for their own sake; while extrinsic values are pursued as a means to other ends. For instance, education can be said have intrinsic value when it is aimed at the improvement of man. It can be said to have extrinsic value when it seen as a means to attaining political power or to acquire material wealth. Axiology can be conveniently divided into the following sub-branches– ethics, aesthetics, social and political philosophy, philosophy of law and education†¦(1) 4 One seminal distinction that has emerged from this classical history is that ethics was only part of a bigger discipline that included law, politics, education and aesthetics. Except in Indian universities, Britain and some Middle Eastern schools, the study of axiology as the science of values (i. e. human values) have almost disappeared. In its place, ethics – its sub-branch– is taking the centre stage as the ? worthy‘ discipline of value for the society. The word ethics comes from the Greek root word – ethos- ? eaning custom or characte’r, defined by professor Aja as: ‘that branch of axiology which is sometimes called moral philosophy. It deals with the values concomitant with human conduct and human character. Ethics should be distinguished from morals or morality. The morals or morality of a person or society are the sum total of all the moral judgements (or moral beliefs or moral beliefs implicit in certain acts or behaviour) of that perso n or society2 3 Right In an ethical sense, a right is any action by man in society seen and interpreted to be into tune with the moral law of a people in such a society. At this juncture, we readily see that right makes us to remember the idea of duty. The concepts of justice, right and fairness, stand to each other as correlatives. But in a legal sense, a right translates into ? a claim which a person can make against others with the backing of the law. The person pressing for a claim to secure his right does so with explicit or implicit knowledge that the law recognizes that right and will justly rationalize his claim to award a compensation where necessary‘. An ethical right must conform to not only the moral law but also to the principles of natural rights embedded in natural law. On the other hand, legal rights must conform to the principles of positive rights whose validity derive from the positive law or the man-made law of the state. Currently there is an increasing movement for the establishment 5 of an African legal system or jurisprudence which will be based upon not only what the law is (positive law) but also what the law ought to be (African public moral values). A June 2008 international conference with the theme ? the law and Africa‘ organised by the Department of Philosophy University of Nigeria, centred upon exploring such possibility of harmonizing state law and African public morality in a new African jurisprudence. Conceptually considered, a right is a moral power that a person possesses to do something, to keep something and to exact something from another so long as the action is not in violation of the law or any attendant obligation. You read "Right, Duty and Obligation/Responsibility: a Search for Ethical" in category "Papers" 4 My right, as Dr. Ani Casimir, as a citizen of the Universe and Nigeria in particular could be used to illustrate the morphology of somerville‘s conception of what is a right: Dr. Ani has a right to do something, to keep something, and exact something provided in so doing Dr. Ani does not disregard the rights of others or their interests. So in essence, Dr. Ani‘s right and his enjoyment of them must end where the rights of other members of the society starts. 5 A right is judged by its impact upon the interests of mankind. When a right has a good effect upon others‘ interests it is alled just rights. Otherwise, it is called an unjust right, when it does not promote the well-being of man in the direction of life, liberty, health and reputation. Just rights are interests recognized and protected in law for which people are accordingly punished when they are violated. Violating any of them both in ethics and the law constitutes what is defined as ? wrong’. In other words, when we violate a right we are ? wrong‘ and the law states the punishment for those who have become wrong doers, that threaten the stability of the social order. It becomes immediately clear from the discussion above that we can categorize a right into that of 6 the moral and the legal order. What determines whether a right is classified as moral or legal depends a lot upon its nature, the nature of its source and the importance with which the society within which it operates attaches to it. A moral right invokes a correspondent duty whose violation by the moral agent is against the principles of natural justice. But a legal right is prescribed, recognised, known and protected by the law (positive law). Moral and legal rights are performable and enforceable only within human society and between persons since human beings are rational beings with intelligence to know them and guide their actions accordingly. In what I have insistently decided to call ‘moral sphere’—the stability of subsisting atmosphere of moral values in every society—every right has a corresponding object to which it must perforce relate to. This object makes it possible for the owner of the right to identify and claim his interest, protected and given recognition by the law of the state and the social conscience of the public. The object could either be material, immaterial or even services. In the context of human rights, this is what I define as a social, economic, political or an even environmental benefit, advantage or a constitutional entitlement. Rights can also be classified as either perfect or imperfect. A right is perfect if it corresponds to a duty that is in turn recognized and enforced by the law. A perfect right has both moral and legal correlatives in its source, recognition and execution. In otherwords, we are talking about a moral power that makes a law of society to b enforceable. For according to Nyasani: The enforceability here means that an action, and or criminal, will be taken against a person in breach of it, and if need be, judgement will be executed against him using physical force of the state. where a right is recognizable by the law, the state using its machinery, will have an interest in making sure that the 7 duty of respecting that right is enforced resorting to physical compulsion if necessary. 6 A right can also be classified as either positive or negative. According to the positive right perspective, it enables an individual to receive something more than he already has, whereas under the negative right perspective, the individual goes on to retain what one already has, such as the right to money in his pockets. 7 Another classification of rights is real rights as against personal rights. Real rights (jus in rem) entitles one ? to require that a duty is imposed upon all other persons to respect that person‘s interest? 8 On the other hand, personal rights(rights in personam) ? imposes a duty on a particular or determinate person or persons to respect the other‘s legally protected interested? Professor Nyasani illustrates this new classification with a telling example: My right to the occupation of my house or vehicle is in rem in the sense that all other people†¦ have to respect that right and the interest I have in the house or vehicle if on the other hand, I have my house to a tenant for occupation, the arrangement of its lease and use in between me and him exclusively and that arrangement does not directly enteret other people†¦ this kind of jus in personam which exclusively avails against no other persons but the tenant alone imposes a duty on the tenant to comply with the interert in the property ;eased to him. It is a person to person arrangement which creates an obligation on the party accepting the offer of lease hence personal and not real right with its attendant obligation; on the world at large†¦108 Rights can also be referred to as proprietary and personal if they relate to the person‘s estate, assets and property or to his status or personal condition. 11 Property rights are convertible to monetary values while personal rights relate to status and cannot be converted into money or made an object of commercial exchange. The latter cannot be taken away by any body. This is why such personal rights relating to 8 reputation and the integrity of the human person are described as inalienable and not transferable. On the other hand, proprietary rights are transferable 3 What is a Wrong? As we can see from the foregoing discussion, a right– moral or legal- has several classifications and it is the heart and soul of justice as a virtue. At the opposite end of that pendulum where the first position is occupied by right is what is known as wrong or injury. Just as we did with right, a wrong could be moral or legal in its texture. A moral wrong is an act that is repugnant and contrary to the accepted morals of a community; it is a natural wrong which need not always be a legal wrong10 On the other hand a legal wrong is any act forbidden by law and therefore not contrary to rules governing the proper administration of justice by the state. 11 A legal wrong may not necessarily be a moral wrong. In Britain, for example, the law prohibits the killing of wild games as meat by citizens. But naturalized Nigerians who are living there in Britain are home to a common African delicacy we call ? bush meat‘ as a delicacy. By consuming bush meat Nigerian – Britons who live have committed no moral wrong but they have violated a law prohibiting its consumption in Britain. A legal wrong: don’t kill nor eat wild games; if you do so, it is legally wrong and punishable. 4 Duty/obligation The complexity found in ethical discourses and subjects is fully consummated in the twin concepts of duty and obligation. But we shall attempt to dissemble the complexity through the simple process of marrying the concepts of duty with obligation and drawing out its meaning in bits followed with illustrations. 9 The word duty also comes variously as devoir, il dovere, pflicht or obligation. Duty has to do with the rightness of human actions regardless of whether it has happiness as its goal. Man is seen as having a duty, to live a life of virtue whether it conduces to his happiness or not. In other words, happiness is not that goal of duty but it is what we must do because we have to do it – either in accordance with personal conscience, public morality or the demands of the law. Duty is seen by many ethical scientists as a necessity in human moral conduct that helps to establish a moral society. For Immanuel Kant, duty is relegated to the higher order of the categorical‘ as against conditional or hypothetical imperative – that which we must do when and whenever we are called upon to do it: The categorical imperative makes it the supreme, absolute moral law of all rational, self-determining beings and in such a way that we (as human beginsare able to act on maxims which can at the same time have for their object themselves as universal laws of nature†¦ it posits the necessity of action at an end in itself and not as a possible action posing as a means to something alse that is alled or might be willed†¦12 Kant insists that if there is something whose existence has in itself an absolute worth, that is, something which is an end in itself, that same thing, pursued for its own sake, must become a source of definite laws and that inversely will be the source of a possible categorical imperative13. Kant gave the concept of duty to a humanity that makes public morality a desirable ethical inevitable good for the state and for its citizens a good worthy of being pursued. According to professor Nyasani: The objective principle is that the categorical imperative is beween the supreme practical law and the source of all laws of the will. In this sense then the practical imperative will require everyone of us to act in such a way as to handlet the rest of humanity in the most charitable manner possible so as to see them as an end in themselves and never as a means to an end. It is every one’s duty as a rational being to treat others in the same way as he would like them to treat him. This is the community that Kant so elaborately preached and practised14. 10 We can glean the core idea of duty from the trend of our discussion – duty is a kind of obligation we owe to ourselves, to others and to the society of which we are a members. But duty is a special kind of obligation: Duty as an obligation entails some kind of necessity†¦ not physical necessity by sheer implied command rolled up in the categorical must. It is a moral necessity imposed upon the human – will that ultimately derives its validity and force from the law of human nature which in term upon the eternal law of the author of creation15 5 Duty as Obligation: Duty comes across as a kind of obligation which is fundamental and basic to ny other responsibility we owe to any one because of its divine and natural correlates. As an obligation it comes either as a natural (moral) or legal category. We have a moral duty to obey our parents and not to steal from our neighbour. A moral duty and a legal duty could coincide in the burden imposed upon the individual citizen. If I steal from my neighbour, for example, I could get legal positive measures as punishment. Also, my neglect of my parents could attract social sanctions. So it is the rules that govern particular duties given recognition by their generators (makers) that will make a particular duty either moral or legal. Lacey gives an etymological conception to duty when he relates duty to ? ught obligation, duty-connected to others;‘ we ought‘ suggests a gap which ought to be filled . Obligations are primarily moral or legal. They are also always traced to some moral agent. 16 As against obligation, duty is primarily connected with roles, whether or not there are voluntarily undertaken. Duties tend to be of longer standing and not as ad-hoc as obligation: one meets one‘s obligations as one incurs them, but does one‘s duty or discharges as one incurs them in the normal course of things17 . 11 A ccording to Lacey they have similarities: ?duties and obligations are therefore special kind of things we always ought to perform them since they may be overridden, whether by other duties etc or even by something non-moral 18. Kant, however, has distinguished perfect duties which were absolute and could never be over ridden by other duties or even by, inclinations. As against object of material duties, we have also subjective or putative duties19 which are ? what we think we ought to do? 20 while material duties are ? what we really ought to do21. Finally, we can say with regard to duty that it is an ontological impulse which compels us (by the power of conscience) to act in a particular way, refrain from doing something which could harm or dismay another citizen from enjoying his or her own rights. The object and subject of duty is justice, doing right to oneself and to all . rofessor Nyasani‘s own conception tallies with my dialectical linkage of duty and conscience: It is a positive moral intuition that links in our subconscious conscience that drives an individual to make a crucial decision vis-a-vis the enhancement, protection and preservation of the self and by extension that of the community w hich happens to be the object of any legal legislation and moral norms22. Duties arise from the relationship of parties – say between father and son, husband and wife, duties also arise from commands given to citizens under a statute say tax return. Duties equally arise from contracts for which non-performance may lead to serious damage to public interest. 12 6 Responsibility: How does one‘s duty translate to one‘s responsibility? If I say that I have an obligation to perform a particular task or carry out an action ,can we say it is the same thing as saying that ? I have a responsibility to perform the same task or carryout the action. These questions throw more light on the law segment of our discourse, seeking to know the relationship between a person‘s moral actions, duty and responsibility . what is the single element that holds the three moral concepts together? The word is accountability23. According to Wallace ? responsibility designates a person‘s moral accountability for his actions. The same general idea is expressed by the related term imputability – as a quality of actions, facts or consequences by which they are attributable to an agent, and responsibility is the quality of the agent to which they are attributed. 24 Responsibility can be applied ethico-legally in the following three ways: 1) Descriptive Employment 2) Prescriptive usage 3) Ascriptive application 1) Descriptive Employment: This is the expression of a cause- effect relationship between an agent and an action or a consequence, without implying anything with regard to the ethical character of the act. 2) Prescriptive Usage: This is an expression of a moral obligation bidding one to do or to avoid doing something. For example, when Peter tells his friend Emeka – Emeka it is your 13 responsibility to take care of your parents in the village? It becomes an objective responsibility which Emeka carries for his parents in the village. 3) Ascriptive Application: The term ascribes blame or credit to an agent who acts with or without due conformity to moral norms of conduct. This portrays a more personal and subjective sense of responsibility different from the prescriptive model above. In all moral situation in which the sense of responsibility is questioned, ascertained, prescribed, ascribed or described, before and after the actions, there is a problem introduced when it is no longer a question of one moral agent but two or more agents committing a particular moral action. The name given to that problem is ? cooperation‘ – how to ascertain the degree of responsibility of the agents in carrying out the action. For example, a dead one can aid another living agent to commit evil, but is no longer living. A situation when an agent shares in the intention and modus of an action is defined as formal cooperation. While in a situation such an agent does not share in the intention and refuses to participate on the modus of the action is known as material cooperation because he may unintentionally do something that will lead to the committing of the evil. Conclusion: In dealing with the concept of right, duty, obligation and responsibility as ethical considerations, we have basically dealt, as briefly as we could, with the levers of morality, which is defined as the quality attributable to human action by reason of its conformity to rules according to which it should be regulated. 25 This means that there 14 is, in every society, a subsisting standard to which every human action can be measured. It also means that man is responsible for his moral actions and the consequences. Hence every citizen has a right which the state and every other citizen owe a duty to protect, cherish and promote as an ethical and legal obligation. The moral principles exposed under this chapter become the ethical foundations for the global experience which we define as human rights – which will be treated under another heading in another project. Notes 1 Aja Egbeke, Philosophy: An Introduction, Eungu, Auto century †¦ Ibid p. 13) 2 publishing co Ltd, 1991, p. 12 3 Nyasani; J. M. Nairobi, consolata institute of philosophy press, 1995, 255 4 Ibid 5 Nyasani, Ibid see also Somerville, Francis, Christ is king: A manual of catholic social Doctrine (catholic social Guild, oxford, 1962) p. 12. 6 Ibid pp 29-31 Salomon, John jurisprudence ed. Brullians, London, sweet and maxawell Ltd, 1957, pp 265-266. 8 Ibid 9 Ibid 15 10 Ibid 11 Ibid p. 33 12 Ibid p. 35. 13 Ibid 14 See also imanuel Kant, â€Å"fundamental principles of the metaphysics of morals† oxford, the Clarendon Pr ess, 1954 pp 85-110 15 Nyasani, cit p 22). 16 Ibid p 23 17 ibid 18 Lacey, A. R. A dictionary of philosophy)London, rout ledge and Paul,1976, pp. 148 – 151 19 Ibid p 150. 20 Ibid 21 Ibid 22 H. N. Castanenda Imperative, duties and moral ought, Australian Journal of philosophy, 1966 pp 50-120. 23 Nyasani, Ibid p 24 24 Wallace, W. the elements of philosophy, New York, Alba, House, 2008, p. 53. 25 Wallace, 162 How to cite Right, Duty and Obligation/Responsibility: a Search for Ethical, Papers

Immigration Law

Questions: 1. A critical analysis on European Union convention of human right 1950.2. Discuss the relation between European Union Convention of human right 1950 and Immigration Act, 2014. 3. Asylum application For Burain Answers: 1. European Union convention of human right 1950 Introduction: Article 8 of theEuropean Convention on Human Rightsdeclared a right to respect for a persons private and family life, subject to certain limitations according to the law. Right to private life and family life is a basic right of any individual. Sometime state law acts in contravention with the International laws. The Immigration Laws are somehow in contravention with Art 8 of the convention. So this kind of contradiction between laws makes various complicacies. Though the new Immigration Act, 2014 included the provisions which matches the provisions of Art 8 of European Union convention of human right 1950. A critical analysis: Theright to private lifemeans personal independence. This right give the power to take own decision about own life without states interference (Harris, O'Boyle and Warbrick, 1995). This right helps a person to expand personality and to set up associations with others. The right to private life includes the physical and mental reliability of a person, sex life, sexual category, individual data, status, names and photographs (Echr-online.info, 2015). The concept offamily lifeincludes the legally recognized ties among the persons who are connected by blood or marriage (Harris, O'Boyle and Warbrick, 1995). Generally we can give main focus on the relation between husband and wife or parents and children or between the siblings. But the relation with grandparents or grandchild or relation with uncle or aunt can also be included. Theright to respect for correspondenceunder article 8 gives emphasis on the right to free and continuous communication. Although the term correspondence might be referred to letters only, but article 8 intent to include the protection to communication through the telephone, parcels, telexes or fax (Echr-online.info, 2015). But the rights are not unlimited they are also subject to some restriction according to law. The term in accordance with law mentioned under article 8 of this convention includes some criteria for examination. They are accessibility of law; that law should be foreseeable and the interference must be necessary for the society. Accessibility of law under this purview means that interference to a right under article 8 has to be openly accessible. Citizens have to be able to find information regarding their rights which may be hampered. The law must be foreseen means the language of law must be unambiguous. It must be understood by public. Different case studies make indicate a clear overview about the applicability of Article 8 of European Union convention of human right 1950 (Curtice, 2010). In Smith and Grady v United Kingdom (Smith and Grady v United Kingdom, [1999]) case it was happen that Smith; the petitioner was an employee of the Royal Air Force. In 1994, a lady called the air force authority and alleged that Smith was a lesbian. She also alleged that smith sexually harassed other callers. The authority questioned smith and she admits the fact. The service police asked her to submit details of her sexual life, forced her to disclose the names of her partners and questioned about her HIV status and other particulars. After few months the authority discharged her from the service. The British government accepted that there was an interference with the right to a private life prescribed under Article 8 of European Union convention of human right 1950 (Mowbray, 2007). The court decided the case in the question whe ther such interference was justified or not. The court accepted the fact that the British Government had not give proper evidence and heavy reasons for the investigation of the applicants sexual orientation therefore decided that there was an infringement of the right to a private life described in Article 8 of the European Convention of human right 1950 (WEHMEIER and Press, 2015). In another leading case i.e. Silver and others v. The United Kingdom, (silver and others v. the United Kingdom, [1980]) similar type of matters are decided. In this case the petitioners were prisoners. They alleged that the prison authority intercepted of their letters. They sent letters to their advocates, family members, broadcasting organisation, newspapers, reporters etc. Generally interception of mail violates the right of private life in addition to the right to freedom of expression, but if that act was necessary or not, that was the determining question for this case. Later it was found by the court that some letters contains threats of violence. But court also added that a mere addressing of the mail to reporters or advocate or, human rights authorities, or that the letters discussed abuse in prison could not be measured as necessary (Mowbray, 2007). In a case of Birmingham City Council v. Clue (Birmingham City Council v. Clue, [2010]) it was happened that the woman and his daughter who were the native of Jamaica entered UK as a visitor for 6 months. The object was to visit some relative there. She remained there and also had 3 children of her British partner. She remained there until the relationship was broke down with her partner (Bailii.org, 2015). After that she applied for indefinite leave for herself and her children under Article 8 of European Convention on human rights. During the pendency of the application she applied for financial assistance from Birmingham city council (Bailii.org, 2015). But the council suspended it on the ground that she was unlawfully resides in United Kingdom. It was held that the refusal by Birmingham City Council to supply financial support and accommodation while the immigration request was pending resulted in a infringement of article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights. Proper inves tigation should be made by the authority before the taking any decision. Illegal immigrants have restricted chance to obtain employment and are hardly ever permitted to public assistance if they are jobless (Bell, 2014). 2. Relation betweenEuropean Union Convention of human right 1950 and Immigration Act, 2014 Section 19 of theImmigration Act 2014uplift some issues which questions about the roles of courts in accordance with human-rights (Elliott, 2014). Section 19 of the 2014 Act introduced a set of new provisions into theNationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 in which courts deal with cases of deportation which are resisted on the ground that the provisions are in contravention to Article 8 of theEuropean Convention on Human Rights (Cvetic, 1987). After several problems the question raises that whether the new Act require UK courts to decide cases in accordance with Art. 8. Definition of a refugee: The definition of a refugee under the 1951 CSR (or the Geneva Convention) under Article 1 was in this manner that refugee is a person who has fear of being harassed for the reason of nationality, religion, caste, creed or political activity. For this reason he is unwilling to return to his home country. Economic migrates are different from refugee. Definition of asylum seeker in UK law: The NIAA, 2002 defines Asylum seeker. A person considered to be an asylum seeker if his age is 18 years or more, he is presents the United Kingdom, the want for asylum has been made by him at a place selected by the Secretary of State, the Secretary of State has recorded the claim. Claim must show that the removal of that person must violate UKs responsibility under the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees done at Geneva on 28th July 1951 and its protocol, or Article 3 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms settled by the Council of Europe. Thus, the 1951 Convention and the European Convention on Human Rights remain the foundation of UK Asylum laws. EU Qualifications Directive: Even if a person is not allowed to the protection under the Refugee Convention or Article 3 of the ECHR, he can pursue the claim under the broader Qualification Directive. On 9 October 2006, fundamental changes to the Immigration Rules were introduced, which start an extraordinary detail the criteria for granting asylum or humanitarian protection in the UK. The new Rules are based on Council Directive 2004/83/EC (the 'Qualification Directive' which is inserted in domestic law by the Refugee or Person in Need of International Protection (Qualification) Regulations 2006 (SI 2525/2006). The new provisions in Immigration Act, 2014: Previously section 19 of Immigration Act leads frustration to the Government of UK. The main issue was relating to the deportation of foreign criminals. The new provision in 2014 Act indented to indicate this problem. The provision of Public interest is the area of attraction. The Government can take decision regarding the deportation if it involves the question of public interest. The new legislation claims that it is in the public interest that there should be an efficient system of immigration management, along with that its better that the immigrants can speak English and they must be financially independent. The Act says that importance should be preserved to private life and relationships that is established by an individual at a time when that individual is in the United Kingdom without authorization. The new provisions are more rigid in relation to foreign criminals. The public interest must be taken into consideration in case of deportation. The more serious offence involves more question of public person. The Act creates a difference between the persons who are sentence for 4 years and more and person who gets the sentence less than 4 years. There are two exceptions for the deportation of criminals whose punishment is less than 4 years. Firstly, the individual has been lawfully resident in the United Kingdom for maximum span of his life. Along with that he is socially and culturally incorporated towards the nation, and there would be very prominent obstacles to his incorporation into the country to which he is going to be deported. Secondly, the individual has a authentic relationship with a qualifying partner, with a qualifying child, parents and the deportation affects the partner or child very cruelly. Non- Refoulement: The foundation of international refugee is the principle of non-refoulement. This is measured as a very important right under international human rights law. The duty of non-refoulement (Art 33 of CSR 1951) directs States not to return refugee to areas where his or her life would be at danger. The convention is the concept of non-refoulement i.e. the prohibition of remove a refugee and compels to return to a country where his life or freedom would be in danger on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. Conclusion: The harmonization between state and international law is very much necessary. Otherwise people will suffer the problem. UKs new law, The Immigration Act, 2014 somehow lesser the controversy with Art.8 of the convention. Now the prime point to determine before deportation is public interest. . Right to private life and family life is given importance by the immigrations laws. 3. Asylum application for Burian To Office in charge Asylum Screening Unit of United Kingdom Croydon, United Kingdom Application for asylum Dear officer, I represent Burain, a citizen of Ukraine who lived in Sebastopol till 2013. He is an eligible and deserving candidate for asylum under section Article 3 of EU convention on human right 1950, article 33 of convention on the statue of Refugees 1951 and Article 15(c) of the EU Refugee Qualification Directive 2004. On this behalf I submit this memorandum and other supplement document in support of his application of asylum. Factual Summary: Burain is a Ukraine National who lived in Sebastopol till 2013. He lived there with his family. In 2014 February; Russia started to send troops of military apparatus towardsUkraine. Russian backed rebel have expelled him from his village. He is homeless now. He feared that he will face danger of his life because he is ethnic Ukraine who at first confidentially supported Crimean independence from Ukraine. His brother and family supported pro Ukraine. But now they are missing. He is now fears that he may be targeted next because of the political view of this brother and family. For this above mention cause Burain seeks asylum in United Kingdom. Condition of Ukraine: Started from Crimean crisis, the military with unclear authorization intended to take control over the territory of Crimea.Putin originally denied the whole activity of Russia but afterward admitted it that Russian troops were influential in Crimea Now for the militant attacks in Ukraine disturb the life of the citizen and it also became dangerous for the people there. Applicable Laws Article 3 of EU convention on human right 1950 provides the prohibition of torture to the human being (Greer, 2006). In a famous case called Bamber Case it was happened that he was a UK prisoner and won an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. He was sentenced for whole life without parole. The court said that it was a contravention to the Article 3 of European Convention of Human Rights 1950. UK government is now forced to review the sentence. Convention on the statue of Refugees 1951: According to the definition from of convention on the statue of Refugees 1951a refugee as is individual who due to fear of being victimized on the ground of race, faith, nationality, association of a social group or for observing a particular political opinion is unable or, is unwilling to return to his native place. This Article has a unique feature. It talks about the principle of non- refoulement. This protects the refugees right of protection against forceful return. This Article states that no state can expel or sent bact a refugee whose life is in danger at his own country or territory. The cause can be political or can be social or any other reason (Clayton, 2004). It is extensively established that the prohibition of forcible return is division of customary international law. It implies that the States that are not a party to the Refugee Convention, 1951, also obey the principle of non-refoulement. Therefore, it is clear that the States are also compelled under the Convention as well as customary international law to maintain the principle ofnon-refoulement. Whenever, this principle is in danger, UNHCR can take action by intervening with proper authorities, and if it thinks essential, can inform the public (Simeon, 2013). Asylum law in the UK: After Germany, United Kingdom is the most favorite target for asylum seekers. Asylum laws are considered to be the part of immigration law but it can be differentiate in other aspects. Refugee laws are mainly derived from the international laws but applicable domestically. Mainly it comes from United Nation CSR1951, amended in 1967. UK ratified this. Along with this several provisions of the European Human Rights Convention on Human Rights are relevant and have been the foundation for the European Court restructuring immigration decisions of State parties. The 1993 and 1996 Asylum and Immigration Acts marked as first open acknowledgment of the obligations of UK under Geneva Conventions. R (European Roma Rights Centre) v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport[2004]UKHL 55is a asylum case of UK relating to Article 33 of theConvention Relating to the Status of Refugees. The fact of the case is that Romas are the people who are the in more and more time refused to enter to the United Kingdom under the British rule and policy relating to immigration. If state officials determined that the passengers would seek asylum after they arrived, they immediately refused the entry. The ERRC brought this action against this kind of action alleging that it is a direct discrimination to a cluster of asylum seekers. Roma experience discrimination at their territory. The claimants argued that the Government, represented by Greenwood QC, was violating its international duties. TheCourt of Appeal could not find any discrimination. The House of Lords held the procedure was naturally and methodically biased and contrary tosection 1(1)(a) Race Relation Act, 1976.Roma were intentionally quest ioned because the officers had knowledge that generally all Czech asylum seekers were Roma. So, they were treated less sympathetically on racial grounds that are a direct contravention of domestic and international law. The main question raised in this occasion is that when there is single law then why a particular race will be treated less favorably. The ground discrimination was race. So this motive is totally void. The main object of legislation is to promote each persons equal right. There should not be any discrimination is the ground of race, sex, colour, creed etc. when the legislation itself is a non discriminatory one then it is unlawful on the part of the officials. But after different opinion of the judges the appeal was failed. The majority of the panel thought that there was no international law that is essentially required the Roma to be permitted into the country prior to they give application for asylum. The failure of the State to provide adequate protection to an a sylum seeker was an essential part to constitute maltreatment under Art.1A (2) Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees 1951. EU Refugee Qualification Directive 2004 This Article also protects the right of the refugees. This Article talks about the condition of serious harm to a human being. According to this Article serious harm consist of death penalty of execution; secondly it includes inhumane and dangerous torture or punishment of the applicant from a country of origin (Vrachnas, 2005). Finally it includes serious and personal threats to a citizens life for the reason of random violence and attack in the country (Clayton, 2005). HJ (Iran) and HT (Cameroon) vSecretary of State for the Home Department In this case it was determined by theSupreme Court of the United Kingdomrelating to two individual who are the native ofIranandCameroon. They claimedasylumin theUnited Kingdomfor their homosexuality as the ground. The persons appeal was rejected previously on the ground that they could not face harassment in their own nation if they would hide their sexuality. Interventions were prepared by theEquality and Human Rights Commissionand theUnited Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Both of this Gay man of Iran and Cameroon arrived at UK but arrested by the police for using false passport. After that they claim asylum. It was held that the individual could not be likely to hide their sexual desire and that it was erroneous to apply prudence test in this situation. Both the cases then sent for reconsideration according to the recommendation given in judgment. Asylum in the United Kingdom is maintained by theUK Border Agency but they refused asylum in both cases. The Court of Appeal observed that theAsylum and Immigration Tribunalwas permitted to locate that HJ was likely to bear the requirement for prudence on his depart to Iran, so there was no case of asylum. The Court observed that HT also unable to prove the requirement for asylum. The Court held that on this basis both of them are entitled to return to their native country of origin. Grounds for application: Burains family believes in a particular political opinion so he can in danger if he returns to the country of origin. So he wants protection under article 33 of convention on the statue of Refugees 1951. There is an improved dependence on the ECHR in asylum cases. It can be stated that there is a risk the to the asylum seeker that they can be subjected to inhuman treatment which contrary to Article 3 and or his right to respect for his private and family life, his home will be violated which is contrary to Article 8 if he is returned to his country of origin . This is applicable to this case also. Burain is entitled to get asylum because he is entitled under Article 15(c) of the EU Refugee Qualification Directive 2004 Conclusion: After discussing all this matters it is proved that under Article 3 of EU convention on human right 1950, article 33 of convention on the statue of Refugees 1951 and Article 15(c) of the EU Refugee Qualification Directive 2004 Burain is entitled to claim asylum in UK because UK is a state party to all this conventions. For all this above mentioned cause and discussion, Burain respectfully requests to this authority for asylum. Respectfully Submitted Burain References: Bailii.org, (2015).Birmingham City Council v Clue [2010] EWCA Civ 460 (29 April 2010). [online] Available at: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2010/460.html [Accessed 25 Mar. 2015]. Bell, B. (2014). Crime and immigration.IZAWOL. Birmingham City Council v. Clue[2010]EWCA (civ), p.460. Clayton, G. (2004).Textbook on immigration and asylum law. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Clayton, G. (2005). Review: UK Asylum Law and Policy: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives.Journal of Refugee Studies, 18(1), pp.126-127. Curtice, M. (2010). The European Convention on Human Rights: an update on Article 3 case law.Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, 16(3), pp.199-206. Cvetic, G. (1987). Immigration Cases in Strasbourg: The Right to Family Life Under Article 8 of the European Convention.International Comparative Law Quarterly, 36(03). Echr-online.info, (2015).Article 8 ECHR - Introduction. [online] Available at: https://echr-online.info/article-8-echr/ [Accessed 24 Mar. 2015]. Elliott, M. (2014).The Immigration Act 2014: A sequel to the prisoner-voting saga?. [online] Public law for everyone. Available at: https://publiclawforeveryone.com/2014/05/23/the-immigration-act-2014-a-sequel-to-the-prisoner-voting-saga/ [Accessed 24 Mar. 2015]. Greer, S. (2006).The European Convention on Human Rights. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Hargreaves, S. (2001). UK government overhauls asylum procedures.The Lancet, 358(9292), p.1524. Harris, D., O'Boyle, M. and Warbrick, C. (1995).Law of the European Convention on Human Rights. London: Butterworths. Harvey, C. (2000).Seeking asylum in the UK. London: Butterworths. Harvey, C. (n.d.). Developments in UK Asylum Law and Policy.SSRN Journal. Mowbray, A. (2007).Cases and materials on the European Convention on Human Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ramji-Nogales, J., Schoenholtz, A., Schrag, P. and Kennedy, E. (2009).Refugee roulette. New York, N.Y.: New York University Press. Silver and others v. the united kingdom[1980]EHRR 3, p.475. Simeon, J. (2013).The UNHCR and the supervision of international refugee law. Cambridge University Press. Smith and Grady v United Kingdom[1999]EHRR 29, p.493. Storey, H. (2008). EU Refugee Qualification Directive: a Brave New World?.International Journal of Refugee Law, 20(1), pp.1-49. Vrachnas, J. (2005).Migration and refugee law. Cambridge [UK]: Cambridge University Press. WEHMEIER, N. and Press, O. (2015).Oxford University Press | Online Resource Centre | Notes on key cases. [online] Global.oup.com. Available at: https://global.oup.com/uk/orc/law/public/endicott2e/01student/ch03/03cases/ [Accessed 24 Mar. 2015].