his application was not accepted by the Vietnamese Government on the grounds that he had been previously resettled in China. China was approached again for the return of Mr CAM and his family but as Mr CAM had by now married a screened-out Vietnamese migrant, China would not agree to the return of his wife. Under normal circumstances, Mr CAM would have been
returned to China and his wife to Vietnam. On 19 May 1993,
Mr CAM and his family were treated exceptionally and given access to resettlement under the UNHCR mandate. They were
transferred to the Bataan Refugee Transit Centre in Philippines on 1 June 1993 to await resettlement.
74. As illustrated by Mr CAM's case, the return of the ECVIIS depends on their full co-operation in providing accurate information on their previous residence in China.
75.
It also highlights the dilemma and difficulties faced by the Hong Kong Government in finding a durable solution for an ECVII who is married to a screened-out Vietnamese migrant.
China will not agree to accept a screened-out Vietnamese migrant whereas Vietnam will not accept ECVIIS. Prior to a marriage taking place between an ECVII and a Vietnamese migrant, the Hong Kong Government invariably explains to them their peculiar situation so they are fully aware of the consequences and their likely future separation upon being repatriated to China or Vietnam. In this case, Mr CAM was so warned but decided to proceed with the marriage nonetheless.
76.
Legally, both Mr CAM and Mr VUONG have been regarded as illegal immigrants from China. The legal framework of the Immigration Ordinance, Cap. 115 applicable to this category of person is applied to them. Claims for refugee status do
No claims for refugee
not arise and are not considered.
status in respect of their life in China have been received. There is no question of screening.
Arb.Det
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.