I am still baffled by the idea of the EU. Despite not having lived in Europe all my life, or maybe because of it, I find it difficult to understand the concept of the EU. It does not help that sometimes the EU and the individual countries may have different laws, or at least a different view of the law.
This is most apparent when you have cases such as the Congolese man, a convicted rapist awaiting deportation, who is now allowed to remain in the UK in order to wed a fellow African. His fiancee happens to be a German national. According to EU law, EU citizens are allowed to move around at will. Being married to her this rapist will have the right to remain. Of course, nothing is yet set in stone, but on the surface, that is how it appears. It seems that EU law could take precedence.
If I was liberal-minded, I might argue that he has served his time, therefore, he has won his freedom and should be given another chance. That’s what would happen to a British citizen. Of course, the fact that he was not a British citizen and had betrayed the trust of the natives meant that he lost any rights; therefore, he should be deported.
I have to admit I am narrow-minded when it comes to these issues. If the man was supposed to be deported, he should not be allowed to remain. However, if he is allowed to stay solely for the purpose of a wedding, boot him after the wedding. If his wife wants to stay, they will have to remain physically separated. EU law should not force the UK to accept into its bosom a convicted felon. Other people have been banned from entering the UK, so why can’t this criminal?
If the EU wants to function as a cohesive unit, perhaps they should consider that a convicted felon of one EU country should not be allowed to be in any of the other EU countries unless he/she is a national of that country.
