daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Railways

Railways (Inter)national commuter and freight trains



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old February 16th, 2017, 04:12 PM   #1021
luacstjh98
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,355
Likes (Received): 285

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
PRC border agents cannot enforce PRC laws on Hong Kong soil. That's the bookseller case all over again.
He expressly said "stationing Hong Kong police in the "cleared" sections of the station to emphasize Hong Kong's jurisdiction over it". I take that statement to mean that nobody would be, and should be, enforcing PRC laws on Hong Kong soil.

How about arming those HK policemen, with instructions to shoot the PRC border agents if they try even so much as an unauthorized smoke break? The PRC border agents would be in WKT only to provide advisory opinions, and ultimately if they want someone detained they have to either take him off at Futian or ask the HK police to do it. And if any border agent misbehaves, they can just be relieved of duty, declared persona non grata, and put on the next train back to Futian like how exposed spies are treated, that is if HK police didn't already shoot them.

Legally, the PRC agents staffing WKT wouldn't be considered part of the People's Armed Police Border Guard, but as representatives of the PRC Liaison Office in HK. Thus, they wouldn't be given arms or anything like that. And of course, officially the People's Armed Police would be officially delegating the maintenance of the border inspection station at WKT to the Liaison Office.
__________________
Doors closing. Please stand clear of all train doors.

I have a bad habit of retroactively editing my posts without prior warning.

Last edited by luacstjh98; February 16th, 2017 at 04:23 PM.
luacstjh98 no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old February 16th, 2017, 06:27 PM   #1022
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,844
Likes (Received): 18129

Quote:
Originally Posted by luacstjh98 View Post
He expressly said "stationing Hong Kong police in the "cleared" sections of the station to emphasize Hong Kong's jurisdiction over it". I take that statement to mean that nobody would be, and should be, enforcing PRC laws on Hong Kong soil.

How about arming those HK policemen, with instructions to shoot the PRC border agents if they try even so much as an unauthorized smoke break? The PRC border agents would be in WKT only to provide advisory opinions, and ultimately if they want someone detained they have to either take him off at Futian or ask the HK police to do it. And if any border agent misbehaves, they can just be relieved of duty, declared persona non grata, and put on the next train back to Futian like how exposed spies are treated, that is if HK police didn't already shoot them.

Legally, the PRC agents staffing WKT wouldn't be considered part of the People's Armed Police Border Guard, but as representatives of the PRC Liaison Office in HK. Thus, they wouldn't be given arms or anything like that. And of course, officially the People's Armed Police would be officially delegating the maintenance of the border inspection station at WKT to the Liaison Office.
Then what are PRC agents enforcing under Hong Kong police's eyes? They certainly can't be enforcing their own laws under the knowing eyes of Hong Kong law enforcers, or ask their Hong Kong counterparts to do it for them. If these PRC agents are there to provide useless and unenforceable advice, then they don't need to be there in the first place.

Since when can the Liaison Office impose PRC laws in Hong Kong?
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 16th, 2017, 06:59 PM   #1023
luacstjh98
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,355
Likes (Received): 285

PRC agents would be able to check documents, nothing more. If they want to prevent someone from entering the PRC, they have to ask the HK police to do it, under HK immigration laws denying exit. If they want to deny someone exit from the PRC, they have to let him out and ask HK police to deny entry and detain him, likewise under HK laws.

If they want to deal with him under PRC law, then they'll have to let him in, and take him across the border to Futian, or ask the HK authorities to deport the person in question to Futian or some other entry point to the PRC.
__________________
Doors closing. Please stand clear of all train doors.

I have a bad habit of retroactively editing my posts without prior warning.

Last edited by luacstjh98; February 16th, 2017 at 07:06 PM.
luacstjh98 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 16th, 2017, 07:20 PM   #1024
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,844
Likes (Received): 18129

Quote:
Originally Posted by luacstjh98 View Post
PRC agents would be able to check documents, nothing more. If they want to prevent someone from entering the PRC, they have to ask the HK police to do it, under HK immigration laws denying exit. If they want to deny someone exit from the PRC, they have to let him out and ask HK police to deny entry and detain him, likewise under HK laws.

If they want to deal with him under PRC law, then they'll have to let him in, and take him across the border to Futian, or ask the HK authorities to deport the person in question to Futian or some other entry point to the PRC.
Hong Kong law enforcement cannot stop someone whom PRC doesn't want to admit. If this person didn't violate Hong Kong laws, then there is no basis to enforce.

Just because PRC doesn't want a lad in doesn't mean Hong Kong has to bar departure. That's not how immigration works.

Your intermingling of Hong Kong and PRC laws and enforcement is exactly the Mad Max scenario people here fear. The rule of law is being jeopardized.
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 16th, 2017, 07:27 PM   #1025
luacstjh98
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,355
Likes (Received): 285

I'm not sure, I don't think you're getting what I'm trying to say.

Why can't HK and the PRC put in place the same, if not similar, preclearance procedures that the US currently has with Canada, Ireland and some other countries?

That is my question.

This is what is currently being done for the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...l_restrictions
__________________
Doors closing. Please stand clear of all train doors.

I have a bad habit of retroactively editing my posts without prior warning.

kunming tiger liked this post
luacstjh98 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 16th, 2017, 07:34 PM   #1026
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,844
Likes (Received): 18129

Quote:
Originally Posted by luacstjh98 View Post
I'm not sure, I don't think you're getting what I'm trying to say.

Why can't HK and the PRC put in place the same, if not similar, preclearance procedures that the US currently has with Canada, Ireland and some other countries?

That is my question.

This is what is currently being done for the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...l_restrictions
No PRC laws can be enforced in Hong Kong soil. Hence, joint immigration facilities on Hong Kong soil violate the One Country Two Systems doctrine. The only way this is going to work is to have Hong Kong immigration officers jointly stationed on mainland Chinese soil, where they are allowed to enforce Hong Kong laws in a specially designated area. That is happening at Shenzhen Bay already.
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 16th, 2017, 07:54 PM   #1027
luacstjh98
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,355
Likes (Received): 285

Then the main complaint from the Chinese side is that such arrangements would not only limit the available destinations that can be served from WKT, it would also make things hard for both the PRC and HK by having to split out operations over many scattered areas.

Am I not wrong?

Besides, US CBP has no legal powers on foreign soil. So likewise, under an arrangement like what the US has, PRC border guards would NOT be allowed to enforce PRC laws, thus following the One Country Two Systems doctrine.

I guess I'll recuse myself from the discussion here, since we seem to be going nowhere.
__________________
Doors closing. Please stand clear of all train doors.

I have a bad habit of retroactively editing my posts without prior warning.
luacstjh98 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 16th, 2017, 11:11 PM   #1028
urbanfan89
Registered User
 
urbanfan89's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,502
Likes (Received): 67

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
No PRC laws can be enforced in Hong Kong soil. Hence, joint immigration facilities on Hong Kong soil violate the One Country Two Systems doctrine. The only way this is going to work is to have Hong Kong immigration officers jointly stationed on mainland Chinese soil, where they are allowed to enforce Hong Kong laws in a specially designated area. That is happening at Shenzhen Bay already.
It would be the same as if someone shows up at HKIA (or any airport anywhere), checks in to any international flight, and are told by the airline staff they are barred from entering the destination country and therefore cannot board the flight. If the barred passenger proceeded to exit control anyway, that person will be without a valid boarding pass and be stopped. The person's right to leave HK was never violated, and only Hong Kong laws are ever enforced during this whole process.

Admittedly, putting official PRC agents at WKT may not be legally tenable. But the railway company has the complete right (and obligation) to conduct document checks prior to boarding. Since it already occurs at airports, it should be doable for the railway.
__________________

luacstjh98 liked this post
urbanfan89 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 16th, 2017, 11:27 PM   #1029
doc7austin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 380
Likes (Received): 809

Quote:
Thus, they wouldn't be given arms or anything like that.
I cannot remember seeing any Mainland Chinese immigration officer having a firearm.
doc7austin no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 16th, 2017, 11:34 PM   #1030
urbanfan89
Registered User
 
urbanfan89's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,502
Likes (Received): 67

Quote:
Originally Posted by doc7austin View Post
I cannot remember seeing any Mainland Chinese immigration officer having a firearm.
Giving immigration agents weapons, especially when the jurisdictional issues aren't 1000% clear, is a really bad idea.
urbanfan89 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2017, 04:23 AM   #1031
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,844
Likes (Received): 18129

Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanfan89 View Post
It would be the same as if someone shows up at HKIA (or any airport anywhere), checks in to any international flight, and are told by the airline staff they are barred from entering the destination country and therefore cannot board the flight. If the barred passenger proceeded to exit control anyway, that person will be without a valid boarding pass and be stopped. The person's right to leave HK was never violated, and only Hong Kong laws are ever enforced during this whole process.

Admittedly, putting official PRC agents at WKT may not be legally tenable. But the railway company has the complete right (and obligation) to conduct document checks prior to boarding. Since it already occurs at airports, it should be doable for the railway.
Airlines check for proper visas before granting a boarding pass. The problem occurs when a passenger has a valid visa document, whether it is a HRP or an actual visa if carrying a foreign passport. I don't believe the check-in agent can scan the actual passenger's name against international criminal databases.

China tends to bar entry to certain "flagged" individuals even though they may have a valid HRP or visa to enter the country. So the check-in agent will grant a boarding pass even though they will be turned back at entry into China. I don't think the railway operator has this unofficial blacklist or has any authority to stop a passenger from travelling based on this reason.

The same applies to air travel.
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2017, 05:29 AM   #1032
luacstjh98
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,355
Likes (Received): 285

Then give the railway operator the authority, it's China Railway, a state owned corporation after all.

Since you already need ID to buy a HSR ticket, China Railway can simply be made to run a name check against the Ministry of State Security, and deny ticket sales to anyone not allowed to enter or leave China. In fact, if they don't already do this, I'd be surprised. After all, China Railway do run trains across the Chinese border (to Russia and North Korea, at least).

This is what the US does. Airlines are required to submit passenger names to the Secure Flight system for matching against no-fly lists and such, to determine whether a passenger is allowed to board a plane. This includes domestic and international flights, as well as flights that overfly the US but do not land in the US.
__________________
Doors closing. Please stand clear of all train doors.

I have a bad habit of retroactively editing my posts without prior warning.
luacstjh98 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2017, 05:56 AM   #1033
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,844
Likes (Received): 18129

Quote:
Originally Posted by luacstjh98 View Post
Then give the railway operator the authority, it's China Railway, a state owned corporation after all.

Since you already need ID to buy a HSR ticket, China Railway can simply be made to run a name check against the Ministry of State Security, and deny ticket sales to anyone not allowed to enter or leave China. In fact, if they don't already do this, I'd be surprised. After all, China Railway do run trains across the Chinese border (to Russia and North Korea, at least).

This is what the US does. Airlines are required to submit passenger names to the Secure Flight system for matching against no-fly lists and such, to determine whether a passenger is allowed to board a plane. This includes domestic and international flights, as well as flights that overfly the US but do not land in the US.
Chinese immigration and security authorities do not release their blacklists to even state-owned airlines at this time. That's why we still hear people being turned away at the airport upon arrival, and not prevented from boarding. If they are willing to give access, then this may be the solution, but seems they are not willing, hence this matter is still unresolved.

Not too sure how border-crossing formalities are being done at Russia and North Korea borders. Don't think there is any sort of preclearance or joint immigration facilities for these trains.

For the US pre-clearance system, I recall the data submission takes places days before the flight? I suppose last-minute airline ticket sales are more rare compared to railways. Chinese high-speed trains don't allow long-dated pre-sales anyway.
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2017, 06:21 AM   #1034
YannSZ
Shenzhen !
 
YannSZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Shenzhen
Posts: 804
Likes (Received): 1159

Even if they don't give access to such a list, it's not a big problem.
Just take the next train back to Shenzhen and you will be in Futian train station 15 minutes later.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
Chinese immigration and security authorities do not release their blacklists to even state-owned airlines at this time. That's why we still hear people being turned away at the airport upon arrival, and not prevented from boarding. If they are willing to give access, then this may be the solution, but seems they are not willing, hence this matter is still unresolved.

Not too sure how border-crossing formalities are being done at Russia and North Korea borders. Don't think there is any sort of preclearance or joint immigration facilities for these trains.

For the US pre-clearance system, I recall the data submission takes places days before the flight? I suppose last-minute airline ticket sales are more rare compared to railways. Chinese high-speed trains don't allow long-dated pre-sales anyway.
__________________
Shenzhen under construction photo set on flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/yleberre/sets/1582442/
ShenzhenCity Twitter account: @ShenzhenCity
ShenzhenVille Instagram account: @ShenzhenVille
YannSZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2017, 02:20 PM   #1035
Short
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Lismore
Posts: 215
Likes (Received): 165

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
PRC border agents cannot enforce PRC laws on Hong Kong soil. That's the bookseller case all over again.
The situation is not different to the various consulates and diplomatic missions already existing in Hong Kong. They validate and judge the suitability which individuals can or can not gain a visa to their respective countries as per their respective laws. Anyone causing any trouble or illegal issue, they are immediately dealt with by Hong Kong authorities.

Having PRC Immigration and Customs officials at WKT in effect would be little different to the Chinese consular staff issuing visa working in HK or the PRC soldiers on guard at their respective barracks, where HK police deal with disturbances because it is in their jurisdiction.

It works in so many other places, there is no reason why it can not work in China. The only problem is not a legal one, but one of image. Where as French and British officials are respected equally in each others country for Eurostar services and USA officials share the same respect in the various countries they operate in, in Hong Kong there is less respect for the PRC officials. If the Hong Kong government can show and demonstrate that the PRC officials would operate only in the same manner as these other proven examples, then public opinion can change. It is like how the Australian and American public can not see the value of a high speed rail network because they have no exposure to how well they work in the countries where they exist. If HK people were more aware of how this situation works well in other countries without any fears of a loss in sovereignty, there would be less fear about this issue.
Short no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2017, 05:28 PM   #1036
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,844
Likes (Received): 18129

Quote:
Originally Posted by Short View Post
The situation is not different to the various consulates and diplomatic missions already existing in Hong Kong. They validate and judge the suitability which individuals can or can not gain a visa to their respective countries as per their respective laws. Anyone causing any trouble or illegal issue, they are immediately dealt with by Hong Kong authorities.

Having PRC Immigration and Customs officials at WKT in effect would be little different to the Chinese consular staff issuing visa working in HK or the PRC soldiers on guard at their respective barracks, where HK police deal with disturbances because it is in their jurisdiction.

It works in so many other places, there is no reason why it can not work in China. The only problem is not a legal one, but one of image. Where as French and British officials are respected equally in each others country for Eurostar services and USA officials share the same respect in the various countries they operate in, in Hong Kong there is less respect for the PRC officials. If the Hong Kong government can show and demonstrate that the PRC officials would operate only in the same manner as these other proven examples, then public opinion can change. It is like how the Australian and American public can not see the value of a high speed rail network because they have no exposure to how well they work in the countries where they exist. If HK people were more aware of how this situation works well in other countries without any fears of a loss in sovereignty, there would be less fear about this issue.
Chinese consular staff in HK are subject to HK laws and cannot ask HK police to enforce PRC law in HK.

If a passenger is denied entry into China at West Kowloon due to the Chinese "blacklist", HK police cannot forbid the passenger from boarding because that passenger did not violate any HK laws. Hence, the PRC agents at the terminus have no power whatsoever, rendering their check or presence useless.

European examples do not apply because HK has to adhere to the Basic Law, whose clauses forbid any joint immigration facilities enforcing different laws on HK soil.

This is not an example of how other countries' models can work in HK, but whether the law can allow this to happen. These are 2 very different problems.
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2017, 05:33 PM   #1037
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,844
Likes (Received): 18129

Quote:
Originally Posted by YannSZ View Post
Even if they don't give access to such a list, it's not a big problem.
Just take the next train back to Shenzhen and you will be in Futian train station 15 minutes later.
Then joyriders will waste the valuable seats that can otherwise go to fare-paying passengers, knowing they will be bounced back even though they don't have the proper paperwork to cross the border.

Back a few years ago when pregnant women tried all sorts of means to cross and overstay in HK to give birth, they would be able to exploit this loophole to enter HK territory to give birth on the train or squatting at the terminus station before immigration so their child can gain residency.
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 18th, 2017, 01:26 AM   #1038
urbanfan89
Registered User
 
urbanfan89's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,502
Likes (Received): 67

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
Chinese consular staff in HK are subject to HK laws and cannot ask HK police to enforce PRC law in HK.

If a passenger is denied entry into China at West Kowloon due to the Chinese "blacklist", HK police cannot forbid the passenger from boarding because that passenger did not violate any HK laws. Hence, the PRC agents at the terminus have no power whatsoever, rendering their check or presence useless.
The Chinese government would be able to revoke the documents and cancel the tickets - thus turning the passenger into a trespasser who can be removed by HK police under HK law.

This already happens at the airport, where Hong Kong pro-democracy activists who did possess valid HRPs were found on a Chinese government blacklist, had their HRPs revoked, and denied boarding by airline staff, not HK or PRC border agents on a flight to Beijing:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...elling-beijing

So maybe no PRC agents at WKT are needed after all - the Chinese government simply needs to do what is already done at the airport and update railway staff on any blacklist.
__________________

luacstjh98 liked this post
urbanfan89 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 18th, 2017, 10:48 AM   #1039
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,973
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
Then joyriders will waste the valuable seats that can otherwise go to fare-paying passengers, knowing they will be bounced back even though they don't have the proper paperwork to cross the border
Do they have a legal right to recoup the fare? OK, they have to be accommodated on return trip... but the seat for the rest of the outward trip is vacant.
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 18th, 2017, 12:36 PM   #1040
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,844
Likes (Received): 18129

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
Do they have a legal right to recoup the fare? OK, they have to be accommodated on return trip... but the seat for the rest of the outward trip is vacant.
In the airline scenario, the airline will need to pay a penalty if they send a passenger to a destination without the proper visas.

Don't think the legal recourse on the passenger can recoup the regulatory penalty, but rather the fare only.
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium