Police officers in Środa Śląska detained a 29-year-old Ukrainian citizen who, according to a police communication, drove a car after alcohol, had no rights, and with him had drugs. Officers besides established that the man stayed in Poland despite the current expulsion decision. This case raises a circumstantial question about the effectiveness of enforcement of migration decisions.
The audit revealed a series of infringements
Officers of the Police territory Command in Środa Śląska detained a 29-year-old Ukrainian citizen for inspection. According to an authoritative police announcement, the man was driving the car, under the influence of alcohol. During the operation, police besides found drugs on him.
Further checks showed further irregularities. The detainee was not entitled to drive and the car had no valid method tests. Each of these elements represents a real threat to another traffic participants. Driving after alcohol is not a formal offense without victims, but a conscious hazard to the lives of people on the road.
The police did not state in the communication the amount of alcohol, kind or amount of resources found. There is so no reason to supplement this information with conjecture. The work of the man will be decided by the competent authorities, with the presumption of innocence.
The expulsion decision was valid
The most serious strategy question concerns the residence position of the detained. According to the Police, the 29-year-old stayed in Poland despite the current decision to expel from the country. Upon completion of his trial and administrative activities, he was handed over to Border defender officers.
The administrative decision itself does not defend borders and does not supply security. The effectiveness of the State only begins erstwhile the final and enforceable decisions are actually enforced. If the individual obliged to leave Poland inactive resides freely in the country, drives the car without authority and is not subject to control until the next violation, the citizen has the right to ask where the supervision has failed.
The message does not explain erstwhile the decision was made, why or why it was not executed earlier. It is besides unknown whether its implementation has been halted by a legal or factual obstacle. These circumstances should be clarified by appropriate services, without political evasion and without prejudice to the rights of the detainee.
Security requires law enforcement
The nationality of the perpetrator is only applicable in this case due to the fact that the police officially confirmed it, and 1 of the key threads is the legality of the stay and the decision to expel. This gives no basis for collective work towards the Ukrainians. Criminal and administrative liability is individual.
However, the State is obliged to remove from the territory of the country the foreigners to whom the feasible decisions have been made, especially erstwhile they are breaking the law and endanger safety. Permissiveness is not humanity. It strikes law-abiding Poles and foreigners, and besides undermines assurance in the full legal migration system.
Basic safety on Polish roads and reliability of Border Guard, Police and migration administration are at stake. The state boundary does not end in detention. Its protection besides covers the verification of the legality of the stay and the smooth implementation of expulsion decisions. Without this, the law exists on paper, and the cost of its ineffectiveness is borne by average people.
Source: Police
