You mean Taiwan and not CHINA??
Applies to Aussie too (NZ and Aussie warned residents before this about if you did not come back home in April/May ect, you may not be able to come back later)
1 Like
I have not found where it says they would deny entry to positive tested in NZ. It only says about max capacity of inbound. That’s all.
They’re avoiding constitutional issues right now by ordering Air NZ not to sell tickets on flights into NZ unless the government confirms there is space in quarantine facilities for that date and for the 14 days following. Technically if you hold a NZ passport you still have a right of entry. So if you can get on a flight they won’t turn you away. But you can’t get on a flight because no one will sell you a ticket.
3 Likes
ROC. This is a google translation.
Ah thanks for clearing that up, I also used Google translate.
This is a clear violation of the right of return principle that is enshrined in virtually every significant human rights proclamation of the past half century.
‘We’re not a recognized country’ isn’t a line that can be hopped back and forth over when convenient - Taiwan believes in human rights and this is a terrible look considering we have mandatory testing in the airport and an enforced 14-day quarantine.
3 Likes
Australia has a limit on the number of inbound each week. All due to Quarantine Hotel availability, as there is no such thing as “Home Quarantine” in Australia (some cant be trusted unfortunately so the majority suffer). This has had the effect that Airlines operate with very low numbers, which causes them to up the prices to make the trip viable. China Airlines for instance is only operating once a week to/from Sydney (it operates daily, the other days its Cargo only), with the result that a return Economy ticket will set you back about TWD60000. Other routes into Australia are even worse, the airlines apparently bump you if you dont upgrade to Business Class it seems.
Also, you can’t let people know of such a high impact rule only 12 days ahead of validation!!
1 Like
Uh, no to the “refugees” language here. The pandemic has been ongoing for months. If someone has not returned by now, then seriously what’s up?
Sure you can understand that one could become infected en route to Taiwan? And no to testing in the middle of the quarantine period. This effectively breaks the quarantine—and on top of that adds in potential false negatives or weak positives that would complicate, and not enable, the management of public health.
Guy
3 Likes
Refugee is anyone who cannot return home and do so safely.
And it doesn’t matter what’s up if they didn’t return. We don’t discuss human rights and cannot ignore them at our will or moral standard. Many rights I don’t agree with I can’t ignore just because don’t match what I think is reasonable. What is a right is a right.
Do you have an idea of the false positive test result and risk of being strained abroad because of such?
While this certainly puts a wrench in our family plans for CNY I actually think its good move. The benefits of keeping the Virus out are larger than the hardship of this.
I’m being a bit facetious, but there will be cases where a person can’t stay in a country and needs to leave back home. That’s why international law says that you need to let your own people back in. There’s the potential to create situations where people are stuck in unwilling exile.
2 Likes
Exceptions can always be made for humanitarian reasons. NZ did that for two English women whose mother died in NZ. Of course the fact that the two women ignored all instructions to isolate all the way to the funeral and back wasn’t a great result.
2 Likes
Do I need to copy paste all UN Human Rights Committee documents that prove this is International Law and Taiwan is going against it?
Or is Taiwan not submitted to Human Rights International Law because of the whole UN Taiwan-China situation?
Translate as ‘not enough beer in the inn’?
Did anyone see today’s press release?
Does this mean that masks will need to be strictly worn in bars etc. again from Dec. 1?
1 Like
No international news talking about this new ‘no reentry unless covid negative’ rule. Let’s see what will happen once they start writing about this and all the critics.
Yeah, it’s an interesting question. I get the point about “right to return”, although I’m not sure to what degree that translates to “right to return by commercial flights while risking infecting all the other passengers and crew and airport staff”. As in, I’m not sure that governments should be allowed to refuse entry to infected citizens (and resident foreigners) at the border…but it also wouldn’t seem entirely unreasonable to me for airlines themselves to refuse carriage on this basis.
If they do decide to go ahead with this policy, maybe the government should introduce special quarantine flights or something so that citizens/residents testing positive are still able to get home, with the staff in full protective gear and passengers immediately transferred to some quarantine center somewhere.
2 Likes