Any outgoing travel post restriction by EEA Family members

[saddleback]

Hello everyone,

Times are challenging but my question is whether anyone has travelled out of UK since the lockdown imposed last Thursday. GOV.UK indicates that all non-substantiated (e.g. study, work, medical treatment) outgoing travel is not permitted. It would be good to hear to the first-hand experience, including from those who brandish EEA family-issued documents.

[kamoe]

Times are challenging but my question is whether anyone has travelled out of UK since the lockdown imposed last Thursday. GOV.UK indicates that all non-substantiated (e.g. study, work, medical treatment) outgoing travel is not permitted. It would be good to hear to the first-hand experience, including from those who brandish EEA family-issued documents.

If the government communicates that non-essential travel is not permitted, then you should not plan to travel for non-essential reasons.

Of course, your circumstances might grant to travel, and in that case, can you give us some background? Why are you asking this question?

[Zerubbabel]

Hello everyone,

Times are challenging but my question is whether anyone has travelled out of UK since the lockdown imposed last Thursday. GOV.UK indicates that all non-substantiated (e.g. study, work, medical treatment) outgoing travel is not permitted. It would be good to hear to the first-hand experience, including from those who brandish EEA family-issued documents.

The UK has no business preventing people from leaving the country. Go to Heathrow, if they try to block you call your embassy. Also, keep the name of anyone on your way. These are illegal orders and anyone following them is personally responsible and can be sued.

Check this out:

https://www.un.org/en/universal-declara ... an-rights/

Article 13.
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

Anyone violating the Universal Declaration above cannot hide under "I was doing my job" or "just following the orders". They are personally responsible.

If Syria or Iran violated the above, it would've been all over the news. But there is an obvious White Privilege here! If it's the UK, it's fine. But it's NOT.

[kamoe]

The UK has no business preventing people from leaving the country.

Actually, any nation has, if the circumstances -such as a global pandemic- grant it.

Check this out:

https://www.un.org/en/universal-declara ... an-rights/

Article 13.
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

True, but also, check this out: https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/03/19/hum ... 9-response

International human rights law guarantees everyone the right to the highest attainable standard of health and obligates governments to take steps to prevent threats to public health and to provide medical care to those who need it. Human rights law also recognizes that in the context of serious public health threats and public emergencies threatening the life of the nation, restrictions on some rights can be justified when they have a legal basis, are strictly necessary, based on scientific evidence and neither arbitrary nor discriminatory in application, of limited duration, respectful of human dignity, subject to review, and proportionate to achieve the objective.

The scale and severity of the COVID-19 pandemic clearly rises to the level of a public health threat that could justify restrictions on certain rights, such as those that result from the imposition of quarantine or isolation limiting freedom of movement.

And https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/03/19/hum ... oc35446580

Freedom of movement under international human rights law protects, in principle, the right of everyone to leave any country, to enter their own country of nationality, and the right of everyone lawfully in a country to move freely in the whole territory of the country. Restrictions on these rights can only be imposed when lawful, for a legitimate purpose, and when the restrictions are proportionate, including in considering their impact. Travel bans and restrictions on freedom of movement may not be discriminatory nor have the effect of denying people the right to seek asylum or of violating the absolute ban on being returned to where they face persecution or torture.

Does not seem to be that the current measures are disproportionate.
Bottomline is, really, if your travel is non essential, stick to the recommendations put in place.

[saddleback]

I did not mean to incite the discursive battle here

Well, my problem is the vagueness of the language and the lack of clear guidance, all of which are way too common in UK nowadays (apologies, but it is true).

I have my family abroad, they are going to be there for a bit, and I need to go and join them taking my car along. The good thing, that driving across EU notwithstanding how insane it sounds in 2020, is actually the safest option which opts me out of the civid-related restrictions, as long as I do not stay in any country for longer than 48h and do not interact with the natives. However, the lack of clarity around the definition of what is permissible as a ground for travelling out is insane. I guess this is a longer version of the initial question.

[kamoe]

I did not mean to incite the discursive battle here

No worries. I see this more like a volley ball game

Well, my problem is the vagueness of the language and the lack of clear guidance, all of which are way too common in UK nowadays (apologies, but it is true).

I have my family abroad, they are going to be there for a bit, and I need to go and join them taking my car along. The good thing, that driving across EU notwithstanding how insane it sounds in 2020, is actually the safest option which opts me out of the civid-related restrictions, as long as I do not stay in any country for longer than 48h and do not interact with the natives. However, the lack of clarity around the definition of what is permissible as a ground for travelling out is insane. I guess this is a longer version of the initial question.

I think, in the end, the responsibility lies on you. There is a reason why the borders were never really hard closed, why they are not at the moment hard closed, and why the guidelines are somewhat open to interpretation. I think, this is because it would be impossible to enumerate everyone's individual circumstances and put them all into a list. Anyone with a reasonable reason to travel has always been allowed to travel, provided they supply some evidence of their motives. Hence why the onus is on you to judge.

If you believe your reasons grant it, and if this really cannot wait until the end of lockdown, then plan your travel, and arm yourself with some evidence that justifies it, if you can. I think you will encounter less restrictions if travelling by car.