Nothing can be better than having a crime-free history! Sometimes, a crime committed in the past can come back knocking, simply because, there is data for such. In the quest to see that a visa is approved, some visa applicants provide forged documents, which can lead to visa rejection. In some cases, a visa can be rejected if an applicant once committed a crime in another country, like overstayed in a country with an expired visa. At times, the reason for the visa rejection may be made known to you, while some visa officers will just decline the visa. To shock you, did you know that some embassies share applicants’ information with each other? One may then ask is it ethical to share such data with other embassies? You’ll know more about data sharing with other embassies in this article.
Obtaining a visa to another country can be difficult particularly, if applying from a third-world country to visit top-tier countries such as the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, or any European country. Out of desperation, many provide fake documents. Sadly, the forged documents can attract a visa ban. The terrible aspect is that even if you manage to get another passport probably because it is the only option for other embassies not to see a visa ban on the passport, what if your data has been recorded and shared?
What kind of data is shared among countries/embassies?
Typically, when an individual’s data is collected, it may reveal details about everything about the person as sensitive information is collected. Worst of it is if, by peradventure, there is a hack on the embassy’s database and the website hacker steals information, so many lives might be at risk. It is normal for embassies to request such information, but the notion of sharing such sensitive information among other embassies seems like a way of “selling someone out”. Certain bio-details are frequently given in this data, such as full name, gender, date of birth, educational qualifications, occupation, and marital status. This enables the data set to be associated with a single individual. Information such as Marital Details is needed when filling a visa form, while, married folks are asked for names of dependents (kids, and spouse). Whether the principal applicant is moving with his/her dependents (family) or not, it is one of the entry fields that must be filled; with evidence like marriage certificates and birth certificates.
Also, the applicant’s occupation is shared. Both past and current employment are requested that applicants fill. Which in a way tells that everything about an individual is recorded by an embassy and there is a likelihood, the data would be shared with another.
Ordinarily, after several attempts of applying for a visa for a particular country, and it is still the same old story (visa rejected), a better clue would be to try other countries, and most times, it comes out positive (visa approved), however, it is not in the case of forgery or other crime-related matters. This is where it gets tough, if the applicant tries applying to another country within the same region, the visa will be rejected, making a lot of persons to have likened visa officers as super-humans. The dexterity of VOs is quite commending, that they can easily smell a foul play from any doctored document. In a situation that a visa is rejected even after applying to another country is simply because the embassy shares applicant’s information with that country.
Data sharing among other embassies are mostly done if both countries have such mutual agreement. when applicants submit their documents for a visa, if the passport is collected, it can stay between 7-120 days depending on the countries visa processing time. While the applicant awaits a response from the embassy, the data has been recorded, which can be accessed by another country if they are aligned with each other. Some countries had expected to see new migration trends from time to time, such as a sharp increase in the number of asylum seekers, or tourists from a specific country or region. They quickly realized that in order to have a meaningful interchange of information and policy discussions, they would need to produce and share data.
Ethically, the embassy sharing applicant’s information looks bad, but there are justifications for that as there are assertions that such treaty enables both countries or embassies to track applicant’s status in the event that an applicant has been linked with any form of crime in the past. Where it becomes disturbing is when applicants are asked to submit their social media accounts; which some embassies make mandatory for visa application as a panacea to counter-terrorism or frauds such as cybercrime.
Data sharing is not done by every country but is mostly carried out by European countries. With the collection of data systematically shared by these countries, a large number of foreigners see it as an infringement on their civil rights.
The question is should one worry if his/her data is shared with another country?
The concern is not the sensitive and huge nature of the data that embassies collect and share with other countries; it’s also the third-party operators that store it. Which travelers have very little control over how their data is shared and stored, as most of these countries are yet to provide accountability and review processes. In any case, applicants can settle on better choices if they knew about the dangers and have a better knowledge of what befalls their data when they apply for a visa. Of which individuals’ data is turning out to be gradually connected to security and the work they do.
In contrast with other international regions, the Schengen Area of the EU has further developed protection and information maintenance enactment, with information being held “in the VIS [Visa Information System] for a very long time. This maintenance period starts on the approved visa’s expiry date, the date of an adverse choice, or the date of a choice to correct an issued visa. Also, in spite of the way that any individual has the privilege to be educated about their information in the VIS and any individual might demand that incorrect information about the person in question be amended and unlawfully recorded information is erased. Unfortunately, it is not clear how to gain access to this data, not to mention the address or erase the wrong and unlawfully recorded information.
The principal purpose of the Visa Information System (VIS) is to share visa information between member countries and to link data from non-EU embassies and consulates to Schengen Area external borders. Through a biometric matching – principally of fingerprints, of the Schengen short-stamp system, VIS creates analyzed and processed data, particularly regarding the identity and purpose of travel.
Countries within the Schengen area zone use the following to share visa applicants’ data with other member countries.
Visa Information System (VIS) – This Schengen Area security support system acts as a tool for member countries to exchange data for short-stay visa applications.
Schengen Information System (SIS) – An additional Schengen Area safety system is through the Schengen Information System. It allows member states to share information about suspected criminals, individuals who may not have the legal right to enter and remain in the Schengen Zone, stolen, misappropriated, or lost assets, and people who have gone missing.
Do countries share immigration information?
The answer is yes, but depends if there is a treaty between each other. The signing of the Immigration Information Sharing Treaty allows nations to communicate information about applicants seeking visas or permit to travel to another country in a systematic manner. This became required as migration has become a more significant topic on the global agenda, and not just for governments. Migration data and statistics have been requested by the media, civil society, and international organizations.
Countries that share applicant information with each other
Countries that share applicant’s information can be classified based on the type of agreement between these countries that allow a legal data sharing process.
1- The Big Migration Five (M5)
This was established in 2009 after the five Countries Conference (FCC) where each participant officially agrees to share biometric data from applications for visa and other immigration benefits of potential immigrants to jointly combat illegal immigration under the High-Value Protocol Data Sharing (HVDS) initiative. The participating countries are:
a- United States
b- United Kingdom
c- Canada
d- Australia
e- New Zealand
2- The Schengen Visa Information System (VIS)
Established in June 2004 and fully implemented and rolled out since October 2011, The Visa Information System (VIS) allows the Schengen States to exchange visa data. It provides many advantages such as effortless verification of Schengen visa by any member state, prevents visa fraud, fighting visa abuse, helping with asylum applications and much more. The participating countries are:
Germany, Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland.
3- Common Border
Some countries share the same border. Usually, these borders are not manned or patrolled making it easy for anyone interested in crossing the border. Many of such countries in most cases are known to share immigration data in order to unify their records. For instance, someone might get banned for 10 years for providing forged documents while applying for a UK visa. If the person is desperate to enter the UK, since Ireland borders with the UK, he can just get a visa from Ireland and from there “walk into” the UK through the open border between both countries. To prevent this from happening, both countries presently share their immigration data. This implies that if you have a ban from entering the UK, Ireland is already aware and will be very reluctant in approving your visa should you decided to apply. Similar deals exist between other neighboring countries too such as:
• Canada and the US.
Canada and the US share data; this is understandable both are situated in the same region- North America. The United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand have multilateral cooperation agreements, and data is exchanged through (FVEY) an intelligence partnership. Biometric data of incoming individuals and immigration data such as biographical details, fingerprints, flight history, and credit card details are all shared across borders under the FVEY alliance.
• Australia and New Zealand
These two countries share borders and are part of the FVEY multilateral cooperation policy. In the interests of national and border security for both countries, the applicant’s information is frequently publicized.
• The US and the UK
This relationship doesn’t fit any of our categories but we still have to discuss it. The United States and the United Kingdom share data with each other. Despite the fact that they are not in the same region, both countries communicate immigration, visa, and nationality information through reciprocal arrangements and stages such as the Secure Real-Time Platform (SRTP); Implementing Agreement of the US Department of Homeland Security. The SRTP allows foreign governments to submit biometric data on migrants for comparison with biometric data collected by the US Border Patrol screening.
Final words
The goal of these embassies is to increase security cooperation between or among countries. They serve as the foundation for immigration policies and their implementation in order to limit the entry of immigrants and detect any border-crossing fraud. The reason may be genuine but looks abysmal by visa applicants knowing that their information can be shared with other embassies. Some countries share visa approvals and refusals with one another, whereas others do not.
Generally, when countries share applicant information, it is critical that these countries have protection laws in place to prevent illegal access to personal data, which is extremely sensitive for the individual concerned.
