Deportation, is a country forced to accept a person?

In this recent case:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/06/us-usa-colombia-deportation-idUSTRE8051OS20120106

A young US citizen lied about her nationality when arrested in the US, she was deported to the country she claimed to be from(Colombia) and issued a Colombian passport on her arrival and otherwise helped to integrate by the Colombian government. I have seen other cases where US citizens were mistakingly deported back to a country they are basically dumped in.

What options would the US have if someone arrested without ID in Sweden claims to be a US citizen and Sweden wants to deport? Do they just accept them and issue them a US passport and help them integrate back into society and work?!

Is this just a oddity of Colombia because of the amount of deportees send back there from the US? It seems odd they just accept anyone the US sends without question.

It depends on what the treaty between the two countries says, but of course that needs a treaty to exist in the first place. One of the biggest problems the EU has with regards to illegal immigrants from subraharian Africa is that it can be very difficult to identify where exactly do they come from, plus many of them come from countries which do not accept deportees.

Well I guess that answers my question, is it normal to accept someone with no proof at all(living relatives, vital records, etc). That seems like one hell of a loophole!

I’m wondering now if the US leams on poorer countries to make it as easy as dumping people there no questions asked.

Countries don’t always even take back people who they know to be their own citizens. There’s not much that can be done to make them do so, apart from applying diplomatic and other forms of pressure.

Some countries, not only subraharian Africa, actually charge/fine, people deported back, generally confiscating passports, family revenues, and or prison,etc. No individual in his right mind will be too forthcoming under those constraints.

All countries are supposed to admit their own citizens; a right of entry is one of the incidents of citizenship.

However the receiving country is entitled to satisfy itself that the deportee is a citizen and, if not satisifed, can refuse to accept.

Canada IIRC has several cases where the “refugees” have destroyed their passports en route. Without documentation, their country of origin has refused to accept them, claiming there is no proof they belong to that country. This also happens when the person is a “problem” and the recipient country would rather let someone else handle them.

IIRC if the person has correct and legal documentation that says they are a citizen, then the country must take them back. Of course, if some rinky-dink country wants to play games with the western countries, things can get nasty - ambassadors get booted out, all visitors from there need visas, any other retaliatory methods if they want to be difficult. Basically, nobody refuses a legit citizen deportee with documentation.

The weird thing in this case is how nobody checked the validity of the ID; I have trouble imagining the Columbian passport photo on file matched -so what does this say about procedures in both countries?

Of course, the essence of a deportation is that the person in question does not wish to exercise their right of entry.

Hard to judge anything on the basis of what Latin America does. Typical Central/South American systems of process as far as immigration control make the Mayberry Jail look like a Silicon Valley tech campus. The Texas case is an example of the worst-worst case scenario. Shocking that situation was allowed to devolve to the point of an actual deportation. There was criminal negligence from numerous parties, every step of the way.

A person can be rendered ‘stateless’- leaving them vulnerable to long term, procedural incarceration- until a country is located that will give them asylum or their native country takes them back. Different countries go about it in different ways. Some countries are harsh and keep the person locked up until a resolution can be found (at their leisure), some might let them wander around on an emergency visa… Whenever your physical person is in a country of which you are not a resident, things get dicey, even if you’re there lawfully as a tourist. A lot of the fundamental protections afforded to citizens of that country usually aren’t available to aliens. You’re usually going to be subject to some VERY ‘open ended’ laws regarding aliens, liable to very lazy interpretations and equally lazy bureaucrats who don’t care about you, as you sit in the jail. Talk to any US Consular official overseas, about “AIA’s” (Americans Incarcerated Abroad). There are horror stories.

Statelessness happens, though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statelessness

It the modern era, statelessness can happen to immigrants, children of immigrants, refugees, deportees or renunciants who renounce without having another citizenship lined up.