When can one flee a state that is becoming more authoritarian
<p>Britain is undeniably becoming more authoritarian by the day. The government has stripped an unprecedented number of rights from its citizens in the last few years and continues to do so. For instance, the government is about to place significant restrictions on the right to protest.</p>
<p>My question is thus:</p>
<p>At what point does a state become so authoritarian that its citizens would stand a reasonable chance of claiming asylum elsewhere?</p>
<p>(Obviously we're nowhere near that point but it's an interesting hypothetical and also useful to have a vague idea of where the line lies)</p>

<h2>Anyone can claim asylum</h2>
<p>Whether that person qualifies as a refugee depends on the law in the country where they make the claim which usually involves an administrative decision making process. If a country is a signatory to the UN convention on refugees then local law will reflect that in some way. <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/binaries/library/pubs/bn/sp/asylumfacts.pdf" rel="noreferrer">This</a> outlines the process in <a href="/questions/tagged/australia" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;australia&#39;" rel="tag">australia</a>.</p>
<p>Under the convention a refugee is a person who:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>... owing to well‐founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it ...</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>Being a citizen or a resident of a state with an authoritarian government does not, of itself, make one a refugee.</strong></p>
<p>The individual must have a “well‐founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.” Most citizens of most authoritarian countries are not persecuted or at risk of persecution.</p>
<p>They also must be outside their home country.</p>
<p><strong>You can always emigrate</strong></p>
<p>The UK has no general restrictions on people leaving the country in search of more freedom.</p>
<p>However, you need to choose carefully. At <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index" rel="noreferrer">last</a> count the UK is less authoritarian than 151 of the 167 countries in the world. If you are going to emigrate there are 15 places you could go that are better. Fortunately, 4 of them have English as a primary language and, not coincidentally, a system of government in the UK model.</p>

<p>Simply being under an authoritarian government is not sufficient grounds for asylum. There are plenty of states in the world that restrict political activity where many people living there face no persecution.</p>
<p>On the other hand, refugees can come from more &quot;free&quot; nations. Edward Snowden for example is a refugee from the United States.</p>

<p>You can check in advance if you flee to Norway. On <a href="https://www.udi.no/en/want-to-apply/protection-asylum/protection-asylum-in-norway/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this page</a>, you can select a country and they will give you a current policy statements (though individual circumstances may differ). US and UK are &quot;generally safe&quot;, Russia and North Korea are not. As they say for the &quot;safe country&quot; page,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>your application for asylum will be processed and rejected within 48
hours. If you are over the age of 18, you will also be expelled from
the Schengen area for one year.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I suspect they make an exception to the later in case you are a citizen of a country in the Schengen area. They follow the <a href="https://www.udi.no/en/word-definitions/cooperation-under-the-dublin-regulation/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Dublin Regulation</a>, where they send you back to where you came from, but the UK withdrew from that agreement. You could use some of the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_freedom_indices" rel="nofollow noreferrer">freedom indices</a> to devise an average repression rating and see how that relates to Norwegian policy. As with all countries that I know of, asylum is based on personal safety and the ability of local authorities to protect you: and not how restrictive the laws of the country are.</p>

united-kingdom refugee-law asylum