border security

History

In medieval Europe, the boundaries between rival countries and centres of power were largely symbolic or consisted of amorphous borderlands, 'marches', and 'debatable lands' of indeterminate or contested status and the real 'borders' consisted of the fortified walls that surrounded towns and cities, where the authorities could exclude undesirable or incompatible people at the gates, from vagrants, beggars and the 'wandering poor', to 'masterless women', lepers, Romani, or Jews.

The concept of border controls has its origins in antiquity. In Asia, the existence of border controls is evidenced in classical texts. The Arthashastra (c. 3rd century BCE) makes mention of passes issued at the rate of one masha per pass to enter and exit the country. Chapter 34 of the Second Book of Arthashastra is concerned with the duties of the Mudrādhyakṣa (lit. 'Superintendent of Seals') who must issue sealed passes before a person could enter or leave the countryside. Passports resembling those issued today were an important part of the Chinese bureaucracy as early as the Western Han (202 BCE-220 CE), if not in the Qin dynasty. They required details such as age, height, and physical features. The passports (zhuan) determined a person's ability to move throughout imperial counties and through points of control. Even children needed passports, but those of one year or less who were in their mother's care may not have needed them.

Medieval period

In the Golden age of the Islamic Caliphate (medieval time in Europe), a form of passport was the bara'a, a receipt for taxes paid. Border controls were in place to ensure that only people who paid their zakah (for Muslims) or jizya (for dhimmis) taxes could travel freely between different regions of the Caliphate; thus, the bara'a receipt was a "basic passport".

In medieval Europe, passports were issued as early as the reign of Henry V of England to help his subjects prove who they were in foreign lands. The earliest reference to these documents is found in an act of Parliament, the Safe Conducts Act 1414 (2 Hen. 5. Stat. 1. c. 6). In 1540, granting travel documents in England became a role of the Privy Council of England, and it was around this time that the term "passport" was used. In 1794, issuing British passports became the job of the Office of the Secretary of State. The 1548 Imperial Diet of Augsburg required the public to hold imperial documents for travel, at the risk of permanent exile. During World War I, European governments introduced border passport requirements for security reasons, and to control the emigration of people with useful skills. These controls remained in place after the war, becoming a standard, though controversial, procedure. British tourists of the 1920s complained, especially about attached photographs and physical descriptions, which they considered led to a "nasty dehumanization".

Beginning in the mid-19th century, the Ottoman Empire established quarantine stations on many of its borders to control disease. For example, along the Greek-Turkish border, all travellers entering and exiting the Ottoman Empire would be quarantined for 9–15 days. Armed guards often manned the stations. If plague appeared, the Ottoman army would be deployed to enforce border control and monitor disease.

Modern history

One of the earliest systematic attempts of modern nation-states to implement border controls to restrict the entry of particular groups was the policy adopted by Canada, Australia, and America to curtail the immigration of Asians in white settler states in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The first anti-East Asian policy implemented in this era was the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 in America, which was followed by the Chinese Immigration Act of 1885 in Canada, which imposed what came to be called the Chinese head tax. These policies were a sign of injustice and unfair treatment to the Chinese workers because the jobs they engaged in were mostly menial. Similar policies were adopted in various British colonies in Australia over the latter half of the 19th century targeting Asian immigrants arriving as a result of the region's series of gold rushes as well as Kanakas (Pacific Islanders brought into Australia as indentured labourers) who alongside the Asians were perceived by trade unionists and White blue collar workers as a threat to the wages of White settlers. Following the establishment of the Commonwealth of Australia in 1901, these discriminatory border control measures quickly expanded into the White Australia Policy, while subsequent legislation in America (e.g. the Immigration Act of 1891, the Naturalisation Act of 1906, the Immigration Act of 1917, and the Immigration Act of 1924) resulted in an even stricter policy targeting immigrants from both Asia and parts of southern and eastern Europe.

Even following the adoption of measures such as the White Australia Policy and the Chinese Exclusion Act in English-speaking settler colonies, pervasive control of international borders remained a relatively rare phenomenon until the early 20th century, before which many states had open international borders either in practice or due to a lack of any legal restriction. John Maynard Keynes identified World War I in particular as the point when such controls became commonplace.

Decolonisation during the twentieth century saw the emergence of mass emigration from nations in the Global South, thus leading former colonial occupiers to introduce stricter border controls. In the United Kingdom this process took place in stages, with British nationality law eventually shifting from recognising all Commonwealth citizens as British subjects to today's complex British nationality law which distinguishes between British citizens, modern British Subjects, British Overseas Citizens, and overseas nationals, with each non-standard category created as a result of attempts to balance border control and the need to mitigate statelessness. This aspect of the rise of border control in the 20th century has proven controversial. The British Nationality Act 1981 has been criticised by experts, as well as by the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination of the United Nations, on the grounds that the different classes of British nationality it created are, in fact, closely related to the ethnic origins of their holders.

COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 produced a drastic tightening of border controls across the globe. Many countries and regions have imposed quarantines, entry bans, or other restrictions on citizens of, or recent travellers to, the most affected areas. Other countries and regions have imposed global restrictions that apply to all foreign countries and territories, or prevent their own citizens from travelling overseas. The imposition of border controls has curtailed the spread of the virus, but because they were first implemented after community spread was established in multiple countries in different regions of the world, they produced only a modest reduction in the total number of people infected These strict border controls economic harm to the tourism industry through lost income and social harm to people who were unable to travel for family matters or other reasons. When the travel bans are lifted, many people are expected to resume travelling. However, some travel, especially business travel, may decrease in the long term as lower-cost alternatives, such as teleconferencing and virtual events, are preferred. A possible long-term impact has been a decline of business travel and international conferencing, and the rise of their virtual, online equivalents. Concerns have been raised over the effectiveness of travel restrictions to contain the spread of COVID-19.

Tactics

Contemporary border control policies are complex and address a variety of distinct phenomena depending on the circumstances and political priorities of the state(s) implementing them. Consequently, several aspects of border control vary in nature and importance from region to region.

Air and maritime borders

In addition to land borders, countries also apply border control measures to airspace and waters under their jurisdiction. Such measures control access to air and maritime territory, as well as to extractable resources (e.g., fish, minerals, fossil fuels).

Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), states exercise varying degrees of control over different categories of territorial waters:

Internal waters: Waters landward of the baseline, over which the state has complete sovereignty: not even innocent passage is allowed without explicit permission from said state. Lakes and rivers are considered internal waters.

Territorial sea: A state's territorial sea is a belt of coastal waters extending at most 22 kilometres from the baseline of a coastal state. If this overlaps with another state's territorial sea, the border is taken as the median line between the states' baselines, unless the states in question agree otherwise. A state can also choose to claim a smaller territorial sea. The territorial sea is regarded as the sovereign territory of the state. However, foreign ships (military and civilian) are allowed innocent passage through it, or transit passage for straits; this sovereignty also extends to the airspace over and seabed below. As a result of UNCLOS, states exercise a similar degree of control over their territorial sea as over land territory. They may thus utilise coast guard and naval patrols to enforce border control measures, provided they do not prevent innocent or transit passage.

Contiguous zone: A state's contiguous zone is a band of water extending farther from the outer edge of the territorial sea to up to 44 kilometres (27 miles) from the baseline, within which a state can implement limited border control measures for the purpose of preventing or punishing "infringement of its customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws and regulations within its territory or territorial sea". This will typically be 22 kilometres (14 miles) wide, but could be more (if a state has chosen to claim a territorial sea of less than 22 kilometres), or less, if it would otherwise overlap another state's contiguous zone. However, unlike the territorial sea, there is no standard rule for resolving such conflicts, and the states in question must negotiate their own compromise. America invoked a contiguous zone out to 44 kilometres from the baseline on 29 September 1999.

Biosecurity

Biosecurity refers to measures aimed at preventing the introduction and/or spread of harmful organisms (e.g., viruses, bacteria, etc.) to animals and plants to mitigate the risk of transmission of infectious disease. In agriculture, these measures are aimed at protecting food crops and livestock from pests, invasive species, and other organisms not conducive to the welfare of the human population. The term includes biological threats to people, such as pandemic diseases and bioterrorism. The definition has sometimes been broadened to embrace other concepts, and it is used for different purposes in different contexts. The most common category of biosecurity policies is quarantine measures adopted to counteract the spread of disease and, when applied as part of border control, primarily focus on mitigating the entry of infected individuals, plants, or animals into a country. Other aspects of biosecurity related to border control include mandatory vaccination policies for inbound travellers and measures to curtail the risk posed by bioterrorism or invasive species. Quarantine measures are frequently implemented regarding the mobility of animals, including both pets and livestock. Notably, to reduce the risk of introducing rabies from continental Europe, the United Kingdom used to require that dogs and most other animals introduced into the country spend six months in quarantine at an HM Customs and Excise pound. This policy was abolished in 2000 in favour of a scheme generally known as Pet Passports, under which animals can avoid quarantine if they have documentation showing they are up to date with their appropriate vaccinations.

In the past, European countries implemented quarantine measures to curb the Bubonic Plague and Cholera. In the British Isles, for example, the Quarantine Act 1710 (9 Ann. c. 2) established maritime quarantine policies in an era in which strict border control measures as a whole were yet to become mainstream. The first act was called for due to fears that the plague might be imported from Poland and the Baltic states. A second act of Parliament, the Quarantine Act 1721 (8 Geo. 1. c. 10), was due to the prevalence of the plague at Marseille and other places in Provence, France. It was renewed in 1733 after a new outbreak in continental Europe, and again in 1743, due to an epidemic in Messina. A rigorous quarantine clause was introduced into the Levant Act 1752, an act regulating trade with the Levant, and various arbitrary orders were issued during the next twenty years to meet the supposed danger of infection from the Baltic states. Although no plague cases ever came to England during that period, the restrictions on traffic became more stringent, and a very strict Quarantine and Customs Act 1788 (28 Geo. 3. c. 34) was passed, with provisions affecting cargoes in particular. The act was revised in 1801 and 1805, and in 1823–24 an elaborate inquiry was followed by an act making quarantine only at the discretion of the Privy Council, which recognised yellow fever or other highly infectious diseases as calling for quarantine, along with plague. The threat of cholera in 1831 was the last occasion in England when quarantine restrictions were used. Cholera affected every country in Europe despite all efforts to keep it out. When cholera returned to England in 1849, 1853, and 1865–66, no attempt was made to seal the ports. In 1847 the privy council ordered all arrivals with a clean bill of health from the Black Sea and the Levant to be admitted, provided there had been no case of plague during the voyage and afterwards, the practice of quarantine was discontinued.

Customs

Each country has its own laws and regulations for the import and export of goods into and out of a country, which its customs authority enforces. The import or export of certain goods may be restricted or prohibited, in which case customs controls enforce these policies. Customs enforcement at borders can also entail collecting excise tax and preventing the smuggling of dangerous or illegal goods. A customs duty is a tariff or tax on the importation (usually) or exportation (unusually) of goods.

In many countries, border controls for arriving passengers at many international airports and some road crossings are separated into red and green channels to prioritise customs enforcement. Within the European Union's common customs area, airports may operate additional blue channels for passengers arriving from within that area. For such passengers, border control may focus specifically on prohibited items and other goods that are not covered by the common policy. Luggage tags for checked luggage travelling within the EU are green-edged to facilitate identification. In most EU member states, travellers coming from other EU countries within the Schengen Area can use the green lane. However, airports outside the Schengen Area, or those with frequent flights arriving from jurisdictions within the Schengen Area but outside the European Union, may use blue channels for convenience and efficiency.

A customs area is a designated area for storing commercial goods that have not cleared border controls. Commercial goods not yet cleared through customs are often stored in a customs area known as a bonded warehouse until processed or re-exported. Ports authorized to handle international cargo generally include recognised bonded warehouses. For customs duties, goods within the customs area are treated as being outside the country. This allows easy transshipment to a third country without the involvement of customs authorities. For this reason, customs areas are usually carefully controlled and fenced to prevent smuggling. However, the area is still part of the country's territory. Hence, the goods within the area are subject to other local laws (for example, drug laws and biosecurity regulations) and may thus be searched, impounded, or turned back. The term is also sometimes used to define an area (usually composed of several countries) that forms a customs union, a customs territory, or to describe the area at airports and ports where travellers are checked through customs.

Sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures are customs measures to protect humans, animals, and plants from diseases, pests, or contaminants. The Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, concluded at the Uruguay Round of the Multilateral Trade Negotiations, establishes the types of SPS measures that each jurisdiction may impose. Examples of SPS are tolerance limits for residues, restricted use of substances, labelling requirements related to food safety, hygienic requirements, and quarantine requirements. In certain countries, sanitary and phytosanitary measures focus extensively on curtailing and regulating the import of foreign agricultural products to protect domestic ecosystems. For example, Australian border controls restrict most (if not all) food products, certain wooden products, and other similar items. Similar restrictions exist in Canada, America and New Zealand.

Border security

Border security refers to measures taken by one or more governments to enforce their border control policies. Such measures target a variety of issues, ranging from customs violations and trade in unlawful goods to the suppression of unauthorized migration or travel. The specific border security measures taken by a jurisdiction vary with local authorities' priorities and are influenced by social, economic, and geographical factors. Some countries use deadly force to deter illegal entry. Sanctions for attempted illegal entry were found to deter repeated attempts (recidivism).

In India, which maintains free movement with Nepal and Bhutan, border security focuses primarily on the Bangladeshi, Pakistani, and Myanmar borders. India's primary focus with regard to the border with Bangladesh is to deter unlawful immigration and drug trafficking. On the Pakistani border, the Border Security Force aims to prevent the infiltration of Indian territory by terrorists from Pakistan and other countries in the west (Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, etc.). In contrast, India's border with Myanmar is porous and the 2021 military coup in Myanmar saw an influx of refugees seeking asylum in border states including Mizoram. The refoulement of Rohingya refugees is a contentious aspect of India's border control policy vis à vis Myanmar.

Meanwhile, American border security policy is largely centred on the country's border with Mexico. Security along this border comprises many distinct elements, including physical barriers, patrol routes, lighting, and border patrol personnel. In contrast, the border with Canada is primarily maintained through joint border patrol and security camera programs, making it the world's longest undefended border. In remote areas along the border with Canada, where staffed border crossings are unavailable, there are hidden sensors on roads, trails, railways, and wooded areas near crossing points.

Members of the Schengen Agreement are required to apply strict checks on travellers entering and exiting the area. These checks are coordinated by the European Union's Frontex agency, and subject to common rules. The details of border controls, surveillance and the conditions under which permission to enter into the Schengen Area may be granted are exhaustively detailed in the Schengen Borders Code. All persons crossing external borders are subject to a check by a border guard. The only exception is for regular cross-border commuters (both those with the right of free movement and third-country nationals) who are well known to the border guards: once an initial check has shown that there is no alert on record relating to them in the Schengen Information System or national databases, they can only be subject to occasional 'random' checks, rather than systematic checks every time they cross the border. Additionally, border security in Europe is increasingly being outsourced to private companies, with the border security market growing at a rate of 7% per year. In its Border Wars series, the Transnational Institute showed that the arms and security industry helps shape European border security policy through lobbying, regular interactions with the EU's border institutions, and its shaping of research policy. The institute criticises the border security industry for having a vested interest in increasing border militarisation to increase profits. Furthermore, the same companies are also often involved in the arms trade and thus profit twice: first from fuelling the conflicts, repression, and human rights abuses that have led refugees to flee their homes and later from intercepting them along their migration routes.

Immigration law

Immigration law refers to the national statutes, regulations, and legal precedents governing immigration into and deportation from a country. Strictly speaking, it is distinct from other matters such as naturalisation and citizenship, although they are often conflated. Immigration laws vary around the world and according to the social and political climate of the times, as acceptance of immigrants shifts from the widely inclusive to the deeply nationalist and isolationist. Countries frequently maintain laws that regulate both entry and exit rights and internal rights, such as the duration of stay, freedom of movement, and the right to participate in commerce or government. National laws regarding the immigration of citizens of that country are regulated by international law. The United Nations' International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights mandates that all countries allow entry to their own citizens.

Immigration policies

Certain countries adopt immigration policies designed to be favourable towards members of diaspora communities with a connection to the country. For example, the Indian government confers Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI) status on foreign citizens of Indian origin to enable them to live and work indefinitely in India. OCI status was introduced in response to demands for dual citizenship by the Indian diaspora, particularly in countries with large populations of Indian origin. It was introduced by The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2005 in August 2005. Similar to OCI status, the UK Ancestry visa exempts members of the British diaspora from usual immigration controls. Poland issued the Karta Polaka to citizens of certain northeast European countries with Polish ancestry, but later expanded it to the worldwide Polonia.

Some nations recognise a right of return for people with ancestry in that country or a connection to a particular ethnic group. A notable example of this is the right of Sephardi Jews to acquire Spanish nationality by virtue of their community's Spanish origins. Similar exemptions to immigration controls exist for people of Armenian origin seeking to acquire Armenian citizenship. Ghana similarly grants an indefinite right to stay in Ghana to members of the African diaspora, regardless of citizenship. Similarly, Israel maintains a policy permitting members of the Jewish diaspora to immigrate to Israel regardless of prior nationality.

South Korean immigration policy is relatively unique in that, as a consequence of its claim over the territory currently administered by North Korea, citizens of North Korea are regarded by the South as its own citizens by birth. As a result, North Korean refugees in China often attempt to travel to countries such as Thailand which, while not offering asylum to North Koreans, classifies them as unauthorized immigrants and deports them to South Korea instead of North Korea. At the same time, the policy has operated to prevent pro-North Korea Zainichi Koreans recognised by Japan as Chōsen-seki from entering South Korea without special permission from the South Korean authorities as, despite being regarded as citizens of the Republic of Korea and members of the Korean diaspora, they generally refuse to exercise that status.

An open border is the deregulation and/or lack of regulation of the movement of persons between nations and jurisdictions; this does not apply to trade or movement between privately owned land areas. Most nations have open borders for travel within their nation of travel, though more authoritarian states may limit the freedom of internal movement of its citizens, as for example in the former USSR. However, only a handful of nations have deregulated open borders with other nations, an example of this being European countries under the Schengen Agreement or the open Belarus-Russia border. Open borders used to be very common among all nations, however this became less common after the First World War, which led to the regulation of open borders, making them less common and no longer feasible for most industrialised nations.

International zones

An international zone is any area not fully subject to the border control policies of the state in which it is located. There are several types of international zones, ranging from special economic zones and sterile zones at ports of entry exempt from customs rules to concessions over which administration is ceded to one or more foreign states. International zones may also maintain distinct visa policies from the rest of the surrounding state.

Effects

The direct cost of border control is hundreds of billions to the United States government alone. Although the indirect economic costs of migration restrictions are much less well studied than those of trade barriers, some economists estimate that the indirect economic cost of border controls cost many trillions of dollars and the size of the global economy could double if migration restrictions were lifted. Immigration can in some cases reduce wages or worsen economic life-cycle assessments.

Global border controls have been associated with more than 63,000 border deaths since 2000, although scholars estimate that border deaths are significantly underestimated. Governments often blame unauthorized border crossers for taking excessive risks. Some unauthorized border crossers describe they choose dangerous methods of border crossing when safe and legal avenues are closed. In some cases, enforcement tactics have rerouted migrants to more dangerous routes with the stated goal to deter border crossers with the increased danger. Efforts to make unauthorized immigration more difficult may promote permanent settlement in place of earlier patterns of temporary migration.

Internal border controls

Internal border controls are measures implemented to control the flow of people or goods within a given country. Such measures take a variety of forms, ranging from the imposition of border checkpoints to the issuance of internal travel documents, and vary depending on the circumstances in which they are implemented. Circumstances resulting in internal border controls include increasing security around border areas (e.g., internal checkpoints in America or Bhutan near border regions), preserving the autonomy of autonomous or minority areas (e.g., border controls between Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah, and Sarawak; border controls between Hong Kong, Macau, and mainland China), preventing unrest between ethnic groups (e.g., Northern Ireland's peace walls, border controls in Tibet and Northeastern India), and disputes between rival governments (e.g., between the Republic of China and the People's Republic of China).

During the COVID-19 pandemic, temporary internal border controls were introduced in jurisdictions across the globe. For instance, travel between Australian states and territories was prohibited or restricted by state governments at various points of the pandemic, either in conjunction with sporadic lockdowns or as a stand-alone response to COVID-19 outbreaks in neighbouring states. Internal border controls were also introduced at various stages of Malaysia's Movement Control Order, per which interstate travel was restricted depending on the severity of ongoing outbreaks. Similarly, internal controls were introduced by national authorities within the Schengen Area, though the European Union ultimately rejected the idea of suspending the Schengen Agreement per se.

Asia

Internal border controls exist in many parts of Asia. For example, travellers visiting minority regions in India and China often require special permits to enter. Internal air and rail travel within non-autonomous portions of India and mainland China also generally require travel documents to be checked by government officials as a form of interior border checkpoint. For such travel within India, Indian citizens may utilise their Voter ID, National Identity Card, passport, or other proof of Indian citizenship, whilst Nepali nationals may present any similar proof of Nepali citizenship. For such travel within mainland China, Chinese nationals must use their national identity cards.

Within China, extensive border controls are maintained for those travelling between the mainland and the special administrative regions of Hong Kong and Macau. Foreign nationals need to present their passports or other required travel documents when travelling between these jurisdictions. For Chinese nationals (including those with British National (Overseas) status), there are special documents for travel between these territories. Internal border controls in China have also led to the creation of special permits that allow Chinese citizens to immigrate to or reside in other immigration areas within the country.

China also maintains distinct, relaxed border control policies in the Special Economic Zones of Shenzhen, Zhuhai and Xiamen. Nationals of most countries can obtain a limited area visa upon arrival in these regions, which permits them to stay within these cities without proceeding further into other parts of mainland China. Visas for Shenzhen are valid for 5 days, and those for Xiamen and Zhuhai are valid for 3 days. The duration of stay starts the day after arrival. The visa can only be obtained only upon arrival at Luohu Port, Huanggang Port Control Point, Fuyong Ferry Terminal or Shekou Passenger Terminal for Shenzhen; Gongbei Port of Entry, Hengqin Port or Jiuzhou Port for Zhuhai; and Xiamen Gaoqi International Airport for Xiamen.

Similarly, China permits nationals of non—visa-exempt ASEAN countries to visit Guilin without a visa for a maximum of 6 days if they travel with an approved tour group and enter China from Guilin Liangjiang International Airport. They may not visit other cities within Guangxi or other parts of mainland China.

Neither the People's Republic of China nor the Republic of China recognises the passports issued by the other, and neither considers travel between mainland China and areas controlled by the Republic of China

Europe

An example from Europe is the implementation of border controls on travel to and from Svalbard, which maintains a policy of free migration under the Svalbard Treaty and the Schengen Area, which includes the rest of Norway. Other examples of effective internal border controls in Europe include the closed cities of certain CIS members, areas of Turkmenistan that require special permits to enter, restrictions on travel to the Gorno-Badakhshan Autonomous Region in Tajikistan, and (depending on whether Northern and Southern Cyprus are considered separate countries) the Cypriot border. Similarly, Iraq's Kurdistan region maintains a separate, more liberal visa and customs regime from the rest of the country, even allowing visa-free entry for Israelis, whilst the rest of the country bans them from entering. Denmark also maintains a complex system of subnational countries which, unlike the Danish mainland, are outside the European Union and maintain autonomous customs policies. In addition to the numerous closed cities of Russia, parts of 19 subjects of the Russian Federation are closed for foreigners without special permits and are consequently subject to internal border controls.

Another complex border-control situation in Europe involves the United Kingdom. Whilst the crown dependencies are within the Common Travel Area, neither Gibraltar nor the sovereign British military exclaves of Akrotiri and Dhekelia are. The former maintains its own border control policies, thus requiring physical border security at its border with the Schengen Area, as well as implementing border controls for travellers travelling directly between Gibraltar and the British mainland. The latter maintains a relatively open border with Southern Cyprus, though not with Northern Cyprus. Consequently, it is a de facto member of the Schengen Area, and travel to or from the British mainland is subject to border controls. On 31 December 2020, Spain and the United Kingdom reached an agreement in principle under which Gibraltar would join the Schengen Area, clearing the way for the European Union and the UK to start formal negotiations on the matter.

In the aftermath of Brexit, border controls for goods flowing between Great Britain and Northern Ireland were introduced in accordance with the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland agreed to as part of the UK's withdrawal agreement with the EU. Due to the thirty-year internecine conflict in Northern Ireland, the UK-Ireland border has had a special status since that conflict was ended by the Belfast Agreement/Good Friday Agreement of 1998. As part of the Northern Ireland Peace Process, the border has been largely invisible, without any physical barrier or custom checks on its many crossing points; this arrangement was made possible by both countries' common membership of both the EU's Single Market and Customs Union and of their Common Travel Area. Upon the UK's withdrawal from the European Union, the border in Ireland became the only land border between the UK and the EU. EU single market and UK internal market provisions require certain customs checks and trade controls at their external borders. The Northern Ireland Protocol is intended to protect the EU single market, while avoiding imposition of a 'hard border' that might incite a recurrence of conflict and destabilize the relative peace that has held since the end of the Troubles. Under the Protocol, Northern Ireland is formally outside the EU single market, but EU free movement of goods rules and EU Customs Union rules still apply; this ensures there are no customs checks or controls between Northern Ireland and the rest of the island. In place of an Ireland/Northern Ireland land border, the protocol has created a de facto customs border down the Irish Sea for customs purposes, separating Northern Ireland from the island of Great Britain, to the disquiet of prominent Unionists. To operate the terms of the protocol, the United Kingdom must provide border control posts at Northern Ireland's ports: actual provision of these facilities is the responsibility of Northern Ireland's Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs (DAERA). Temporary buildings were put in place for 1 January 2021, but in February 2021, the responsible Northern Ireland minister, Gordon Lyons (DUP), ordered officials to stop work on new permanent facilities and to stop recruiting staff for them. In its half yearly financial report on 26 August 2021, Irish Continental Group, which operates ferries between Great Britain and the Republic of Ireland, expressed concern at the lack of implementation of checks on goods arriving into Northern Ireland from Great Britain, as required under the protocol. The company said that the continued absence of these checks (on goods destined for the Republic of Ireland) is causing a distortion of the level playing field, since goods that arrive directly at the Republic of Ireland's ports from Great Britain are checked on arrival. The implementation of border controls between Great Britain and Northern Ireland was the primary catalyst for the 2021 Northern Ireland riots.

Middle East

The Israeli military maintains an intricate network of internal border controls within the Israeli-occupied West Bank as well as external border controls between the West Bank and Israel, restricting the freedom of movement of Palestinians, composed of permanent, temporary, and random manned checkpoints in the West Bank; the West Bank Barrier; and restrictions on the usage of roads by Palestinians. Spread throughout the areas of the State of Palestine under de facto Israeli control, internal border control measures are a key feature of Palestinian life and are among the most restrictive in the world. Additionally, the blockade of the Gaza Strip results in a de facto domestic customs and immigration border for Palestinians. To clear internal border controls, Palestinians are required to obtain a variety of permits from Israeli authorities, depending on the purpose and area of their travel. The legality and impact of this network of internal border controls are controversial. B'Tselem, an Israeli non-governmental organisation that monitors human rights in Palestine, argues that they breach the rights guaranteed by the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights—in particular, the right to a livelihood, the right to an acceptable standard of living, the right to satisfactory nutrition, clothing, and housing, and the right to attain the best standard of physical and mental health. B'Tselem also argues that the restrictions on ill, wounded and pregnant Palestinians seeking acute medical care is in contravention of international law that states that medical professionals and the sick must be granted open passage. While Israeli Supreme Court has deemed the measures acceptable for security reasons, Haaretz's Amira Hass argues this policy defies one of the principles of the Oslo Accords, which states that Gaza and the West Bank constitute a single geographic unit.

Strained intercommunal relations in Northern Ireland between Irish Catholics and the descendants of Protestant settlers from England and Scotland have resulted in de facto internal checkpoints. The peace lines are an internal border security measure to separate predominantly republican and nationalist Catholic neighbourhoods from predominantly loyalist and unionist Protestant neighbourhoods. They have been in place in some form or another since the end of The Troubles in 1998, with the Good Friday Agreement. The majority of peace walls are located in Belfast, but they also exist in Derry, Portadown, and Lurgan, with more than 32 kilometres (20 miles) of walls in Northern Ireland. The peace lines range in length from a few hundred metres to over 5 kilometres. They may be made of iron, brick, steel, or a combination of the three and are up to 8 metres (26 feet) high. Some have gates in them (sometimes staffed by police) that allow passage during daylight but are closed at night.

North America

Multiple types of internal border controls exist in the United States. While the American territories of Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands follow the same visa policy as the mainland, together, they also maintain their own visa waiver programme for certain nationalities. Since the two territories are outside the customs territory of the United States, there are customs inspections when travelling between them. The rest of the U.S. American Samoa has its own customs and immigration regulations, thus travelling between it and other American jurisdictions involves both customs and immigration inspections. The Virgin Islands are a special case: they fall within the American immigration zone and follow American visa policy, but are a customs-free territory. As a result, there are no immigration checks between the two, but travellers arriving in Puerto Rico or the American mainland directly from the Virgin Islands are subject to border control for customs inspection. The United States also maintains interior checkpoints, similar to those maintained by Bhutan, along its borders with Mexico and Canada, subjecting people to border controls even after they have entered the country.

The Akwesasne nation; with territory in Ontario, Quebec, and New York; features several de facto internal border controls. As a result of protests by Akwesasne residents on their rights to cross the border unimpeded, as provided under the 1795 Jay Treaty, the Canada Border Services Agency closed its post on Cornwall Island, instead requiring travellers to proceed to the checkpoint in the city of Cornwall. As a consequence of the arrangement, residents of the island are required to clear border controls when proceeding North to the Ontario mainland, as well as when proceeding South to Akwesasne territory in New York, thereby constituting internal controls from both a Canadian and an Akwesasne perspective. Similarly, travelling between Canada and the Quebec portion of the Akwesasne nation requires driving through the state of New York, meaning individuals must clear American controls when leaving Quebec proper and Canadian border controls when entering Quebec proper. However, Canada does not impose border controls when entering the Quebec portion of the Akwesasne Nation. Nevertheless, for residents who assert a Haudenosaunee national identity distinct from Canadian or American citizenship, the intricate network of Canadian and American border controls is seen as a foreign-imposed system of internal border controls, similar to the Israeli checkpoints in Palestinian territory.

The city of Hyder, Alaska, has also been subject to internal border controls since America chose to stop regulating arrivals in Hyder from British Columbia. Since travellers exiting Hyder into Stewart, British Columbia, are subject to Canadian border controls, it is theoretically possible for someone to accidentally enter Hyder from Canada without their travel documents and then face difficulties, as both the U.S. and Canada would subject them to border controls that require travel documents. At the same time, however, the northern road connecting Hyder to the uninhabited mountain regions of British Columbia has neither American nor Canadian border controls, meaning that tourists from Canada proceeding northwards from Hyder are required to complete Canadian immigration formalities when they return to Stewart, despite never having cleared American immigration.

Historical

Identification and freedom of internal movement have sometimes been instruments of oppression, for example, in Canada's pass system, or Apartheid-era South Africa's Pass laws.

Specific requirements

The degree of strictness of border controls varies across countries and borders. In some countries, controls may be targeted at the traveller's religion, ethnicity, nationality, or countries visited. Others may need to ensure the traveller has paid the appropriate fees for their visas and has future travel planned outside the country. Yet others may concentrate on the contents of the traveller's baggage and imported goods to ensure nothing is being carried that might pose a biosecurity risk to the country.

Biometrics

Several countries require all travellers, or all foreign travelers, to be fingerprinted on arrival and refuse admission to or arrest travellers who refuse to comply. In some countries, such as America, this may apply even to transit passengers proceeding to a third country. Many countries also require a photo to be taken of people entering the country. The United States, which does not fully implement exit control formalities at its land frontiers (although long mandated by domestic legislation), intends to implement facial recognition for passengers departing from international airports to identify people who overstay their visa. Together with fingerprint and face recognition, iris scanning is one of three biometric identification technologies internationally standardised since 2006 by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) for use in e-passports and the United Arab Emirates conducts iris scanning on visitors who need to apply for a visa. The Department of Homeland Security has announced plans to increase the biometric data it collects at American borders greatly. In 2018, Singapore began trials of iris scanning at three land and maritime immigration checkpoints.

Immigration stamps

An immigration stamp is an inked impression in a passport or other travel document, typically made by a rubber stamp upon entering or exiting a territory. Depending on the jurisdiction, a stamp can serve different purposes. For example, in the United Kingdom, an immigration stamp in a passport includes the formal leave to enter granted to a person subject to entry control. In other countries, a stamp activates or acknowledges the continuing leave conferred in the passport bearer's entry clearance. Under the Schengen system, a foreign passport is stamped with a date stamp which does not indicate any duration of stay. This means the person is deemed to have permission to remain for either 3 months or the period shown on their visa, if specified otherwise. Member states of the European Union are not permitted to place a stamp in the passport of a person who is not subject to immigration control. Stamping is prohibited because it imposes a control to which the person is not subject. Passport stamps may occasionally take the form of sticker stamps, such as entry stamps from Japan. Depending on nationality, a visitor may not receive a stamp at all (unless specifically requested), such as an EU or EFTA citizen travelling to an EU or EFTA country, Albania, or North Macedonia. Most countries issue exit stamps in addition to entry stamps. A few countries issue only entry stamps, including Canada, El Salvador, Ireland, Mexico, New Zealand, Singapore, United Kingdom and the United States of America. Australia, Hong Kong, Israel, Macau and South Korea do not stamp passports upon entry nor exit. These countries or regions issue landing slips instead, except for Australia, which does not issue any physical evidence of entry. Visas may also take the form of passport stamps.

Immigration authorities usually use different stamp styles for entries and exits to make it easier to track people's movements. Ink colour might be used to designate the mode of transportation (air, land, or sea), as in Hong Kong before 1997, while border styles did the same in Macau. Other variations include changing the stamp size to indicate the length of stay, as in Singapore.

In many cases, passengers on cruise ships do not receive passport stamps because the entire vessel has been cleared into port. It is often possible to get a souvenir stamp, although this requires finding the immigration office by the dock. In many cases, officials are used to such requests and will cooperate. Also, as noted below, some of the smallest European countries will give a stamp on request, either at their border or tourist office charging, at most, a nominal fee.

Exit controls

Whilst most countries implement border controls both at entry and exit, some jurisdictions do not. For instance, the United States and Canada do not implement exit controls at land borders and collect exit data on foreign nationals through airlines and by sharing information with neighbouring countries' entry border controls. These countries consequently do not issue exit stamps, even to travellers who require entry stamps. Similarly, Australia, Singapore, and South Korea have eliminated exit stamps even though they continue to implement brief border control checks upon exit for most foreign nationals. In countries where there is no formal control by immigration officials over travel documents at departure, exit information may be recorded by immigration authorities using information provided by transport operators.

No exit control:

United States of America

Canada

Mexico (by air, but entrance declaration coupon is collected)

Bahamas

Ireland

United Kingdom

Formal exit control without passport stamping:

Albania (Entry & Exit stamp may be issued upon request)

Australia (Exit stamp issued upon explicit request)

China (Exit stamp issued upon request when using e-Gate)

Costa Rica (only at Costa Rican airports; different entry and exit stamps are made at the border crossing with Panama)

El Salvador

Fiji

Hong Kong (no entry or exit stamps are issued; instead, landing slips are issued upon arrival only)

Exit permits

Some countries maintain controversial exit visa systems in addition to regular border controls. For instance, Uzbekistan requires its citizens to obtain exit visas before leaving for countries outside the CIS, including Eastern European nations. Several countries in the Arabian peninsula require exit visas for foreign workers under the Kafala System, meaning "sponsorship system"). Russia occasionally requires foreigners who overstay to obtain exit visas since one cannot exit Russia without a valid visa. Czechia has a similar policy. Similarly, a foreign citizen granted a temporary residence permit in Russia needs an exit visa to take a trip abroad (valid for both exit and return). Not all foreign citizens are subject to that requirement. Citizens of Germany, for example, do not require this exit visa. During the Cold War, countries in the Eastern Bloc maintained strict controls on citizens' ability to travel abroad. Citizens of the Soviet Union, East Germany, and other communist states were typically required to obtain permission before travelling abroad. Unlike most of these states, citizens of Yugoslavia enjoyed a significant freedom of international movement.

Certain Asian countries have policies that similarly require specific categories of citizens to obtain official authorization before travelling or emigrating. This is usually either to enforce national service obligations or to protect migrant workers from travelling to places where employers may abuse them. Singapore, for instance, operates an Exit Permit scheme to enforce the national service obligations of its male citizens and permanent residents. These restrictions vary according to age and status. South Korea and Taiwan have similar policies. India, on the other hand, requires citizens who have not met certain educational requirements (and thus may be targeted by human traffickers or be coerced into modern slavery) to apply for approval before leaving the country and endorses their passports with "Emigration Check Required". Nepal similarly requires citizens emigrating to America on an H-1B visa to present an exit permit issued by the Ministry of Labour. This document, called a work permit, must be presented to immigration to leave the country. In a bid to increase protection for the large amount of Indian, Bangladeshi, Chinese, and Nepali citizens smuggled through Indian airports to the Middle East as underpaid labourers, many Indian airline companies require travellers to obtain an 'OK to Board' confirmation sent directly from visa authorities in certain GCC countries directly to the airline and will bar anyone who has not obtained this endorsement from clearing exit immigration.

Eritrea requires the vast majority of its citizens to obtain special authorization to leave the country or even to travel within it.

Travel documents

Border control policies typically require travellers to present valid travel documents to ascertain their identity, nationality, permanent residence status, and eligibility to enter a given jurisdiction. The most common form of travel document is the passport, a booklet-form identity document issued by national authorities or the governments of certain subnational territories containing an individual's personal information as well as space for the authorities of other jurisdictions to affix stamps, visas, or other permits authorising the bearer to enter, reside, or travel within their territory. Certain jurisdictions permit individuals to clear border controls using identity cards, which typically contain similar personal information.

Visas

A visa is a travel document issued to foreign nationals enabling them to clear border controls. They traditionally take the form of an adhesive sticker or, occasionally, a stamp affixed to a page in an individual's passport or equivalent document. Visas policies different purposes depending on the priorities of each jurisdiction, ranging from ensuring that visitors do not pose a national security risk or have sufficient financial resources to simply functioning as a tax on tourists, as is the case with countries like Mauritius and other leisure destinations which issue visas on arrival, electronic visas, or electronic travel authorisations (ETAs) to most or all visitors. Visas may include limits on the duration of the foreigner's stay, areas within the state they may enter, the dates they may enter, the number of permitted visits, or an individual's right to work in the state in question.

Many countries in Asia have liberalised their visa controls in recent years to encourage transnational business and tourism. For example, India, Myanmar, and Sri Lanka have introduced electronic visas to ease border control for business travellers and tourists. Malaysia has introduced similar eVisa facilities and the eNTRI programme to expedite clearance for Indian and mainland Chinese citizens. Thailand regularly issues visas on arrival to many non-exempt visitors at major ports of entry to encourage tourism. Indonesia, in recent years, has progressively liberalized its visa regime, no longer requiring visas or on-arrival visas from most nationals, while Singapore has signed visa waiver agreements with many countries in recent years and has introduced electronic visa facilities for Indians, Eastern Europeans, and mainland Chinese. This trend towards visa liberalisation in Asia is part of the regional trend toward social and economic globalisation that has been linked to heightened economic growth.

Certain countries, predominantly, though not exclusively, in Western Europe and the Americas, issue working holiday visas for younger visitors to supplement their travel funds by working in minor jobs. These are especially common among members of the European Union and elsewhere in Europe. Saudi Arabia issues a special category visa for people on religious pilgrimage. Similar policies are in force in other countries with significant religious sites. Certain jurisdictions impose special visa requirements on journalists. Countries that require such visas include Cuba, China, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, America, and Zimbabwe.

As a consequence of awkward border situations created by the fall of the Soviet Union, certain former members of the USSR and their neighbours maintain special visa-exemption policies for travellers transiting across international boundaries within a single country. For instance, Russia permits vehicles to transit through the Saatse Boot between the Estonian villages of Lutepää and Sesniki without a visa or border checkpoint, provided they do not stop. Similar provisions apply to the issuance of Facilitated Rail Transit Documents by Schengen Area members for travel between Kaliningrad Oblast and the Russian mainland, enabling Russian citizens to travel to and from the exclave without a passport or visa.

Electronic visas and electronic travel authorisations

Beginning in the 2000s, many countries introduced e-visas and electronic travel authorisations (ETAs) as an alternative to traditional visas. An ETA is a form of pre-arrival registration, which may or may not be officially classified as a visa depending on the issuing jurisdiction, and is required for foreign travellers who are exempt from obtaining a full visa. In contrast to the procedures that typically apply regarding proper visas, under which the traveller normally has no recourse if rejected, if an ETA is rejected, the traveller can choose to apply for a visa instead. In contrast, an e-visa is a visa that travellers can apply for and obtain online, without visiting the issuing state's consular mission or visa agency. The following jurisdictions require certain categories of international travellers to hold an ETA or e-visa to clear border controls upon arrival:

Australia:

Electronic Travel Authority (ETA)

eVisitor programme

East African Community: From February 2014, Kenya, Rwanda and Uganda issue an East African Tourist Visa.

Hong Kong: Mainland Travel Permit for Taiwan Residents

India: India permits nationals of most jurisdictions to clear border controls using an e-visa.

Kenya: From 1 January 2021, Kenya solely issues e-visas, and physical visas are no longer available.

New Zealand: Electronic Travel Authority (NZeTA)

North America: Canadian ETA, US Electronic System for Travel Authorisation

Pakistan: Pakistani ETA.

South Korea: eligible visa-free visitors must obtain Korea Electronic Travel Authorization (K-ETA).

Nationality and travel history

Many nations implement border controls restricting the entry of people of certain nationalities or who have visited certain countries. For instance, Georgia refuses entry to holders of passports issued by the Republic of China. Similarly, since April 2017, nationals of Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sudan, Syria, Yemen, and Iran have been banned from entering the parts of eastern Libya under the control of the Tobruk government. The majority of Arab countries, as well as Iran and Malaysia, ban Israeli citizens, however exceptional entry to Malaysia is possible with approval from the Ministry of Home Affairs. Certain countries may also restrict entry to those with Israeli stamps or visas in their passports. As a result of tension over the Artsakh dispute, Azerbaijan currently forbids entry to Armenian citizens as well as to individuals with proof of travel to Artsakh.

Between September 2017 and January 2021, the United States did not issue new visas to nationals of Iran, North Korea, Libya, Somalia, Syria, or Yemen pursuant to restrictions imposed by the Trump administration, which were subsequently repealed by the Biden administration on 20 January 2021. While in force, the restrictions were conditional and could be lifted if the countries affected meet the required security standards specified by the Trump administration, and dual citizens of these countries could still enter if they presented a passport from a non-designated country.

Prescreening

A significant number of countries maintain prescreening facilities for passengers departing from other jurisdictions to clear border controls before arrival, thereby skipping checkpoints upon arrival. Aside from simplifying arrival formalities, this enables border control authorities to deny entry to potentially inadmissible travellers before they embark and to reduce congestion at border checkpoints at ports of arrival.

Hong Kong and mainland China: There are two border crossings between Hong Kong and mainland China at which border controls imposed by the two jurisdictions are colocated:

West Kowloon Railway Station (simplified Chinese: 香港西九龙站; traditional Chinese: 香港西九龍站): A component of the Guangzhou–Shenzhen–Hong Kong Express Rail Link (Chinese: 廣深港高速鐵路; pinyin: Guǎng–Shēn–Gǎng Gāosù Tiělù), West Kowloon Station contains a "Mainland Port Area (simplified Chinese: 站内地口岸区; traditional Chinese: 站內地口岸區)", essentially enabling passengers and goods to clear mainland Chinese immigration on Hong Kong soil.

Shenzhen Bay Port (simplified Chinese: 深圳湾口岸; traditional Chinese: 深圳灣口岸): The land border checkpoint at Shenzhen Bay Port in the mainland contains a Hong Kong Port Area (simplified Chinese: 港方口岸区; traditional Chinese: 港方口岸區) which enables passengers and goods to clear Hong Kong border controls in the mainland. The checkpoint is located in mainland China on land leased from the city of Shenzhen in Guangdong province. By enabling travellers to clear both Chinese and Hong Kong border controls at a single location, it eliminates the need for a second checkpoint on the Hong Kong side of the Shenzhen Bay Bridge.

Singapore and Malaysia:

Woodlands Train Checkpoint (Malay: Pusat Pemeriksaan Kereta Api Woodlands, Chinese: 兀兰火车关卡, Tamil: ஊட்லண்ட்ஸ் இரயில் மசாதலைச்சாவடிப): For cross-border rail passengers, Singaporean exit and Malaysian entry preclearance border controls are co-located at the Woodlands Train Checkpoint in Singapore, whilst Malaysian exit controls are located separately at Johor Bahru Sentral railway station in Malaysia.

Johor Bahru – Singapore Rapid Transit System (Malay: Sistem Transit Aliran Johor Bahru–Singapura, Chinese: 新山－新加坡捷运系统, Tamil: ஜோகூர் பாரு – சிங்கப்பூர் விரைவான போக்குவரத்து அமைப்பு, RTS): The upcoming RTS connecting Singapore and Johor Bahru will feature border control preclearance both on the Singaporean side and on the Malaysian side. This will enable passengers arriving in Singapore from Malaysia or vice versa to proceed straight to their connecting transport, since the RTS will link to both the Singapore MRT system (Thomson–East Coast Line) and Johor Bahru Sentral. Unlike the preclearance systems adopted in America and Hong Kong, but similar to the United Kingdom's juxtaposed controls, this system will mitigate the need for arrival border controls on both sides of the border.

Expedited border controls

Certain countries and trade blocs establish programmes for high-frequency and/or low-risk travellers to expedite border controls, subjecting them to lighter or automated checks or priority border-control facilities. In some countries, citizens or residents have access to automated facilities not available to foreigners. The following expedited border control programmes are currently in effect:

APEC Business Travel Card (ABTC): The APEC Business Travel Card, or ABTC, is an expedited border control programme for business travellers from APEC economies (excluding Canada and America). It provides visa exemptions and access to expedited border control facilities. ABTC holders are eligible for expedited border control at Canadian airports but not for any visa exemptions. ABTCs are generally issued only to citizens of APEC member countries; however, Hong Kong issues them to Permanent Residents who are not Chinese citizens, a category primarily consisting of British, Indian, and Pakistani citizens. The use of ABTCs in China is restricted due to the One Country, Two Systems and One China policies. Chinese nationals from Hong Kong, Macau, and the Republic of China are required to use special internal travel documents to enter the mainland. Similar restrictions apply to the use of ABTC by Chinese citizens from other regions entering areas administered by the Republic of China. (see: Internal border controls).

Australia: SmartGates located at major Australian airports, allowing Australian ePassport holders and ePassport holders of several other countries to clear immigration controls more rapidly, and to enhance travel security by performing passport control checks electronically. SmartGate uses facial recognition system to verify the traveller's identity against the data stored in the chip in their biometric passport, as well as checking against immigration databases. Travellers require a biometric passport to use SmartGate as it uses information from the passport (such as photograph, name and date of birth) and in the respective countries' databases (i.e. banned travellers database) to decide whether to grant entry or departure from Australia or to generate a referral to a customs agent. These checks would otherwise require manual processing by a human, which is time-consuming, costly, and potentially error-prone.

UK and Ireland: ePassport gates in the UK and Ireland are operated by the UK Border Force and the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service, and are located at immigration checkpoints in the arrival halls of some airports across both countries, offering an alternative to using desks staffed by immigration officers. The gates use a facial recognition system to verify the user's identity by comparing their facial features to those recorded in the photograph stored on the chip of their biometric passport. British citizens, European Economic Area citizens and citizens of Australia, Canada, Japan, New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan and the United States as well as Chinese citizens of Hong Kong who are enrolled in the Registered Traveller Service, can use ePassport gates at 14 ports of entry in the United Kingdom provided that they are aged either 18 and over or 12 and over, travelling with an adult and holding valid biometric passports. In Ireland, eGates are available at Dublin Airport for arrivals at Terminal 1 (Piers 1 and 2) and Terminal 2 and, in addition to Irish and British citizens, they are currently available to citizens of Switzerland and the European Economic Area with electronic passports aged 18 or over though there are proposals to extend the service to non-European citizens. Irish passport cards can be used at eGates in Dublin Airport.

Local border traffic

Local border traffic is the flow of travellers residing within the area surrounding a controlled international or internal border. In many cases, local border traffic is subject to special regulations to expedite it. Depending on the particular border in question, these measures may be restricted to residents, implemented as a blanket regional visa waiver by one jurisdiction for nationals of the other, restricted to frequent cross-border travellers, or available to individuals lawfully present in one jurisdiction seeking to visit the other.

Schengen Area: Schengen states which share an external land border with a non-Schengen state are authorised by EU Regulation 1931/2006 to conclude bilateral agreements with neighbouring countries implementing a simplified local border traffic regime. Such agreements define a border area and provide for the issuance of local border traffic permits to residents of the border area that may be used to cross the EU external border within the border area.

Relaxed control in near-border areas

Bhutan: For example, the relaxed border controls maintained by Bhutan for those not proceeding past Phuentsholing and certain other border cities enable travellers to enter without going through any document check whatsoever.

America: The Border Crossing Card issued by American authorities to Mexican nationals enables Mexicans to enter border areas without a passport. Both United States and Bhutan maintain interior checkposts to enforce compliance.

China: China maintains relaxed border controls for individuals lawfully in Hong Kong or Macau to visit the surrounding Pearl River Delta visa-free provided that certain conditions are met.

Belarus The "Brest – Grodno" visa-free territory, established by a presidential decree signed in August 2019, has permitted local visa-free access to most visitors lawfully present in the neighbouring Schengen Area since 10 November 2019. Visitors are allowed to stay without a visa for 15 days. Entry is possible through designated checkpoints with Poland and Lithuania, Brest-Uschodni Railway Station, Grodno Railway Station, Brest Airport and Grodno Airport. Before travel, visitors must obtain authorisation from a local travel agency in Belarus.

Border control organisations by country

Border control is generally the responsibility of specialised government organisations which oversee various aspects of their jurisdiction's border control policies, including customs, immigration policy, border guard, biosecurity measures. Official designations, division of responsibilities, and command structures of these organisations vary considerably, and some countries split border control functions across multiple agencies.

Australia

Australian Border Force

Brunei

Department of Immigration and National Registration

Royal Customs and Excise Department

Canada

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada

Canada Border Services Agency (previously Canada Customs and Revenue Agency)

Canadian Air Transport Security Authority

China

National Immigration Administration of Ministry of Public Security

People's Armed Police

General Administration of Customs

Immigration Department (Hong Kong)

Hong Kong Customs and Excise Department

Public Security Police Force of Macau

Macau Customs Service

Controversies by country

Certain border control policies of various countries have been the subject of controversy and public debate. Public opinion on border control and closing borders varies by country.

Australia:

Offshore detention centres: Beginning in 2001, Australia implemented border control policies featuring the detention of asylum seekers and economic migrants who arrived unlawfully by boat in nearby islands in the Pacific. These policies are controversial, and in 2017, the Supreme Court of Papua New Guinea declared the detention centre at the Manus Island unconstitutional. The adherence of these policies to international human rights law is a matter of controversy.

Travel restrictions on Australian citizens during the COVID-19 pandemic: During the COVID-19 pandemic, Australia adopted a policy of denying entry to its own citizens arriving from jurisdictions perceived to pose a high risk of COVID-19 transmission. Additionally, Australia adopted a broad policy of restricting entry to the country for all individuals located overseas, including Australian citizens, resulting in a large number of Australian citizens stranded abroad. Australia's policies concerning its own citizens undermined the principle in international law that a state must permit entry to its own citizens, as enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. At the same time, the Australian government prohibited most Australian citizens from leaving the country, even if they ordinarily reside overseas.

Bhutan: Starting primarily in the 1990s, the Bhutanese government implemented strict restrictions on the country's ethnically Nepali Lhotshampa population and implemented internal border control policies to restrict immigration or return of ethnic Nepalis, creating a refugee crisis. This policy shift effectively ended previously liberal immigration policies concerning Nepalis and counts among the most racialised border control policies in Asia.

China: China does not currently recognise North Korean defectors as refugees and subjects them to immediate deportation if caught. The China-DPRK border is fortified, and both sides aim to deter refugees from crossing. Human rights organisations have criticised this aspect of Chinese border control policy.