美國簽證申請表上的那些怪問題

Am I coming to the US to engage in prostitution? Do I belong to a clan or tribe? Do I have tuberculosis or infectious leprosy?

我是不是來美國從事賣淫的？我是不是一個宗族或者部落的成員？我有沒有患肺結核或者是傳染性麻風？

I have just renewed my five-year US visitor’s visa after truthfully answering “no” to the above and many other questions.

在給我的五年期美國旅遊簽證續簽的時候，我如實地對上述問題以及很多其他問題做出了否定回答。

At the US London embassy the ticket-based queueing system was well organised, there was free coffee, the consular staff who interviewed me were good-humoured and my passport was returned with a fresh visa just three days later.

在倫敦的美國大使館，人們有序排隊，有免費的咖啡，和我面談的領事館工作人員態度和藹，三天之後我就拿到了帶有新簽證的護照。

But as I filled in the application form before my embassy appointment, I wondered what the point was of asking “Do you seek to engage in terrorist activities while in the United States?” when those who plan to do so will surely click “no”.

但在來大使館面籤之前填寫申請表的時候，我真的不知道問“你在美國的時候是否會尋求從事恐怖活動？”這種問題有什麼意義，因爲那些策劃恐怖活動的人肯定會選“否”。

Why are some of the questions so imprecise? For example, on the form I had to fill in (as a journalist, I require a particular type of visa), I was asked if I had ever been responsible as a government official for “particularly severe violations of religious freedom”. What does particularly severe mean? Are mild violations of religious freedom acceptable?

爲什麼有些問題如此含糊？比如說，在我需要填寫的申請表中（作爲一名記者，我需要辦理特定類別的簽證），我被問及是否曾經作爲政府官員“組織特別嚴重的違反宗教自由的活動”。“特別嚴重”是什麼意思？輕微違反宗教自由就可以接受嗎？

Or take an example from the Electronic System for Travel Authorisation (Esta) form that visitors with a US visa waiver complete (this includes tourists from many European and some other countries): “Have you ever been arrested or convicted for an offence or crime involving moral turpitude?”

再來看美國免籤遊客需要填寫的旅遊許可電子系統(Esta)表格（面向多個歐洲國家和其他一些國家的遊客），上面有一道這樣的問題：“你有沒有因爲道德敗壞行爲或犯罪而被捕或被判刑？”

What is a crime involving moral turpitude? Does agreeing to accept someone else’s speeding points count as moral turpitude when an opinion poll by the AA motoring organisation suggested 300,000 people in the UK had done that?

什麼是道德敗壞罪？超速之後拿別人的分數頂算不算道德敗壞？英國汽車協會(AA)的一項民調顯示，英國有30萬人都這麼做過。

And, finally, how did US visa application forms come to be such a curious agglomeration of questions?

最後，美國簽證申請表怎麼會有這麼多奇怪的問題？

My first query – whether miscreants are likely to answer incriminating questions truthfully – is one nearly every visa applicant asks. “Clients constantly say: ‘Are you kidding? Does anyone answer ‘yes’?’” says Kehrela Hodkinson, a London-based US immigration lawyer.

我的第一個疑問：邪惡分子有沒有可能如實回答關於犯罪的問題？這也是幾乎每個簽證申請者會問的問題。在倫敦工作的美國移民律師科瑞拉•霍德金森(Kehrela Hodkinson)說，客戶經常問“你開玩笑吧？鬼才會回答‘是’呢！”

It is also the easiest mystery to solve. The point of asking these questions is that, if you answer them untruthfully, you have obtained a visa by fraud or misrepresentation and can be deported if you are found out, either on this visit, or if you subsequently win the right to live in the US.

這個疑問很容易解答。問這些問題的意圖在於，如果不如實回答問題，就相當於通過欺騙或者誤導獲得簽證，一旦被發現就可能遭到驅逐，不管是在此次旅行中，還是以後獲得美國居住權的時候。

My query about the imprecision of some of the questions has a less precise answer. There have been many academic discussions – and even an entire book – on what moral turpitude is.

對一些語義不清晰的問題，我就不能準確地解釋了。關於什麼是道德敗壞，有過很多學術討論，甚至有一整本書都是講這個的。

There is no statutory definition of the term. It is up to judges and the Board of Immigration Appeals to decide what it means, Mary Holper of Boston College Law School says in an informative paper. When deciding whether to deport someone, judges have to assess whether the crime in question offends the “moral standards generally prevailing in the United States”. This, Prof Holper says, “casts judges in the role of God”.

這個詞沒有法定的定義。波士頓學院法學院(Boston College Law School)的瑪麗•霍爾波(Mary Holper)在一篇頗具啓發意義的論文中說，它的意思取決於法官和移民上訴委員會(Board of Immigration Appeals)。在決定是否要驅逐某個人的時候，法官必須判斷其所犯的罪是否違反了“美國的主流道德標準”。霍爾波教授說，這“讓法官扮演了上帝的角色”。

In cases over the years, fraud, theft and many sexual offences have been classed as involving moral turpitude. Assault has been, too, “when the offence has an aggravating factor such as a deadly weapon”, Prof Holper says.

多年來，欺騙、盜竊以及很多性犯罪都被歸爲道德敗壞行爲。霍爾波教授說：“如果犯罪過程中有使用致命武器等加重情節的因素，”攻擊也算是道德敗壞罪。

As for severely restricting religious freedom, the US Commission on International Religious Freedom, a statutory body, says only one person has ever been barred on those grounds: Narendra Modi, tipped by many to be the next Indian prime minister, for his alleged complicity in the deadly 2002 anti-Muslim riots in his home state of Gujarat. (He denies responsibility.)

至於嚴重限制宗教自由，法定機構美國國際宗教自由委員會(US Commission on International Religious Freedom)指出，到目前只有一個人因爲這個原因沒被放行，他就是很多人認爲有望出任下一屆印度總理的納倫德拉•莫迪(Narendra Modi)，原因是他被控參與了2002年在他的家鄉古吉拉特邦爆發的反穆斯林嚴重騷亂（他對此表示否認）。

The reason US visa forms seem such an odd accretion of questions is that is what they are. They have been added to over the decades to confront whatever danger the US was dealing with at the time.

美國簽證申請表之所以看起來像是很多奇怪的問題堆積而成的，原因就是它們本來就是這樣的。這些問題幾十年來不斷累積增多，以應對美國在各個時期面臨的風險。

Prof Holper points out that “moral turpitude” was introduced into US immigration law in 1891. Questions about issues such as prostitution go back to before visas existed, as do many health questions. Officials at Ellis Island used to keep visitors out because they had tuberculosis, says Muzaffar Chishti of the US-based Migration Policy Institute.

霍爾波教授指出，“道德敗壞”是1891年引入美國移民法的。關於賣淫等一些方面的問題在簽證存在之前就有了，很多健康方面的問題也是如此。美國移民政策研究所(Migration Policy Institute)的穆扎法爾•齊矢堤(Muzaffar Chishti)說，埃利斯島(Ellis Island，原美國移民局所在地)的官員曾拒絕有結核病的遊客進入。

Are the visa forms an effective way of keeping undesirables out of the US? “If we’re interested in keeping people who mean to do us harm out, it’s not very effective,” Mr Chishti says. Biometric screening, databases and finger printing are far more useful, he says.

簽證申請表是不是將不良分子拒於美國之外的一種有效方式呢？齊矢堤說：“如果我們不想讓有意傷害我們的人進入美國，這種方式就不是很有效。”他認爲，生物篩選、數據庫以及指紋圖譜要有用得多。