View source for Border control

{{Short description|Measures taken to regulate the movement of goods and people across borders}}
{{Redirect|Border crossing||Border Crossing (disambiguation){{!}}Border Crossing}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=September 2024}}
{{Use British English|date=August 2018}}
{{Very long|date=December 2023}}
{{multiple image
|total_width=400
|image1=Bhutan gate in Phuentsoling 0.jpg
|caption1=As seen from the Bhutanese side
|image2=Bhutan gate in Phuentsholing 1.jpg
|caption2=As seen from the Indian side
|footer=The border gate between [[Phuentsholing]], Bhutan, and [[Jaigaon]], India
}}
{{multiple image
| total_width       = 400
| image1            = Indonesia-Timor Leste border.jpg
| caption1          = The gate that borders [[East Nusa Tenggara]] in [[Indonesia]] and [[East Timor]]
| image2            = China - Russia Railway.jpg
| caption2          = A train crossing the [[China–Russia border]], travelling from [[Zabaykalsk]] in Russia to [[Manzhouli]] in China
| footer            = Different categories of borders have varying features and levels of security.
}}

'''Border control''' comprises measures taken by governments to monitor<ref>{{cite web |url=https://definitions.uslegal.com/b/border-control/ |title=Border Control Law and Legal Definition &#124; USLegal, Inc |access-date=3 August 2018 |archive-date=21 March 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190321031712/https://definitions.uslegal.com/b/border-control/ |url-status=live }}</ref> and regulate the movement of people, animals, and goods across land, air, and maritime [[border]]s. While border control is typically associated with international borders, it also encompasses controls imposed on [[#Internal border controls|internal borders]] within a single state.

Border control measures serve a variety of purposes, ranging from enforcing [[#Customs|customs]], sanitary and phytosanitary, or [[#Biosecurity|biosecurity]] regulations to restricting [[human migration|migration]]. While some borders (including most states' internal borders and international borders within the [[Schengen Area]]) are [[#Open borders|open]] and completely unguarded, others (including the vast majority of borders between countries as well as some internal borders) are subject to some degree of control and may be crossed legally only at [[#Border checkpoints|designated checkpoint]]s. Border controls in the 21st century are tightly intertwined with intricate systems of travel documents, visas, and increasingly complex policies that vary between countries.

Border controls have significant human and economic costs, including tens of thousands of [[Border deaths (disambiguation)|border deaths]]. According to one estimate, the indirect economic cost of border controls is many trillions of dollars and the size of the global economy could double if migration restrictions were lifted.

{{TOC limit|3}}

==History==
[[File:Great Wall of China July 2006.JPG|thumb|right|The purpose of the [[Great Wall of China]] was to stop the "barbarians" from crossing the northern border of China.]]
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.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.historytoday.com/matt-carr/beyond-border |title=Beyond the Border &#124; History Today}}</ref>

[[File:Arabic papyrus with an exit permit, dated January 24, 722 CE, pointing to the regulation of travel activities. From Hermopolis Magna, Egypt.jpg|thumb|left|Arabic papyrus with an exit permit, dated 24 January 722 AD, pointing to the regulation of travel activities; from Hermopolis Magna, Egypt]]
[[File:QingPassport.jpg|thumb|upright|right|Chinese passport from the [[Qing dynasty]], 24th Year of the Guangxu Reign, 1898]]

The concept of border controls has its origins in antiquity. In Asia, the existence of border controls is evidenced in classical texts. The [[Arthashastra]] ({{circa| 3rd century BCE}}) makes mention of passes issued at the rate of one ''[[Masha (unit)|masha]]'' per pass to enter and exit the country. Chapter 34 of the Second Book of Arthashastra concerns with the duties of the {{IAST|''Mudrādhyakṣa''}} ({{literally|Superintendent of Seals}}) who must issue sealed passes before a person could enter or leave the countryside.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=K85NA7Rg67wC&q=kautilya+city+superintendent&pg=PA63|title=The First Great Political Realist: Kautilya and His Arthashastra|last=Boesche|first=Roger|date=2003|publisher=Lexington Books|isbn=978-0-7391-0607-5|pages=62 A superintendent must issue sealed passes before one could ''enter or leave the countryside''(A.2.34.2,181) a practice that might constitute the first passbooks and passports in world history}}</ref> 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 such details as age, height, and bodily features.<ref name=":0">{{Cite book |editor-last1=Nylan |editor-first1=Michael |editor-last2=Loewe |editor-first2=Michael |title=China's early empires: a re-appraisal |date=2010 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0-521-85297-5 |location=Cambridge |pages=297, 317–318 |oclc=428776512 | ol=OL24864515M | editor-link1= Michael Nylan  | editor-link2= Michael Loewe | lccn=2011378715 }}</ref> 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.<ref name=":0" />

===Medieval period===
In the Golden age of the [[Caliphate|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 ''[[zakat|zakah]]'' (for [[Muslim]]s) or ''[[jizya]]'' (for [[dhimmi]]s) taxes could travel freely between different regions of the Caliphate; thus, the ''bara'a'' receipt was a "basic passport".<ref>{{Cite book |title=The Jews of Medieval Islam: Community, Society, and Identity |first=Daniel |last=Frank |publisher=[[Brill Publishers]] |year=1995|isbn=90-04-10404-6|page=6}}</ref>

In medieval Europe, passports were issued since at least the reign of [[Henry V of England]], as a means of helping 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).<ref name="brief history">[https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2006/nov/17/travelnews "A brief history of the passport"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191009193215/https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2006/nov/17/travelnews |date=9 October 2019 }}. ''The Guardian''</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7634744.stm |title=Analysis: The first ID cards |publisher=BBC News |date=25 September 2008 |first=Dominic |last=Casciani |access-date=27 September 2008 |archive-date=15 February 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090215125305/http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7634744.stm |url-status=live }}</ref> 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 (United Kingdom)|Secretary of State]].<ref name="brief history"/> The 1548 Imperial Diet of Augsburg required the public to hold imperial documents for travel, at the risk of permanent exile.<ref>[[John Torpey]], "Le contrôle des passeports et la liberté de circulation. Le cas de l'Allemagne au XIXe siècle", ''Genèses'', 1998, n° 1, pp. 53–76</ref> 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".<ref>Marrus, Michael, ''The Unwanted: European Refugees in the Twentieth Century''. New York: Oxford University Press (1985), p. 92.</ref>

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. The stations were often manned by armed guards. If plague appeared, the [[Ottoman army]] would be deployed to enforce border control and [[disease monitoring|monitor disease]].<ref>{{cite book|title=Plague and Contagion in the Islamic Mediterranean|editor-first=Nukhet|editor-last=Varlik|author=Andrew Robarts|pages=236–7|publisher=Arc Humanities Press}}</ref>

===Modern history===
One of the earliest systematic attempts of modern nation states to implement border controls to restrict entry of particular groups were policies adopted by Canada, Australia, and America to curtail immigration of Asians in white [[settler colonialism|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 suit by the [[Chinese Immigration Act of 1885]] in Canada, which imposed what came to be called the [[Chinese head tax in Canada|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 jobs.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Bodenner |first=Chris |date=6 February 2013 |title=Chinese Exclusion Act |journal=Issues and Controversies in American History |url=http://www.ndhs.org/s/1012/images/editor_documents/library/issues_and_controversies_in_american_history_-_chinese_exclusion_act.pdf?sessionid=7aa0a591-8d60-4578-ba02-e7cfe36e74ab&cc=1 |page=5 |access-date=6 August 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171208122340/http://www.ndhs.org/s/1012/images/editor_documents/library/issues_and_controversies_in_american_history_-_chinese_exclusion_act.pdf?sessionid=7aa0a591-8d60-4578-ba02-e7cfe36e74ab&cc=1 |archive-date=8 December 2017 }}</ref> 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 [[Australian gold rushes|series of gold rushes]]<ref>R. Lockwood, "British Imperial Influences in the Foundation of the White Australia Policy", ''Labour History'', No. 7 (November 1964), pp. 23–33 [https://www.jstor.org/stable/27507761 in JSTOR] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211021174146/https://www.jstor.org/stable/27507761 |date=21 October 2021 }}</ref> as well as [[Kanakas]] (Pacific Islanders brought into Australia as indentured labourers)<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.philgriffiths.id.au/writings/articles/Shadow%20of%20mill.rtf |last=Griffiths |first=Phil |date=4 July 2002 |title=Towards White Australia: The shadow of Mill and the spectre of slavery in the 1880s debates on Chinese immigration |format=RTF |publisher=11th Biennial National Conference of the Australian Historical Association |access-date=14 June 2006 |archive-date=14 February 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150214224516/http://www.philgriffiths.id.au/writings/articles/Shadow%20of%20mill.rtf |url-status=live }}</ref> who alongside the Asians were perceived by [[trade union]]ists and White blue collar workers as a threat to the wages of White settlers.<ref name="Markey">{{cite web |url=http://www.highbeam.com/library/docfree.asp?DOCID=1G1:18167215&ctrlInfo=Round20%3AMode20c%3ADocG%3AResult&ao= |archive-url=https://archive.today/20121209053742/http://www.highbeam.com/library/docfree.asp?DOCID=1G1:18167215&ctrlInfo=Round20:Mode20c:DocG:Result&ao= |archive-date=9 December 2012 |last=Markey |first=Raymond |date=1 January 1996 |title=Race and organized labor in Australia, 1850–1901  |access-date=14 June 2006 }}</ref> Following the establishment of the [[Australia|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 [[Naturalization Act of 1906|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.

[[File:British Passport cover 2010 (non-EU).jpg|thumb|upright|British Nationality (Overseas) or BN(O)  passports sported a burgundy red cover, identical to that of the [[British Citizen]] passports, albeit without the words "European Union" text at the top part of the cover between 1990 and March 2020.]]

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, prior to 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.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Keynes |first=John Maynard |title=The Economic Consequences of the Peace |title-link=The Economic Consequences of the Peace |publisher=Harcourt Brace |year=1920 |location=New York |chapter=2 |author-link=John Maynard Keynes}}</ref>

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.<ref name=newint>{{Cite web|url=https://newint.org/features/1991/09/05/simply|title=Simply... The History of Borders|work=New Internationalist |date=5 September 1991|access-date=6 August 2018|archive-date=27 March 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190327092858/https://newint.org/features/1991/09/05/simply|url-status=live}}</ref> In the United Kingdom this process took place in stages, with British nationality law eventually shifting from recognising all [[Commonwealth citizen]]s as British subjects to today's complex [[British nationality law]] which distinguishes between British citizens, modern [[British Subjects]], [[British Overseas Citizens]], and [[British National (Overseas)|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,{{efn|For example, [[Ann Dummett]], an activist for racial equality, criticised the legislation, saying that "there is no indication at all in our nationality law of ethnic origin being a criterion. But the purpose of the law since 1981, and the manner in which it is implemented, make sure that ethnic origin is in fact and in practice a deciding factor."<ref name="statewatch">{{cite web|url=http://www.statewatch.org/news/2006/oct/eu-meijers-cttee-vis-proposal.pdf|date=25 September 2006|title=Letter to Franco FRATTINI, Standing committee of experts on international immigration, refugee and criminal law|access-date=1 February 2021|archive-date=3 March 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160303211143/http://www.statewatch.org/news/2006/oct/eu-meijers-cttee-vis-proposal.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref> Ms Dummett also said that "the 1981 Nationality Act in effect gave full British citizenship to a group of whom at least 96% are white people, and the other, less favourable forms of British nationality to groups who are at least 98% non-white"<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.britishhongkong.com/main/2009/01/latest-letter-to-the-houses-of-parliament-lack-of-basic-human-rights-in-the-borders-citizenship-and-immigration-bill/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110911063159/http://www.britishhongkong.com/main/2009/01/latest-letter-to-the-houses-of-parliament-lack-of-basic-human-rights-in-the-borders-citizenship-and-immigration-bill/|title=britishhongkong.com|archive-date=11 September 2011|website=britishhongkong.com}}</ref>}} as well as by the [[Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination]] of the United Nations,{{efn|In March 1996, there was a submission to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination of United Nations. The committee criticised the arrangements of the BN(O) nationality under "Principal subjects of concern": "The Government's statement that South Asian residents of Hong Kong are granted some form of British nationality, whether that of a British National Overseas (BNO) or a British Overseas Citizen (BOC), so that no resident of Hong Kong would be left stateless following the transfer of sovereignty is noted with interest. It is, however, a matter of concern that such status does not grant the bearer the right of abode in the United Kingdom and contrasts with the full citizenship status conferred upon a predominantly white population living in another dependent territory. It is noted that most of the persons holding BNO or BOC status are Asians and that judgements on applications for citizenship appear to vary according to the country of origin, which leads to the assumption that this practice reveals elements of racial discrimination."<ref name="unhchr">{{cite web|url=http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/5ff3d725d136a1fcc12563e0003dbc08?Opendocument|website=unhchr.ch|title=Concluding observations of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. 28/03/96|date=28 March 1996|access-date=1 February 2021|archive-date=28 July 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130728190912/http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/5ff3d725d136a1fcc12563e0003dbc08?Opendocument|url-status=live}}</ref>}} on the grounds that the different classes of British nationality it created are, in fact, closely related to the ethnic origins of their holders.

The creation of British Nationality (Overseas) status, for instance, (with fewer privileges than British citizen status) was met with criticism from many Hong Kong residents who felt that British citizenship would have been more appropriate in light of the "moral debt" owed to them by the UK.{{efn|For example, the legislative councilor [[Henrietta Ip Man-Hing|Henrietta Ip]] criticised the idea of British National (Overseas) and again urged the UK Parliament, to grant full British citizenship to Hong Kong's British nationals in the council meeting held on 5 July 1989, saying that "we were born and live under British rule on British land.... It is therefore... our right to ask that you should give us back a place of abode so that we can continue to live under British rule on British land if we so wish.... I represent most of all those who live here to firmly request and demand you to grant us the right to full British citizenship so that we can, if we so wish, live in the United Kingdom, our Motherland... I say to you that the right of abode in the United Kingdom is the best and the only definitive guarantee....'' With your failure to give us such a guarantee, reluctant as I may, I must advise the people of Hong Kong, and urgently now, each to seek for themselves a home of last resort even if they have to leave to do so''. I do so because, as a legislator, my duty is with the people first and the stability and prosperity of Hong Kong second, although the two are so interdependent on each other...."}}{{efn|The legislation is sometimes compared with [[Macau]], a former colony of Portugal, where many residents of Chinese descent were granted right of abode in Portugal when Macau was still under colonial rule. They were not deprived of their right of abode after the [[transfer of sovereignty over Macau]] in 1999, their [[Portuguese passport]]s and citizenship are valid and inheritable, and it turned out that many of them still choose to stay in Macau.}} Some British politicians{{efn|Then [[Shadow Home Secretary]], [[Jack Straw (politician)|Jack Straw]], said in a letter to the then [[Home Secretary]] [[Michael Howard]] dated 30 January 1997 that a claim that British National (Overseas) status amounts to British nationality "is pure [[sophistry]]".<ref>[http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=48962 "Labour call for British citizenship for Hong Kong ethnic Asians"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120426104019/http://www2.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=48962 |date=26 April 2012 }}, ''PR Newswire Europe Ltd.'', 1997.</ref>}} and magazines{{efn|''The Economist'' also wrote critically in an article published on 3 July 1997 that "the failure to offer citizenship to most of Hong Kong's residents was shameful", and "it was the height of cynicism to hand 6m people over to a regime of proven brutality without allowing them any means to move elsewhere." The article commented that the real reason that the new [[Labour Party (UK)|Labour government]] still refused to give full British citizenship to other British Dependent Territories Citizens in around 1997 – because the United Kingdom was waiting until Hong Kong had been disposed of – "would be seen as highly cynical", as [[Elizabeth Symons, Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean|Baroness Symons]], a [[Foreign Office]] minister, has conceded.<ref>"Britain's colonial obligations", ''The Economist'', 3 July 1997.</ref>}} also criticised the creation of BN(O) status. In 2020, the British government under [[Second Johnson ministry|Boris Johnson]] announced a program under which BN(O)s would have leave to remain in the UK with rights to work and study for five years, after which they may apply for [[Indefinite leave to remain|settled status]]. They would then be eligible for full citizenship after holding settled status for 12 months.<ref name="GovUK20200701">{{cite press release |url=https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-to-extend-residence-rights-for-british-nationals-overseas-citizens-in-hong-kong |title=UK to extend residence rights for British Nationals (Overseas) citizens in Hong Kong |website=[[gov.uk]] |publisher=[[Government of the United Kingdom]] |date=1 July 2020 |access-date=1 July 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200701123253/https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-to-extend-residence-rights-for-british-nationals-overseas-citizens-in-hong-kong |archive-date=1 July 2020}}</ref> This was implemented as the eponymously named "British National (Overseas) visa", a residence permit that BN(O)s and their dependent family members have been able to apply for since 31 January 2021.<ref name="BNOvisa">{{cite web |url=https://www.gov.uk/british-national-overseas-bno-visa |title=British National (Overseas) visa |website=[[gov.uk]] |publisher=[[Government of the United Kingdom]] |access-date=9 February 2021 |archive-date=10 February 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210210062627/https://www.gov.uk/british-national-overseas-bno-visa}}</ref><ref name="BNOvisafamily">{{cite web |url=https://www.gov.uk/british-national-overseas-bno-visa/your-family-members |title=British National (Overseas) visa: Your family members |website=[[gov.uk]] |publisher=[[Government of the United Kingdom]] |access-date=28 July 2021 |archive-date=21 July 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210721093356/https://www.gov.uk/british-national-overseas-bno-visa/your-family-members}}</ref> BN(O)s and their dependents who arrived in the UK before the new immigration route became available were granted "Leave Outside the Rules" at the discretion of the [[Border Force]] to remain in the country for up to six months as a temporary measure.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/977103/hong-kong-bn_o_-v2.0-ext.pdf |title=Hong Kong British National (Overseas) route |date=8 April 2021 |page=10 |version=2.0 |publisher=[[Home Office]] |access-date=19 July 2021 |archive-date=14 July 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210714020822/https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/977103/hong-kong-bn_o_-v2.0-ext.pdf}}</ref> In effect, this retroactively granted BN(O)s a path to right of abode in the United Kingdom. Despite the [[COVID-19 pandemic]], about 7,000 people had entered the UK under this scheme between July 2020 and January 2021.<ref>{{cite news |last=Dathan |first=Matt |date=18 February 2021 |title=Thousands in Hong Kong sign up to BNO visa scheme for UK citizenship |work=[[The Times]] |url=https://www.thetimes.com/world/asia/article/thousands-in-hong-kong-sign-up-to-bno-visa-scheme-for-uk-citizenship-jbgffszbn |url-access=subscription |access-date=18 February 2021 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20210218011533/https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/thousands-in-hong-kong-sign-up-to-bno-visa-scheme-for-uk-citizenship-jbgffszbn |archive-date=18 February 2021 |url-status=live }}</ref>

Ethnic tensions created during colonial occupation also resulted in discriminatory policies being adopted in newly independent African nations, such as Uganda under [[Idi Amin]] which banned [[Expulsion of Asians from Uganda|Asians from Uganda]], thus creating a mass exodus of the (largely Gujarati<ref>{{cite magazine|url=https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/international/story/19790515-hopes-soar-among-ugandan-asians-as-idi-amin-dictatorial-regime-falls-822011-2014-02-28|title=Hopes soar among Ugandan Asians as Idi Amin's dictatorial regime falls|date=28 February 2014|first=K|last=Srinivas|magazine=India Today|access-date=6 August 2018|archive-date=24 May 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200524030733/https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/international/story/19790515-hopes-soar-among-ugandan-asians-as-idi-amin-dictatorial-regime-falls-822011-2014-02-28|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=toi>{{cite news|url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/ahmedabad/Gujaratis-survived-Idi-Amin-fuelled-East-Africas-economy/articleshow/3625352.cms|title=Gujaratis survived Idi Amin, fuelled East Africa's economy|date=22 October 2008|first1=Ashish|last1=Vashi|first2=Ankur|last2=Jain|newspaper=The Times of India|access-date=6 August 2018|archive-date=8 May 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190508034945/https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/ahmedabad/Gujaratis-survived-Idi-Amin-fuelled-East-Africas-economy/articleshow/3625352.cms|url-status=live}}</ref>) Asian community of Uganda. Such ethnically driven border control policies took forms ranging from anti-Asian sentiment in East Africa to [[Apartheid]] policies in South Africa and Namibia (then known as [[Southwest Africa]] under South African rule) which created [[bantustan]]s{{efn|Bantustans within the borders of South Africa were classified as "self-governing" or "independent" and theoretically had some sovereign powers. Independent Bantustans (Transkei, Bophuthatswana, Venda, and Ciskei; also known as the TBVC states) were intended to be fully sovereign. In reality, they had no economic infrastructure worth mentioning and with few exceptions encompassed swaths of disconnected territory. This meant all the Bantustans were little more than puppet states controlled by South Africa. Throughout the existence of the independent Bantustans, South Africa remained the only country to recognise their independence. Nevertheless, internal organisations of many countries, as well as the South African government, lobbied for their recognition. For example, upon the foundation of Transkei, the [[Swiss-South African Association]] encouraged the Swiss government to recognise the new state. In 1976, leading up to a [[United States House of Representatives]] resolution urging the President to not recognise Transkei, the South African government intensely lobbied lawmakers to oppose the bill. While the bill fell short of its needed two-thirds vote, a simple majority of lawmakers nevertheless supported the resolution.<ref>{{cite web |last=Pitterman |first=Shelly |title=A Fine Face for Apartheid |work=Southern Africa Perspectives |url=http://kora.matrix.msu.edu/files/50/304/32-130-E84-84-al.sff.document.af000020.pdf |access-date=6 August 2018 |archive-date=18 December 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191218200853/http://kora.matrix.msu.edu/files/50/304/32-130-E84-84-al.sff.document.af000020.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> Each TBVC state extended recognition to the other independent Bantustans while South Africa showed its commitment to the notion of TBVC sovereignty by building embassies in the TBVC capitals.}} and [[pass laws]]{{efn|In South Africa, pass laws were designed to segregate the population, manage urbanisation, and allocate migrant labour. Also known as the natives law, pass laws severely limited the movements of not only blacks, but other peoples as well (e.g. Asians) by requiring them to carry pass books when outside their homelands or designated areas. Before the 1950s, this legislation largely applied to African men, and attempts to apply it to women in the 1910s and 1950s were met with significant protests. Pass laws would be one of the dominant features of the country's [[apartheid]] system, until it was effectively ended in 1986.
The first internal passports in South Africa were introduced on 27 June 1797 by the [[George Macartney, 1st Earl Macartney|Earl Macartney]] in an attempt to prevent natives from entering the [[Cape Colony]].<ref name="report-1920">{{cite book |title=Report of the Inter-departmental committee on the native pass laws |publisher=Union of South Africa |year=1920 |page=2 |chapter=Part II&nbsp;– Historical |chapter-url=https://archive.org/stream/reportofinterdep00sout#page/2/mode/1up/search/pass |access-date=12 December 2009}}</ref> In 1896 the [[South African Republic]] brought in two pass laws which required Africans to carry a metal badge and only those employed by a master were permitted to remain on the Rand. Those entering a "labour district" needed a special pass which entitled them to remain for three days.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Kiloh|first1=Margaret|last2=Sibeko|first2=Archie|title=A Fighting Union|date=2000|publisher=Ravan Press|location=Randburg|isbn=0-86975-527-7|page=1}}</ref> The Natives (Urban Areas) Act of 1923 deemed urban areas in South Africa as "white" and required all black African men in cities and towns to carry around permits called "passes" at all times. Anyone found without a pass would be arrested immediately and sent to a rural area. It was replaced in 1945 by the Natives (Urban Areas) Consolidation Act, which imposed "influx control" on black men, and also set up guidelines for removing people deemed to be living idle lives from urban areas. This act outlined requirements for African peoples' "qualification" to reside legally in white metropolitan areas.<ref name=OMalley>{{cite web|last1=O'Malley|first1=Padraig|title=1945. Native Urban Areas Consolidation Act No. 25|url=https://www.nelsonmandela.org/omalley/index.php/site/q/03lv01538/04lv01646/05lv01810.htm|website=O'Malley: The Heart of Hope|publisher=Nelson Mandela Centre of Memory|access-date=7 August 2017|archive-date=4 January 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180104073302/https://www.nelsonmandela.org/omalley/index.php/site/q/03lv01538/04lv01646/05lv01810.htm|url-status=live}}</ref>}} to segregate and impose border controls against non-whites, and encouraged immigration of whites at the expense of Blacks as well as Indians and other Asians. Whilst border control in Europe and east of the Pacific have tightened over time,<ref name=newint/> they have largely been liberalized in Africa, from [[Yoweri Museveni]]'s reversal of Idi Amin's anti-Asian border controls{{efn|Thousands of Gujaratis returned to Uganda after Yoweri Museveni, the subsequent head of state of Uganda, criticised Idi Amin's policies and invited them to return.<ref name=toi/> According to Museveni, "Gujaratis have played a lead role in Uganda's social and industrial development. I knew that this community can do wonders for my country and they have been doing it for last many decades." The Gujaratis have resurfaced in Uganda and helped rebuild the economy of East Africa, and are financially well settled.<ref name=toi/><ref>{{cite book|author1=A. Didar Singh|author2=S. Irudaya Rajan|title=Politics of Migration: Indian Emigration in a Globalised World|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1-ffCgAAQBAJ&pg=PT180|year=2015|publisher=Taylor & Francis|isbn=978-1-317-41223-6|pages=180–}}</ref>}} to the fall of Apartheid (and thus racialized border controls) in South Africa.

With the development of border control policies over the course of the 20th century came the standardization of [[refugee travel document]]s under the [[Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees]] of 1951{{efn|The 145 states which are parties to the convention are required to provide travel documents to refugees lawfully residing within their territory as per Article 28 of the convention. Refugee travel documents issued pursuant to Article 28 by certain states cannot be used for travel to the bearer's country of citizenship,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/passport/travel-documents/types.asp |title=Types of passports and travel documents |date=26 June 2015 |publisher=Government of Canada |access-date=9 December 2015 |archive-date=15 November 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171115001434/http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/passport/travel-documents/types.asp |url-status=live }}</ref>}} and the [[1954 Convention travel document]]<ref>{{cite book |editor1-first=Brad K. |editor1-last=Blitz |editor2-first=Maureen |editor2-last=Lynch |title=Statelessness and the Benefits of Citizenship: A Comparative Study |date=2009 |publisher=Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights and International Observatory on Statelessness |isbn=978-0-9563275-1-2 |page=27 |quote=[T]he Convention also provides for the issuance of travel documents, this time to stateless persons who are lawfully staying in the territory of a contracting state. The so-called Convention Travel Document (CTD) is designed to function in lieu of a passport—a document that is generally unavailable to stateless persons since it is usually issued by the country of nationality. |url=http://www.udhr60.ch/report/statelessness_paper0609.pdf |access-date=6 August 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111008171613/http://www.udhr60.ch/report/statelessness_paper0609.pdf |archive-date=8 October 2011 }}</ref> for stateless people under the similar 1954 statelessness convention.

===COVID-19===
The [[Travel restrictions related to the COVID-19 pandemic|<noinclude>COVID-19 </noinclude>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 for citizens of or recent travellers to the most affected areas.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/article/coronavirus-travel-restrictions.html |title=Coronavirus Travel Restrictions, Across the Globe |date=26 March 2020 |work=The New York Times |access-date=11 October 2021 |archive-date=12 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200612021308/https://www.nytimes.com/article/coronavirus-travel-restrictions.html |url-status=live }}</ref> Other countries and regions have imposed global restrictions that apply to all foreign countries and territories, or prevent their own citizens from travelling overseas.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.smartraveller.gov.au/COVID-19 |title=Coronavirus (COVID-19) – information for Australian travellers |publisher=Australian Government |access-date=4 September 2020 |archive-date=4 September 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200904042001/https://www.smartraveller.gov.au/COVID-19 |url-status=live }}</ref> 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<ref>Gowreesunkar V. et al. (2020). Tourism Destination Management in a Post-Pandemic Context: Global Issues and Destination Management Solutions. In Tourism Security-Safety and Post Conflict Destinations, Bingley, Emerald.</ref> These strict border controls [[Economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic|economic harm]] to the [[tourism industry]] through lost income and [[Social impact of the COVID-19 pandemic|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 traveling. However, some travel, especially [[business travel]], may be decreased long-term as lower cost alternatives, such as [[Teleconferencing during the 2019-20 coronavirus pandemic|teleconferencing]] and [[virtual event]]s, are preferred.<ref>Chaya Hurnath and Kiran Dookhony-Ramphul. (2020). Exploring impacts of a Health crisis on emotional solidarity and support for tourism: Case of Mauritius. Tourism Destination Management in a Post-Pandemic Context: Global Issues and Destination Management Solutions. Emerald, Bingley UK.</ref> A possible long-term impact has been a decline of [[business travel]] and international conferencing, and the rise of their virtual, online equivalents.<ref>{{cite news |title=The long-term effects of the coronavirus |website=The Jerusalem Post |url=https://www.jpost.com/Opinion/The-long-term-effects-of-the-coronavirus-619118 |access-date=12 March 2020 |archive-date=14 April 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200414175246/https://www.jpost.com/Opinion/The-long-term-effects-of-the-coronavirus-619118 |url-status=live }}</ref> Concerns have been raised over the effectiveness of travel restrictions to contain the spread of [[COVID-19]].<ref>{{cite news |last1=Nsikan |first1=Akpan |date=24 February 2020 |title=Coronavirus spikes outside China show travel bans aren't working |work=National Geographic |url=https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/02/why-travel-restrictions-are-not-stopping-coronavirus-covid-19/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200221193730/https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/02/why-travel-restrictions-are-not-stopping-coronavirus-covid-19/|archive-date=21 February 2020|access-date=2 April 2020}}</ref>

==Tactics==
{{undue|to=details of the "how" and "what" rather than "why", impacts, and alternatives|date=October 2025}}
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, there are several aspects of border control which 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 [[territorial waters|waters under their jurisdiction]]. Such measures control access to air and maritime territory as well as extractible resources (e.g. [[fishing|fish]], minerals, fossil fuels).

Under the [[United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea]] (UNCLOS),<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/part2.htm|title=UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA|access-date=31 October 2021|archive-date=23 May 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210523020808/https://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/part2.htm|url-status=live}}</ref> states exercise varying degrees of control over different categories of territorial waters:
* Internal waters: Waters landward of the baseline,{{efn|name=baseline|Normally, the baseline from which the territorial sea is measured is the low-water line along the coast as marked on large-scale charts officially recognised by the coastal state. This is either the low-water mark closest to the shore, or alternatively it may be an unlimited distance from permanently exposed land, provided that some portion of elevations exposed at low tide but covered at high tide (like mud flats) is within 5.6 km of permanently exposed land. Straight baselines can alternatively be defined connecting fringing islands along a coast, across the mouths of rivers, or with certain restrictions across the mouths of bays. In this case, a bay is defined as "a well-marked indentation whose penetration is in such proportion to the width of its mouth as to contain land-locked waters and constitute more than a mere curvature of the coast. An indentation shall not, however, be regarded as a bay unless its area is as large as, or larger than, that of the semi-circle whose diameter is a line drawn across the mouth of that indentation". The baseline across the bay must also be no more than 44 km in length.}} over which the state has complete sovereignty: not even [[innocent passage]]{{efn|All "archipelagic waters" within the outermost islands of an [[archipelagic state]] such as [[Indonesia]] or the [[Philippines]] are also considered internal waters, and are treated the same with the exception that innocent passage through them must be allowed. However, archipelagic states may designate certain sea lanes through these waters.}} 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{{efn|name=baseline}} of a coastal state. If this would overlap with another state's territorial sea, the border is taken as the median point 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, although foreign ships (military and civilian) are allowed [[innocent passage]] through it, or [[transit passage]] for [[strait]]s; this sovereignty also extends to the [[Airspace#Horizontal boundary|airspace]] over and seabed below. As a result of UNCLOS, states exercise a similar degree of control over its territorial sea as over land territory and 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 {{ Convert |44|km|abbr=off}} 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 {{ Convert |22|km|abbr=off}} 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.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://clinton4.nara.gov/CEQ/990902a.html|title=New Action to Protect & Preserve U.S. Shores & Oceans|access-date=27 April 2016|archive-date=12 April 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160412215203/http://clinton4.nara.gov/CEQ/990902a.html}}</ref>
* Exclusive economic zone: An [[exclusive economic zone]] extends from the baseline{{efn|name=baseline}} to a maximum of {{ Convert |370|km|abbr=off}}. A coastal nation has control of all economic resources within its exclusive economic zone, including fishing, mining, oil exploration, and any pollution of those resources.<ref>{{cite web|title=What is the EEZ|url=http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/eez.html|publisher=National Ocean Service|access-date=8 September 2016|archive-date=2 June 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230602092829/https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/eez.html|url-status=live}}</ref> However, it cannot prohibit passage or loitering above, on, or under the surface of the sea that is in compliance with the laws and regulations adopted by the coastal State in accordance with the provisions of the UN Convention, within that portion of its exclusive economic zone beyond its territorial sea. The only authority a state has over its EEZ is therefore its ability to regulate the extraction or spoliation of resources contained therein and border control measures implemented to this effect focus on the suppression of unauthorised commercial activity.

Vessels not complying with a state's maritime policies may be subject to [[ship arrest]] and enforcement action by the state's authorities. Maritime border control measures are controversial in the context of international trade disputes, as was the case following France's detention of British fishermen in October 2021 in the aftermath of Brexit<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/28/world/europe/france-detains-british-boat.html|title=France Detains British Boat as a Fight Over Fishing Rights Escalates|newspaper=[[The New York Times]]|date=28 October 2021|access-date=30 October 2021|archive-date=29 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211029231605/https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/28/world/europe/france-detains-british-boat.html|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-59073715|title=UK boat detained by France amid fishing rights row|work=[[BBC World News]]|date=28 October 2021|access-date=30 October 2021|archive-date=29 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211029222606/https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-59073715|url-status=live}}</ref> or when the Indonesian navy detained the crew of the ''Seven Seas Conqueress'' alleging that the vessel was unlawfully fishing within Indonesian territorial waters while the Singaporean government claimed the vessel was in Singaporean waters near [[Pedra Branca, Singapore|Pedra Branca]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/singaporean-fishing-boat-captain-ricky-tan-returns-home-after-being-detained-in-indonesia|title=Singaporean fishing boat captain Ricky Tan returns home after being detained in Indonesia for 8 months|newspaper=[[The Straits Times]]|date=5 May 2017|access-date=30 October 2021|archive-date=31 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211031025003/https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/singaporean-fishing-boat-captain-ricky-tan-returns-home-after-being-detained-in-indonesia|url-status=live}}</ref>

Similarly, international law accords each state control over the [[airspace]] above its land territory, internal waters, and territorial sea. Consequently, states have the authority to regulate [[flyover rights]] and tax foreign aircraft utilising their airspace. Additionally, the [[International Civil Aviation Organization]] designates states to administer international airspace, including airspace over waters not forming part of any state's territorial sea. Aircraft unlawfully entering a country's airspace may be grounded and their crews may be detained.

No country has sovereignty over [[international waters]], including the associated airspace. All states have the freedom of fishing, navigation, overflight, laying cables and pipelines, as well as research. Oceans, seas, and waters outside national jurisdiction are also referred to as the high seas or, in [[Latin]], ''mare liberum'' (meaning ''free sea''). The 1958 [[Convention on the High Seas]] defined "high seas" to mean "all parts of the sea that are not included in the [[territorial sea]] or in the [[internal waters]] of a State" and where "no State may validly purport to subject any part of them to its sovereignty".<ref>Text of [http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/entri/texts/high.seas.1958.html Convention on the High Seas] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190222040400/http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/entri/texts/high.seas.1958.html |date=22 February 2019 }} (U.N.T.S. No. 6465, vol. 450, pp. 82–103)</ref> Ships sailing the high seas are generally under the jurisdiction of their [[flag state]] (if there is one);<ref>UNCLOS article 92(1)</ref> however, when a ship is involved in certain criminal acts, such as [[piracy]],<ref>UNCLOS article 105</ref> any nation can exercise jurisdiction under the doctrine of [[universal jurisdiction]] regardless of maritime borders.

As part of their air and maritime border control policies, most countries restrict or regulate the ability of foreign [[airline]]s and vessels to [[transport]] of goods or passengers between sea ports and airports in their jurisdiction, known as [[cabotage]]. Restrictions on maritime cabotage apply exist in most countries with territorial and internal waters so as to protect the domestic shipping industry from foreign competition, preserve domestically owned shipping infrastructure for national security purposes, and ensure safety in congested territorial waters.<ref>{{cite web|title=Adherence to the cabotage system|url=http://www.naiko-kaiun.or.jp/e/union/union10.html|publisher=Japan Federation of Coastal Shipping Associations|access-date=26 December 2014|archive-date=26 December 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141226093328/http://www.naiko-kaiun.or.jp/e/union/union10.html}}</ref> For example, in America, the [[Merchant Marine Act of 1920|Jones Act]] provides for extremely strict restrictions on cabotage.{{efn|All goods transported by water between American ports must be carried on ships that have been constructed in the United States and that fly the American flag, are owned by American citizens, and are crewed by American citizens and/or permanent residents}} Similarly, China does not permit foreign flagged vessels to conduct domestic transport or domestic transhipments without the prior approval of the Ministry of Transport.<ref name="ukpandi">{{Cite web|url=https://www.ukpandi.com/-/media/files/imports/13108/briefings/33224---uk_legal_briefing_cabotage_web.pdf|publisher=UK P&I Club|title=Legal Briefing: A Quick Overview of Maritime Cabotage Regimes|date=August 2018|access-date=4 November 2021|archive-date=4 November 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211104125647/https://www.ukpandi.com/-/media/files/imports/13108/briefings/33224---uk_legal_briefing_cabotage_web.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref> While Hong Kong and Macau maintain distinct internal cabotage regimes from the mainland, maritime cabotage between either territory and the mainland is considered domestic carriage and accordingly is off limits to foreign vessels.<ref name="ukpandi"/> Similarly, maritime crossings across the [[Taiwan Strait]] requires special permits from both the People's Republic of China and the Republic of China{{efn|name=ROC}} and are usually off-limits to foreign vessels.<ref name="ukpandi"/> In India, foreign vessels engaging in the coasting trade{{efn|Defined as: the carriage of goods or passengers from any port or place in India to any other port or place in India or Sri Lanka<ref name="ukpandi"/>}} require a licence that is generally only issued when no local vessel is available.<ref name="ukpandi"/> Similarly, a foreign vessel may only be issued a licence to engage in cabotage in Brazil if there are no Brazilian flagged vessels available for the intended transport.<ref name="ukpandi"/>

As with maritime cabotage, most jurisdictions heavily restrict cabotage in passenger aviation, though rules regarding air cargo are typically more lax. Passenger cabotage is not usually granted under most [[open skies]] agreements. Air cabotage policies in the [[European Union]] are uniquely liberal insofar as carriers licensed by one member state are permitted to engage in cabotage in any EU member state, with few limitations.<ref>[http://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/road/haulage/cabotage_en "Cabotage"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211016103430/https://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/road/haulage/cabotage_en |date=16 October 2021 }} European Commission.</ref> [[Chile]] has the most liberal air cabotage rules in the world, enacted in 1979, which allow foreign airlines to operate domestic flights, conditional upon reciprocal treatment for Chilean carriers in the foreign airline's country. Countries apply special provisions to the ability of foreign airlines to carry passengers between two domestic destinations through an offshore hub.{{efn|For instance, a Boston-Toronto-Seattle itinerary.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Vasigh|first1=Bijan|title=Introduction to Air Transport Economics: From Theory to Applications|date=2008|publisher=Ashgate Publishing|pages=156–157|isbn=978-0-7546-7079-7|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZzPekWiS9I0C&q=qantas%20new%20york%20cabotage&pg=PA157|access-date=26 December 2014}}</ref> Such services are currently considered to constitute cabotage and are not permitted.<ref>{{cite press release|title=Canada's new government delivers greater Air Travel choice through Open Skies agreement with the United States|publisher=[[Government of Canada]]|date=12 March 2007|url=http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=283149|access-date=10 January 2014|archive-date=10 January 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140110173318/http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=283149}}</ref> In 2002, American authorities fined [[Asiana Airlines]] for selling tickets from the mainland US to [[Guam]] and [[Saipan]] via Seoul.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Compart|first1=Andrew|title=DOT fines Asiana for violating cabotage laws|url=http://www.travelweekly.com/Travel-News/Airline-News/DOT-fines-Asiana-for-violating-cabotage-laws/|access-date=26 December 2014|work=Travel Weekly|date=31 October 2002|archive-date=26 December 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141226063142/http://www.travelweekly.com/Travel-News/Airline-News/DOT-fines-Asiana-for-violating-cabotage-laws/|url-status=live}}</ref>}}

Many countries implement [[air defence identification zone]]s (ADIZs) requiring aircraft approaching within a specified distance of its airspace to contact or seek prior authorization from its military or transport authorities.<ref name=Abeyratne/> An ADIZ may extend beyond a country's territory to give the country more time to respond to possibly hostile aircraft.<ref name=WSJNov13 /> The concept of an ADIZ is not defined in any international treaty and is not regulated by any international body,<ref name=WSJNov13>{{cite news|last=Page|first=Jeremy|title=The A to Z on China's Air Defense Identification Zone|url=https://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2013/11/27/the-a-to-z-on-chinas-air-defense-identification-zone/|access-date=29 November 2013|newspaper=[[The Wall Street Journal]]|date=Nov 27, 2013|archive-date=4 May 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170504094959/https://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2013/11/27/the-a-to-z-on-chinas-air-defense-identification-zone/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=GlobSec>{{cite web|title=Air Defense Identification Zone|url=http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/adiz.htm|publisher=[[GlobalSecurity.org]]|access-date=29 November 2013|archive-date=10 June 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230610010913/https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/adiz.htm|url-status=live}}</ref> but is nevertheless a well-established aerial border control measure.{{efn|About 20 countries and regions now have such zones including [[Canada]], [[India]],<ref>{{cite news|title=Navy Closely Watching China Claims|url=http://newindianexpress.com/nation/Navy-Closely-Watching-China-Claims/2013/12/07/article1932211.ece|access-date=7 December 2013|newspaper=New Indian Express|date=7 December 2013|archive-date=14 March 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160314082829/http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/Navy-Closely-Watching-China-Claims/2013/12/07/article1932211.ece}}</ref> [[Japan]], [[Pakistan]], [[Bangladesh]], [[Finland]], [[Norway]], the [[United Kingdom]], [[People's Republic of China]], [[South Korea]], [[Republic of China]], [[United States|America]], [[Sweden]], [[Iceland]] and [[Iran]]. [[Russia]] and [[North Korea]] have unofficial ADIZs as well.<ref name="Abeyratne">{{cite journal |last=Abeyratne |first=Ruwantissa |title=In search of theoretical justification for air defence identification zones |journal=Journal of Transportation Security |volume=5 |issue=1|pages=87–94|publisher=Springer Nature|date=2011-09-13|issn=1938-7741|doi=10.1007/s12198-011-0083-2 |s2cid=153873530 |url=http://aviationdevelopment.org/eng/sites/default/files/2011111501_Publication.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140709162934/http://aviationdevelopment.org/eng/sites/default/files/2011111501_Publication.pdf |archive-date=2014-07-09 }}</ref><ref name=WSJNov13 /><ref>Jane Perlez (27 November 2013), [https://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/28/world/asia/china-explains-handling-of-b-52-flight-as-tensions-escalate.html China Explains Handling of B-52 Flight as Tensions Escalate] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170207224210/http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/28/world/asia/china-explains-handling-of-b-52-flight-as-tensions-escalate.html |date=7 February 2017 }} ''[[The New York Times]]''</ref>}} Usually such zones only cover undisputed territory, do not apply to foreign aircraft not intending to enter territorial airspace, and do not overlap.<ref name=GlobSec/><ref>Rick Gladstone and Matthew L. Wald (27 November 2013), [https://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/28/world/asia/chinas-move-puts-airspace-in-spotlight.html China's Move Puts Airspace in Spotlight] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170722035022/http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/28/world/asia/chinas-move-puts-airspace-in-spotlight.html |date=22 July 2017 }} ''[[The New York Times]]''</ref>

===Biosecurity===
[[File:Insignia of China Inspection and Quarantine 2012 (2).jpg|thumb|Quarantine operations deployed by mainland Chinese border control]]
[[File:International Certificate of Vaccination for COVID-19 Vaccine from the Philippines.jpg|thumb|left|An International Certificate of Vaccination issued by the Bureau of Quarantine in the Philippines to an individual after being vaccinated with a [[COVID-19 vaccine]] in 2021]]
{{main|Biosecurity|Quarantine|Travel restrictions related to the COVID-19 pandemic|Vaccination requirements for international travel}}

Biosecurity refers to measures aimed at preventing the introduction and/or spread of harmful [[organism]]s (e.g. [[virus]]es, [[bacteria]], etc.) to [[animal]]s and [[plant]]s in order to mitigate the risk of transmission of [[infectious disease]]. In [[agriculture]], these measures are aimed at protecting [[food crop]]s and [[livestock]] from [[pest (organism)|pests]], [[invasive species]], and other organisms not conducive to the welfare of the [[human population]]. The term includes [[Biological pest control|biological threats]] to people, including those from [[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 are quarantine measures adopted to counteract the spread of disease and, when applied as a component of border control, focus primarily on mitigating the entry of infected individuals, plants, or animals into a country.<ref>Champion P.D.; Hofstra D.E.; Clayton J.S. (2007) Border control for potential aquatic weeds. Stage 3. Weed risk assessment. ''Science for Conservation 271''. p. 41. Department of Conservation, New Zealand. [http://www.doc.govt.nz/upload/documents/science-and-technical/sfc271.pdf] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120926131809/http://www.doc.govt.nz/upload/documents/science-and-technical/sfc271.pdf|date=26 September 2012}}</ref> 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 with regard to the mobility of animals, including both pets and livestock. Notably, in order to reduce the risk of introducing [[rabies]] from continental Europe, the United Kingdom used to require that dogs, and most other animals introduced to the country, spend six months in quarantine at an [[Her Majesty's Customs and Excise|HM Customs and Excise]] pound. This policy was abolished in 2000 in favour of a scheme generally known as [[Pet Passports]], where animals can avoid quarantine if they have documentation showing they are up to date on their appropriate [[vaccine|vaccinations]].<ref>[https://www.gov.uk/take-pet-abroad#countries-and-territories Bringing your pet dog, cat or ferret to the UK] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200803113924/https://www.gov.uk/take-pet-abroad#countries-and-territories |date=3 August 2020 }} ''www.gov.uk'', accessed 27 January 2020</ref>

In the past, quarantine measures were implemented by European countries in order to curtail 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.<ref>{{cite book |url=https://archive.org/details/statutesatlargef04grea/page/420/ |title=Quarantine Act 1710 |last=Stuart |first=Anne |year=1710 |trans-title=9 Ann. Chapter II A.D. 1710 |series=The Statutes at Large: from Magna Charta to the End of the Last Parliament, 1761 |location=London, Great Britain |via=Internet Archive |publisher=Mark Baskett, Henry Woodfall, and William Strahan |volume=IV |pages=420–421 |oclc=228755149}}</ref> 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 Parliamemt, 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|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 of the United Kingdom|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 of the use of quarantine restrictions. 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.<ref name=Booker>{{cite book |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=B7OoDQAAQBAJ&pg=PT5 |first=John |last=Booker |chapter=Maritime Quarantine: The British Experience, c.1650–1900 |title=The History of Medicine in Context |publisher=Routledge |year=2016 |isbn=978-1-351-91984-5 |access-date=6 February 2020}}</ref>

In modern [[maritime law]], biosecurity measures for arriving vessels centre around 'pratique', a licence from border control officials permitting a ship to enter port on assurance from the captain that the vessel is free from [[contagious disease]]. The clearance granted is commonly referred to as 'free pratique'. A ship can signal a request for 'pratique' by flying a solid yellow square-shaped flag. This yellow flag is the [[Yellow flag (contagion)|'''Q''' flag]] in the set of [[international maritime signal flags]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/xf~q.html|title=Quarantine Flag|publisher=crwflags.com|access-date=19 October 2021|archive-date=20 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211020145426/https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/xf~q.html|url-status=live}}</ref> In the event that 'free pratique' is not granted, a vessel will be held in quarantine according to biosecurity rules prevailing at the port of entry until a border control officer inspects the vessel.<ref>[https://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/border-health/maritime-border-control/health-quarantine-inspection-places-notice-2014 Health (Quarantine Inspection Places) Notice 2014] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211019021417/https://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/border-health/maritime-border-control/health-quarantine-inspection-places-notice-2014 |date=19 October 2021 }} ''www.health.govt.nz''</ref> During the [[COVID-19 pandemic]], a controversy arose as to who granted pratique to the ''[[Ruby Princess]]''.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-18/coronavirus-ruby-princess-agriculture-inquiry/12568798|title=Agriculture officers did not conduct coronavirus health checks as required on Ruby Princess|date=18 August 2020|first=Jordan|last=Hayne|publisher=[[ABC News (Australia)]]|access-date=19 October 2021|archive-date=19 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211019021408/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-18/coronavirus-ruby-princess-agriculture-inquiry/12568798|url-status=live}}</ref> A related concept is the 'bill of health', a document issued by officials of a [[port]] of departure indicating to the officials of the port of arrival whether it is likely that the ship is carrying a [[contagious disease]], either literally on board as [[fomite]]s or via its crewmen or passengers. As defined in a consul's handbook from 1879:

{{blockquote|A bill of health is a document issued by the consul or the public authorities of the port which a ship sails from, descriptive of the health of the port at the time of the vessel's clearance. A ''clean'' bill of health certifies that at the date of its issue no infectious disease was known to exist either in the port or its neighbourhood. A ''suspected'' or ''touched'' bill of health reports that rumours were in circulation that an infectious disease had appeared but that the rumour had not been confirmed by any known cases. A ''foul'' bill of health or the absence of a clean bill of health implies that the place the vessel cleared from was infected with a contagious disease. The two latter cases would render the vessel liable to quarantine.<ref>Lewis Joel, ''A consul's manual and shipowner's and shipmaster's practical guide in their transactions abroad'', 1879 [https://books.google.com/books?id=94wBAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA239 text at Google Books]</ref>}}

Another category of biosecurity measures adopted by border control organisations is [[Vaccination requirements for international travel|mandatory vaccination]]. As a result of the prevalence of [[Yellow Fever]] across much of the African continent, a significant portion of countries in the region require arriving passengers to present an [[International Certificate of Vaccination or Prophylaxis]] (Carte Jaune) certifying that they have received the [[Yellow Fever vaccine]]. A variety of other countries require travelers who have visited areas where Yellow Fever is endemic to present a certificate in order to clear border checkpoints as a means of preventing the spread of the disease. Prior to the emergence of [[COVID-19]], Yellow Fever was the primary human disease subjected to [[de facto]] [[Immunity passport|vaccine passport]] measures by border control authorities around the world. Similar measures are in place with regard to [[Polio]] and [[meningococcal meningitis]] in regions where those diseases are endemic and countries bordering those regions. Prior to the [[Smallpox#Eradication|eradication of smallpox]], similar Carte Jaune requirements were in force for that disease around the world.

[[File:Vermont COVID travel sign.jpg|thumb|right|upright|A road sign at an exit on [[Interstate 91]] in [[Vermont]] advising individuals entering the state of a quarantine policy adopted in response to COVID-19, photographed in November 2020]]
[[File:Berg a DNV - 49655647492.jpg|thumb|left|[[COVID-19 pandemic in Slovakia|Slovakia]], which otherwise maintains open borders with other [[Schengen Area]] jurisdictions, closed borders to non-residents because of the COVID-19 pandemic.]]

As a result of the [[COVID-19 pandemic]], biosecurity measures have become a highly visible aspect of border control across the globe. Most notably, quarantine and [[Vaccination requirements for international travel#COVID-19|mandatory COVID-19 vaccination]] for international travelers. Together with a decreased willingness to travel, the implementation of biosecurity measures has had a [[Economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic|negative economic]] and [[Social impact of the COVID-19 pandemic|social impact]] on the [[travel industry]].<ref>
Sharad Kumar Kulshreshtha. (2021). Virus Outbreaks and Tourism Mobility: Strategies to Counter Global Health Hazards. Emerald, New York, UK.</ref> Slow travel increased in popularity during the pandemic, with tourists visiting fewer destinations during their trips.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Glusac|first=Elaine|date=12 August 2021|title=Who Needs a Whirlwind Trip When You Can Take It Slow?|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/12/travel/who-needs-a-whirlwind-trip-when-you-can-take-it-slow.html|access-date=3 September 2021|archive-date=3 September 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210903022055/https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/12/travel/who-needs-a-whirlwind-trip-when-you-can-take-it-slow.html|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Palmer|first=Sarah|date=7 August 2021|title=The rise of 'slow travel': What is it and who is it for?|url=https://www.euronews.com/travel/2021/08/07/the-rise-of-slow-travel-what-is-it-and-who-is-it-for|access-date=3 September 2021|website=euronews|archive-date=3 September 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210903152807/https://www.euronews.com/travel/2021/08/07/the-rise-of-slow-travel-what-is-it-and-who-is-it-for|url-status=live}}</ref>

Biosecurity measures such as restrictions on cross-border travel, the introduction of mandatory vaccination for international travellers, and the adoption of quarantine or mandatory testing measures have helped to contain the spread of COVID-19.<ref name=":0b">{{Cite journal|last1=Burns|first1=Jacob|last2=Movsisyan |first2=Ani|last3=Stratil|first3=Jan M|last4=Biallas|first4=Renke Lars|last5=Coenen|first5=Michaela |last6=Emmert-Fees|first6=Karl MF |last7=Geffert|first7=Karin|last8=Hoffmann|first8=Sabine|last9=Horstick |first9=Olaf|last10=Laxy|first10=Michael|last11=Klinger|first11=Carmen|date=25 March 2021|editor-last=Cochrane Public Health Group|title=International travel-related control measures to contain the COVID-19 pandemic: a rapid review|journal=Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews|volume=2021|issue=3|at=CD013717 |doi=10.1002/14651858.CD013717.pub2 |pmid=33763851|pmc=8406796|s2cid=232356197}}</ref> While test-based border screening measures may prove effective under certain circumstances, they may fail to detect a significant quantity positive cases if only conducted upon arrival without follow-up. A minimum 10-day quarantine may be beneficial in preventing the spread of COVID-19 and may be more effective if combined with an additional control measure like border screening.<ref name=":0b" /> A study in ''[[Science (journal)|Science]]'' found that travel restrictions could delay the initial arrival of COVID-19 in a country, but that they produced only modest overall effects unless combined with domestic [[infection prevention and control]] measures to considerably reduce transmissions.<ref>{{cite journal |date=6 March 2020 |title=The effect of travel restrictions on the spread of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak |journal=[[Science (journal)|Science]] |volume=368 |issue=6489 |pages=395–400 |bibcode=2020Sci...368..395C |doi=10.1126/science.aba9757 |pmc=7164386 |pmid=32144116|first4=Corrado|first16=Alessandro|first14=M. Elizabeth|last15=Longini, Jr.|first15=Ira M.|author-link15=Ira M. Longini, Jr.|last16=Vespignani |first3=Marco|author-link16=Alessandro Vespignani |first13=Hongjie|last3=Ajelli|first2=Jessica T. |first1=Matteo|last14=Halloran|last13=Yu|last5=Litvinova|first8=Kunpeng|first5=Maria|last6=Merler |first6=Stefano|last4=Gioannini|last7=Pastore y Piontti|first7=Ana|last8=Mu |last9=Rossi|first12=Xinyue |last2=Davis|first9=Luca|last10=Sun|first10=Kaiyuan|last11=Viboud|last1=Chinazzi|author-link11=Cécile Viboud|last12=Xiong |first11=Cécile}}</ref> (That is consistent with prior research on influenza and other communicable diseases.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Mateus |first1=Ana LP |last2=Otete |first2=Harmony E |last3=Beck |first3=Charles R |last4=Dolan |first4=Gayle P |last5=Nguyen-Van-Tam |first5=Jonathan S |date=1 December 2014 |title=Effectiveness of travel restrictions in the rapid containment of human influenza: a systematic review |url=http://www.who.int/entity/bulletin/volumes/92/12/14-135590.pdf |journal=Bulletin of the World Health Organization |volume=92 |issue=12 |pages=868–880D |doi=10.2471/BLT.14.135590 |issn=0042-9686 |pmc=4264390 |pmid=25552771}}</ref><ref name=":2">{{Cite web |last=Kenny |first=Charles |date=19 January 2021 |title=At Best, Travel Bans to Stop Infectious Diseases Merely Delay the Inevitable |website=Slate Magazine |url=https://slate.com/technology/2021/01/plague-cycle-excerpt-coronavirus-covid-travel-bans.html |access-date=13 March 2021 |archive-date=13 March 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210313175552/https://slate.com/technology/2021/01/plague-cycle-excerpt-coronavirus-covid-travel-bans.html |url-status=live }}</ref>) Travel bans early in the pandemic were most effective for isolated locations, such as small [[island nation]]s.<ref name=":2" />

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many jurisdictions across the globe introduced biosecurity measures on internal borders. This ranged from quarantine measures imposed upon individuals crossing state lines within America to [[COVID-19 pandemic in Australia|prohibitions on interstate travel in Australia]].

===Customs===
{{main|Customs}}

[[File:North Korea - Sunan Airport (5194926935).jpg|thumb|left|North Korean customs officer at [[Pyongyang Sunan International Airport]]]]
[[File:Ports of Auckland Customs Boundary.jpg|thumb|right|Southern edge (customs border) of Captain Cook wharf, [[Ports of Auckland]], New Zealand; an [[electric fence]] is faintly visible behind the historical fence]]
Each country has its own laws and regulations for the [[international trade|import]] and [[export]] of goods into and out of a country, which its customs authority enforces. The import or export of some goods may be restricted or forbidden, in which case customs controls enforce such policies.<ref name="Chowdhury 1992">
Chowdhury, F. L. (1992) Evasion of Customs Duty in Bangladesh, unpublished MBA dissertation submitted to Monash University, Australia.
</ref> 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 in order to prioritise customs enforcement.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Dual-Channel System (Customs Clearance) |url=http://www.ica.gov.sg/page.aspx?pageid=98#red-or-green |website=Ica.gov.sg |access-date=2 September 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150906070322/http://www.ica.gov.sg/page.aspx?pageid=98#red-or-green |archive-date=6 September 2015 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Customs regulations for travellers to and from Norway |date=July 2006 |publisher=Norwegian Customs Service |url=http://www.toll.no/upload/Dokumenter/brosjyrer_veiledere/Reisende_ENG.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090319202853/http://www.toll.no/upload/Dokumenter/brosjyrer_veiledere/Reisende_ENG.pdf |archive-date=19 March 2009 |access-date=31 December 2017}}</ref> 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. [[Bag tag|Luggage tags]] for checked luggage traveling within the EU are green-edged so they may be identified.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/customs/customs_controls/baggage_controls/index_en.htm#exit|title=EUROPA – Taxation and Customs Union / Baggage controls|website=ec.europa.eu|date=21 February 2007|access-date=6 January 2012|archive-date=17 August 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160817165237/http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/customs/customs_controls/baggage_controls/index_en.htm#exit|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/resources/images/etiquette_verte.gif |title=XB Airlines |website=ec.europa.eu |access-date=19 January 2007 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070328205916/http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/resources/images/etiquette_verte.gif |archive-date=28 March 2007 }}</ref> In most EU member states, travellers coming from other EU countries within the [[Schengen Area]] can use the green lane, although airports outside the Schengen Area or with frequent flights arriving from jurisdictions within Schengen but outside the European Union may use blue channels for convenience and efficiency.

A customs area is an area designated for storage of commercial goods that have not cleared border controls. Commercial goods not yet cleared through customs are often stored in a type of customs area known as a [[bonded warehouse]], until processed or re-exported.<ref name="ANTW">[http://www.haven.antwerpen.be/html/17_FAQ/page_FAQ_00.html Port of Antwerp FAQ] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20030517113119/http://www.haven.antwerpen.be/html/17_FAQ/page_FAQ_00.html |date=17 May 2003}} (from the official website of the [[Port of Antwerp]]. Accessed 16 June 2008.)</ref><ref>[http://www.chennaicustoms.gov.in/note2001/PN003_2001.htm Public Notice No. 03 /2001] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080828071637/http://www.chennaicustoms.gov.in/note2001/PN003_2001.htm |date=28 August 2008}} (from the 'Office of the Commissioner of Customs', Customs House, [[Chennai]], India. Retrieved 12 October 2007)</ref> Ports authorized to handle international cargo generally include recognised bonded warehouses. For the purpose of [[customs duties]], goods within the customs area are treated as being outside the country. This allows easy [[transshipment]] to a third country without customs authorities being involved.<ref name="ANTW"/> For this reason, customs areas are usually carefully controlled and fenced to prevent [[smuggling]]. However, the area is still territorially part of the country, so the goods within the area are subject to other local laws (for example [[drug laws]] and [[biosecurity]] regulations), and thus may be searched, [[Search and seizure|impounded]] or turned back. The term is also sometimes used to define an area (usually composed of several countries) which form 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 each jurisdiction is permitted to 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 focuses extensively on curtailing and regulating the import of foreign agricultural products in order to protect domestic ecosystems. For example, Australian border controls restrict most (if not all) food products, certain wooden products and other similar items.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.agriculture.gov.au/travelling/arriving-in-australia |title=Department of Agriculture Fact sheet – Travelling or returning to Australia |access-date=2 August 2018 |archive-date=12 March 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190312101833/http://agriculture.gov.au/travelling/arriving-in-australia |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=http://newzealand.embassy.gov.au/wltn/customsfaq.html |title=Australian High Commission in |access-date=2 August 2018 |archive-date=3 August 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180803014426/http://newzealand.embassy.gov.au/wltn/customsfaq.html |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Importing prohibited and restricted goods |publisher=Department of Home Affairs, Australian Government |url=https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/busi/cargo-support-trade-and-goods/importing-goods/prohibited-and-restricted |access-date=2 August 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180907224853/https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/busi/cargo-support-trade-and-goods/importing-goods/prohibited-and-restricted |archive-date=7 September 2018 }}</ref> Similar restrictions exist in Canada, America and New Zealand.

[[File:Capital punishment for drugs world map.svg|thumb|400px|Map depicting countries with a policy of executing drug traffickers <br /> {{legend|#e8aa30|Only under certain conditions}}
{{legend|#cc7662|[[Capital punishment for drug trafficking|Capital punishment for drug offences]]}}]]
Border control in many countries in Asia and the Americas prioritizes enforcing customs laws pertaining to narcotics. For instance, India and Malaysia are focusing resources on eliminating drug smuggling from Myanmar and Thailand respectively. The issue stems largely from the high output of dangerous and illegal drugs in the [[Golden Triangle (Southeast Asia)|Golden Triangle]] as well as in regions further west such as Afghanistan. A similar problem exists east of the Pacific, and has resulted in countries such as Mexico and the United States tightening border control in response to the northward flow of illegal substances from regions such as Colombia. The [[Mexican drug war]] and similar cartel activity in neighboring areas has exacerbated the problem. In certain countries illegal importing, exporting, sale, or possession of drugs constitute capital offences and may result in a death sentence. A 2015 article by ''[[The Economist]]'' says that the laws of 32 countries provide for capital punishment for drug smuggling, but only in six countries – [[China]], [[Iran]], [[Saudi Arabia]], [[Vietnam]], [[Malaysia]], and [[Singapore]] –are drug offenders known to be routinely executed.<ref>[https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2015/04/economist-explains-28 Which countries have the death penalty for drug smuggling?] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190618124037/http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2015/04/economist-explains-28 |date=18 June 2019 }} 29 April 2015. ''[[The Economist]].''</ref> Additionally, Singapore, Malaysia, and Indonesia impose mandatory death sentences on individuals caught smuggling restricted substances across their borders. For example, Muhammad Ridzuan Ali was executed in Singapore on May 19, 2017 for drug trafficking.<ref>{{cite news |title=Singaporean drug trafficker executed at Changi Prison for heroin offence |work=The Straits Times |date=19 May 2017 |url=http://str.sg/4u3w |access-date=21 August 2018 |archive-date=27 March 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200327235759/http://str.sg/4u3w |url-status=live }}</ref> According to a 2011 article by the [[Lawyers Collective]], an [[Non-governmental organization|NGO]] in [[India]], "32 countries impose [[capital punishment]] for offences involving [[narcotic drug]]s and [[psychotropic]] substances."<ref>[http://www.lawyerscollective.org/news/archived-news-a-articles/119-bombay-high-court-overturns-mandatory-death-penalty-for-drug-offences-first-in-the-world-to-do-so.html Bombay High Court overturns mandatory death penalty for drug offences; first in the world to do so] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130522223452/http://www.lawyerscollective.org/news/archived-news-a-articles/119-bombay-high-court-overturns-mandatory-death-penalty-for-drug-offences-first-in-the-world-to-do-so.html |date=22 May 2013 }}. 17 June 2011 by [[Lawyers Collective]]. "Consequently, the sentencing Court will have the option and not obligation, to impose capital punishment on a person convicted a second time for drugs in quantities specified under Section 31A. ... Across the world, 32 countries impose capital punishment for offenses involving narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances."</ref> South Korean law provides for capital punishment for drug offences,<ref>[http://www.koreaobserver.com/drug-smuggling-reaches-a-record-high-in-south-korea-26160 Drug smuggling reaches a record-high in South Korea] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220314034557/http://www.koreaobserver.com/drug-smuggling-reaches-a-record-high-in-south-korea-26160 |date=14 March 2022 }}. Feb. 6, 2015. By Chung Hye-min. ''The Korea Observer''.</ref> but [[South Korea]] has a de facto moratorium on capital punishment as there have been no executions since 1997, even though there are still people on death row and new death sentences continue to be handed down.<ref>[https://www.deathpenaltyworldwide.org/country-search-post.cfm?country=South+Korea The Death Penalty in South Korea] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191210074322/http://www.deathpenaltyworldwide.org/country-search-post.cfm?country=South+Korea |date=10 December 2019 }}. [https://www.deathpenaltyworldwide.org/about.cfm Cornell Center on the Death Penalty Worldwide] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191205141328/http://www.deathpenaltyworldwide.org/about.cfm |date=5 December 2019 }}.</ref>

===Border security===
{{Redirect|Border security|other uses|Border Security (disambiguation){{!}}Border Security}}
Border security refers to measures taken by one or more governments to enforce their border control policies.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.dhs.gov/border-security |title=Border Security |website=Department of Homeland Security |date=30 April 2012 |access-date=1 August 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180327050413/https://www.dhs.gov/border-security |archive-date=27 March 2018 }}</ref> Such measures target a variety of issues, ranging from customs violations and trade in unlawful goods to the suppression of unauthorized [[human migration|migration]] or travel. The specific border security measures taken by a jurisdiction vary depending on the priorities of local authorities and are affected by social, economic, and geographical factors.

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 [[Bangladesh–India border|border with Bangladesh]] is to deter unlawful immigration and drug trafficking.<ref name="channel4">{{cite news|title=Channel 4 News|date=24 July 2009|url=http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/politics/international_politics/indiabangladesh+apossecurityapos+fence/3281357|website=channel4.com|access-date=1 February 2021|archive-date=28 December 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091228183555/http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/politics/international_politics/indiabangladesh+apossecurityapos+fence/3281357}}</ref> 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 Myanmar coup d'état|2021 military coup]] in Myanmar saw an influx of refugees seeking asylum in border states including [[Mizoram]].<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.dw.com/en/life-of-myanmar-refugees-in-an-indian-border-village/a-59361986 |title=Life of Myanmar refugees in an Indian border village |work=[[Deutsche Welle]] |access-date=11 October 2021 |archive-date=8 October 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211008045745/https://www.dw.com/en/life-of-myanmar-refugees-in-an-indian-border-village/a-59361986 |url-status=live }}</ref> The [[Non-refoulement|refoulement]] of [[Rohingya]] refugees is a contentious aspect of India's border control policy vis à vis Myanmar.<ref>{{cite news |title=India detains Rohingya refugees and threatens to deport them to Myanmar |work=The Guardian |date=8 March 2021 |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/08/india-detains-rohingya-refugees-and-threatens-to-deport-them-to-myanmar |access-date=10 October 2021 |archive-date=11 October 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211011024718/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/08/india-detains-rohingya-refugees-and-threatens-to-deport-them-to-myanmar |url-status=live }}</ref>

Meanwhile, American border security policy is largely centered on the country's [[Mexico–United States border|border with Mexico]]. Security along this border is composed of many distinct elements; including physical barriers, patrol routes, lighting, and border patrol personnel. In contrast, the [[Canada–United States border|border with Canada]] is primarily composed of joint border patrol and security camera programs, forming the longest undefended border in the world. In remote areas along the border with Canada, where staffed border crossings are not available, there are hidden [[sensor]]s on roads, trails, railways, and wooded areas, which are located near crossing points.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Mallonee |first1=Laura |title=The Invisible Security of Canada's Seemingly Chill Border |url=https://www.wired.com/2016/04/invisible-security-canadas-seemingly-chill-border/ |access-date=27 April 2021 |magazine=Wired |date=2016-01-04 |archive-date=28 May 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230528175246/https://www.wired.com/2016/04/invisible-security-canadas-seemingly-chill-border/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

Border security on the Schengen Area's external borders is especially restrictive. Members of the Schengen Agreement are required to apply strict checks on travellers entering and exiting the area. These checks are co-ordinated 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.<ref name="schengen borders code">Regulation (EC) No 562/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 establishing a Community Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code) ([https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32006R0562:EN:NOT OJ L 105, 13 April 2006, p. 1] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131114121129/http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32006R0562:EN:NOT |date=14 November 2013 }}).</ref> All persons crossing external borders—inbound or outbound—are subject to a check by a [[border guard]]. The only exception is for regular cross-border commuters (both those with the [[Directive 2004/38/EC on the right to move and reside freely|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.<ref>Practical Handbook for Border Guards, Part II, Section I, Point 5.8 ([https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/e-library/documents/policies/borders-and-visas/schengen/docs/c2019-7131-annex.pdf C (2019) 7131, 8 October 2019, p. 45] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201230025715/https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/e-library/documents/policies/borders-and-visas/schengen/docs/c2019-7131-annex.pdf |date=30 December 2020 }})</ref><ref>Annex VII of the Schengen Borders Code ([https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32006R0562:EN:NOT OJ L 105, 13 April 2006, p. 1] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131114121129/http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32006R0562:EN:NOT |date=14 November 2013 }}).</ref><ref>Annex VII, Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code) ([https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32016R0399 OJ L 77, 23 March 2016, p. 1] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211105080924/https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32016R0399 |date=5 November 2021 }})</ref> 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.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Mordor Intelligence|url=https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/border-security-market|access-date=28 October 2021|archive-date=28 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211028101554/https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/border-security-market|url-status=live}}</ref> 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 EU's border institutions and its shaping of research policy.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2016-07-04|title=Border Wars|url=https://www.tni.org/en/publication/border-wars|access-date=2021-10-28|website=Transnational Institute|archive-date=28 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211028101604/https://www.tni.org/en/publication/border-wars|url-status=live}}</ref> The institute criticises the border security industry for having a vested interest in increasing border militarisation in order 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.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2021-07-28|title=Smoking guns|url=https://www.tni.org/en/publication/smoking-guns|access-date=2021-10-28|website=Transnational Institute|archive-date=28 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211028101615/https://www.tni.org/en/publication/smoking-guns|url-status=live}}</ref>

====Border walls====
Border walls are a common aspect of border security measures across the world. Border walls generally seek to limit unauthorised travel across an international border and are frequently implemented as a [[Right-wing populism|populist]] response to refugees and economic migrants.

The [[Bangladesh–India border#India–Bangladesh barrier|India-Bangladesh barrier]] is a {{ Convert |3406|km|abbr=off}} long fence of barbed wire and concrete just under {{ Convert |3|m|ftin|abbr=off}} high currently under construction.<ref name="Centre has fenced 3406 km along Indo-Bangladesh border">{{cite news|url=http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/india-news/centre-has-fenced-3406-km-along-indo-bangladesh-border_1006842.html|title=Centre has fenced 3406 km along Indo-Bangladesh border|publisher=Thaindian news|date=27 November 2007|access-date=5 November 2021|archive-date=28 January 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120128074028/http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/india-news/centre-has-fenced-3406-km-along-indo-bangladesh-border_1006842.html}}</ref> Its stated aim is to limit unauthorised migration.<ref name="channel4"/> The project has run into several delays and there is no clear completion date for the project yet.<ref name="Centre has fenced 3406 km along Indo-Bangladesh border"/> Similar to India's barrier with Bangladesh and the proposed wall between America and Mexico, Iran has constructed a [[Iran–Pakistan border|wall on its frontier with Pakistan]]. The wall aims to reduce unauthorised border crossings<ref>{{cite news
| url = http://www.zeenews.com/articles.asp?aid=357668&sid=SAS&ssid=
| title = Iran erecting wall along the border with Pakistan
| date = March 2007
| newspaper = The Hindu
| access-date = 11 June 2007
| archive-date = 30 September 2007
| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20070930185510/http://www.zeenews.com/articles.asp?aid=357668&sid=SAS&ssid=
| url-status = live
}}</ref> and stem the flow of drugs,<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/DAH337249.htm |title=Interview – "Iranian wall" seen hindering drug smugglers-UN |access-date=11 June 2007 |last=Dahl |first=Fredrik |date=13 May 2007 |agency=Reuters |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080706034537/http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/DAH337249.htm |archive-date=6 July 2008}}</ref> and is also a response to terrorist attacks, notably the one in the Iranian border town of [[Zahedan]] on February 17, 2007, which killed thirteen people, including nine [[Iranian Revolutionary Guard]] officials.<ref>{{cite news
| url = http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007%5C05%5C19%5Cstory_19-5-2007_pg7_15
| title = Pakistan and Iran blame Afghanistan for unrest
| date = 19 May 2007
| newspaper = Daily Times (Pakistan)
| access-date = 11 June 2007
| archive-date = 18 April 2012
| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20120418212445/http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007%5C05%5C19%5Cstory_19-5-2007_pg7_15
| url-status = live
}}</ref> Former president [[Donald Trump]]'s proposal to build [[Mexico–United States barrier|a new wall along the border]] formed a major feature of his 2016 presidential campaign and, over the course of his presidency, his administration spent approximately US$15 billion on the project, with US$5 billion appropriated from [[US Customs and Border Protection]], US$6.3 billion appropriated from anti-narcotics initiative funded by congress, and US$3.6 billion appropriated from the American military.<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46824649 |title=Trump wall: How much has he actually built? |date=31 October 2020 |work=BBC World News |access-date=10 October 2021 |archive-date=15 May 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190515110129/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46824649 |url-status=live }}</ref> Members of both the [[Democratic Party of the United States|Democratic]] and [[Republican Party of the United States|Republican]] parties who opposed Trump's border control policies regarded the border wall as unnecessary or undesirable, arguing that other measures would be more effective at reducing illegal immigration than building a wall, including tackling the economic issues that lead to immigration being a relevant issue altogether, border surveillance or an increase in the number of customs agents.<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/08/us/politics/trump-border-wall-funding-surveillance.html |title=To Pay for Wall, Trump Would Cut Proven Border Security Measures |last=Nixon |first=Ron |date=2018 |work=The New York Times |access-date=4 February 2018 |archive-date=9 January 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180109022244/https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/08/us/politics/trump-border-wall-funding-surveillance.html |url-status=live }}</ref> Additionally, in August 2020, the United States constructed 3.8&nbsp;km of short cable fencing along the border between [[Abbotsford, British Columbia|Abbotsford]], British Columbia, and [[Whatcom County, Washington|Whatcom County]], Washington.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Johnston |first1=Patrick |title='Fence' south of Aldergrove about road safety and border security, U.S. officials say |url=https://vancouversun.com/news/border-fence-south-of-aldergrove-simply-a-road-safety-measure-officials-claim |access-date=13 April 2021 |work=[[Vancouver Sun]] |date=20 Aug 2020 |archive-date=3 August 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230803232512/https://vancouversun.com/news/border-fence-south-of-aldergrove-simply-a-road-safety-measure-officials-claim |url-status=live }}</ref>

Border walls have formed a major component of European border control policy following the [[European migrant crisis]]. The [[Melilla border fence|walls at Melilla]] and [[Ceuta border fence|at Ceuta]] on Spain's border with Morocco are designed to curtail the ability of refugees and migrants to enter the European Union via the two Spanish cities on the Moroccan coast. Similar measures have been taken on the Schengen area's borders with Turkey in response to the refugee crisis in Syria. The creation of European Union's collective border security organisation, [[Frontex]], is another aspect of the bloc's growing focus on border security. Within the Schengen Area, border security has become an especially prominent priority for the Hungarian government under right-wing [[Strongman (politics)|strongman]]<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/30/danger-hungary-verge-full-blown-autocracy-viktor-orban-vengeance|title=Here lies danger. Hungary is on the verge of full-blown autocracy &#124; George Szirtes|date=30 March 2018|website=The Guardian|access-date=6 November 2020|archive-date=6 November 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201106151931/https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/30/danger-hungary-verge-full-blown-autocracy-viktor-orban-vengeance|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-lloyd-hungary-commentary/commentary-orban-and-the-autocratic-spring-idUSKBN1HK2F2 |title=Commentary: Orban and the autocratic spring |publisher=Reuters |date=13 April 2018 |access-date=2 August 2018 |archive-date=2 August 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180802223428/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-lloyd-hungary-commentary/commentary-orban-and-the-autocratic-spring-idUSKBN1HK2F2 |url-status=live }}</ref> Viktor Orbán.{{efn|Hungary completed the construction of 175 kilometres of fencing between with Serbia in September 2015 and on the border with Croatia in October 2015 to stop unauthorised border crossings.<ref>{{cite news |title=Hungary to fence off border with Serbia to stop migrants |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hungary-immigration-idUSKBN0OX17I20150617 |date=17 June 2015 |newspaper=Reuters |access-date=2 August 2018 |archive-date=24 September 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150924220554/http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/17/us-hungary-immigration-idUSKBN0OX17I20150617}}</ref> In April 2016, Hungarian government announced construction of reinforcements of the barrier, which it described as "temporary".<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.kormany.hu/en/ministry-of-defence/news/reinforcement-of-temporary-security-barrier-starts-on-the-hungarian-serbian-border|title=Reinforcement of temporary border barrier starts on the Hungarian–Serbian border|access-date=2 August 2018|archive-date=29 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200729115815/https://www.kormany.hu/en/ministry-of-defence/news/reinforcement-of-temporary-security-barrier-starts-on-the-hungarian-serbian-border}}</ref> In July 2016, nearly 1,300 migrants were "stuck" on the Serbian side of the border.<ref>[https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36753648 Migrant crisis: UN criticises Hungary over border controls] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180803012030/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36753648 |date=3 August 2018 }}. BBC News. 9 July 2016.</ref> In August 2016, Orbán announced that Hungary will build another larger barrier on its southern border.<ref>[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/26/hungarys-pm-plans-more-massive-fence-to-keep-out-migrants Hungary's PM plans 'more massive' fence to keep out migrants] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210131081453/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/26/hungarys-pm-plans-more-massive-fence-to-keep-out-migrants |date=31 January 2021 }}. theguardian.com. 26 August 2016.</ref> On 28 April 2017, the Hungarian government announced it had completed a second fence, 155 kilometres long with Serbia.<ref>{{cite web |title=Hungary Completes 2nd Border Fence Meant to Stop Migrants |url=https://www.foxnews.com/world/hungary-completes-2nd-border-fence-meant-to-stop-migrants |date=28 April 2017 |publisher=[[Fox News]] (from the [[Associated Press]]) |access-date=13 September 2017 |archive-date=14 September 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170914130303/http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/04/28/hungary-completes-2nd-border-fence-meant-to-stop-migrants.html |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Hungary Completes Second Fence to Keep Out Migrants |url=http://p.dw.com/p/2c64B |date=28 April 2017 |publisher=[[Deutsche Welle]] |access-date=13 September 2017}}</ref> On 24 September 2015, Hungary began building fence on its border with [[Slovenia]], in the area around [[Tornyiszentmiklós]]–[[Pince]] border crossing.<ref>[http://www.hirado.hu/2015/09/24/a-szloven-hatarnal-is-keszul-a-drotakadaly/ A szlovén határnál is készül drótakadály] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170901115956/http://www.hirado.hu/2015/09/24/a-szloven-hatarnal-is-keszul-a-drotakadaly/ |date=1 September 2017}} [[Híradó]], 24 September 2015 (in Hungarian)</ref> The razor wire obstacle was removed two days later.<ref>[http://www.blikk.hu/blikk_aktualis/tekercsekben-all-a-lebontott-drotakadaly-a-magyar-szloven-hataron-2403475 Tekercsekben áll a lebontott drótakadály a magyar-szlovén határon] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151012151229/http://www.blikk.hu/blikk_aktualis/tekercsekben-all-a-lebontott-drotakadaly-a-magyar-szloven-hataron-2403475 |date=12 October 2015 }} [[Blikk]], 26 September 2015 (in Hungarian)</ref>}} Similarly, [[Saudi Arabia]] has begun construction of a border barrier or fence between its territory and [[Yemen]] to prevent the unauthorized movement of people and goods. The difference between the countries' economic situations means that many Yemenis head to Saudi Arabia to find work. Saudi Arabia does not have a barrier with its other neighbours in the [[Gulf Cooperation Council]], whose economies are more similar. In 2006 Saudi Arabia proposed constructing a security fence along the entire length of its 900 kilometre long desert border with Iraq.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-2126835,00.html/ |title=The Times & The Sunday Times |website=Timesonline.co.uk |access-date=21 May 2016 |archive-date=29 September 2006 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060929222846/http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-2126835,00.html/ }}</ref> As of July 2009 it was reported that Saudis will pay $3.5&nbsp;billion for a security fence.<ref name="infoprod">{{cite web |url=https://investmentfraudlawyers.com/ |title=security fraud |website=infoprod.co.il |access-date=18 August 2021 |archive-date=17 August 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210817180100/https://investmentfraudlawyers.com/ |url-status=live }}</ref> The combined wall and ditch will be {{ Convert |965|km|abbr=off}} long and include five layers of fencing, watch towers, [[night-vision]] cameras, and radar cameras and manned by 30,000 troops.<ref>{{cite news|last=Spencer |first=Richard |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/saudiarabia/11344116/Revealed-Saudi-Arabias-Great-Wall-to-keep-out-Isil.html |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220112/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/saudiarabia/11344116/Revealed-Saudi-Arabias-Great-Wall-to-keep-out-Isil.html |archive-date=12 January 2022 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live |title=Revealed: Saudi Arabia's 'Great Wall' to keep out Isil |newspaper=Telegraph |date=14 January 2015 |access-date=21 May 2016}}{{cbignore}}</ref> Elsewhere in Europe, the [[Republic of Macedonia]] began erecting a fence on its border with Greece in November 2015.<ref>{{cite news |first=Yannis |last=Behrakis |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-macedonia-idUSKBN0TH04M20151128 |title=Police, migrants clash on Macedonia border; soldiers build fence |date=28 November 2015 |publisher=Reuters |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151202235719/http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/28/us-europe-migrants-macedonia-idUSKBN0TH04M20151128 |archive-date=2 December 2015}}</ref>

In 2003, [[Botswana]] began building a {{ Convert |480|km|abbr=off}} long [[electric fence]] along its border with [[Zimbabwe]]. The official reason for the fence is to stop the spread of [[foot-and-mouth disease]] among livestock. Zimbabweans argue that the height of the fence is clearly intended to keep out people. Botswana has responded that the fence is designed to keep out cattle, and to ensure that entrants have their shoes disinfected at legal border crossings. Botswana also argued that the government continues to encourage legal movement into the country. Zimbabwe was unconvinced, and the barrier remains a source of tension.<ref>{{Cite news|periodical=BBC News|title=Zimbabwe crisis spills over border|url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3582459.stm|last=Phillips|first=Barnaby|date=30 March 2004|access-date=4 January 2010|archive-date=12 March 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190312123932/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3582459.stm|url-status=live}}</ref>

<gallery mode="nolines">
File:Algodones sand-dune-fence.jpg|[[Mexico–United States barrier|Mexico–US fence]], from [[California]]
File:Indo-Bangladeshi Barrier.JPG|[[India]]n fence, from [[Hili railway station (Bangladesh)|Hili, Bangladesh]]
File:Hungary-Serbia border barrier.jpg|[[Hungary]]–[[Serbia]] fence, from Hungary
</gallery>

====Border checkpoints====
{{main|Border checkpoint|Port of entry|International airport}}
{{further|International zone#Sterile zones at ports of entry}}

{{multiple image
| direction = vertical
| width = 220
| footer = The Sultan Iskandar Building ([[Malaysia]]) and Woodlands Checkpoint ([[Singapore]]) on the [[Malaysia–Singapore border]] handles the busiest international land border crossing in the world, with 350,000 travellers daily prior to the [[COVID-19 pandemic]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://infographics.channelnewsasia.com/interactive/causewayjam/index.html|title=Clearing the Causeway|date=9 June 2018|access-date=7 February 2019|archive-date=2 July 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180702024524/https://infographics.channelnewsasia.com/interactive/causewayjam/index.html|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=":1">{{cite news|url=https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/a-look-at-woodlands-checkpoint-singapores-first-and-last-line-of-defence|title=A Look at Woodlands Checkpoint|last=Lim|first=Yan Liang|date=13 October 2013|work=The Straits Times|access-date=13 June 2019|archive-date=23 March 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200323041636/https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/a-look-at-woodlands-checkpoint-singapores-first-and-last-line-of-defence|url-status=live}}</ref>
| image1 = SultanIskandarCIQ.JPG
| alt1 = Sultan Iskandar Building, Johor Bahru, Malaysia
| caption1 = [[Sultan Iskandar Building]]
| image2 = Woodlands Checkpoint, Singapore - 200301.jpg
| alt2 = Woodlands Checkpoint, Singapore
| caption2 = [[Johor–Singapore Causeway#Woodlands Checkpoint|Woodlands Checkpoint]]
}}
[[File:International Terminal of San Francisco International Airport2.jpg|thumb|The International Terminal at [[San Francisco International Airport]] is an airport of entry for travellers entering America and has border checkpoint facilities for arriving passengers. Like most North American airports, it does not have a [[International zone#Sterile zones at ports of entry|sterile international transit area]]. Domestic and international passengers are thus not clearly separated. That enables easier transfers from domestic to international flights but requires international transit passengers to clear the border checkpoint even if their final destination is outside America.]]

A Border checkpoint is a place where goods or individuals moving across borders are inspected for compliance with border control measures. Access-controlled borders often have a limited number of checkpoints where they can be crossed without legal sanctions. Arrangements or treaties may be formed to allow or mandate less restrained crossings (e.g. the [[Schengen Agreement]]). Land border checkpoints (land ports of entry) can be contrasted with the [[customs]] and [[immigration]] facilities at [[port|seaports]], [[international airport]]s, and other [[port of entry|ports of entry]].

Checkpoints generally serve two purposes:
* To prevent entrance of individuals who are either undesirable (e.g. criminals or others who pose threats) or simply unauthorised to enter.
* To prevent entrance of goods or contaminants that are illegal or subject to restriction, or to collect [[tariffs]] in accordance with [[#Customs|customs]] or [[#Quarantine|quarantine]] policies.

A border checkpoint at which travellers are permitted to enter a jurisdiction is known as a port of entry. [[International airport]]s are usually ports of entry, as are road and rail crossings on a land [[border]]. [[Port|Seaports]] can be used as ports of entry only if a dedicated [[#Customs|customs]] presence is posted there. The choice of whether to become a port of entry is up to the civil authority controlling the port. An airport of entry is an [[airport]] that provides customs and immigration services for incoming flights. These services allow the airport to serve as an initial port of entry for foreign visitors arriving in a country. While the terms airport of entry and international airport are generally used interchangeably, not all international airports qualify as airports of entry since international airports without any immigration or customs facilities exist in the Schengen Area whose members have eliminated border controls with each other. Airports of entry are usually larger than [[domestic airport]]s and often feature longer [[runway]]s and facilities to accommodate the heavier aircraft commonly used for international and intercontinental travel. International airports often also host [[domestic flight]]s, which often help feed both passengers and cargo into international ones (and vice versa). Buildings, operations and management have become increasingly sophisticated since the mid-20th century, when international airports began to provide infrastructure for international civilian flights. Detailed technical standards have been developed to ensure safety and common [[Airline codes|coding systems]] implemented to provide global consistency. The physical structures that serve millions of individual passengers and flights are among the most complex and interconnected in the world. By the second decade of the 21st century, there were over 1,200 international airports and almost two billion international passengers along with {{ Convert |50|e6MT|abbr=off}} of cargo passing through them annually.

Border inspections are also meant to protect each country's [[agricultural pest|agriculture from pests]].<ref name = "Already-Present" /> National and international [[phytosanitary authorities]] maintain [[database]]s of border interceptions, occurrences, and [[established species|establishments]].<ref name = "Already-Present" /> Bebber ''et al.'', 2019 analyzes such records and finds that they underreport many important pest species, that [[island nation]]s are more vulnerable because they have lower border-to-area ratios, and that pests are moving [[geographical pole|poleward]] to follow humans' [[crop]]s as our crops follow [[global warming]].<ref name = "Already-Present" >
 {{ Unbulleted list citebundle
    | This review...
    |{{*}} {{ Cite journal |
                language=en|
                    year=2020|
                  volume=1|
                   issue=6|
              department=Review Article|
                  first6=Sarah|
                  first4=William|
                  first3=Thomas|
                  first2=Daniel|
                  first1=Helen|
                   last5=Steinberg|
                   last4=Kay|
                   last6=Gurr|
                  first5=Gero|
                   last3=Chaloner|
                   last2=Bebber|
                   last1=Fones|
               publisher=[[Nature Portfolio]]|
                   pages=332–342|
                   title=Threats to global food security from emerging fungal and omycete crop pathogens|
                     doi=10.1038/s43016-020-0075-0|
                 journal=[[Nature Food]]|
 pmid=37128085|
 s2cid=257160533|
                    issn=2662-1355|
                      id=HF {{ORCID|0000-0002-9914-4885}}. DB {{ORCID|0000-0003-4440-1482}}. WK {{ORCID|0000-0002-2561-4856}}. SG {{ORCID|0000-0002-4821-0635}}}}
    | ...cites this study:
    |{{*}} {{ Cite journal |
                language=en|
                    year=2019|
                  volume=25|
                   issue=8|
                   pages=2703–2713|
                   title=Many unreported crop pests and pathogens are probably already present|
                   last1=Bebber|
                  first1=Daniel|
                   last2=Field|
                  first2=Elsa|
                   last3=Gui|
                  first3=Heng|
                   last4=Mortimer|
                  first4=Peter|
                   last5=Holmes|
                  first5=Timothy|
                   last6=Gurr|
                  first6=Sarah|
                 journal=[[Global Change Biology]]|
                     doi=10.1111/gcb.14698|
                   s2cid=195355553|
               publisher=[[John Wiley & Sons Ltd.]]|
 pmid=31237022|
 bibcode=2019GCBio..25.2703B|
                    issn=1354-1013|
              department=Primary Research Article|
                      id=DB {{ORCID|0000-0003-4440-1482}}. SG {{ORCID|0000-0002-4821-0635}}|doi-access=free|hdl=10871/128845|hdl-access=free}}
 }}
</ref>

A 'Quilantan' or 'Wave Through' entry is a phenomenon at American border checkpoints authorising a form of non-standard but legal entry without any inspection of travel documents. It occurs when the border security personnel present at a border crossing choose to summarily admit some number of persons without performing a standard interview or document examination.<ref>{{cite court |litigants=Matter of Graciela QUILANTAN, Respondent |reporter=A095 426 631 |court=Board of Immigration Appeals |date=28 July 2010 |url=https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/eoir/legacy/2014/07/25/3688.pdf}}</ref> If an individual can prove that they were waved through immigration in this manner, then they are considered to have entered with inspection despite not having answered any questions or received a passport [[Passport stamp|entry stamp]].<ref>{{cite journal |title=Matter of Quilantan helps immigrant |journal=Lexis/Nexis |date=17 January 2012 |last=Kowalski |first=Daniel M. |url=https://www.lexisnexis.com/legalnewsroom/immigration/b/insidenews/archive/2012/01/17/matter-of-quilantan-helps-immigrant.aspx?Redirected=true |access-date=7 December 2017 |quote=Because she wasn't trying to sneak across and hadn't been questioned by the immigration officer who waved them into Texas, the court found she had been "inspected and admitted" legally.}}</ref> This definition of legal entry only extends to foreigners who entered America at official border crossings and does not provide a path to legal residency for those who did not enter through a recognised crossing.<ref>{{cite web |title=Matter of Quilantan helps immigrant |work=Lexis/Nexis |date=17 January 2012 |last=Kowalski |first=Daniel M. |url=https://www.lexisnexis.com/legalnewsroom/immigration/b/insidenews/archive/2012/01/17/matter-of-quilantan-helps-immigrant.aspx?Redirected=true |access-date=7 December 2017 |quote=The case doesn't apply to millions of undocumented immigrants who crossed rivers, mountains and deserts, evading U.S. immigration officials.}}</ref>

<gallery widths="300px">
File:T3TransitArea.JPG|Sterile lounge at [[Changi Airport]] Terminal 3 in [[Singapore]]. Passengers transiting between international flights at Terminals 1, 2, and 3 of Changi Airport disembark directly into the [[International zone#Sterile zones at ports of entry|sterile lounge]], and may proceed to their connecting gate without clearing the border checkpoint or completing any other border control formality, and can move between terminals using the [[Changi Airport Skytrain|Skytrain]] without clearing any checkpoint.
File:Afghan border crossing at Sher Khan in Kunduz Province-4.jpg|A port of entry at [[Shir Khan Bandar]] in northern [[Afghanistan]] near the [[Tajikistan]] border guarded by American military personnel prior to their [[Withdrawal of United States troops from Afghanistan (2020–2021)|withdrawal from Afghanistan]], following which the [[Taliban]] assumed control over border checkpoints between Afghanistan and its neighbours
File:Hong Kong-Macau Ferry Pier.jpg|The [[Hong Kong–Macau Ferry Terminal]] in [[Sheung Wan]] is a sea port of entry to Hong Kong and an example of an internal border checkpoint where travellers arriving from or departing for other cities in the [[Pearl River Delta]] are subject to border control measures.
File:Ocean Terminal with cruise 2008.jpg|The [[cruise ship]] pier at [[Ocean Terminal, Hong Kong|Ocean Terminal]] is also a sea port of entry to Hong Kong. While the HK-Macau Ferry Terminal is a port of entry for travellers from other Chinese cities in the Pearl River Delta, the Ocean Terminal is a port of entry for visitors arriving on cruise ships from a wider variety of jurisdictions.
</gallery>

====Border zones====
{{See also|International zone#Demilitarised zones}}
Border zones are areas near borders that have special restrictions on movement. Governments may forbid unauthorised entry to or exit from border zones and restrict property ownership in the area. The zones function as [[buffer zone]]s specifically monitored by [[border guard|border patrols]] in order to prevent unauthorised cross-border travel. Border zones enable authorities to detain and prosecute individuals suspected of being or aiding undocumented migrants, smugglers, or spies without necessarily having to prove that the individuals in question actually engaged in the suspected unauthorised activity since, as all unauthorised presence in the area is forbidden, the mere presence of an individual permits authorities to arrest them. Border zones between hostile states can be heavily militarised, with [[minefield]]s, barbed wire, and [[watchtower]]s. Some border zones are designed to prevent illegal immigration or emigration and do not have many restrictions but may operate checkpoints to check immigration status. In most places, a [[border vista]] is usually included and/or required. In some nations, movement inside a border zone without a licence is an offence and will result in arrest. No probable cause is required as mere presence inside the zone is an offence, if it is intentional.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.minilex.fi/a/valtionrajarikos-koskee-suomen-rajaa |title=Valtionrajarikos koskee Suomen rajaa – Minilex |access-date=26 September 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160609210740/http://www.minilex.fi/a/valtionrajarikos-koskee-suomen-rajaa |archive-date=9 June 2016}}</ref> Even with a license to enter, photography, making fires, and carrying of firearms and hunting are prohibited.

Examples of international border zones are the [[Border Security Zone of Russia]] and the Finnish border zone on the [[Finnish–Russian border]]. There are also intra-country zones such as the [[Cactus Curtain]] surrounding the [[Guantanamo Bay Naval Base]] in Cuba, the [[Korean Demilitarized Zone|Korean Demilitarised Zone]] along the [[North Korea]]-[[South Korea]] demarcation line and the [[Frontier Closed Area]] in [[Hong Kong]]. Important historical examples are the [[Wire of Death]] set up by [[the German Empire]] to control the [[Belgium–Netherlands border]] and the [[Iron Curtain]], a set of border zones maintained by the Soviet Union and its satellite states along their borders with Western states. One of the most militarised parts was the [[Inner German border#Restricted zone|restricted zone of the inner German border]]. While initially and officially the zone was for border security, eventually it was engineered to prevent escape from the Soviet sphere into the West. Ultimately, the [[Eastern Bloc]] governments resorted to using lethal countermeasures against those trying to cross the border, such as mined fences and orders to shoot anyone trying to cross into the West. The restrictions on building and habitation made the area a "green corridor", today established as the [[European Green Belt]].

In the area stretching inwards from its [[#Internal border controls|internal border]] with the [[Mainland China|mainland]], Hong Kong maintains a [[Frontier Closed Area]] [[Exclusion zone|out of bounds]] to those without special authorisation. The area was established in the 1950s when Hong Kong was under British administration as a consequence of the [[Convention for the Extension of Hong Kong Territory]] prior to the [[Transfer of sovereignty over Hong Kong]] in 1997. The purposes of the area were to prevent illegal immigration and smuggling; smuggling had become prevalent as a consequence of the [[Korean War]]. Today, under the [[one country, two systems]] policy, the area continues to be used to curtail unauthorized migration to Hong Kong and the smuggling of goods in either direction.

[[File:Panmunjeom DMZ.png|thumb|South Korean policemen standing guard at North Korea-South Korea border; view from South Korea]]
[[File:DMZ seen from the north, 2005.jpg|thumb|North Korean policemen standing guard at North Korea-South Korea border; view from North Korea]]

As a result of the partition of the Korean peninsula by America and the Soviet Union after World War II, and exacerbated by the subsequent [[Korean War]], there is a [[Korean Demilitarized Zone|Demilitarised Zone]] (DMZ) spanning the ''[[de facto]]'' border between [[North Korea|North]] and [[South Korea]]. The DMZ follows the effective boundaries as of the end of the Korean War in 1953. Similarly to the Frontier Closed Area in Hong Kong, this zone and the defence apparatus that exists on both sides of the border serve to curtail unauthorised passage between the two sides. In South Korea, there is an additional fenced-off area between the Civilian Control Line (CCL) and the start of the Demilitarized Zone. The CCL is a line that designates an additional buffer zone to the Demilitarized Zone within a distance of {{ Convert |5 to 20|km|abbr=off}} from the Southern Limit Line of the Demilitarized Zone. Its purpose is to limit and control the entrance of civilians into the area in order to protect and maintain the security of military facilities and operations near the Demilitarized Zone. The commander of the [[Eighth United States Army|8th US Army]] ordered the creation of the CCL and it was activated and first became effective in February 1954.<ref>{{cite web | author=Panmunjom tour | title=DMZ – Terminology | website=tourdmz.com | url=http://tourdmz.com/english/02dmz/p2-1.php | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160305210517/http://tourdmz.com/english/02dmz/p2-1.php | archive-date=2016-03-05 }}</ref> The buffer zone that falls south of the Southern Limit Line is called the Civilian Control Zone. Barbed wire fences and manned military guard posts mark the CCLe. South Korean soldiers typically accompany tourist buses and cars travelling north of the CCL as armed guards to monitor the civilians as well as to protect them from North Korean intruders. Most of the tourist and media photos of the "Demilitarised Zone fence" are actually photos of the CCL fence. The actual Demilitarised Zone fence on the Southern Limit Line is completely off-limits to everybody except soldiers and it is illegal to take pictures of the Demilitarized Zone fence.

Similarly, the whole estuary of the [[Han River (Korea)|Han River]] in the Korean Peninsula is deemed a "Neutral Zone" and is officially off-limits to all civilian vessels. Only [[military vessel]]s are allowed within this neutral zone.{{efn|According to the July 1953 [[Korean Armistice Agreement]] civil [[Freight transport|shipping]] was supposed to be permissible in the Han River estuary and allow Seoul to be connected to the [[Yellow Sea]] (West Sea) via the Han River.<ref>{{cite web|title=FindLaw Legal Blogs |url=http://news.findlaw.com/cnn/docs/korea/kwarmagr072753.html |access-date=2014-04-14 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140305164517/http://news.findlaw.com/cnn/docs/korea/kwarmagr072753.html |archive-date=5 March 2014}} Article 1, Section 5. Retrieved 11 March 2017</ref> However, both Koreas and the UNC failed to make this happen. The South Korean government ordered the construction of the [[Ara Canal]] to finally connect [[Seoul]] to the Yellow Sea, which was completed in 2012. Seoul was effectively landlocked from the ocean until 2012. The biggest limitation of the Ara Canal is it is too narrow to handle any vessels except small tourist boats and recreational boats, so Seoul still cannot receive large commercial ships or passenger ships in its port.}} In recent years, Chinese fishing vessels have taken advantage of the tense situation in the [[Han River (Korea)|Han River]] Estuary Neutral Zone and illegally fished in this area due to both [[Korean People's Navy|North Korean]] and [[Republic of Korea Navy|South Korean]] navies never patrolling this area due to the fear of naval battles breaking out. This has led to [[Naval combat|firefights]] and sinkings of boats between Chinese fishermen and [[South Korean Coast Guard]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.maritime-executive.com/article/south-korea-to-respond-to-illegal-fishing-with-force |title=South Korea to Respond to Illegal Fishing with Force |access-date=2017-03-11 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170312070836/http://www.maritime-executive.com/article/south-korea-to-respond-to-illegal-fishing-with-force |archive-date=12 March 2017 }} Retrieved 11 March 2017</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.fiskerforum.dk/en/news/b/han-river-crackdown |title=Han River crackdown – FiskerForum |access-date=2017-03-11 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170312060747/http://www.fiskerforum.dk/en/news/b/han-river-crackdown |archive-date=12 March 2017 |date=13 June 2016 }} Retrieved 11 March 2017</ref> On January 30, 2019, North Korean and South Korean military officials signed a landmark agreement that would open the Han River Estuary to civilian vessels for the first time since the Armistice Agreement in 1953. The agreement was scheduled to take place in April 2019 but the failure of the [[2019 Hanoi Summit]] indefinitely postponed these plans.<ref>{{cite web | title=S. Korea shares nautical charts of Han River estuary with N. Korea | website=English Edition | date=2019-01-31 | url=http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_national/880735.html | access-date=31 October 2021 | archive-date=12 February 2019 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190212011808/http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_national/880735.html | url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news | author=송상호 | title=Koreas to open Han River estuary to civilian ships in April | website=Yonhap News Agency | date=2019-01-30 | url=https://en.yna.co.kr/view/AEN20190130008700315 | access-date=31 October 2021 | archive-date=12 February 2019 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190212011848/https://en.yna.co.kr/view/AEN20190130008700315 | url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_northkorea/914743.html |title=&#91;Reportage&#93; the DMZ that's not on land |website=english.hani.co.kr |access-date=3 May 2020 |archive-date=2 August 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200802232537/http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_northkorea/914743.html |url-status=live }}</ref>

The [[United Nations Buffer Zone in Cyprus|Green Line]] separating [[Cyprus|Southern Cyprus]] and [[Northern Cyprus]] is a demilitarised border zone operated by the [[United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus]]{{efn|The peacekeeping force currently has its headquarters at the abandoned [[Nicosia International Airport]], where the majority of peacekeepers are based and where talks between the two governments are held.}} operate and patrol within the buffer zone. The buffer zone was established in 1974 due to ethnic tensions between [[Greek Cypriots|Greek]] and [[Turkish Cypriots]]. The green line is similar in nature to the [[Korean Demilitarized Zone|38th parallel]] separating the Republic of Korea and North Korea.

{{anchor|Border vista}}
Some border zones, referred to as '''border vistas''', are composed of legally mandated cleared space between two areas of foliage located at an international border intended to provide a clear demarcation line between two jurisdictions. Border vistas are most commonly found along undefended international boundary lines, where border security is not as much of a necessity and a built barrier is undesired, and are a treaty requirement for certain borders. An example of a border vista is a {{ Convert |6|m|adj=on|abbr=off}} cleared space around unguarded portions of the [[Canada–United States border]].<ref>[[Stacy Schiff|Schiff, Stacy]]. [https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/22/opinion/22schiff.html "Politics Starts at the Border"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180802230533/https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/22/opinion/22schiff.html |date=2 August 2018 }}, ''The New York Times''. 22 July 2007. Accessed 3 August 2018.</ref> Similar clearings along the border line are provided for by many international treaties. For example, the 2006 border management treaty [[China–Russia border|between Russia and China]] provides for a {{ Convert |15|m|adj=on|abbr=off}} cleared strip along the two nations' border.<ref>[http://www.rosgranitsa.ru/ru/node/3140 Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the People's Republic of China on the management of the Russia-China international border] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150709062825/http://www.rosgranitsa.ru/ru/node/3140 |date=9 July 2015 }}, rosgranitsa.ru</ref>

In 2024, Egypt announced that they are building a buffer zone on the Egypt Gaza border.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/16/middleeast/egypt-wall-buffer-zone-gaza-border-intl-hnk/index.html#:~:text=Egypt%20is%20building%20a%20massive,of%20Gaza%27s%20population%20is%20sheltering. | title=Egypt is building a new walled buffer zone more than 2 miles wide on Gaza border, satellite images show | date=16 February 2024 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Egypt clearing land, building wall near Gaza border, satellite imagery shows |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/02/15/israel-hamas-war-news-gaza-palestine/ |newspaper=Washington Post |date=15 February 2024 |language=en}}</ref>

<gallery>
File:Border vista.jpg|[[wikt:vista|Vista]], [[Canada–United States border|Canada–US border]], [[Alaska Highway]], from a [[Rest area|wayside]]
File:Civilian_Control_Line,_Imjingak,_Paju,_South_Korea_(3162648972).jpg|Control Line, [[Imjingak]], South Korea
File:Korea DMZ sentry.jpg|alt=South Korean checkpoint at the Civilian Control Line, outside the DMZ|Civilian Control Line, outside the [[Korean Demilitarised Zone|DMZ]], from South
File:DMZ from North Korea side (14319637755).jpg|[[Korean Demilitarised Zone|Korean DMZ]] from North
File:Lo Wu Restricted Area Sign.JPG|alt=Frontier Closed Area signboard at Lo Wu|[[Lo Wu|Lo Wu (HK-PRC mainland)]]
File:Заграждение, КСП и ДОТ на белорусско-польской границе 01.jpg|[[Brest, Belarus|Brest]]: a [[Security alarm#Security electric fence|security electric fence]], a ploughed [[trace-control]] strip, and [[Pillbox (military)|pillbox]].
File:Finnish border zone sign on a tree.jpg|alt=Border zone marked on a tree on the Finland–Russia border: no entry.|[[Finland–Russia border]], start of the Finnish border zone
File:Russia-Norway-Finland border.jpg|alt=Border vista and the tripoint border mark|Vista at the [[Norway–Russia border]], seen from the Russia-Norway-Finland tripoint
</gallery>

===Immigration law===
{{main|Immigration law}}{{Immigration sidebar}}
Immigration law refers to the national [[statute]]s, [[Primary and secondary legislation|regulations]], and [[Precedent|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, as well as according to the social and [[political climate]] of the times, as acceptance of immigrants sways from the widely inclusive to the deeply [[Nationalism|nationalist]] and [[Isolationism|isolationist]]. Countries frequently maintain laws which regulate both the rights of entry and exit as well as 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|United Nations']] [[International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights]] mandates that all countries allow entry to their own citizens.<ref>art 12(4)</ref>

===Immigration policies===
====Diaspora communities====
[[File:Karta Polaka wzór.jpg|thumb|upright|left|''Karta Polaka'' – specimen document]]

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 [[Non-resident Indian and person of Indian origin|Indian origin]] to live and work indefinitely in India. OCI status was introduced in response to demands for [[Multiple citizenship|dual citizenship]] by the Indian diaspora, particularly in countries with large populations of Indian origin.{{efn|In the [[ASEAN]] region, a large portion of the Singaporean, Malaysian, and Bruneian population hold OCI status. Large OCI communities also exist in North America, the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand, as well as in many African nations (particularly South Africa, Madagascar, and members of the [[East African Community]]). OCI status exempts holders from immigration controls generally imposed upon others of the same nationality.}} It was introduced by ''The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2005'' in August 2005.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://mha.nic.in/uniquepage.asp?Id_Pk=553 |title=Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI) |publisher=Ministry of Home Affairs |website=Government of India website |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090926231018/http://mha.nic.in/uniquepage.asp?Id_Pk=553 |archive-date=26 September 2009 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.moia.gov.in/services.aspx?id1=35&id=m3&idp=35&mainid=23 |website=Diaspora Services |title=Overseas Citizenship of India Scheme |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120504131659/http://moia.gov.in/services.aspx?id1=35&id=m3&idp=35&mainid=23 |archive-date=4 May 2012 |publisher=Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs (MOIA)}}</ref> Similar to OCI status, the [[UK Ancestry visa]] exempts members of the British diaspora{{efn|It is issued by the United Kingdom to [[Commonwealth citizen]]s with a grandparent born in the United Kingdom, [[Channel Islands]] or [[Isle of Man]] who wish to work in the United Kingdom. It is used mainly by Australians, New Zealanders, Canadians, and South Africans of [[British diaspora|British descent]] working or studying in the United Kingdom.<ref name=tele>{{cite news |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/21/nvisa121.xml |title=Britain may abolish ancestry visa |location=London |work=The Daily Telegraph |first=Philip |last=Johnston |date=21 February 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080326202004/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fnews%2F2008%2F02%2F21%2Fnvisa121.xml |archive-date=26 March 2008}}</ref>}} 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 [[Polish diaspora|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.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.theafricareport.com/West-Africa/ghana-a-place-for-african-americans-to-resettle.html |title=Ghana, a place for African Americans to resettle |last=Dovi |first=Efam |date=11 May 2015 |website=The Africa Report |access-date=15 August 2018 |archive-date=30 August 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180830110738/http://www.theafricareport.com/West-Africa/ghana-a-place-for-african-americans-to-resettle.html |url-status=live }}</ref> Similarly, Israel maintains a policy permitting members of the [[Jewish diaspora]] to [[Aliyah|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.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Wolman |first=Andrew |date=18 July 2014 |url=https://openaccess.city.ac.uk/id/eprint/20528/1/KLRI%20nk%20escapee%20prepublication.pdf |title=The South Korean Citizenship of North Korean Escapees in Law and Practice |journal=KLRI Journal of Law and Legislation |volume=4 |issue=2 |pages=7–34 |access-date=11 October 2021 |archive-date=13 August 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210813203315/https://openaccess.city.ac.uk/id/eprint/20528/1/KLRI%20nk%20escapee%20prepublication.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> 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.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.voanews.com/a/north-korean-refugees-seek-freedom-via-thailand-136370353/150081.html |title=North Korean Refugees Seek Freedom Via Thailand|publisher=Voice of America|date=28 December 2011 |access-date=29 June 2012 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141206162309/http://www.voanews.com/content/north-korean-refugees-seek-freedom-via-thailand-136370353/150081.html |archive-date=6 December 2014}} Voice of America</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.pol.cmu.ac.th/proceedings-download.php?proceedings_id=91 |script-title=th:ประเทศไทยกับการจัดการผูPลี้ภัยชาวเกาหลีเหนือ|language=th |access-date=19 January 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131017133451/http://www.pol.cmu.ac.th/proceedings-download.php?proceedings_id=91 |archive-date=17 October 2013}} Chiang Mai University, 2012</ref><ref>{{cite magazine |url=http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2009/02/north-korea/oneill-text/2 |title=North Korea |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111228023037/http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2009/02/north-korea/oneill-text/2 |archive-date=28 December 2011 |magazine=National Geographic |first=Tom |last=O'Neill |date=February 2009 |page=2}}</ref> 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.<ref>Odagawa, Ayana; Seki, Sosuke; Akiyama, Hajime; Azukizawa, Fumie; Kato, Keiko; Nakamura, Anna; Fu, Yue; Honda, Manami (December 2017). [https://www.unhcr.org/jp/wp-content/uploads/sites/34/2018/01/TYPOLOGY-OF-STATELESS-PERSONS-IN-JAPAN_webEnglish.pdf Typology of Stateless Persons in Japan] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220319222517/https://www.unhcr.org/jp/wp-content/uploads/sites/34/2018/01/TYPOLOGY-OF-STATELESS-PERSONS-IN-JAPAN_webEnglish.pdf |date=19 March 2022 }} (PDF) (Report). United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. pp. 1–188.</ref>

====Open borders====
{{Main|Open border}}

[[File:Schengen area as a single entity.svg|thumb| {{legend|#3472EB|Member states of the Schengen area}}
{{legend|#33CC33|Other member states of the European Union}}]]

An open border is the deregulation and or lack of regulation on the movement of persons between nations and jurisdictions, this does not apply to trade or movement between privately owned land areas.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/open-border|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160503193452/http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/open-border|archive-date=3 May 2016|title=open border Definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary|date=3 May 2016|access-date=27 July 2018}}</ref> 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 [[Propiska in the Soviet Union|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]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/borders-and-visas/schengen_en|title=Schengen Area – Migration and Home Affairs – European Commission|last=Anonymous|date=6 December 2016|website=Migration and Home Affairs – European Commission|access-date=27 July 2018|archive-date=12 August 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210812074419/https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/borders-and-visas/schengen_en|url-status=live}}</ref> 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 [[Industrialisation|industrialised]] nations.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20140801080227/http://www.populationenvironmentresearch.org/papers/Colemanmigration.pdf "International Union for the Scientific Study of Population : XXIV General Population Conference, Salvador da Bahia, Brazil : Plenary Debate no 4"](PDF). ''Web.archive.org''. 24 August 2001. Archived from the original on 1 August 2014. Retrieved 26 July 2018.
</ref>

Open borders are the norm for borders between subdivisions within the boundaries of [[sovereign state]]s, though some countries do maintain [[#Internal border controls|internal border controls]] (for example between the [[People's Republic of China]] mainland and the [[Special administrative regions of China|special administrative regions]] of [[Hong Kong]] and [[Macau]]; or between the American mainland, the unincorporated territories{{efn|The [[United States Virgin Islands|Virgin Islands]] follows the visa policy applicable in the mainland but is a customs-free area meaning that there are customs checks for passengers travelling from the islands to the mainland or Puerto Rico. [[Guam]] and the [[Northern Marianas]] maintain their own customs and [[Visa policy of the United States#Visa waiver programs of Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands|visa waiver policies]], meaning that flights between Guam and Honolulu, the only air link to an American state, require immigration checks which are conducted prior to departure. [[American Samoa]] maintains a distinct visa and customs policy meaning that flights to Honolulu are treated as international arrivals. Access to the [[United States Minor Outlying Islands]] is governed by a variety of permits issued by the [[Office of Insular Affairs]] or the [[United States Fish and Wildlife Service]] depending on the territory}} other than Puerto Rico, and Hawaii.{{efn|While Hawaii is subject to the same visa and customs controls as the mainland and Puerto Rico, controls are imposed on passengers travelling to and from the state for the purpose of agricultural policy<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.aphis.usda.gov/traveling-with-ag-products/hawaii|title=Information for Travelers Coming to the U.S. Mainland from Hawaii|last=[[United States Department of Agriculture|USDA]]|first=Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service|date=2 June 2020|access-date=4 November 2021|archive-date=4 November 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211104123015/https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/resources/traveler/hawaii/hawaiian_products|url-status=live}}</ref>)}} Open borders are also usual between member states of [[federation]]s, though (very rarely) movement between member states may be controlled in exceptional circumstances.{{efn|For example, inter-state travel in Australia was restricted in 2020 due to the [[COVID-19]] epidemic, for the first time since the [[1918 flu pandemic]].}} Federations, confederations and similar multi-national unions typically maintain external border controls through a collective border control system, though they sometimes have open borders with other non-member states through special international agreements{{snd}} such as between Schengen Agreement countries as mentioned above.

Presently, open border agreements of various types are in force in several areas around the world, as outlined below:
* ''Asia and Oceania'':
** Under the [[1950 Indo-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship]], India and Nepal maintain a similar arrangement to the CTA and the Union State. Indians and Nepalis are not subject to any migration controls in each other's countries and there are few controls on land travel by citizens across the border.
** India and Bhutan also have a similar programme in place The border between Jaigaon, in the Indian state of [[West Bengal]], and the city of Phuentsholing is essentially open, and although there are internal checkpoints, Indians (as outlined under the [[Visa policy of Bhutan]] are allowed to proceed throughout Bhutan with a [[voter ID (India)|voter's ID]] or an identity slip from the Indian consulate in Phuentsholing. Similarly, Bhutanese passport holders enjoy free movement in India.
** Thailand and Cambodia: Whilst not as liberal as the policies concerning the Indo-Nepalese and Indo-Bhutanese borders, Thailand and Cambodia have begun issuing combined visas to certain categories of tourists applying at specific Thai or Cambodian embassies and consulates in order to enable freer border crossings between the two countries.<ref name="nationmultimedia">{{cite news|url=http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Single-entry-visa-for-Thailand-Cambodia-30196863.html|website=nationmultimedia.com|title=national/Single-entry-visa-for-Thailand-Cambodia-30196863|access-date=1 February 2021|archive-date=22 June 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190622221539/http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Single-entry-visa-for-Thailand-Cambodia-30196863.html}}</ref> The policy is currently in force for nationals of America and several European (primarily EU, EEA, and GCC) and Oceanian countries as well as for Indian and Chinese nationals residing in Singapore.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.thaiembassy.sg/announcements/acmecs-single-visa-application-now-opens-for-citizen-of-35-countries-wishing-to-enter-0 |title=ACMECS Single Visa application now opens for citizen of 35 countries wishing to enter Thailand and Cambodia for tourism purposes &#124; Royal Thai Embassy |access-date=7 September 2018 |archive-date=8 September 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180908015653/https://www.thaiembassy.sg/announcements/acmecs-single-visa-application-now-opens-for-citizen-of-35-countries-wishing-to-enter-0 |url-status=live }}</ref>
** Australia and New Zealand: Similar to the agreement between India and Nepal, [[Trans-Tasman Travel Arrangement]] between Australia and New Zealand is a free movement agreement citizens of each country to travel freely between them and allowing citizens and some permanent residents to reside, visit, work, study in the other country for an indefinite period, with some restrictions.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Subclass 444 Special Category visa (SCV) |website=immi.homeaffairs.gov.au |url=https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/visas/getting-a-visa/visa-listing/special-category-visa-subclass-444 |access-date=16 May 2021 |archive-date=27 May 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230527110702/https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/visas/getting-a-visa/visa-listing/special-category-visa-subclass-444 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Information about: Australian Resident Visa |website=Immigration New Zealand |url=https://www.immigration.govt.nz/new-zealand-visas/apply-for-a-visa/about-visa/australian-resident-visa |access-date=16 May 2021 |archive-date=16 May 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210516072525/https://www.immigration.govt.nz/new-zealand-visas/apply-for-a-visa/about-visa/australian-resident-visa |url-status=live }}</ref> The arrangement came into effect in 1973, and allows citizens of each country to reside and work in the other country, with some restrictions. Other details of the arrangement have varied over time. From 1 July 1981, all people entering Australia (including New Zealand citizens) have been required to carry a passport. Since 1 September 1994 Australia, has had a universal visa requirement, and to specifically cater for the continued free movement of New Zealanders to Australia, the [[Special Category Visa]] was introduced for New Zealanders.
* ''Central America'' :The [[Central America-4 Border Control Agreement]] abolishes border controls for land travel between El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Guatemala. However, this does not apply to air travel.
* ''Europe and the Middle East''
** Union State of Russia and Belarus The [[Union State of Russia and Belarus]] is a supranational union of Russia and Belarus, which eliminates all border controls between the two nations. Before a visa agreement was signed in 2020, each country maintained its own visa policies, thus resulting in non-citizens of the two countries generally being barred from travelling directly between the two. However, since the visa agreement was signed, each side recognises the other's visas, which means that third-country citizens can enter both countries with a visa from either country.<ref>{{cite news |title=Lukashenko Signs Law To Ratify Agreement With Russia On Mutual Visa Recognition |date=11 December 2020 |website=BelarusFeed |url=https://belarusfeed.com/ratification-agreement-belarus-russia-mutual-visa/ |access-date=16 May 2021 |archive-date=16 May 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210516072527/https://belarusfeed.com/ratification-agreement-belarus-russia-mutual-visa/ }}</ref>
** Western Europe: The two most significant free travel areas in Western Europe are the [[Schengen Area]], in which very little if any border control is generally visible, and the [[Common Travel Area]] (CTA), which partially eliminates such controls for nationals of the United Kingdom and Ireland. Between countries in the Schengen Area, and to an extent within the CTA on the British Isles, internal border control is often virtually unnoticeable, and often only performed by means of random car or train searches in the [[hinterland]], while controls at borders with non-member states may be rather strict.
** Gulf Cooperation Council: Members of the [[Gulf Cooperation Council]], or GCC, allow each other's citizens freedom of movement in an arrangement similar to the CTA and to that between India and Nepal. Between 5 June 2017 and 5 January 2021, freedom of movement in Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Bahrain was suspended for Qataris as a result of the [[Qatar diplomatic crisis|Saudi-led blockade]] of the country.

<gallery>
File:Visa policy of Bhutan.svg|Visa policy of Bhutan, showing the free movement arrangement between India and Bhutan
File:Visa policy of Nepal.svg|Visa policy of Nepal, showing free movement between India and Nepal under the 1950 treaty
File:Grenzuebergang D-NL Elmpt-Grenze.JL.jpg|Open [[Schengen Area]] border crossing between Germany and the Netherlands
File:Panoramio - V&A Dudush - Avenue Princesse Grace (1).jpg|Open Schengen Area border crossing at the [[France-Monaco border]] (was open long before Schengen started)
File:Впереди Княжество Лихтенштейн - panoramio.jpg|Open Schengen Area border crossing at the Swiss-Liechtenstein border (was open long before Schengen started)
File:Border between Slovenia and Italy - panoramio.jpg|Open Schengen Area border crossing at the [[Slovenian-Italian border]], with abandoned rain shelter
File:SchengenGrenzeBayern-Tirol.jpg|alt=Two road-signs on the side of an open stretch of a two-lane highway. A Schengen internal border crossing marked only by a blue sign indicating the country being entered. The smaller white sign announces entry into the state of Bavaria.|A Schengen internal border crossing marked only by a blue sign indicating the country being entered. The smaller white sign announces entry into the state of [[Bavaria]].
File:New Zealand Resident Visa Stamp on Australian Travel Document.jpg|New Zealand visa stamp issued under [[Trans-Tasman Travel Arrangement]] on an Australian travel document
File:The Border on Killeen School Road - geograph.org.uk - 446719.jpg|Irish border at [[Killean, County Armagh|Killeen]] (within CTA) marked only by a metric speed sign, as the Republic of Ireland uses the [[metric system]] whilst British road signs use [[imperial unit]]s
</gallery>

====Hostile environment policies====
{{further|Home Office hostile environment policy|National Register of Citizens| National Register of Citizens for Assam|Immigration reduction in the United States}}

Certain jurisdictions gear their immigration policies toward creating a hostile environment for undocumented migrants in order to deter migration by creating an unwelcoming atmosphere for potential and existing immigrants. Notably, the British [[Home Office]] adopted a set of administrative and legislative measures designed to make staying in the [[United Kingdom]] as difficult as possible for people without [[Indefinite leave to remain|leave to remain]], in the hope that they may "[[Self-deportation|voluntarily leave]]".<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/nov/28/hostile-environment-the-hardline-home-office-policy-tearing-families-apart|title='Hostile environment': the hardline Home Office policy tearing families apart|last=Hill|first=Amelia|date=2017-11-28|newspaper=[[The Guardian]]|access-date=2018-04-16|archive-date=23 April 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220423191330/https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/nov/28/hostile-environment-the-hardline-home-office-policy-tearing-families-apart|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.newstatesman.com/2017/12/how-theresa-may-s-hostile-environment-created-underworld|title=How Theresa May's "hostile environment" created an underworld|website=Newstatesman.com|date=19 December 2017|access-date=2018-04-16|archive-date=25 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210725231343/https://www.newstatesman.com/2017/12/how-theresa-may-s-hostile-environment-created-underworld|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/inspection-report-of-hostile-environment-measures-october-2016|title=Inspection report of hostile environment measures, October 2016|access-date=2018-04-16|archive-date=23 April 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220423235909/http://www.gov.uk/government/publications/inspection-report-of-hostile-environment-measures-october-2016|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/15/a-home-office-humanity-test|title=A Home Office humanity test|date=2018-04-15|newspaper=[[The Guardian]]|access-date=2018-04-16|archive-date=7 November 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211107172826/https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/15/a-home-office-humanity-test|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite AV media|publisher=Channel 4 News|title=Highly-skilled migrants told to leave UK under 'hostile environment' policy|date=2018-05-20|type=News|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83RfJiuuN2I|access-date=2018-05-20|via=[[YouTube]]|archive-date=6 November 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211106051026/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83RfJiuuN2I|url-status=live}}</ref> The [[Home Office]] policy was first announced in 2012 under the [[Cameron–Clegg coalition|Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition]].<ref>{{cite news |last1=Kirkup |first1=James |title=Theresa May interview: 'We're going to give illegal migrants a really hostile reception' |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/9291483/Theresa-May-interview-Were-going-to-give-illegal-migrants-a-really-hostile-reception.html |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220112/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/9291483/Theresa-May-interview-Were-going-to-give-illegal-migrants-a-really-hostile-reception.html |archive-date=12 January 2022 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live |access-date=17 January 2019 |work=The Telegraph |date=25 May 2012}}{{cbignore}}</ref> The policy was implemented pursuant to the 2010 [[Conservative Party (UK)|Conservative Party]] Election Manifesto.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/nov/28/hostile-environment-the-hardline-home-office-policy-tearing-families-apart|title='Hostile environment': the hardline Home Office policy tearing families apart|last=Hill|first=Amelia|date=2017-11-28|newspaper=[[The Guardian]]|access-date=2018-04-16|archive-date=23 April 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220423191330/https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/nov/28/hostile-environment-the-hardline-home-office-policy-tearing-families-apart|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/15/observer-view-uk-immigration-policy|title=The Observer view on the UK's increasingly harsh immigration policy|date=2018-04-15|newspaper=[[The Guardian]]|access-date=2018-04-16|archive-date=7 November 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211107231110/https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/15/observer-view-uk-immigration-policy|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-politics-43831563/windrush-what-is-the-hostile-environment-immigration-policy|title=What is the 'hostile environment' policy?|work=BBC News|access-date=2018-04-19|archive-date=1 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200701101559/https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-politics-43831563/windrush-what-is-the-hostile-environment-immigration-policy|url-status=live}}</ref> The policy has been criticized for being unclear, has led to many incorrect threats of deportation and has been called "Byzantine" by the [[Court of Appeal (England and Wales)|England and Wales Court of Appeal]] for its complexity.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/government-s-hostile-environment-policy-too-open-to-error-and-risks-undermining-credibility-of-a8158656.html|title=Britain's immigration system 'too open to error', MPs warn|date=2018-01-14|work=The Independent|access-date=2018-04-16|archive-date=11 December 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181211014858/https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/government-s-hostile-environment-policy-too-open-to-error-and-risks-undermining-credibility-of-a8158656.html|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/home-office-immigration-checks-bank-accounts-mps-campaign-groups-urge-stop-caroline-lucas-david-a8118251.html|title=Home Office urged to stop 'inhumane' immigration checks on bank accounts|date=2017-12-19|work=The Independent|access-date=2018-04-16|archive-date=14 August 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190814060614/https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/home-office-immigration-checks-bank-accounts-mps-campaign-groups-urge-stop-caroline-lucas-david-a8118251.html|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=The phrase 'Hostile Environment' is used a lot. But what does it mean exactly?|url=https://www.the3million.org.uk/hostile-environment|access-date=2018-04-16|website=The3million.org.uk|archive-date=6 November 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211106051023/https://www.the3million.org.uk/hostile-environment|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/04/disabled-briton-held-immigration-removal-centre-four-months|title=Disabled Briton held in immigration removal centre for four months|last=Taylor|first=Diane|date=2018-04-04|newspaper=[[The Guardian]]|access-date=2018-04-16|archive-date=6 November 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211106051023/https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/04/disabled-briton-held-immigration-removal-centre-four-months|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|title=The Home Office must drop 'hostile environment' approach for Brexit|date=2018-04-13|work=The Institute for Government|url=https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/home-office-must-drop-hostile-environment-approach-brexit|access-date=2018-04-16|archive-date=6 November 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211106051023/https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/home-office-must-drop-hostile-environment-approach-brexit|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2017/11/22/the-fightback-against-may-s-hostile-environment-has-begun|title=The fightback against May's hostile environment has begun|work=politics.co.uk|access-date=2018-04-16|archive-date=10 July 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190710154348/https://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2017/11/22/the-fightback-against-may-s-hostile-environment-has-begun}}</ref><ref>Colin Yeo, '[https://www.freemovement.org.uk/how-complex-are-the-uk-immigration-rules-and-is-this-a-problem/ How complex is UK immigration law and is this a problem?] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211106051025/https://www.freemovement.org.uk/how-complex-are-the-uk-immigration-rules-and-is-this-a-problem/ |date=6 November 2021 }}' (24/01/18) on Free Movement</ref>

Similarly, [[Immigration reduction in the United States|anti-immigration movements]] in America have advocated for policies aimed at creating a hostile environment for intended and existing immigrants at various points in history. Historical examples include the [[Nativism (politics)|nativist]] [[Know Nothing]] movement of the mid-19th century, which advocated hostile policies against [[Catholic Church|Catholic]] immigrants; the [[Workingman's Party]], which promoted xenophobic attitudes toward Asians in [[California]] during the late-19th century, a sentiment that ultimately led to the [[Chinese Exclusion Act]] of 1882; the [[Immigration Restriction League]], which advocated xenophobic policies against southern and eastern Europe during the late-19th and early 20th centuries, and the joint congressional [[Dillingham Commission]]. After [[World War I]], these cumulatively resulted in the highly restrictive [[Emergency Quota Act]] of 1921 and the [[Immigration Act of 1924]]. Over the first two decades of the 21st century, the [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican Party]] adopted an increasingly nativist platform, advocating against [[Sanctuary city|sanctuary cities]] and in favour of building a [[Mexico–United States barrier|wall with Mexico]] and reducing the number of immigrants permitted to settle in the country. Ultimately, the Trump administration furthered many of these policy goals, including the adoption of harsh policies such as the [[Remain in Mexico]] and [[Trump administration family separation policy|family separation]] policies vis à vis refugees and migrants arriving from Central America via Mexico. [[Islamophobia|Islamophobic]] policies such as the [[Trump travel ban|travel ban]] targeted primarily at Muslim-majority countries also feature prominently in attempts to create a hostile environment for immigrants perceived by [[Right wing populism|populists]] as not belonging to the predominant [[White Anglo-Saxon Protestants|WASP]] culture in the United States.

India's [[National Register of Citizens|citizenship registration policy]] serves to create a hostile environment for the country's Muslim community in the regions in which it has been implemented.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/protests-continue-tamil-nadu-against-caa-nrc-1630224-2019-12-20|title=Protests continue in Tamil Nadu against CAA, NRC|first1=Akshaya|last1=Nath|date=20 December 2019|website=India Today|access-date=22 December 2019|archive-date=9 January 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200109235639/https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/protests-continue-tamil-nadu-against-caa-nrc-1630224-2019-12-20|url-status=live}}</ref> The Indian government is presently in the process of building several detention camps throughout India in order to detain people not listed on the register.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/938-persons-detained-in-6-detention-centres-in-assam-823-declared-as-foreigners-centre-tells-supreme-court/articleshow/68062067.cms|title=938 persons detained in 6 detention centres in Assam, 823 declared as foreigners: Centre to SC|date=2019-02-19|work=The Economic Times|access-date=2019-09-14|archive-date=6 November 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211106051023/https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/938-persons-detained-in-6-detention-centres-in-assam-823-declared-as-foreigners-centre-tells-supreme-court/articleshow/68062067.cms|url-status=live}}</ref> On January 9, 2019, the Union government released a '2019 Model Detention Manual', which said that every city or district, having a major immigration check post, must have a detention centre.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Ganapatye |first1=Shruti |title=Coming up in Nerul: 1st detention centre for illegal immigrants |url=https://mumbaimirror.indiatimes.com/mumbai/cover-story/coming-up-in-nerul-1st-detention-centre-for-illegal-immigrants/articleshow/71018439.cms |access-date=22 December 2019 |work=Mumbai Mirror |date=7 September 2019 |archive-date=22 December 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191222151746/https://mumbaimirror.indiatimes.com/mumbai/cover-story/coming-up-in-nerul-1st-detention-centre-for-illegal-immigrants/articleshow/71018439.cms |url-status=live }}</ref> The guidelines suggest detention centres with {{convert|3|m|ftin|abbr=off}} high boundary walls covered with barbed wires.<ref>{{cite news |title=As they build India's first camp for illegals, some workers fear detention there |url=https://in.reuters.com/article/india-politics-citizenship-camp/as-they-build-indias-first-camp-for-illegals-some-workers-fear-detention-there-idINKCN1VT01I |first1=Zeba |last1=Siddiqui |access-date=22 December 2019 |work=Reuters |date=8 September 2019 |archive-date=14 December 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191214135306/https://in.reuters.com/article/india-politics-citizenship-camp/as-they-build-indias-first-camp-for-illegals-some-workers-fear-detention-there-idINKCN1VT01I }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Singh |first1=Vijaita |title=Explained What is the directive on detention centres? |url=https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/what-is-the-directive-on-detention-centres/article30421358.ece |access-date=30 December 2019 |work=The Hindu |date=29 December 2019 |archive-date=29 December 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191229162249/https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/what-is-the-directive-on-detention-centres/article30421358.ece |url-status=live }}</ref>

===International zones===
{{Main|International zone}}
An international zone is any area [[extraterritoriality|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.

==Internal border controls==
{{main|Internal border control}}
{{further|Travel document#Internal travel documents}}
{{Very long section|date=April 2022}}
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.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.interstatequarantine.org.au/state-and-territory-border-closures/|title=State and territory border closures – Australian Interstate Quarantine|access-date=24 October 2021|archive-date=24 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211024201221/https://www.interstatequarantine.org.au/state-and-territory-border-closures/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.wa.gov.au/organisation/covid-communications/covid-19-coronavirus-controlled-border|title=COVID-19 coronavirus: Travel to WA|access-date=24 October 2021|archive-date=24 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211024201220/https://www.wa.gov.au/organisation/covid-communications/covid-19-coronavirus-controlled-border|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |first=Frances |last=Mao |website=BBC News |place=Sydney |date=3 September 2021 |title=Why has Australia switched tack on Covid zero? |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-58406526 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210906112658/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-58406526 |archive-date=2021-09-06}}</ref> Internal border controls were also introduced at various stages of Malaysia's [[Malaysian movement control order|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.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.dw.com/en/coronavirus-eu-rules-out-schengen-border-closures-amid-italy-outbreak/a-52497811 |title=Coronavirus: EU rules out Schengen border closures amid Italy outbreak |date=24 February 2020 |publisher=Deutsche Welle |access-date=24 October 2021 |archive-date=13 March 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200313142436/https://www.dw.com/en/coronavirus-eu-rules-out-schengen-border-closures-amid-italy-outbreak/a-52497811 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Commission chief warns against unilateral virus travel bans |url=https://www.euractiv.com/section/justice-home-affairs/news/commission-chief-warns-against-unilateral-virus-travel-bans/ |work=[[EURACTIV]] |date=13 March 2020 |access-date=24 October 2021 |archive-date=18 March 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200318195056/https://www.euractiv.com/section/justice-home-affairs/news/commission-chief-warns-against-unilateral-virus-travel-bans/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

===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.{{efn| In India, special permits are required to travel across much of the country's north-east and requirements may vary within a given state. Special provisions are occasionally made for individuals from [[Bhutan]] or [[Nepal]] proceeding to or from their home country. Additionally, individuals arriving in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands from elsewhere in India receive passport stamps (see gallery at end of the section), even though only foreigners are typically subject to permit requirements.

Permits issued for minority regions in India include:
* [[Foreigners (Protected Areas) Order 1958 (India)|Restricted Area Permits and Protected Area Permits]] for foreigners in portions of north-eastern India and the [[Andaman and Nicobar Islands]]
* [[Inner Line Permit]]s for Indian citizens

In the [[Tibet Autonomous Region]] ([[Classical Tibetan|Tibetan]]: བོད་རང་སྐྱོང་ལྗོངས།; {{lang-zh|s=西藏自治区}}), [[Visa policy of China#Tibet Autonomous Region|two categories]] of permits are issued:
* The Tibet Travel Permits ({{lang-zh|s=外国人入藏函}} ''foreigners' entrance letter'') required for all foreigners (as well as Taiwanese nationals from the [[Republic of China]]) to enter the region
* The Alien Travel Permit required for holders of the Tibet Travel Permit to travel outside major urban and tourist areas of the region
* The Military Permit (or Border Permit)<ref name= "AITtpp"/> is required for travel to [[Ngari Prefecture|Ngari]] ([[Classical Tibetan|Tibetan]]: མངའ་རིས་ས་ཁུལ་; {{lang-zh|s=阿里}}), [[Nyingchi]] ([[Classical Tibetan|Tibetan]]: ཉིང་ཁྲི་ས།; {{lang-zh|s=林芝}}), and [[Nagqu]] ([[Classical Tibetan|Tibetan]]: ནག་ཆུ།; {{lang-zh|s=那曲}})

Additionally, special permits are issued to nationals of India and Bhutan for religious pilgrimages to Hindu and Buddhist holy sites in the Tibet Autonomous Region.<ref name= "AITtpp">{{Cite web|url=https://www.adventuresintibet.com/travel-permit-pilgrims/|title=Apply Tibet Travel Permit for Indians & Bhutanese - Adventures in Tibet|access-date=28 October 2021|archive-date=28 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211028035124/https://www.adventuresintibet.com/travel-permit-pilgrims/|url-status=live}}</ref>}} 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 the interior border checkpoint. For such travel within India, Indian citizens may utilise their [[Voter ID (India)|Voter ID]], [[Aadhaar|National Identity Card]], passport, or other proof of Indian citizenship whilst Nepali nationals may present any similar proof of Napali citizenship. Meanwhile, for such travel within mainland China, Chinese nationals from the mainland are required to use their national identity cards.

====China====
Within China, extensive border controls are maintained for those travelling between the [[Mainland China|mainland]], [[Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China|special administrative regions]] of [[Hong Kong]] and [[Macau]]. Foreign nationals need to present their passports or other required types of travel documents when travelling between these jurisdictions. For Chinese nationals (including those with [[British National (Overseas)]] status), there are special [[travel document|documents]]{{efn|For example, [[Hong Kong Permanent Identity Card]] or [[Macau Identity Card]] and [[Home Return Permit]] ({{lang-zh|s=回乡证|t=回鄉證|p=Huíxiāngzhèng}}) are required for Hong Kong or Macau Permanent Residents who are Chinese citizens to cross the border, whilst mainlanders require a [[Exit-Entry Permit for Travelling to and from Hong Kong and Macau|Two-Way Permit]] ({{lang-zh|s=双程证}}).}} for travel between these territories. Internal border controls in China have also resulted in the creation of special permits allowing Chinese citizens to immigrate to or reside in other immigration areas within the country.{{efn|The following documents are currently issued for this purpose:
* For mainlanders emigrating to either of the two Special Administrative Regions, authorities in the mainland issue the [[People's Republic of China Permit for Proceeding to Hong Kong and Macao|One Way Travel Permit]] ({{lang-zh|c=单程证|p=Dānchéngzhèng}}). As the policy is designed to curtail [[emigration]] from the mainland rather than immigration to either SAR, issuance is exclusively the responsibility of authorities on the mainland.
* Since September 2018, authorities in the mainland have issued the [[Residence Permit for Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan Residents]] ({{lang-zh|s=港澳台居民居住证|p=Gǎng-Aò-Tái Jūmín Jūzhùzhèng}}) authorising Chinese citizens from Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwanese nationals to reside in the mainland. The permit is designed to resemble the national identity card issued to individuals with [[hukou|household registration]] on the mainland and enables holders to access public and private sector services that require a national identity card number.}}

China also maintains distinct, relaxed border control policies in the [[Special Economic Zone]]s of [[Shenzhen]], [[Zhuhai]] and [[Xiamen]].<ref name="voa">{{cite web |url=http://crj.gdga.gov.cn/zjzs/201102/t20110216_1462.htm |script-title=zh:广东省公安厅出入境政务服务网 |access-date=16 October 2021 |archive-date=2 November 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191102000121/http://crj.gdga.gov.cn/zjzs/201102/t20110216_1462.htm }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gov.cn/banshi/2005-05/31/content_2396.htm |script-title=zh:签证 |access-date=16 October 2021 |archive-date=16 October 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211016201605/http://www.gov.cn/banshi/2005-05/31/content_2396.htm |url-status=live }}</ref> Nationals of most countries{{efn|Nationals of the following countries are ineligible for the SEZ visa:<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.travelchinaguide.com/cityguides/guangdong/shenzhen/visa-on-arrival.htm|title=Shenzhen 5-Day Visa on Arrival|access-date=16 October 2021|archive-date=16 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211016201605/https://www.travelchinaguide.com/cityguides/guangdong/shenzhen/visa-on-arrival.htm|url-status=live}}</ref>
{{div col|colwidth=12em}}
* {{flag|Afghanistan}}
* {{flag|Algeria}}
* {{flag|Bahrain}}
* {{flag|Cameroon}}
* {{flag|Egypt}}
* {{flag|Iran}}
* {{flag|Iraq}}
* {{flag|Jordan}}
* {{flag|Kuwait}}
* {{flag|Lebanon}}
* {{flag|Liberia}}
* {{flag|Libya}}
* {{flag|Morocco}}
* {{flag|Oman}}
* {{flag|Pakistan}}
* {{flag|Palestine}}
* {{flag|Saudi Arabia}}
* {{flag|Somalia}}
* {{flag|Sri Lanka}}
* {{flag|Sudan}}
* {{flag|Syria}}
* {{flag|Turkey}}
* {{flag|Uganda}}
* {{flag|Yemen}}
{{div col end}}
}} can obtain a limited area visa upon arrival in these regions, which permit them to stay within these cities without proceeding further into other parts of mainland China. Visas for Shenzhen are valid for 5 days, and visas for Xiamen and Zhuhai are valid for 3 days. The duration of stay starts from the next day of arrival.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gdcrj.com/bszn/wgrcrj/200211/t20021118_1712.htm |script-title=zh:广东省公安厅出入境政务服务网 |access-date=16 October 2021 |archive-date=16 November 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161116101540/http://www.gdcrj.com/bszn/wgrcrj/200211/t20021118_1712.htm }}</ref> The visa can only be obtained only upon arrival at [[Luohu|Luohu Port]], [[Huanggang Port Control Point]], [[Fuyong Ferry Terminal]] or [[Shekou Passenger Terminal]] for Shenzhen;<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.sz.gov.cn/cn/bmtx/200609/t20060915_104724.htm |script-title=zh:深圳口岸（落地）签证须知 |publisher=Shenzhen People's Government |date=15 September 2006 |access-date=16 October 2021 |archive-date=19 August 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160819081113/http://www.sz.gov.cn/cn/bmtx/200609/t20060915_104724.htm }}</ref> [[Gongbei Port of Entry]], [[Hengqin]] Port or [[Jiuzhou Port]] for Zhuhai;<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gdga.gov.cn/jwzx/bmts/201512/t20151221_754350.html |script-title=zh:珠海横琴出入境办事处启动办理外国人口岸签证-广东省公安厅平安南粤网 |access-date=16 October 2021 |archive-date=21 November 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181121204222/http://www.gdga.gov.cn/jwzx/bmts/201512/t20151221_754350.html }}</ref> and [[Xiamen Gaoqi International Airport]] for Xiamen.<ref>{{cite web | url =http://gohongkong.about.com/od/traveltochina/a/Shenzen_visa_main.htm | publisher =About.com | title =Shenzhen Visa | access-date =16 October 2021 | archive-date =25 December 2016 | archive-url =https://web.archive.org/web/20161225041351/http://gohongkong.about.com/od/traveltochina/a/Shenzen_visa_main.htm }}</ref>

Similarly, China permits nationals of non—visa-exempt [[ASEAN]] countries{{efn|Non-visa-exempt ASEAN countries are:
{{div col|colwidth=12em}}
* {{flag|Cambodia}}
* {{flag|Indonesia}}
* {{flag|Laos}}
* {{flag|Malaysia}}
* {{flag|Myanmar}}
* {{flag|Philippines}}
* {{flag|Thailand}}
* {{flag|Vietnam}}
{{div col end}}
}} 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.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.xinhuanet.com/local/2015-05/27/c_127845804.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150929171526/http://news.xinhuanet.com/local/2015-05/27/c_127845804.htm |archive-date=29 September 2015 |script-title=zh:桂林：东盟10国旅游团可享6天入境免签-新华网}}</ref>

Neither the People's Republic of China nor the Republic of China recognizes the passports issued by the other and neither considers travel between mainland China and [[Free area of the Republic of China|areas controlled by the Republic of China]]{{efn|name=ROC|The area under the definition consists of:
* [[Geography of Taiwan|Taiwan]] ({{lang-zh|t=台灣}})
* [[Penghu]] ({{lang-zh|t=澎湖}})
* [[Kinmen]] ({{lang-zh|t=金門|p=Jīnmén}})
* [[Matsu Islands]] ({{lang-zh|t=馬祖列島|p=Mǎzǔ Lièdǎo}})
* [[List of islands of Taiwan|Other nearby islands]]}}
as formal international travel. There are arrangements exist for travel between territories controlled by the [[Republic of China]] and territories controlled by the [[People's Republic of China]].{{efn|Documents required for travel between the PRC and ROC are:
* The [[Mainland Travel Permit for Taiwan Residents]] ({{lang-zh|s=台胞证|t=臺胞證|p=Táibāozhèng}}) issued by the PRC for entry to the mainland, which is also valid but not mandatory for entry to Hong Kong and Macau
* The [[Exit & Entry Permit for Taiwan|Taiwan Entry Permit]] ({{lang-zh|s=入臺證|t=入臺證|p=Rùtáizhèngg}}) issued to mainlanders by the ROC
* The [[Exit & Entry Permit for Taiwan|Kinmen-Matsu Permit]] ({{lang-zh|first=t|t=金馬證|s=金马证|p=JīnMǎ zhèng|poj=Kim-Má-chèng}}) issued to residents of [[Kinmen]] and [[Matsu Islands|Matsu]] (ROC-administered territories in [[Fujian Province, Republic of China|Fujian]] as well as [[Penghu]] for travel to and from the mainland.}}

More generally, authorities in [[mainland China]] maintain a system of residency registration known as ''[[Hukou system|hukou]]'' ({{lang-zh|c=户口|l=household individual}}), by which government permission is needed to formally change one's place of residence. It is enforced with [[resident Identity Card|identity card]]s. This system of internal border control measures effectively limited internal migration before the 1980s but subsequent market reforms caused it to collapse as a means of migration control. An estimated 150 to 200 million people are part of the "blind flow" and have unofficially migrated, generally from poor, rural areas to wealthy, urban ones. However, unofficial residents are often denied official services such as education and medical care and are sometimes subject to both social and political [[discrimination]]. In essence, the denial of social services outside an individual's registered area of residence functions as an internal border control measure geared toward dissuading migration within the mainland.

====Bhutan====
Meanwhile, in Bhutan, accessible by road only through India, there are interior border checkpoints (primarily on the [[Lateral Road]]) and, additionally, certain areas require [[Visa policy of Bhutan#Restricted areas permit|special permits]] to enter, whilst visitors not proceeding beyond the border city of [[Phuentsholing]] do not need permits to enter for the day (although such visitors are [[de facto]] subject to Indian visa policy since they must proceed through [[Jaigaon]]). Individuals who are not citizens of India, Bangladesh, or the Maldives must obtain both their visa and any regional permits required through a licensed tour operator prior to arriving in the country. Citizens of India, Bangladesh, and the Maldives may apply for regional permits for restricted areas online.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.bhutan.travel/page/visaentry-permit|title=Visa/Entry Permit|access-date=6 November 2021|archive-date=17 March 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220317005617/https://www.bhutan.travel/page/visaentry-permit}}</ref>

====Malaysia====
Another example is the [[Malaysia]]n states of [[Sabah]] and [[Sarawak]], which have maintained their own border controls<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.lonelyplanet.com/borneo/visas |title=Visas and customs in Borneo |access-date=31 July 2018 |archive-date=1 August 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180801003758/https://www.lonelyplanet.com/borneo/visas }}</ref> since joining Malaysia in 1963. The internal border control is asymmetrical; while Sabah and Sarawak impose immigration control on Malaysian citizens from other states, there is no corresponding border control in [[Peninsular Malaysia]], and Malaysians from Sabah and Sarawak have unrestricted right to live and work in the Peninsular. For social and business visits less than three months, Malaysian citizens may travel between the Peninsular, Sabah and Sarawak using the [[Malaysian identity card]] (MyKad) or [[Malaysian passport]], while for longer stays in Sabah and Sarawak they are required to have an Internal Travel Document or a passport with the appropriate residential permit.

====North Korea====
The most restrictive internal border controls are in [[North Korea]]. Citizens are not allowed to travel outside their areas of residence without explicit authorisation, and access to the capital city of Pyongyang is heavily restricted.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country%2C%2C%2C%2CPRK%2C4562d8cf2%2C487ca236c0%2C0.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121018022844/http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country%2C%2C%2C%2CPRK%2C4562d8cf2%2C487ca236c0%2C0.html |archive-date=18 October 2012 |title=UNHCR &#124; Refworld &#124; Freedom in the World 2008 – North Korea}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/ASA24/002/2009/en/ |title=Document |date=2 August 2009 |access-date=31 July 2018 |archive-date=31 July 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180731213148/https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/ASA24/002/2009/en/ |url-status=live }}</ref> Similar restrictions are imposed on tourists, who are only allowed to leave Pyongyang on government-authorised tours to approved tourist sites.

===Europe===
An example from Europe is the implementation of border controls on travel between [[Svalbard]], which maintains a policy of [[free migration]] as a result of 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 [[Commonwealth of Independent States|CIS]] members, [[Visa policy of Turkmenistan#Special permits|areas of Turkmenistan]] that require special permits to enter, [[Visa policy of Tajikistan#Gorno-Badakhshan|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 [[Iraqi Kurdistan|Kurdistan region]] maintains a separate and more liberal visa and customs area from the rest of the country, even allowing [[Visa policy of Iraq|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.{{efn|These are [[Greenland]] and the [[Faroe Islands]]. These areas do not maintain strict immigration controls with the Schengen Area, but border controls are sporadically enforced for customs purposes.}} In addition to the numerous closed cities of Russia,<ref>{{cite web|title=Russian Federation Country Specific Information – Entry/Exit Requirements for U.S. Citizens|url=http://www.travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1006.html#entry_requirements|publisher=Bureau of Consular Affairs, U.S. Department of State|access-date=18 November 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131203003453/http://www.travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1006.html#entry_requirements|archive-date=3 December 2013}}</ref> parts of 19 subjects{{efn|
* [[Chukotka Autonomous Okrug]], all
* In [[Leningrad Oblast]] – all Russian islands of [[Gulf of Finland]], except [[Gogland]], and 20-km strip along South coast of Gulf of Finland.
* [[North Ossetia-Alania|The Republic of North Ossetia-Alania]], 85% of territory. Transit to border with Georgia and to border with South Ossetia are possible along the main roads. [[Tsey|Tsey Gorge]] is opened for foreigners from 2012.
* Part of [[Kaliningrad Oblast]], approx. 15%.
* Part of [[Moscow Oblast]], approx. 10%.
* Part of [[Arkhangelsk Oblast]], include [[Novaya Zemlya]], approx. 30%.
* Part of [[Murmansk Oblast]], approx. 15%. Transit to/from Norway is possible by main road.
* Part of [[Kamchatka Krai]].
* Part of [[Primorsky Krai]].
}} of the Russian Federation are closed for foreigners without special permits and are consequently subject to internal border controls.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://base.garant.ru/104408/|title=Постановление Правительства РФ от 04.07.1992 N 470 "Об утверждении Перечня территорий Российской Федерации с регламентированным посещением для иностранных граждан" (с изменениями и дополнениями)|website=base.garant.ru|access-date=16 December 2017|archive-date=3 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190403193638/http://base.garant.ru/104408/|url-status=live}}</ref>

Another complex border control situation in Europe pertains to 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 [[Visa policies of British Overseas Territories#Gibraltar|border control policies]], thus requiring physical border security at its border with the Schengen Area as well as the implementation of border controls for travellers proceeding 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 requires border controls. On December 31, 2020, Spain and the United Kingdom reached an agreement in principle under which Gibraltar would join the Schengen Area,<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/31/spain-and-uk-reach-draft-deal-on-post-brexit-status-of-gibraltar|title=Spain and UK reach draft deal on post-Brexit status of Gibraltar|first=Ashifa Kassam Daniel Boffey in|last=Brussels|date=31 December 2020|newspaper=The Guardian|access-date=24 October 2021|archive-date=26 March 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230326041930/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/31/spain-and-uk-reach-draft-deal-on-post-brexit-status-of-gibraltar|url-status=live}}</ref> clearing the way for the European Union and the UK to start formal negotiations on the matter.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.gibraltar.gov.gi/press-releases/chief-ministers-statement-the-new-years-eve-in-principle-agreement-a-post-brexit-deal-for-gibraltar-9462020-6542|title=Chief Minister's Statement – The New Year's Eve 'In-Principle' Agreement: A Post Brexit Deal for Gibraltar – 946/2020|work=Government of Gibraltar|access-date=31 December 2020|archive-date=31 December 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201231165915/https://www.gibraltar.gov.gi/press-releases/chief-ministers-statement-the-new-years-eve-in-principle-agreement-a-post-brexit-deal-for-gibraltar-9462020-6542|url-status=live}}</ref>

In the aftermath of [[Brexit]], border controls for goods flowing between Great Britain and Northern Ireland were introduced in accordance with the [[Northern Ireland Protocol|Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland]] agreed to as part of the UK's [[Brexit withdrawal agreement|withdrawal agreement]] with the EU.<ref name="nipa">{{Cite journal |date=31 January 2020 |title=AGREEMENT on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community |url=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:12020W/TXT&from=EN |journal=Official Journal of the European Union |id=Document 12020W/TXT – L 29/7 |access-date=24 October 2021 |archive-date=3 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220103171738/https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:12020W/TXT&from=EN |url-status=live }}</ref> Due to the [[The Troubles|thirty-year internecine conflict]] in Northern Ireland, the [[Republic of Ireland–United Kingdom border|UK-Ireland border]] has had a special status since that conflict was ended by the [[Good Friday Agreement|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 [[European Single Market|EU's Single Market]] and [[European Union Customs Union|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 EU. [[European Single Market|EU single market]] and [[United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020|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 '[[Brexit and the Irish border#Hard border|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 [[European Single Market|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 [[Irish Sea border|border down the Irish Sea]] for customs purposes, separating Northern Ireland from the island of Great Britain,<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50083026|title=Brexit: What is in Boris Johnson's new deal with the EU?|website=BBC News|date=21 October 2019|access-date=2 January 2020|archive-date=22 December 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191222170733/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50083026|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Parker |first1=George |last2=Brunsden |first2=Jim |title=How Boris Johnson moved to break the Brexit deadlock |website=Financial Times |date=11 October 2019 |url=https://www.ft.com/content/cdb2dadc-ec40-11e9-a240-3b065ef5fc55 |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221210/https://www.ft.com/content/cdb2dadc-ec40-11e9-a240-3b065ef5fc55 |archive-date=10 December 2022 |url-access=subscription |access-date=2 January 2020}}</ref> to the disquiet of prominent [[Ulster Unionism|Unionists]].<ref name="BBC 56737351">{{cite news |title=NI sea border: Border control posts must progress 'without delay' |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-56737351 |date=13 April 2021 |work=BBC News |access-date=24 October 2021 |archive-date=24 October 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211024181550/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-56737351 |url-status=live }}</ref> To operate the terms of the protocol, the United Kingdom must provide border control posts at Northern Ireland's ports:<ref name="BBC 56737351" /> actual provision of these facilities is the responsibility of Northern Ireland's [[Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs]] (DAERA).<ref name="BBC 56737351" /> 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.<ref>{{cite news |title=Brexit: DUP agriculture minister orders Brexit check construction halt |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-56217647 |first=John |last=Campbell |work=BBC News |date=27 February 2021 |access-date=24 October 2021 |archive-date=24 October 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211024181550/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-56217647 |url-status=live }}</ref> In its half yearly financial report on August 26, 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 in the level playing field, since goods that arrive directly into Republic of Ireland ports from Great Britain are checked on arrival.<ref>{{Cite news|date=26 August 2021|title=ICG continues to see Covid impact on ferries business|work=RTE News|url=https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0826/1242916-icg-h1-results/|access-date=24 October 2021|archive-date=24 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211024181550/https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0826/1242916-icg-h1-results/|url-status=live}}</ref> The implementation of border controls between Great Britain and Northern Ireland was the primary catalyst for the [[2021 Northern Ireland riots]].

An unusual example of internal border controls pertains to customs enforcement within the Schengen area. Even though borders are generally invisible, the existence of areas within the Schengen area but outside the [[European Union Value Added Tax Area]], as well as jurisdictions such as Andorra which are not officially a part of the Schengen area but can not be accessed without passing through it, has resulted in the existence of sporadic [[Schengen Area#Internal controls|internal border controls]] for customs purposes. Additionally, as per Schengen area rules,<ref>[http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/;jsessionid=TJcLTTkLTbF0zDNTTm0Z2GGMzHlM1QGpWP9mdKGRx6WlrfTlb2GQ!1620842458?uri=CELEX:32006R0562 Regulation (EC) No 562/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 establishing a Community Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180914131957/https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/;jsessionid=TJcLTTkLTbF0zDNTTm0Z2GGMzHlM1QGpWP9mdKGRx6WlrfTlb2GQ!1620842458?uri=CELEX:32006R0562 |date=14 September 2018 }} See Title III Article 21</ref> hotels and other types of commercial accommodation must register all foreign citizens, including citizens of other Schengen states, by requiring the completion of a registration form by their own hand.{{efn|This does not apply to accompanying spouses and minor children or members of travel groups. In addition, a valid identification document has to be produced to the hotel manager or staff.<ref>Article 45 of the Schengen Convention.</ref>}} The Schengen rules do not require any other procedures; thus, the Schengen states are free to regulate further details on the content of the registration forms, and identity documents which are to be produced, and may also require the persons exempted from registration by Schengen laws to be registered. A Schengen state is also permitted to reinstate border controls with another Schengen country for a short period where there is a serious threat to that state's "public policy or internal security" or when the "control of an external border is no longer ensured due to exceptional circumstances".<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.france24.com/en/20120608-european-union-schengen-border-control-migrants-refugees |title=EU agrees short-term border closures to block migrants |date=8 June 2012 |access-date=8 August 2012 |archive-date=12 July 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120712181401/http://www.france24.com/en/20120608-european-union-schengen-border-control-migrants-refugees |url-status=live }}</ref> When such risks arise out of foreseeable events, the state in question must notify the European Commission in advance and consult with other Schengen states.<ref>Chapter II of the Schengen Borders Code ([http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32006R0562:EN:NOT OJ L 105, 13 April 2006, p. 1] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230407033313/http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32006R0562:EN:NOT |date=7 April 2023 }}).</ref> Since the implementation of the Schengen Agreement, this provision has been invoked frequently by member states, especially in response to the [[European migrant crisis]].{{efn|For example, in April 2010, Malta introduced temporary checks due to [[Pope Benedict XVI]]'s visit.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20100405/local/border-checks-are-back |title=Border checks are back |newspaper=Times of Malta |date=5 April 2010 |access-date=9 May 2010 |archive-date=9 April 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100409020055/http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20100405/local/border-checks-are-back |url-status=live }}</ref> It reimposed checks in 2015 in the weeks surrounding the [[CHOGM 2015|Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting]]. In response to the European migrant crisis, several countries set up internal controls. In 2019, Denmark, worried about the [[bombings in Sweden]], introduced passport controls to Swedish citizens for the first time since the 1950s.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/13/world/europe/denmark-border-sweden.html|title=Denmark, Worried About Bombings by Swedish Gangs, Begins Border Checks|author=Martin Selsoe Sorensen|location=Denmark|date=13 November 2019|website=[[The New York Times]]|access-date=30 November 2019|archive-date=19 November 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191119173832/https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/13/world/europe/denmark-border-sweden.html|url-status=live}}</ref>}}

===Middle East===
The [[Israel Defense Forces|Israeli military]] maintains an intricate network of internal border controls within the [[Israeli-occupied territories|Israeli-occupied]] [[West Bank]] as well as external border controls between the West Bank and Israel, restricting the [[Palestinian freedom of movement|freedom of movement of Palestinians]], composed of [[Israeli checkpoint|permanent, temporary, and random manned checkpoints]] in the [[West Bank]]; the [[West Bank Barrier]]; and restrictions on the usage of roads by Palestinians.<ref>{{Cite web |date=25 September 2019 |title=List of military checkpoints in the West Bank and Gaza Strip |publisher=B'Tselem |url=http://www.btselem.org/freedom_of_movement/checkpoints_and_forbidden_roads |access-date=26 October 2021 |archive-date=5 December 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121205072559/https://www.btselem.org/freedom_of_movement/checkpoints_and_forbidden_roads |url-status=live }}</ref> 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|blockade]] of the [[Gaza Strip]] results in a de facto domestic customs and immigration border for Palestinians. In order to clear internal border controls, Palestinians are required to [[Israeli permit regime in the West Bank|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 is 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.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.btselem.org/english/Freedom_of_Movement/Economy.asp |title=Restrictions on Movement: Effect of Restrictions on the Economy |publisher=[[B'Tselem]] |access-date=29 March 2010 |archive-date=5 June 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110605023306/http://www.btselem.org/english/Freedom_of_Movement/Economy.asp |url-status=live }}</ref> 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.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.btselem.org/english/Medical_Treatment/Index.asp |title=Infringement of the Right to Medical Treatment |publisher=[[B'Tselem]] |access-date=29 March 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110605023353/http://www.btselem.org/english/Medical_Treatment/Index.asp |archive-date=5 June 2011 }}</ref> 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.<ref>[[Amira Hass]] (21 January 2014). [https://www.haaretz.com/news/national/.premium-1.569690 "Report: Israel's High Court supports policy of 'secluding' Palestinians"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150415075213/http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/.premium-1.569690 |date=15 April 2015 }}. ''Haaretz''.</ref>

Much like relations between Jewish settlers in Israel and the native Palestinian population, strained intercommunal relations in Northern Ireland between [[Irish Catholics]] and [[Ulster Protestants|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 [[Irish republicanism|republican]] and [[Irish nationalism|nationalist]] Catholic neighbourhoods from predominantly [[Ulster loyalism|loyalist]] and [[Unionism in Ireland|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]],<ref name="NIF"/> with more than {{ Convert |32|km|abbr=off}} of walls in Northern Ireland.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-northern-ireland-56765168 |title=Cages around houses: Life at Belfast's peace wall |work=BBC News |access-date=16 April 2021 |archive-date=16 April 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210416000107/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-northern-ireland-56765168 |url-status=live }}</ref> 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 {{ Convert |8|m|abbr=off}} high.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/sep/29/belfast-berlin-wall-moment-permanent-peace-walls |title=Will Belfast ever have a Berlin Wall moment and tear down its 'peace walls'? |first=Peter |last=Geoghegan |date=29 September 2015 |work=[[The Guardian]] |access-date=13 April 2019 |archive-date=2 April 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190402164725/https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/sep/29/belfast-berlin-wall-moment-permanent-peace-walls |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="NIF">{{cite web |url=https://northernireland.foundation/projects/sharedfuture/peace-walls/ |title=Peace Walls |work=Northern Ireland Foundation |date=31 January 2013 |access-date=13 April 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190425073940/https://northernireland.foundation/projects/sharedfuture/peace-walls/ |archive-date=25 April 2019 }}</ref> Some have gates in them (sometimes staffed by [[Police Service of Northern Ireland|police]]) that allow passage during daylight but are closed at night.

===North America===
{{see also|Hyder-Stewart Border Crossing|Cornwall Island (Ontario)|Akwesasne}}
[[File:American Samoa Entry Stamp.tif|right|thumbnail|American Samoa entry stamp]]
[[File:Hyder AK.jpg|left|thumb|upright=1.05|Hyder, Alaska, has no border controls for travellers entering from Canada, and travellers flying between Hyder and other Alaskan cities by seaplane undergo internal border control.]]
Multiple types of internal border controls exist in the United States. While the American territories of [[Guam]] and the [[Northern Mariana Islands]] follow the [[visa policy of the United States|same visa policy as the mainland]], together, they also maintain their own visa waiver programme for certain nationalities.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.dhs.gov/guam-cnmi-visa-waiver-program|title=Guam-CNMI Visa Waiver Program|date=6 July 2009|access-date=18 November 2020|archive-date=6 May 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210506025856/https://www.dhs.gov/guam-cnmi-visa-waiver-program|url-status=live}}</ref> Since the two territories are outside the [[customs territory of the United States]], there are customs inspections when travelling between them, and 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 [[United States Virgin Islands|Virgin Islands]] are a special case, falling within the American immigration zone and solely following American visa policy, but being 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 [[United States Border Patrol interior checkpoints|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 (state)|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 (Ontario)|Cornwall Island]], instead requiring travellers to proceed to the checkpoint in the city of [[Cornwall, Ontario|Cornwall]]. As a consequence of the arrangement, residents of the island are required to clear border controls when proceeding North to the Ontarian mainland, as well as when proceeding South to Akwesasne territory in New York, thus constituting internal controls both from a Canadian perspective and from the perspective of the Akwesasne nation. Similarly, travelling between Canada and the Quebec portion of the Akwesasne nation requires driving through the state of New York, meaning that individuals will be required to clear American controls when leaving Quebec proper and to clear Canadian border controls when entering Quebec proper, though 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 are seen as a foreign-imposed system of internal border controls, similar to the Israeli checkpoints in Palestinian territory.<ref>Pratt, A., & Templeman, J. (2018). Jurisdiction, Sovereignties and Akwesasne: Shiprider and the Re-Crafting of Canada-US Cross-Border Maritime Law Enforcement. Canadian Journal of Law and Society / Revue Canadienne Droit Et Société, 33(3), 335–357. {{doi|10.1017/cls.2018.26}}</ref><ref>Kalman, Ian. "Proofing Exemption: Documenting Indigeneity at the Canada–US Border". ''Anthropologica'', vol. 60 no. 1, 2018, p. 212-222. Project MUSE [https://muse.jhu.edu/article/705336].</ref>

The city of [[Hyder, Alaska|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 to face difficulties since both America and Canada would subject them to border controls that require travel documents. At the same time, however, the northern road connecting Hyder to uninhabited mountain regions of British Columbia is equipped with 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 (Canadian history)|pass system]], or [[Apartheid-era South Africa]]'s [[Pass laws]].

==Specific requirements==
[[File:CBP International Travel Preclearance Operations in Canada (26003271678).jpg|thumb|American and Canadian border officers at the [[Vancouver]] airport]]
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 other countries that have been visited. Others may need to be certain the traveller has paid the appropriate fees for their [[visa (document)|visas]] and has future travel planned out of 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 bring a [[biosecurity]] risk into the country.

===Biometrics===
{{See also|Biometric identification by country}}
[[File:161129-Dulles-OFO-Ops-GF-129 (31197598472).jpg|thumb|A fingerprint scanner at [[Dulles International Airport]] collects biometric data on visitors, which can be used for confirming identities.]]
Several countries{{efn|Countries collecting fingerprints at checkpoints include America, Argentina,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://infosurhoy.com/en_GB/articles/saii/features/main/2012/09/27/feature-01|title=Argentina strengthens migratory control|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131202233906/http://infosurhoy.com/en_GB/articles/saii/features/main/2012/09/27/feature-01|archive-date=2 December 2013}}</ref> Brunei, Cambodia,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.us-passport-information.com/Cambodia-Foreign-Entry-Requirements.html|title=Cambodia Foreign Entry Requirements|website=Us-passport-information.com|access-date=17 October 2021|archive-date=17 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211017032400/http://www.us-passport-information.com/Cambodia-Foreign-Entry-Requirements.html|url-status=usurped}}</ref> China,<ref>{{cite web |title=China to Start Fingerprinting Foreign Visitors |date=31 January 2019 |url=https://www.aircanada.com/uk/en/aco/home/book/travel-news-and-updates/2018/china-fingerprinting-foreign-visitors.html |website=Air Canada |access-date=7 July 2018 |quote=Effective 27 April 2018, border control authorities at all of China's ports of entry, including its airports, will start collecting the fingerprints of all foreign visitors aged between 14 and 70. Diplomatic passport holders and beneficiaries of reciprocal agreements are exempted..}}</ref> Ethiopia,<ref name="auswaertiges-amt.de">{{cite web|url=http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/DE/Laenderinformationen/00-SiHi/AethiopienSicherheit.html|title=Äthiopien: Reise- und Sicherheitshinweise|website=Auswaertiges-amt.de|access-date=17 October 2021|archive-date=19 October 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171019110927/http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/DE/Laenderinformationen/00-SiHi/AethiopienSicherheit.html|url-status=live}}</ref> Ghana, Guinea,<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.paf.gov.gn/dnpaf/?page_id=335&lang=en | title=Visa | access-date=17 October 2021 | archive-date=17 October 2021 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211017032402/https://www.paf.gov.gn/dnpaf/?page_id=335&lang=en | url-status=live }}</ref> India, Japan,<ref>{{cite news |title=Japan fingerprints foreigners as anti-terror move |date=20 November 2016 |publisher=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-fingerprinting-idUST23858020071120 |access-date=3 March 2017 |archive-date=4 March 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170304042257/http://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-fingerprinting-idUST23858020071120 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/anger-as-japan-moves-to-fingerprint-foreigners/2007/10/26/1192941320246.html|title=Anger as Japan moves to fingerprint foreigners – World|website=The Age|date=26 October 2007|access-date=17 October 2021|archive-date=8 July 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180708192255/https://www.theage.com.au/news/world/anger-as-japan-moves-to-fingerprint-foreigners/2007/10/26/1192941320246.html|url-status=live}}</ref> Kenya (both fingerprints and a photo are taken),<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.kaa.go.ke/airports/airport-services/immigration-visas/|title=Immigration & Visas FAQs|website=Kenya Airports Authority|access-date=6 May 2019|quote=Will visitors still have their digital photo and fingerprints taken at the immigration desk on arrival? Yes, the need to have photos and fingerprints taken upon arrival is to authenticate that the person who applied for the Visa is the same person at the port of entry|archive-date=3 April 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230403201728/https://www.kaa.go.ke/airports/airport-services/immigration-visas/}}</ref> Malaysia upon entry and departure,<ref name="countryrep1">{{cite web|url=http://www.countryreports.org/travel/Malaysia/entry.htm|title=Malaysia|website=CountryReports|access-date=7 July 2018|archive-date=9 July 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180709154836/http://www.countryreports.org/travel/Malaysia/entry.htm|url-status=live}}</ref>
Paraguay, Saudi Arabia,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://secureidnews.com/news-item/saudi-arabia-mandates-fingerprints-and-biometrics-for-foreigners/|title=Saudi Arabia mandates fingerprints and biometrics for foreigners|work=SecureIDNews|access-date=3 March 2017|archive-date=8 October 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171008231252/http://secureidnews.com/news-item/saudi-arabia-mandates-fingerprints-and-biometrics-for-foreigners/|url-status=live}}</ref> Singapore, South Korea,<ref>{{cite news|url=http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90777/90851/7122530.html|title=S Korea to scan fingerprints of suspicious foreign visitors|work=People's Daily Online|access-date=3 March 2017|archive-date=2 December 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131202225237/http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90777/90851/7122530.html|url-status=live}}</ref> Taiwan, Thailand,<ref>{{cite news|url=http://thainews.prd.go.th/en/news/detail/TCATG190510152510856|title=National News Bureau of Thailand|access-date=17 October 2021|archive-date=19 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211019152450/https://thainews.prd.go.th/en/news/detail/TCATG190510152510856}}</ref> and Uganda.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.africanews.com/2019/01/14/gemalto-awarded-ugandas-new-e-immigration-solution-with-fast-track-border-crossing-ekiosks-at-entebbe-airport/|title=Gemalto awarded Uganda's new e-Immigration solution with fast-track border crossing eKiosks at Entebbe Airport|date=14 January 2019|website=Africanews|access-date=24 April 2019|archive-date=24 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190424064110/https://www.africanews.com/2019/01/14/gemalto-awarded-ugandas-new-e-immigration-solution-with-fast-track-border-crossing-ekiosks-at-entebbe-airport/}}</ref>}} require all travellers, or all foreign travelers, to be [[fingerprint]]ed 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.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Calder |first1=Simon |title=Airline lobbying for a relaxation of draconian rules for London-Auckland travellers |date=24 April 2017 |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/transit-passengers-air-new-zealand-london-heathrow-auckland-us-customs-lax-a7699886.html |newspaper=The Independent |access-date=7 July 2018 |quote=Travellers heading west from the UK to New Zealand may soon be able to avoid the onerous requirement to clear US border control during the refuelling stop at Los Angeles airport (LAX). Unlike almost every other country in the world, the US insists on a full immigration check even for passengers who simply intend to re-board their plane to continue onwards to a foreign destination. Air New Zealand, which flies daily from Heathrow via Los Angeles to Auckland, says there are currently "strict requirements for travellers" in transit at LAX. Through passengers to Auckland on flight NZ1 or Heathrow on NZ2 must apply in advance for an ESTA (online visa) even though they have no intention of staying in the US. They also have to undergo screening by the Transportation Security Administration. |archive-date=21 June 2022 |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220621/https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/transit-passengers-air-new-zealand-london-heathrow-auckland-us-customs-lax-a7699886.html |url-status=live }}</ref> Many countries also require a photo be taken of people entering the country. The United States, which does not fully implement [[#Exit controls|exit control]] formalities at its land frontiers (although long mandated by domestic legislation),<ref>{{cite web |last1=Brown |first1=Theresa Cardinal |title=Biometric Entry-Exit Update: CBP Developing Land Border Process |date=9 May 2016 |url=https://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/biometric-entry-exit-update-cbp-developing-land-border-process/ |website=Bipartisan Policy Center |access-date=25 April 2019 |quote=While a requirement for a biometric entry-exit system has been in law for over a decade, it is not yet a reality. Many reasons for the long gestating development have been documented in BPC's 2014 report Entry-Exit System: Progress, Challenges, and Outlook, including the technological, operational, and cost challenges of creating exit systems and infrastructure where none exist today. However, many critics, especially in Congress, simply accused the Department of Homeland security of dragging its feet... the major operational, logistical, and technical challenge in implementing exit capability at our ports has been the land borders. Unlike airports and seaports, the land border environment is not physically controlled, there is no means to get advance information on who is arriving, and the sheer volume of travel—both vehicular and pedestrian—creates challenges in any system to not further exacerbate delays. While biometric exit for land vehicular traffic is still in the "what if" stage, CBP is moving ahead and piloting systems and technology to use with the large population of pedestrian crossers at the U.S.-Mexico border. |archive-date=25 April 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190425061429/https://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/biometric-entry-exit-update-cbp-developing-land-border-process/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Lipton |first1=Eric |title=U.S. Quietly Monitors Foreigners' Departures at the Canadian Border |work=[[The New York Times]] |date=21 May 2013 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/22/us/us-tracked-foreigners-leaving-for-canada.html |access-date=25 April 2019 |quote=Long demanded by lawmakers in Congress, it is considered a critical step to developing a coherent program to curb illegal immigration, as historically about 30 percent to 40 percent of illegal immigrants in the United States arrived on tourist visas or other legal means and then never left, according to estimates by Homeland Security officials. |archive-date=25 April 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190425062049/https://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/22/us/us-tracked-foreigners-leaving-for-canada.html |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=LIPTON |first1=Eric |title=Administration to Drop Effort to Track if Visitors Leave |work=[[The New York Times]] |date=15 December 2006 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/15/washington/15exit.html |access-date=25 April 2019 |quote=Efforts to determine whether visitors actually leave have faltered. Departure monitoring would help officials hunt for foreigners who have not left, if necessary. Domestic security officials say, however, it would be too expensive to conduct fingerprint or facial recognition scans for land departures. |archive-date=25 April 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190425054433/https://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/15/washington/15exit.html |url-status=live }}</ref> intends to implement [[Facial recognition system|facial recognition]] for passengers departing from international airports to identify people who overstay their visa.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://qz.com/1598148/us-wants-to-use-facial-recognition-on-air-travelers-leaving-the-country/|title=The US wants to scan the faces of all air passengers leaving the country|last=Campoy|first=Ana|website=Quartz|date=17 April 2019 |access-date=24 April 2019|archive-date=24 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190424065206/https://qz.com/1598148/us-wants-to-use-facial-recognition-on-air-travelers-leaving-the-country/|url-status=live}}</ref> Together with fingerprint and face recognition, [[Iris 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-passport]]s<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.icao.int/publications/Documents/9303_p9_cons_en.pdf|title=ICAO Document 9303: Machine Readable Travel Documents, Part 9: Deployment of Biometric Identification and Electronic Storage of Data in MRTDs, 7th edition|date=2015|access-date=23 April 2019|archive-date=22 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190422232940/https://www.icao.int/publications/Documents/9303_p9_cons_en.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref> and the United Arab Emirates conducts iris scanning on visitors who need to apply for a visa.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.moi.gov.qa/site/english/news/2011/12/13/24555.html|title=Iris Scan Implemented at Doha International Airport |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120108085139/http://www.moi.gov.qa/site/english/news/2011/12/13/24555.html|archive-date=8 January 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.simplydxb.com/articles/iris-scanner-could-replace-emirates-id-in-uae/ |title=Iris Scanner Could Replace Emirates ID In UAE |date=11 June 2017 |website=SimplyDXB |access-date=7 July 2018 |quote=The breach of privacy is probably the biggest threat to the biometric technique of iris recognition. Secondly, a device error can false reject or false accept the identity which can also have some heinous consequences. Lastly, the method isn't the most cost-effective one. It is complex and therefore expensive. Furthermore, the maintenance of devices and data can also be relatively burdensome. However, thanks to the oil money and spending ability of Dubai, they are economically equipped to effectively embrace this system. |archive-date=7 July 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180707040122/http://www.simplydxb.com/articles/iris-scanner-could-replace-emirates-id-in-uae/ |url-status=live }}</ref><section end="full" /><section begin="bad" /> The [[Department of Homeland Security]] has announced plans to greatly increase the biometric data it collects at American borders.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Roberts |first1=Jeff John |title=Homeland Security Plans to Expand Fingerprint and Eye Scanning at Borders |date=12 September 2016 |website=Fortune |url=http://fortune.com/2016/09/12/border-security-biometrics/ |access-date=24 April 2019 |quote=Unlike with documents, it's very hard for a traveler to present a forged copy of a fingerprint or iris. That's why the U.S. Department of Homeland Security plans to vastly expand the amount of biometric data it collects at the borders. According to Passcode, a new program will ramp up a process to scan fingers and eyes in order to stop people entering and exiting the country on someone else's passport. |archive-date=24 April 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190424022959/http://fortune.com/2016/09/12/border-security-biometrics/ |url-status=live }}</ref> In 2018, Singapore began trials of iris scanning at three land and maritime immigration checkpoints.<ref>{{cite news |title=Singapore tests eye scans at immigration checkpoints |work=Reuters |date=6 August 2018 |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-singapore-security/singapore-tests-eye-scans-at-immigration-checkpoints-media-idUSKBN1KR0AO |access-date=24 April 2019 |quote=Singapore has started scanning travellers' eyes at some of its border checkpoints, its immigration authority said on Monday, in a trial of expensive technology that could one day replace fingerprint verification. |archive-date=24 April 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190424015341/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-singapore-security/singapore-tests-eye-scans-at-immigration-checkpoints-media-idUSKBN1KR0AO |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Lee |first1=Vivien |title=5 Reasons We Prefer Iris Scans To Fingerprint Checks At Our Borders In Singapore |date=6 August 2018 |url=https://mustsharenews.com/iris-scans-checkpoints/ |access-date=24 April 2019 |quote=The iris technology could potentially scan irises covertly, as opposed to the scanning of thumbprints which necessitates active participation. |archive-date=24 April 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190424022350/https://mustsharenews.com/iris-scans-checkpoints/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

===Immigration stamps===
{{main|Passport stamp}}

An immigration stamp is an inked impression in a [[passport]] or other travel document typically made by 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|entry clearance]]. Under the [[Schengen Information System|Schengen system]], a foreign passport is stamped with a date stamp which does not indicate any duration of stay. This means that the person is deemed to have permission to remain either for three months or for the period shown on his 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 is an imposition of a control to which the person is not subject. Passport stamps may occasionally take the form of sticker stamps, such as entry stamps from [[Visa policy of Japan|Japan]]. Depending on nationality, a visitor may not receive a stamp at all (unless specifically requested), such as an [[European Union|EU]] or [[European Free Trade Association|EFTA]] citizen travelling to an [[Schengen Area|EU or EFTA country]], [[Visa policy of Albania|Albania]],<ref name="parlament.al">https://www.parlament.al/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/ligj-71.pdf {{Dead link|date=May 2020 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> or [[Visa policy of North Macedonia|North Macedonia]].<ref name="mvr.gov.mk">{{Cite web |title= |script-title=mk:ЗА ПРОГЛАСУВАЊЕ НА ЗАКОНОТ ЗА ГРАНИЧНА КОНТРОЛА |trans-title=FOR THE PROCLAMATION OF THE BORDER CONTROL LAW |url=https://www.mvr.gov.mk/Upload/Documents/ZAKON%20ZA%20GRANI%5ENA%20KONTROLA.pdf |access-date=3 November 2023 |website=www.mvr.gov.mk |language=mk |archive-date=5 April 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230405054153/http://www.mvr.gov.mk/Upload/Documents/ZAKON%20ZA%20GRANI%5ENA%20KONTROLA.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> Most countries issue exit stamps in addition to entry stamps. A few countries issue only entry stamps, including [[Visa policy of Canada|Canada]], [[Visa policy of El Salvador|El Salvador]], [[Visa policy of Ireland|Ireland]], Mexico, [[Visa policy of New Zealand|New Zealand]], [[Singapore]], [[Visa policy of the United Kingdom|United Kingdom]] and the [[Visa policy of the United States|United States of America]]. [[Visa policy of Australia|Australia]], [[Visa policy of Hong Kong|Hong Kong]], [[Visa policy of Israel|Israel]], [[Visa policy of Macau|Macau]] and [[Visa policy of South Korea|South Korea]] do not stamp passports upon entry nor exit. These countries or regions issue landing slips instead, with the exception of Australia who do not issue any form of physical evidence of entry. [[Visa (document)|Visas]] may also take the form of passport stamps.

Immigration authorities usually have different styles of stamps for entries and exits, to make it easier to identify the movements of people. Ink colour might be used to designate mode of transportation (air, land or sea), such as in [[Hong Kong]] prior to 1997; while border styles did the same thing in [[Macau]]. Other variations include changing the size of the stamp to indicate length of stay, as in [[Singapore]].

In many cases passengers on [[cruise ship]]s 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.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://cruiseradio.net/5-cool-places-passport-stamps/ |title=5 Caribbean Ports to Get Your Passport Stamped |date=30 September 2013 |access-date=16 October 2021 |archive-date=16 October 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211016114815/https://cruiseradio.net/5-cool-places-passport-stamps/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=https://garyscohen.wordpress.com/2015/04/14/cruise-tales-2015-south-and-east-caribbean-6-in-search-of-passport-stamps/ |title=Cruise Tales – 2015 South and East Caribbean #6: In Search of Passport Stamps |date=14 April 2015 |access-date=16 October 2021 |archive-date=16 October 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211016114815/https://garyscohen.wordpress.com/2015/04/14/cruise-tales-2015-south-and-east-caribbean-6-in-search-of-passport-stamps/ |url-status=live }}</ref> 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.

<gallery>
File:China Immigration Stramps Beijing.jpg|Entry and exit stamps issued at [[Beijing Capital International Airport]] in a [[Republic of Korea passport]]
File:Chengdu Shuangliu International Airport entry stamp.jpg|Entry stamp issued at [[Chengdu Shuangliu International Airport]] in a [[Chinese passport]]
File:Dongguan passport stamp.jpg|Old entry and exit stamps issued at [[Dongguan]] in a Chinese passport<br />(noted that there were no English on stamps)
File:Fuzhou stamps.jpg|Entry and exit stamps issued at [[Fuzhou Changle International Airport]] in a [[Thai passport]]
File:Us stamp 2.png|American stamp from [[John F. Kennedy International Airport]] in a U.S. Passport
File:ISR denied stamp.jpg|An "entry denied" stamp from the Israeli [[Taba Border Crossing]] (Some jurisdictions – such as Germany and Israel – have historically stamped "Entry Denied" on passports.)
File:BOM En.JPG|Entry stamp issued at [[Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport]] in an [[Indian passport]]
File:India passport entry stamp.jpg|Entry stamp issued at [[Indira Gandhi International Airport]] to a citizen of Germany
File:DEL ExO.JPG|Exit stamp in an Indian passport issued at Indira Gandhi International Airport
File:India e-Visa.jpg|An Indian e-Visa issued at Indira Gandhi International Airport in a [[Romanian passport]]
File:Hong Kong landing slip.jpg|Landing slip replacing existent passport stamps (Being unable to present the landing slip on departure does not affect a traveller's ability to clear immigration.)
File:Xijiulong rujing.jpg|Entry stamp issued at [[juxtaposed controls]] at [[Hong Kong West Kowloon railway station]]
File:201901 Xijiulong Mainland Port Exit Stamp.jpg|Exit stamp issued at juxtaposed controls at Hong Kong West Kowloon railway station in a Chinese passport
File:China Visa Stamp.jpg|Entry and exit stamps issued at [[Shanghai Pudong International Airport]] in an [[Italian passport]]
File:Hong Kong passport stamps.jpg|Entry and exit stamps issued at [[Hong Kong International Airport]] and the [[Hong Kong–Macau Ferry Terminal]] in an [[Italian passport]]
File:Hong Kong China Ferry Terminal entry stamp.jpg|Entry stamp issued at [[Hong Kong China Ferry Terminal]] in a Thai passport
</gallery>

===Exit controls===
{{multiple image
| footer            = India and China, like most countries, implement border controls at both entry and exit, and consequently stamp passports upon exit.
| total_width       = 300
| image1            = India passport entry stamp.jpg
| alt1              = Indian entry stamp at New Delhi [[Indira Gandhi International Airport]].
| image2            = India passport stamp.jpg
| alt2              = Indian exit stamp at Indira Gandhi International Airport.
| image3            = China Visa Stamp.jpg
| alt3              = Chinese entry and exit stamps at [[Shanghai Pudong International Airport]].
}}
[[File:Queenston Bridge Canada Passport Bridge.JPG|thumb|upright|Entry stamp at [[Lewiston–Queenston Bridge]], Ontario. Canada only conducts border control and stamps passports upon entry.]]

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 through information sharing with neighbouring countries' entry border controls. These countries consequently do not issue exit stamps even to travellers who require stamps on entry. 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 of travel documents upon departure, exit information may be recorded by immigration authorities using the information provided to them by transport operators.

''No exit control'':
* {{flagicon|USA}} United States of America<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.cbp.gov/travel/international-visitors/i-94|title=Arrival/Departure Forms: I-94 and I-94W|work=U.S. Customs and Border Protection|access-date=10 January 2020|archive-date=16 January 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230116011242/https://www.cbp.gov/travel/international-visitors/i-94|url-status=live}}</ref>
* {{flagicon|Canada}} Canada
* {{flagicon|Mexico}} Mexico (by air, but entrance declaration coupon is collected)
* {{flagicon|Bahamas}} Bahamas
* {{flagicon|Ireland}} Ireland
* {{flagicon|United Kingdom}} United Kingdom{{efn|[[UK Border Force|Border Force]] officers do not carry out ''systematic'' checks of travel documents on passengers travelling to a destination outside the [[Common Travel Area]] by air, rail or sea (though from time to time spot checks are carried out – in this case passports are '''not''' stamped); instead, airline/rail/ferry companies obtain passengers' travel document information at check-in or on departure and transmit the information electronically to the UK Border Force<ref name="UKExitChecks">{{cite web |url=https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/exit-checks-on-passengers-leaving-the-uk/exit-checks-fact-sheet#how-exit-checks-will-work |title=Exit checks fact sheet |date=29 March 2015 |publisher=[[Border Force]] and [[Home Office]] |access-date=16 October 2021 |archive-date=5 May 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210505172712/http://www.gov.uk/government/publications/exit-checks-on-passengers-leaving-the-uk/exit-checks-fact-sheet#how-exit-checks-will-work |url-status=live }}</ref>}}

''Formal exit control without passport stamping'':
* {{flagicon|Albania}} Albania (Entry & Exit stamp may issued upon request)
* {{flagicon|Australia}} Australia (Exit stamp issued upon explicit request)<ref name="Australia's Arrival and Departure procedures">{{cite web|url=https://www.abf.gov.au/entering-and-leaving-australia/crossing-the-border/at-the-border|title=At the Border|date=11 November 2018|website=Australian Border Force|publisher=Australian Government|access-date=10 January 2020|archive-date=29 February 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200229170704/https://www.abf.gov.au/entering-and-leaving-australia/crossing-the-border/at-the-border|url-status=live}}</ref>
* {{flagicon|China}} China (Exit stamp issued upon request when using e-Gate)
* {{flagicon|Costa Rica}} Costa Rica (only at Costa Rican airports; different entry and exit stamps are made at the border crossing with [[Panama]])
* {{flagicon|El Salvador}} El Salvador
* {{flagicon|Fiji}} Fiji
* {{flagicon|Hong Kong}} Hong Kong (no entry or exit stamps are issued, instead landing slips are issued upon arrival only)<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.immd.gov.hk/eng/useful_information/non-stamping-immigration-clearance.html |title=Non-stamping Immigration Clearance Arrangement |website=immd.gov.hk |access-date=10 January 2020 |archive-date=26 August 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210826034816/https://www.immd.gov.hk/eng/useful_information/non-stamping-immigration-clearance.html |url-status=live }}</ref>
* {{flagicon|Iran}} Iran<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.tehrantimes.com/news/437345/No-more-passport-stamps-for-foreign-nationals-visiting-Iran|title=No more passport stamps for foreign nationals visiting Iran|date=24 June 2019|website=Tehran Times|access-date=10 January 2020|archive-date=31 May 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220531024457/https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/437345/No-more-passport-stamps-for-foreign-nationals-visiting-Iran|url-status=live}}</ref>
* {{flagicon|Israel}} Israel (no entry or exit stamps are issued at [[Ben Gurion Airport]], instead landing slips are issued upon arrival and departure)
* {{flagicon|Japan}} Japan (Exit stamp issued upon request & when not using e-Gate since July 2019)<ref name="Japan Begin Screening Departing Foreign Travelers Facial Recognition Technology">{{cite news|title=departing or arriving|url=https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2019/07/02/national/japan-begin-screening-departing-foreign-travelers-facial-recognition-technology/|website=japantimes|publisher=Japan Times|access-date=2 July 2017|archive-date=19 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211019192408/https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2019/07/02/national/japan-begin-screening-departing-foreign-travelers-facial-recognition-technology/|url-status=live}}</ref>
* {{flagicon|Macau}} Macau (no entry or exit stamps are issued, instead landing slips are issued upon arrival only)
* {{flagicon|New Zealand}} New Zealand
* {{flagicon|South Korea}} South Korea (since 1 November 2016)
* {{flagicon|Panama}} Panama (only at Panamanian airports; stamps are made at the border crossing with [[Costa Rica]])
* {{flagicon|Taiwan}} Republic of China (exit stamp issued upon request & when not using e-Gate)
* {{flagicon|Singapore}} Singapore (no exit stamps since 22 April 2019)<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/foreigners-leaving-singapore-do-not-need-passports-stamped-11452944|title=Foreigners leaving Singapore will no longer have their passports stamped|website=CNA|access-date=10 January 2020|archive-date=19 June 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210619085233/https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/foreigners-leaving-singapore-do-not-need-passports-stamped-11452944}}</ref>
* {{flagicon|Saint Kitts and Nevis}} Saint Kitts and Nevis
* {{flagicon|Europe}} [[Schengen Area]] countries (when the [[Entry/Exit System]] becomes operational, it is anticipated that the passports of third-country nationals will not be stamped when they enter and leave the Schengen Area){{Citation needed|date=October 2021}}

===Exit permits===
Some countries in Europe maintain controversial exit visa systems in addition to regular border controls. For instance, Uzbekistan requires its own citizens to obtain exit visas prior to leaving for countries other than [[Commonwealth of Independent States|fellow CIS]] nations in eastern Europe. Several [[Gulf Cooperation Council|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 [[Visa policy of Russia#Exit|exit visas]] since one cannot exit Russia without a valid visa. Czechia has a similar policy.<ref>[http://www.sagit.cz/_texty/sb99326.htm Act on the status of aliens in Czech Republic] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170911135231/http://www.sagit.cz/_texty/sb99326.htm |date=11 September 2017 }}, §20</ref> 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 prior to engaging in international travel. Unlike most of these states, citizens of [[Yugoslavia]] enjoyed a significant freedom of international movement.{{efn|In 1960, local border traffic on the Yugoslavia — Italy border in [[Istria]] registered almost seven million crossings in both directions.<ref>''Review: Yugoslav Magazine'', 1961, [https://books.google.com/books?id=BVc8AQAAIAAJ&q="local+border+traffic p.43]</ref> In 1977 Yugoslavia had 55 local border traffic agreements with the neighboring countries, including 7 with Italy, 11 with Austria, 8 with Hungary, 10 with Romania, 8 with Bulgaria, 5 with Greece.<ref>Vojislav Mićović, Velimir Popović, ''Yugoslavia's openness to the world: the freedom of exchange of information and cultural goods and of movement of people'', p. 97</ref>}}

Certain Asian countries have policies that similarly require certain categories of citizens to seek official authorisation prior to travelling or emigrating. This is usually either as a way to enforce [[conscription|national service]] obligations or to protect migrant workers from travelling to places where they may be abused by employers. Singapore, for instance, operates an Exit Permit scheme in order to enforce the [[National service in Singapore|national service]] obligations of its male citizens and permanent residents.<ref>{{cite act |title=Enlistment Act |2=number25 |date=1970 |article=32 |articletype=s. |page= |url=https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/EA1970#legis }} {{Cite web |url=https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/EA1970 |title=Enlistment Act 1970 - Singapore Statutes Online |access-date=7 February 2021 |archive-date=24 January 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190124152427/https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/EA1970 |url-status=bot: unknown }}</ref> These restrictions vary according to age and status.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.ecitizen.gov.sg/Topics/Pages/National-Service-Exit-permit-requirements.aspx |title=National Service: Exit permit requirements |website=ecitizen.gov.sg |access-date=8 August 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170108045359/http://www.ecitizen.gov.sg/Topics/Pages/National-Service-Exit-permit-requirements.aspx |archive-date=8 January 2017 }}</ref> [[South Korea]] and [[Taiwan]]<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.ris.gov.tw/departure/app/|title=內政部役政署役男線上申請短期出境|website=ris.gov.tw|access-date=8 August 2018|archive-date=29 July 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180729081459/https://www.ris.gov.tw/departure/app/}}</ref> 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 prior to leaving the country and endorses their passports with [[Emigration Act, 1983|"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 is called a work permit and needs to be presented to immigration to leave the country.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://dol.gov.np/|title=Department of Labour – Government Of Nepal|access-date=8 August 2018|archive-date=10 August 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180810033012/http://dol.gov.np/|url-status=live}}</ref> 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 apply for special authorization if they wish to leave, or even travel within, the country.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://freedomhouse.org/country/eritrea/freedom-world/2021|title=Eritrea: Freedom in the World 2021 Country Report|access-date=27 October 2021|archive-date=27 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211027050538/https://freedomhouse.org/country/eritrea/freedom-world/2021|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |publisher=Amnesty International |title=Amnesty International Report 2017/18 – Eritrea |date=22 February 2018 |url=https://www.refworld.org/docid/5a99390ba.html |access-date=27 October 2021 |archive-date=14 September 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230914130859/https://www.refworld.org/docid/5a99390ba.html |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |author=((United Kingdom: Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Human Rights and Democracy)) |title=The 2012 Foreign & Commonwealth Office Report – Eritrea |date=15 April 2013 |url=https://www.refworld.org/docid/516fb7ca11.html |access-date=27 October 2021 |archive-date=15 September 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230915175352/https://www.refworld.org/docid/516fb7ca11.html |url-status=live }}</ref>

===Travel documents===
{{main|Travel document}}
[[File:Aeroport de dubai terminal 3 egate (echecking of passport).jpg|thumb|Automated travel document inspection at [[Dubai International Airport|Dubai Airport]]]]

Border control policies typically require travellers to present valid travel documents in order to ascertain their identity, nationality or 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{{efn|The local governments of most inhabited [[British Overseas Territories]] issue passports to [[British Overseas Territories citizen]]s resident holding [[belonger status]] in the territory concerned, while the Chinese [[Special Administrative Region]]s of Hong Kong and Macau issue passports to Chinese citizens holding permanent residence in the region concerned.}} 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===
{{main|Travel visa}}
{{multiple image
| image1            = Indian Tourist Visa 2016 stamped.jpg
| image2            = Singapore visa issued to stateless person.jpg
| footer            = Tourist visas issued by India ''(left)'' and Singapore ''(right)'' in a stateless person's travel document
| total_width       = 300
}}
{{multiple image|left|
|image1= Brazil visa and stamps.png
|caption1=Brazilian multiple entry visa in an American passport
|image2= Tourist visa of the People's Republic of China.jpg
|caption2=Tourist entry visa for mainland China
|total_width=300
|align=left
}}
[[File:Malaysian ENTRI.jpg|left|thumb|upright|Sample of printed out eNTRI slip for Indian and mainland Chinese citizens to clear Malaysian border controls without a visa]]
{{multiple image
|image1=FRTD.jpg
|caption1=Facilitated Rail Transit Document issued in Saint Petersburg for travel to Kaliningrad
|image2=Thai Visa on Arrival.jpg
|caption2=Thai visa issued on arrival in stamp form
|total_width=300}}

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 [[Visa policy of Mauritius|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, [[Visa policy of India|India]], [[Visa policy of Myanmar|Myanmar]], and [[Visa policy of Sri Lanka|Sri Lanka]] have introduced electronic visas to make border control less arduous for business travellers and tourists. [[Visa policy of Malaysia|Malaysia]] has introduced similar eVisa facilities, and has also introduced the eNTRI programme to expedite clearance for Indian citizens and Chinese citizens from the mainland. [[Visa policy of Thailand|Thailand regularly issues]] visas on arrival to many non-exempt visitors at major ports of entry in order to encourage tourism. Indonesia, in recent years, has progressively liberalized [[Visa policy of Indonesia|its visa regime]], no longer requiring visas or on-arrival visas from most nationals, while [[Visa policy of Singapore|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.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Mohamad Salleh |first1=Nur Asyiqin |title=Asia can benefit greatly from globalisation if countries work together: Ong Ye Kung |newspaper=The Straits Times |date=4 June 2017 |url=https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/south-east-asia-can-benefit-greatly-from-globalisation-if-countries-work-together-ong |access-date=20 August 2018 |archive-date=20 August 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180820105629/https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/south-east-asia-can-benefit-greatly-from-globalisation-if-countries-work-together-ong |url-status=live }}</ref>

Certain countries, predominantly but not exclusively in western Europe and the Americas, issue [[working holiday visa]]s for younger visitors to supplement their travel funds by working minor jobs. These are especially common in members of the European Union, and elsewhere in Europe. Saudi Arabia issues a [[Visa policy of Saudi Arabia#Hajj visas|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 [[journalism|journalists]]. Countries that require such visas include Cuba, [[Visa policy of China|China]], North Korea, Saudi Arabia, [[Visa policy of the United States#I visa|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 between two points in a single country. For instance, Russia permits vehicles to transit across the [[Saatse Boot]] between the Estonian villages of [[Lutepää]] and [[Sesniki]] without any visa or border checkpoint provided that they do not stop. Similar provisions are made for 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.

Many countries let individuals clear border controls using foreign visas.{{efn|For instance, the following jurisdictions permit visitors to use American visas to clear border controls:
{{div col|colwidth=18em}}
* {{flag|Albania}} — 90 days;
* {{flag|Antigua and Barbuda}} — 30 days; USD 100 visa waiver fee applies.
* {{flag|Belize}} — 30 days; USD 50 visa waiver fee applies.
* {{flag|Bosnia and Herzegovina}} — 30 days;<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.bhembassy.no/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=17&Itemid=28&lang=en |title=Embassy of Bosnia and Herzegovina in the Kingdom of Norway |access-date=3 August 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170528110326/http://www.bhembassy.no/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=17&Itemid=28&lang=en |archive-date=28 May 2017 }}</ref>
* {{flag|Canada}} — up to 6 months; only for citizens of Brazil, arriving by air with Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA).
* {{flag|Chile}} — 90 days; for nationals of China only.
* {{flag|Colombia}} — 90 days; applicable to certain nationalities only.
* {{flag|Costa Rica}} — 30 days or less if the visa is about to expire; must hold a multiple entry visa.
* {{flag|Dominican Republic}} — 90 days;
* {{flag|El Salvador}} — 90 days; not applicable to all nationalities.
* {{flag|Georgia}} — 90 days within any 180-day period;
* {{flag|Guatemala}} — 90 days; not applicable to all nationalities.
* {{flag|Honduras}} — 90 days; not applicable to all nationalities.
* {{flag|Jamaica}} — 30 days; not applicable to all nationalities.
* {{flag|Mexico}} — 180 days;<ref>[http://www.inm.gob.mx/index.php/page/Paises_Visa/en.html Countries and regions that require a visa to travel to Mexico] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151018020812/http://www.inm.gob.mx/index.php/page/paises_visa/en.html |date=18 October 2015}}, [[Instituto Nacional de Migración]], 27 September 2013.</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.timaticweb.com/cgi-bin/tim_website_client.cgi|archive-url=https://archive.today/20140314210748/https://www.timaticweb.com/cgi-bin/tim_website_client.cgi?FullText=1&COUNTRY=MX&SECTION=VI&SUBSECTION=00&user=KLMB2C&subuser=KLMB2C|title=None|archive-date=14 March 2014|access-date=3 August 2018}}</ref>
* {{flag|Montenegro}} — 30 days;
* {{flag|Nicaragua}} — 90 days; not applicable to all nationalities.
* {{flag|North Macedonia}} — 15 days;
* {{flag|Oman}} — certain nationalities can obtain an electronic Omani visa if holding a valid American visa.
* {{flag|Panama}} — 30/180 days; must hold a visa valid for at least 2 more entries.
* {{flag|Peru}} — 180 days; applicable to nationals of China and India only.
* {{flag|Philippines}} — 7 days for nationals of China from the mainland; 14 days for nationals of India.
* {{flag|Qatar}} — Non-visa-free nationals can obtain an ETA for 30 days if holding a valid American visa.
* {{flagicon|Taiwan}} [[Taiwan|Republic of China]]{{efn|name=ROC}} (Taiwan) — certain nationalities can obtain an online travel authorisation if holding a valid American visa.
* {{flag|São Tomé and Príncipe}} — 15 days;
* {{flag|Serbia}} — 90 days;
* {{flag|South Korea}} — 30 days;
* {{flag|Turkey}} — certain nationalities can obtain an electronic Turkish visa if holding a valid American visa.
* {{flag|UAE}} — Visa on arrival for 14 days; for nationals of India only. (Applicable for Indian citizens holding American Green Card.)<ref>{{Cite news |url=http://gulfnews.com/news/uae/tourism/uae-visa-on-arrival-for-indians-with-us-visa-green-card-1.2002287 |title=UAE visa on arrival for Indians with US visa, Green Card |access-date=3 August 2018 |archive-date=3 August 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180803133855/https://gulfnews.com/news/uae/tourism/uae-visa-on-arrival-for-indians-with-us-visa-green-card-1.2002287 |url-status=live }}</ref>
{{div col end}}
}} Notably, the Philippines permits nationals of India and China can use any of several foreign visas to clear border controls.{{efn|Nationals of China from the Mainland travelling as tourists and holding a valid visa issued by Australia, Canada, Japan, America, or a Schengen Area state may enter and stay without a visa for up to 7 days. Nationals of India holding a valid tourist, business or resident visa issued by Australia, Canada, Japan, Singapore, United Kingdom, America, or a Schengen Area state may enter and stay without a visa for up to 14 days. They may enter from any port of entry.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.financialexpress.com/article/lifestyle/travel-tourism/now-indians-can-travel-visa-free-to-the-philippines/71394/|title=Business News, India Stock Market, Personal Finance, IPO, Financial News Headlines|author=The Financial Express|website=Financial Express |access-date=2 April 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151008203806/http://www.financialexpress.com/article/lifestyle/travel-tourism/now-indians-can-travel-visa-free-to-the-philippines/71394/|archive-date=8 October 2015}}</ref>}} In order to encourage tourism by transit passengers, [[Visa policy of South Korea|South Korea]] permits passengers in transit who would otherwise require a South Korean visa to enter for up to thirty days utilizing an Australian, Canadian, American, or Schengen visa. Uniquely, the British territory of Bermuda has ceased to issue its own visas and instead requires that travellers either clear immigration visa-free in one of the three countries (Canada, America, and United Kingdom) to/from which it has direct flights, or hold a visa for one of them.

===Electronic visas and electronic travel authorisations===
{{main|Electronic visa}}
Beginning in the 2000s, many countries introduced e-visas and electronic travel authorisations (ETAs) as an alternative to traditional visas. An ETA is a kind of pre-arrival registration, which may or may not be officially classified as a visa depending on the issuing jurisdiction, required for foreign travellers who are exempted from obtaining a full visa. In contrast to the procedures that typically apply in regard to proper visas, per which the traveller normally has no recourse if rejected, if an ETA is rejected the traveler can choose to apply for a visa instead. In contrast, an e-visa is simply a visa that travellers can apply for and receive 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 in order to clear border controls upon arrival:
* ''Australia'':
** Electronic Travel Authority ([[Visa policy of Australia#Electronic visas|ETA]])<ref name=factsheet>{{cite web|title=Fact Sheet 53 – Australia's Entry System for Visitors|url=http://www.border.gov.au/about/corporate/information/fact-sheets/53entry-system|publisher=Department of Immigration and Border Protection|access-date=30 August 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150817235342/http://www.border.gov.au/about/corporate/information/fact-sheets/53entry-system|archive-date=17 August 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Policy study on an EU Electronic System for travel Authorization (EU ESTA) – Annexes: Introduction of the ETA, eVisitor and eVisa systems|url=http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/e-library/docs/pdf/esta_annexes_en.pdf|publisher=PricewaterhouseCoopers|access-date=25 September 2013|archive-date=4 March 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304225458/http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/e-library/docs/pdf/esta_annexes_en.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) for Electronic Travel Authority (subclass 601)|url=http://www.southkorea.embassy.gov.au/seol/FAQ_601.html#Q1|publisher=Australian Embassy, Republic of Korea|access-date=25 September 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130927084216/http://www.southkorea.embassy.gov.au/seol/FAQ_601.html#Q1|archive-date=27 September 2013}}</ref><ref name=ETA>{{cite web|title=Electronic Travel Authority (Subclass 601)|url=https://www.border.gov.au/Trav/Visa-1/601-|publisher=Department of Immigration and Border Protection|access-date=30 August 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171212173727/http://www.border.gov.au/Trav/Visa-1/601-|archive-date=12 December 2017}}</ref>
** eVisitor programme<ref name=evisitor>{{cite web|url=https://www.border.gov.au/Trav/Visa-1/651-|title=eVisitor (subclass 651)|publisher=Department of Immigration and Border Protection|access-date=30 August 2015|archive-date=10 December 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171210123027/http://www.border.gov.au/Trav/Visa-1/651-}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://spotidoc.com/doc/171167/evisitor--frequently-asked-questions-for-clients|title=eVisitor: Frequently asked questions for clients What is eVisitor?|website=spotidoc.com|access-date=31 March 2018|archive-date=1 April 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180401005155/http://spotidoc.com/doc/171167/evisitor--frequently-asked-questions-for-clients|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=For eVisitor Applicants – Who can apply|url=https://www.border.gov.au/Trav/Visa-1/651-#tab-content-1|publisher=Department of Immigration and Border Protection|access-date=30 August 2015|archive-date=10 December 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171210123027/http://www.border.gov.au/Trav/Visa-1/651-#tab-content-1}}</ref>
* ''[[East African Community]]'': From February 2014, [[Kenya]], [[Rwanda]] and [[Uganda]] issue an East African Tourist Visa.<ref>[http://allafrica.com/stories/201403071100.html East Africa: Single Visa to Boost East Regional Tourism] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304204110/http://allafrica.com/stories/201403071100.html |date=4 March 2016 }}, All Africa, 6 March 2014.</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title = V11-East Africa Tourist Visa|url = https://www.migration.gov.rw/our-services/visa/visitors-visa/v11-east-african-tourist-visa/|website = www.migration.gov.rw|access-date = 31 October 2021|archive-date = 17 November 2021|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20211117215043/https://www.migration.gov.rw/our-services/visa/visitors-visa/v11-east-african-tourist-visa/}}</ref>
* ''Hong Kong'': [[Mainland Travel Permit for Taiwan Residents]]
* ''India'': India permits nationals of most jurisdictions{{efn|This includes nationals of:<ref>[https://indianvisaonline.gov.in/evisa/tvoa.html e-Visa] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220621123747/https://indianvisaonline.gov.in/evisa/tvoa.html |date=21 June 2022 }}, Government of India.</ref>
* {{flagicon|European Union}} All [[European Union citizenship|European Union citizens]]
* {{flagdeco|United Kingdom}} [[British Overseas Territories citizen]]s of:
** {{flag|Anguilla}}
** {{flag|Cayman Islands}}
** {{flag|Montserrat}}
** {{flag|Turks and Caicos Islands}}
{{div col|colwidth=12em}}
* {{flag|Afghanistan}}
* {{flag|Albania}}
* {{flag|Andorra}}
* {{flag|Angola}}
* {{flag|Antigua and Barbuda}}
* {{flag|Argentina}}
* {{flag|Armenia}}
* {{flag|Australia}}
* {{flag|Azerbaijan}}
* {{flag|Bahamas}}
* {{flag|Barbados}}
* {{flag|Belarus}}
* {{flag|Belize}}
* {{flag|Benin}}
* {{flag|Bolivia}}
* {{flag|Bosnia and Herzegovina}}
* {{flag|Botswana}}
* {{flag|Brazil}}
* {{flag|Brunei}}
* {{flag|Burundi}}
* {{flag|Cambodia}}
* {{flag|Cameroon}}
* {{flag|Cape Verde}}
* {{flag|Chile}}
* {{flag|Colombia}}
* {{flag|Comoros}}
* {{flag|Costa Rica}}
* {{flag|Cuba}}
* {{flag|Djibouti}}
* {{flag|Dominica}}
* {{flag|Dominican Republic}}
* {{flag|East Timor}}
* {{flag|Ecuador}}
* {{flag|El Salvador}}
* {{flag|Equatorial Guinea}}
* {{flag|Eritrea}}
* {{flag|Eswatini}}
* {{flag|Fiji}}
* {{flag|Gabon}}
* {{flag|Gambia}}
* {{flag|Georgia}}
* {{flag|Ghana}}
* {{flag|Grenada}}
* {{flag|Guatemala}}
* {{flag|Guinea}}
* {{flag|Guyana}}
* {{flag|Haiti}}
* {{flag|Honduras}}
* {{flag|Iceland}}
* {{flag|Israel}}
* {{flag|Ivory Coast}}
* {{flag|Jamaica}}
* {{flag|Japan}}
* {{flag|Jordan}}
* {{flag|Kenya}}
* {{flag|Kiribati}}
* {{flag|Laos}}
* {{flag|Lesotho}}
* {{flag|Liberia}}
* {{flag|Liechtenstein}}
* {{flag|Madagascar}}
* {{flag|Malawi}}
* {{flag|Mali}}
* {{flag|Marshall Islands}}
* {{flag|Mauritius}}
* {{flag|Mexico}}
* {{flag|Micronesia}}
* {{flag|Moldova}}
* {{flag|Monaco}}
* {{flag|Mongolia}}
* {{flag|Montenegro}}
* {{flag|Mozambique}}
* {{flag|Myanmar}}
* {{flag|Namibia}}
* {{flag|Nauru}}
* {{flag|New Zealand}}
** {{flag|Cook Islands}}
** {{flag|Niue}}
* {{flag|Nicaragua}}
* {{flag|Niger}}
* {{flag|North Macedonia}}
* {{flag|Norway}}
* {{flag|Oman}}
* {{flag|Palau}}
* {{flag|Palestine}}
* {{flag|Panama}}
* {{flag|Papua New Guinea}}
* {{flag|Paraguay}}
* {{flag|Peru}}
* {{flag|Philippines}}
* {{flag|Russia}}
* {{flag|Rwanda}}
* {{flag|Saint Kitts and Nevis}}
* {{flag|Saint Lucia}}
* {{flag|Saint Vincent and the Grenadines}}
* {{flag|Samoa}}
* {{flag|San Marino}}
* {{flag|Senegal}}
* {{flag|Serbia}}
* {{flag|Seychelles}}
* {{flag|Sierra Leone}}
* {{flag|Singapore}}
* {{flag|Solomon Islands}}
* {{flag|South Africa}}
* {{flag|South Korea}}
* {{flag|Suriname}}
* {{flag|Switzerland}}
* {{flag|Taiwan}}
* {{flag|Tanzania}}
* {{flag|Thailand}}
* {{flag|Togo}}
* {{flag|Tonga}}
* {{flag|Trinidad and Tobago}}
* {{flag|Tuvalu}}
* {{flag|Uganda}}
* {{flag|Ukraine}}
* {{flag|United Arab Emirates}}
* {{flag|United States}}
* {{flag|Uruguay}}
* {{flag|Vanuatu}}
* {{flag|Vatican City}}
* {{flag|Venezuela}}
* {{flag|Vietnam}}
* {{flag|Zambia}}
* {{flag|Zimbabwe}}
{{div col end}}
}} to clear border controls using an e-visa.{{efn|{{div col|colwidth=12em}}
* [[Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport|Ahmedabad]]
* [[Sri Guru Ram Dass Jee International Airport|Amritsar]]
* [[Bagdogra Airport|Bagdogra]]
* [[Bengaluru International Airport|Bengaluru]]
* [[Chandigarh International Airport|Chandigarh]]
* [[Chennai International Airport|Chennai]]
* [[Coimbatore International Airport|Coimbatore]]
* [[Delhi International Airport|Delhi]]
* [[Gaya Airport|Gaya]]
* [[Dabolim Airport|Goa]]
* [[Lokpriya Gopinath Bordoloi International Airport|Guwahati]]
* [[Hyderabad International Airport|Hyderabad]]
* [[Jaipur Airport|Jaipur]]
* [[Cochin International Airport|Kochi]]
* [[Kolkata International Airport|Kolkata]]
* [[Calicut International Airport|Kozhikode]]
* [[Chaudhary Charan Singh International Airport|Lucknow]]
* [[Madurai Airport|Madurai]]
* [[Mangaluru Airport|Mangaluru]]
* [[Mumbai International Airport|Mumbai]]
* [[Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar International Airport|Nagpur]]
* [[Pune Airport|Pune]]
* [[Thiruvananthapuram International Airport|Thiruvananthapuram]]
* [[Tiruchirappalli International Airport|Tiruchirappalli]]
* [[Lal Bahadur Shastri Airport|Varanasi]]
* [[Visakhapatnam Airport|Visakhapatnam]]{{div col end}}}}{{efn|{{div col|colwidth=12em}}
* [[Cochin Port|Cochin]]
* [[Mormugao|Goa]]
* [[New Mangalore Port|Mangalore]]{{div col end}}}}<ref>[https://www.traveldailymedia.com/india-denies-e-visas-to-uk-and-canadian-nationals/ India denies e-visas to UK and Canadian nationals], Travel Daily, 22 September 2021.</ref>
* ''Kenya'': From 1 January 2021, Kenya solely issues e-visas and physical visas are no longer available.<ref>[http://immigration.go.ke/visa-section/ Visa and exemption services] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230328000547/http://immigration.go.ke/visa-section/ |date=28 March 2023 }}, Directorate of Immigration Services of Kenya.</ref>
* ''New Zealand'': Electronic Travel Authority (NZeTA)<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.immigration.govt.nz/about-us/media-centre/news-notifications/electronic-travel-authority|title=Electronic Travel Authority |website=immigration.govt.nz|access-date=2 July 2019|archive-date=22 July 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190722210017/https://www.immigration.govt.nz/about-us/media-centre/news-notifications/electronic-travel-authority}}</ref>
* ''North America'': [[Electronic Travel Authorization (Canada)|Canadian ETA]], [[Electronic System for Travel Authorization|US Electronic System for Travel Authorisation]]
* ''Pakistan'': [[Electronic Travel Authorization (Pakistan)|Pakistani ETA]].{{efn|Eligible jurisdictions are as follows:<ref>{{cite web|url=https://visa.nadra.gov.pk/tourist-friendly-countriestfc/|title=List of Countries for Visa on Arrival (Tourist)|access-date=19 October 2021|archive-date=9 August 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190809052811/https://visa.nadra.gov.pk/tourist-friendly-countriestfc/|url-status=live}}</ref>
{{div col|colwidth=12em}}
* {{flag|Angola}}
* {{flag|Argentina}}
* {{flag|Australia}}
* {{flag|Austria}}
* {{flag|Azerbaijan}}
* {{flag|Bahamas}}
* {{flag|Bahrain}}
* {{flag|Barbados}}
* {{flag|Botswana}}
* {{flag|Brunei}}
* {{flag|Canada}}
* {{flag|China}}
* {{flag|Costa Rica}}
* {{flag|Finland}}
* {{flag|France}}
* {{flag|Germany}}
* {{flag|Ghana}}
* {{flag|Iceland}}
* {{flag|Indonesia}}
* {{flag|Iran}}
* {{flag|Italy}}
* {{flag|Japan}}
* {{flag|Jordan}}
* {{flag|Kuwait}}
* {{flag|Lithuania}}
* {{flag|Luxembourg}}
* {{flag|Malaysia}}
* {{flag|Maldives}}
* {{flag|Malta}}
* {{flag|Monaco}}
* {{flag|Mozambique}}
* {{flag|Nepal}}
* {{flag|Netherlands}}
* {{flag|New Zealand}}
* {{flag|Norway}}
* {{flag|Oman}}
* {{flag|Paraguay}}
* {{flag|Philippines}}
* {{flag|Poland}}
* {{flag|Qatar}}
* {{flag|Russia}}
* {{flag|Rwanda}}
* {{flag|Saint Kitts and Nevis}}
* {{flag|Saint Lucia}}
* {{flag|Samoa}}
* {{flag|Saudi Arabia}}
* {{flag|Singapore}}
* {{flag|South Africa}}
* {{flag|South Korea}}
* {{flag|Spain}}
* {{flag|Sri Lanka}}
* {{flag|Sweden}}
* {{flag|Switzerland}}
* {{flag|Tajikistan}}
* {{flag|Tanzania}}
* {{flag|Thailand}}
* {{flag|Tonga}}
* {{flag|Trinidad and Tobago}}
* {{flag|Tunisia}}
* {{flag|Turkey}}
* {{flag|United Arab Emirates}}
* {{flag|United Kingdom}}
* {{flag|United States}}
* {{flag|Zambia}}
{{div col end}}
}}
* ''South Korea'': eligible visa-free visitors must obtain [[Korea Electronic Travel Authorization]] (K-ETA).
* ''Sri Lanka'': [[Electronic Travel Authorization (Sri Lanka)|Sri Lankan ETA]]<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.eta.gov.lk/slvisa/visainfo/fees.jsp#profee |title=Online Visa Application |access-date=7 September 2018 |archive-date=27 April 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190427214849/http://eta.gov.lk/slvisa/visainfo/fees.jsp#profee |url-status=live }}</ref>
* ''Qatar'': ETA needed for up to 30 days.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/article/14/09/2017/Qatar-launches-Electronic-Travel-Authorisation-System|title=Qatar launches Electronic Travel Authorisation System|date=14 September 2017|access-date=31 October 2021|archive-date=17 December 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171217155222/http://thepeninsulaqatar.com/article/14/09/2017/Qatar-launches-Electronic-Travel-Authorisation-System|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20170628080618/http://www.qatarvisaservice.com/Qatar-Online/QROnline/VisaCategoryAndPricingDetails/DisplayVisaCategoryAndPricingDetails#no-back Qatar visas]</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=https://qatar.vfsevisa.com/Qatar-Online/QROnline/VisaCategoryAndPricingDetails/Faq#7 |title=FAQS |access-date=31 October 2021 |archive-date=15 December 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181215212138/https://qatar.vfsevisa.com/Qatar-Online/QROnline/VisaCategoryAndPricingDetails/Faq#7 }}</ref>
* ''United Kingdom'': Electronic Visa Waiver, or EVW{{efn|A holder of an EVW authorisation can visit and/or study in the UK for up to 6 months without a visa. An EVW is only valid for one entry, and a new EVW must be obtained each time an eligible person wishes to enter the UK to visit and/or study for up to 6 months without a visa. The EVW is valid for visits up to 90 days to Ireland once a holder has cleared immigration in the United Kingdom.}}<ref name="Oman evisa">{{cite web|url=https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-electronic-visa-waiver-introduced-for-oman-qatar-and-uae|title=UK electronic visa waiver introduced for Oman, Qatar and UAE|access-date=8 August 2018|archive-date=23 July 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190723175408/https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-electronic-visa-waiver-introduced-for-oman-qatar-and-uae|url-status=live}}</ref> The [[Nationality and Borders Bill]], before the parliament in Spring 2022, includes a proposal to introduce the [[Electronic Travel Authorisation (UK)|Electronic Travel Authorisation]] system for all non-UK and Irish citizens.<ref>{{Cite web|first=Ninian|last=Wilson|url=https://www.thenational.scot/news/20012805.nationality-borders-bill-amendments-voted/|title=How MPs voted on amendments by Lords to Nationality and Borders Bill|website=[[The National (Scotland)|The National]]|date=22 March 2022|access-date=23 March 2022|archive-date=23 March 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220323130543/https://www.thenational.scot/news/20012805.nationality-borders-bill-amendments-voted/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="ETA Gov">{{Cite web |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220320104444/https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nationality-and-borders-bill-electronic-travel-authorisation-factsheet/nationality-and-borders-bill-electronic-travel-authorisation-factsheet |date=2022-02-25 |url=https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nationality-and-borders-bill-electronic-travel-authorisation-factsheet/nationality-and-borders-bill-electronic-travel-authorisation-factsheet |title=Nationality and Borders Bill: Electronic Travel Authorisation factsheet |website=[[Gov.uk]]|archive-date=2022-03-20 |url-status=live}}</ref>

===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.<ref name=timatic>{{cite web|title=Country information (passport section)|work=[[Timatic]]|publisher=[[International Air Transport Association]] (IATA) through [[Olympic Air]] |url=http://cms.olympicair.com/timatic/webdocsI/countryinfo.html |access-date=3 August 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190129030557/http://cms.olympicair.com/timatic/webdocsI/countryinfo.html |archive-date=29 January 2019}}</ref> 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 [[House of Representatives (Libya)|Tobruk government]].<ref name=timatic/><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/news/2017/4/11/khalifa-haftar-introduces-a-muslim-ban-in-east-libya |title=Khalifa Haftar introduces a 'Muslim ban' in east Libya|first=Robert|last=Cusack|date=11 April 2017 |website=Alaraby.co.uk}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.libyanexpress.com/haftar-issues-travel-ban-on-six-muslim-countries-in-eastern-libya/|title=Haftar issues travel ban on six Muslim countries in eastern Libya |publisher=Libyan Express|date=11 April 2017 |website=Libyanexpress.com|access-date=10 August 2017}}</ref> The majority of [[Arab]] countries, as well as Iran and Malaysia, ban Israeli citizens,<ref name=timatic/> however exceptional entry to Malaysia is possible with approval from the [[Ministry of Home Affairs (Malaysia)|Ministry of Home Affairs]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.imi.gov.my/index.php/en/main-services/visa/visa-requirement-by-country|title=Visa requirements by country |publisher=Immigration Department of Malaysia|access-date=3 August 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170210231743/http://www.imi.gov.my/index.php/en/main-services/visa/visa-requirement-by-country|archive-date=10 February 2017}}</ref> Certain countries may also restrict entry to those with Israeli stamps or visas in their passports. As a result of tension over the [[Republic of Artsakh|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 [[Executive Order 13780#Presidential Proclamation 9645|restrictions]] imposed by the [[First presidency of Donald Trump|Trump administration]],<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/24/us/politics/new-order-bars-almost-all-travel-from-seven-countries.html |title=New Order Indefinitely Bars Almost All Travel from Seven Countries |newspaper=The New York Times |date=24 September 2017 |last1=Shear |first1=Michael D.}}</ref> which were subsequently repealed by the [[Biden administration]] on 20 January 2021.<ref name=":6">{{cite web|date=2021-01-21 |title=Proclamation on Ending Discriminatory Bans on Entry to The United States|website=The White House |url=https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/20/proclamation-ending-discriminatory-bans-on-entry-to-the-united-states/|access-date=2021-01-24}}</ref> 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 [[Multiple citizenship|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 prior to arrival and thereby skip [[#Border checkpoints|checkpoints]] upon arrival. Aside from simplifying arrival formalities, this enables border control authorities to deny entry to potentially inadmissible travellers prior to their embarking and to reduce congestion at border checkpoints located at ports of arrival.
* '''Hong Kong and mainland China''': There are two border crossings between Hong Kong and the Chinese mainland at which border controls imposed by the two jurisdictions are colocated:
** West Kowloon Railway Station ({{lang-zh|s=香港西九龙站|t=香港西九龍站}}): A component of the [[Guangzhou–Shenzhen–Hong Kong Express Rail Link]] ({{lang-zh|t=廣深港高速鐵路|广深港高速铁路|p=Guǎng–Shēn–Gǎng Gāosù Tiělù}}), West Kowloon Station contains a "[[Hong Kong West Kowloon railway station#Mainland Port Area|Mainland Port Area]] ({{lang-zh|s=站内地口岸区|t=站內地口岸區}})", essentially enabling passengers and goods to clear mainland Chinese immigration on Hong Kong soil.
** Shenzhen Bay Port ({{lang-zh|s=深圳湾口岸|t=深圳灣口岸}}): The land border checkpoint at [[Shenzhen Bay Port]] in the mainland contains a Hong Kong Port Area ({{lang-zh|t=港方口岸區|s=港方口岸区}}) which enables passengers and goods to clear Hong Kong border controls in the mainland. The checkpoint is located in the Chinese mainland on land leased from the city of [[Shenzhen]] in [[Guangdong]] province. By enabling travellers to clear both Chinese and Hong Kong border controls in one place, it eliminates any need for a second checkpoint on the Hong Kong side of the [[Hong Kong–Shenzhen Western Corridor|Shenzhen Bay Bridge]].

<gallery>
File:Shenzhen Bay Port Hong Kong Entrance 201703.jpg|Entrance of the Hong Kong Port Area of the Shenzhen Bay Port Passenger Terminal Building
File:HK West Kowloon Station Mainland Port Area B3 Entrance 201809.jpg|Entrance of the Mainland Port Area at West Kowloon Station
File:HK West Kowloon Station B3 Mainland Port Area Police Station 2018.jpg|Mainland Chinese police station in the Mainland Port Area
File:Xijiulong rujing.jpg|Mainland Chinese entry stamp issued at Hong Kong West Kowloon railway station
File:201901 Xijiulong Mainland Port Exit Stamp.jpg|Mainland Chinese exit stamp issued at Hong Kong West Kowloon railway station in a [[Chinese passport]]
</gallery>
[[File:MRT map SGJB.svg|thumb|Map of the upcoming Rapid Transit system]]
* '''Singapore and Malaysia''':
** Woodlands Train Checkpoint ({{langx|ms|Pusat Pemeriksaan Kereta Api Woodlands}}, {{lang-zh|s=兀兰火车关卡}}, {{langx|ta|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 ({{langx|ms|Sistem Transit Aliran Johor Bahru–Singapura}}, {{lang-zh|s=新山－新加坡捷运系统}}, {{langx|ta| ஜோகூர் பாரு – சிங்கப்பூர் விரைவான போக்குவரத்து அமைப்பு}}, RTS): The upcoming [[Johor Bahru–Singapore Rapid Transit System|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 [[Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore)|Singapore MRT system]] ([[Thomson–East Coast MRT line|Thomson–East Coast Line]]) and [[Johor Bahru Sentral railway station|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 arrival border controls on both sides of the border.<ref name="iskandar">{{Cite web|url=http://www.iskandar.asia/insight/iskandar-malaysia-in-the-news/2-uncategorised/145-final-plan-for-singapore-johor-bahru-rapid-transit-system-rts-link-by-end-of-2014.html |title=Final plan for Singapore-Johor Bahru Rapid Transit System (RTS) link by end of 2014|website=iskandar.asia}}</ref><ref>{{cite press release |title=Calling of Tender for Malaysia-Singapore Rapid Transit System (RTS Link) Engineering Study on 18 Nov 2011 |date=16 November 2011 |publisher=Malaysia Land Transport Authority |url=http://app.lta.gov.sg/apps/news/page.aspx?c%3D2%26id%3D0pt1z213cvn5f2h2t1ti39b4tjkckorbk76uh7r32nykq33d1n |access-date=27 August 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140903033605/http://app.lta.gov.sg/apps/news/page.aspx?c=2&id=0pt1z213cvn5f2h2t1ti39b4tjkckorbk76uh7r32nykq33d1n |archive-date=3 September 2014}}</ref>
* '''Malaysia and Thailand''':
** Padang Besar railway station ({{langx|th|สถานีรถไฟปาดังเบซาร์}}, {{langx|ms|Stesen keretapi Padang Besar}}): The [[Padang Besar railway station]] in [[Padang Besar, Malaysia]] has co-located border control facilities for both Malaysia and Thailand, although the station is wholly located inside Malaysian territory (albeit just 200 metres south of the [[Malaysia-Thailand border]]). The facilities for each country operate from separate counters inside the railway station building at the platform level.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.malaysiatrains.com/padang-besar-railway-station-train-times-tickets/ |title=Padang Besar Railway Station – Train times & tickets |date=8 August 2018 |publisher=Malaysia Trains|access-date=11 June 2019}}</ref> Passengers entering Thailand clear Malaysian and Thai border formalities here in Malaysian territory before boarding their [[State Railway of Thailand]] trains which then cross the actual borderline several minutes after departing the station. Passengers from Thailand entering Malaysia are also processed here, using the same counters as there are no separate counters for processing entries and exits for either country.
* '''United Kingdom and the Schengen Area''': Border control for travel between the United Kingdom and the Schengen Area features significant prescreening under the [[juxtaposed controls]] programme for travel both by ferry and rail. This includes customs and immigration prescreening on both sides of the [[Channel Tunnel]],{{efn|In order to facilitate juxtaposed controls, the United Kingdom and France established or "control zones" at both ends of the Channel Tunnel, per which British authorities exercise authority within the control zone on the French side, and French authorities exercise authority within the control zone on the UK side, under a system of [[juxtaposed controls]]. Violations in the control zone are treated as if they occurred within the territory of the adjoining state within that zone, and extradition is not required to remove a violator to the operating state for prosecution. Officers of the adjoining state may carry firearms within the control zone.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/lords/1993/jul/05/channel-tunnel-international|title=Channel Tunnel (International Arrangements) Order 1993 (Hansard, 5 July 1993)|website=[[Hansard|Parliamentary Debates (Hansard)]]|date=5 July 1993|access-date=22 July 2016}}</ref>}} and immigration-only prescreening for ferry passengers and on the [[Eurostar]] between the United Kingdom and stations located in Belgium, France, and the Netherlands. Eurostar and Eurotunnel passengers departing from the Schengen area go through both French, Dutch, or Belgian exit border control and British entry border controls before departures, while passengers departing from the United Kingdom, including those departing for Belgium or the Netherlands, undergo French border controls on British soil. For travel by ferry, French entry border control for ferries between Dover and Calais or [[Dunkirk|Dunkerque]] takes place at the [[Port of Dover]], whilst French exit and British entry border control takes place at [[Calais]] and Dunkerque. For travel by rail, twelve juxtaposed border control checkpoints are currently in operation.{{efn|Currently operational rail checkpoints include:{{div col|colwidth=18em}}
* In Belgium<ref>{{cite web |url=http://publications.europa.eu/resource/cellar/8ec06bfe-f76c-479b-a230-7dcd9af53966.0006.02/DOC_1 |title=Update of the list of border crossing points referred to in Article 2(8) of Regulation (EC) No 562/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 establishing a Community Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code) (2007/C 316/01) |date=28 December 2007 |publisher=European Council}}</ref>
** [[Brussels-South railway station|Brussel-Zuid/Bruxelles-Midi]]
* In France<ref name="2015/C 229/06"> {{cite web|url=http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.C_.2015.229.01.0005.01.ENG&toc=OJ:C:2015:229:FULL|title=Update of the list of border crossing points referred to in Article 2(8) of Regulation (EC) No 562/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Community Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code) (2015/C 229/06) |date=14 July 2015 |publisher=European Council}}</ref>
** [[Bourg-Saint-Maurice station|Bourg-Saint-Maurice]]
** [[Calais-Fréthun station|Calais-Fréthun]]
** Coquelles
** [[Gare du Nord]]
** [[Lille-Europe station|Lille-Europe]]
** [[Moûtiers]]
* In the Netherlands:<ref>{{cite news |title=Eurostar's Amsterdam odyssey kicks off to little fanfare |url=https://www.euractiv.com/section/railways/news/eurostars-amsterdam-odyssey-kicks-off-to-little-fanfare/ |work=[[EURACTIV]] |date=27 October 2020}}</ref>
** [[Rotterdam Centraal station]]
** [[Amsterdam Centraal station]]
* In the UK<ref name="2015/C 229/06"/>
** [[Ashford International railway station|Ashford International]]
** [[Ebbsfleet International railway station|Ebbsfleet International]]
** [[St Pancras railway station|St Pancras International]]
{{div col end}}}}

<gallery>
File:France LFT Londres passport stamp.jpg|[[Passport stamp|Entry stamp]] into the [[Schengen Area]] issued by the [[Direction centrale de la police aux frontières|French Border Police]] at St Pancras International station ('LFT' stands for 'Liaison fixe transmanche' (literally: cross-Channel fixed link).)
File:France LFT Paris Nord passport stamp.jpg|[[Passport stamp|Exit stamp]] from the Schengen Area issued by the French Border Police at Gare du Nord
File:Uk paris entry.jpg|British [[Passport stamp|entry stamp]] issued by the [[UK Border Force]] at Gare du Nord
File:Bruxelles-Midi-Eurostar-Check-in-and-Passport-Control03.JPG|Juxtaposed immigration controls at [[Brussels-South railway station|Brussel-Zuid/Bruxelles-Midi railway station]], with the [[Federal Police (Belgium)|Belgian Federal Police]] carrying out exit immigration checks from the [[Schengen Area]] in front, and the [[Border Force|UK Border Force]] carrying UK entry immigration checks behind
File:Eurotunnel Coquelles UK Border.jpg|[[Border Force|UK Border Force]] checkpoint at the [[Eurotunnel Calais Terminal]], where entry checks are carried out before boarding the train to the UK
File:London-St Pancras-French-immigration-control.JPG|[[French Border Police]] checkpoint at [[St Pancras railway station|London St Pancras International station]], where entry immigration checks to the [[Schengen Area]] are carried out before boarding the train
</gallery>

* '''United States''': The [[Federal government of the United States|U.S. government]] operates [[United States border preclearance|border preclearance facilities]] at a number of ports and airports in foreign territory. They are staffed and operated by [[U.S. Customs and Border Protection]] officers. Travellers pass through the U.S. [[U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement|Immigration and Customs]], [[United States Public Health Service|Public Health]], and [[United States Department of Agriculture|Agriculture]] inspections before boarding their aircraft, ship, or train. This process is intended to streamline border procedures, reduce congestion at ports of entry, and facilitate travel between the preclearance location and American airports unequipped to handle international travellers. These facilities are present at the majority of major Canadian airports, as well as selected airports in Bermuda, Aruba, the Bahamas, Abu Dhabi<ref>{{cite news |url=http://ph.news.yahoo.com/us-customs-pre-clearance-facility-opens-uae-162934663--sector.html |title=US Customs pre-clearance facility opens in UAE |work=Yahoo! News Philippines |date=28 January 2014 |access-date=12 April 2014}}</ref> and Ireland.<ref>{{cite news |last=Batrawy |first=Aya. |date=26 January 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140126203639/http://www.seattlepi.com/news/world/article/US-Customs-passenger-facility-opens-in-UAE-5176441.php |title=US Customs passenger facility opens in UAE |agency=Associated Press |work=Seattle Post Intelligencer |url=http://www.seattlepi.com/news/world/article/US-Customs-passenger-facility-opens-in-UAE-5176441.php |archive-date=26 January 2014}}</ref> Facilities located in Canada accept [[NEXUS]] cards and [[United States Passport Card|United States Passport cards]] (land/sea entry only) in lieu of passports. A preclearance facility is currently being planned at [[Dubai International Airport]].<ref>{{cite news |url=http://ph.news.yahoo.com/us-border-pre-clearance-facility-planned-dubai-220024656--sector.html |title=US border pre-clearance facility planned in Dubai |work=Yahoo! News Philippines |date=15 February 2014 |access-date=12 April 2014}}</ref> Citizens of the Bahamas who enter United States through either of the two preclearance facilities in that country enjoy an exemption from the general requirement to hold a visa as long as they can sufficiently prove that they do not have a significant criminal record in either the Bahamas or the U.S. All Bahamians applying for admission at a port-of-entry other than the preclearance facilities located in [[Nassau International Airport|Nassau]] or [[Freeport International Airport|Freeport International]] airports are required to be in possession of a valid visa.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://help.cbp.gov/s/article/Article-1250?language=en_US |title=Bahamian citizen document requirements |access-date=13 June 2020}}</ref> Preclearance facilities are also operated at [[Pacific Central Station]], the Port of Vancouver, and the Port of Victoria in [[British Columbia]], and there are plans to open one at [[Montreal Central Station]] in Quebec.

<gallery>
File:YUL U.S. Departures Sector.JPG|The interior of the U.S. preclearance departures at Montréal
Image:shannon2.jpg|[[Shannon Airport]] preclearance
File:Stamps in a United States passport.JPG|Canadian and U.S. stamps in an [[United States passport|U.S. passport]], both issued in [[Montréal-Pierre Elliott Trudeau International Airport|Montréal]]
</gallery>

* '''Informal prescreening''': In some cases countries can introduce controls that function as border controls but are not border controls legally and do not need to be performed by government agencies. Normally they are performed and organised by private companies, based on a law that they have to check that passengers do not travel into a specific country if they are not allowed to. Such controls can take effect in one country based on the law of another country without any formalised border control prescreening agreement in force. Even if they are not border controls function as such. The most prominent example is airlines which check passports and visas before passengers are allowed to board the aircraft. Also for some passenger boats, such checks are performed before boarding.

==Expedited border controls==
{{see also|Automated border control system}}
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 as a result of the [[One Country, Two Systems]] and [[One China Policy|One China]] policies. [[Chinese nationality law|Chinese nationals]] from [[Hong Kong residents|Hong Kong]], [[Macau Resident Identity Card|Macau]], and the [[Taiwanese nationality law|Republic of China]]{{efn|name=ROC}} are required to use special internal travel documents to enter [[China|the mainland]]. Similar restrictions exist on the use of ABTC for Chinese citizens of other regions entering areas administered by the Republic of China. (see: [[#Internal border controls|Internal border controls]]).
* {{flag|Australia}}: [[SmartGate]]s located at major Australian airports allow [[Australian passport|Australian ePassport]] holders and [[ePassport]] holders of a number of other countries to clear immigration controls more rapidly, and to enhance travel security by performing passport control checks electronically.<ref name="newshub">{{Cite news|url=http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2015/07/new-smartgate-aims-to-decrease-airport-queues.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170116204923/http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2015/07/new-smartgate-aims-to-decrease-airport-queues.html|archive-date=16 January 2017|title=New SmartGate aims to decrease airport queues|newspaper=Newshub|date=23 July 2015}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{Cite web|title=New Zealand Customs Service: How does SmartGate work?|url=http://www.customs.govt.nz/features/smartgate/howsmartgateworks/Pages/default.aspx |website=customs.govt.nz|access-date=2 August 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170320124138/http://www.customs.govt.nz/features/smartgate/howsmartgateworks/Pages/default.aspx|archive-date=20 March 2017}}</ref> These checks would otherwise require manual processing by a human which is time-consuming, costly and potentially error-prone.<ref name="oag.govt.nz">{{Cite web|url=http://www.oag.govt.nz/2012/realising-benefits/part5.htm|title=Part 5: Processing passengers faster at airports — Office of the Auditor-General New Zealand|website=oag.govt.nz|access-date=15 January 2017}}</ref>
* {{flagicon|United Kingdom}}{{flagicon|Ireland}} British Isles: [[ePassport gates]] in the British Isles 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 the British Isles, offering an alternative to using desks staffed by immigration officers. The gates use [[facial recognition system]] to verify the user's identity by comparing the user's facial features to those recorded in the photograph stored in the chip in their [[biometric passport]]. [[British nationality law|British]] citizens, [[European Economic Area]] citizens and citizens of [[Australian nationality law|Australia]], [[Canadian nationality law|Canada]], [[Japanese nationality law|Japan]], [[New Zealand nationality law|New Zealand]], [[Singaporean nationality law|Singapore]], [[South Korean nationality law|South Korea]], [[Taiwanese nationality law|Taiwan]] and the [[United States nationality law|United States]] as well as [[Chinese nationality law|Chinese]] citizens of [[Hong Kong]] who are enrolled in the Registered Traveller Service,<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.gov.uk/registered-traveller |title=Registered Traveller: Faster entry through the UK border}}</ref> can use ePassport gates at 14 ports of entry in the United Kingdom{{efn|
{{div col|colwidth=18em}}
* [[Birmingham Airport]]
* [[Bristol Airport]]
* [[Cardiff Airport]]
* [[East Midlands Airport]]
* [[Edinburgh Airport]]
* [[St Pancras railway station|Eurostar St Pancras Terminal]]
* [[Brussels-South railway station|Eurostar Brussels-Zuid Terminal]]
* [[Gatwick Airport]] (North and South Terminals)
* [[Glasgow Airport]]
* [[Heathrow Airport]] (Terminals 2, 3, 4 and 5)
* [[London City Airport]]
* [[Luton Airport]]
* [[Manchester Airport]] (Terminals 1, 2 and 3)
* [[Stansted Airport]]
{{div col end}}
}} 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 card]]s can be used at eGates in Dublin Airport.
* {{flag|Caribbean Community}}: [[CARIPASS]] is a voluntary travel card programme that will provide secure and simple border crossings for citizens and legal residents of participating{{efn|The following CARICOM jurisdictions are participating in the programme:<ref>{{cite web |title=CARICOM Member States and Associate Members |url=http://www.caricom.org/jsp/community/member_states.jsp?menu=community |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120316204349/http://www.caricom.org/jsp/community/member_states.jsp?menu=community%7D |archive-date=16 March 2012 }}</ref>
{{div col|colwidth=12em}}
* [[Antigua and Barbuda]]
* [[Barbados]]
* [[Dominica]]
* [[Grenada]]
* [[Guyana]]
* [[Jamaica]]
* [[St. Kitts and Nevis]]
* [[Saint Lucia]]
* [[St. Vincent and the Grenadines]]
* [[Trinidad and Tobago]]
{{div col end}}
}} Caribbean Community jurisdictions.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://abcnews.go.com/Travel/wireStory?id=12305062 |title=Travel News, Tips & Deals |website=ABC News}}</ref> The CARIPASS initiative is coordinated by the Implementation Agency for Crime and Security (CARICOM IMPACS), and seeks to provide standardised border control facilities within participating Caribbean communities.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.caricom.org/jsp/single_market/caripass.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101213023423/http://caricom.org/jsp/single_market/caripass.pdf |archive-date=13 December 2010 |title=What is CARIPASS?}}</ref> CARIPASS is accepted as a valid travel document within and between participating member states and will allow cardholders to access automated gate facilities at immigration checkpoints that will use biometric technology to verify the user.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://caricomimpacs.org/|title=CARICOM IMPACS – The Caribbean Community Implementation Agency for Crime and Security}}</ref>
* China:
** {{flagicon|China}} ''Mainland China'': Residents in the PRC, both Chinese citizens and foreign residents (not tourists) can use the Chinese E-Channel after registration, which is done at the border, before leaving the Mainland. Chinese citizens with Hong Kong or Macau Permanent Residence can use their Home Return Permit instead of their passport to enter and leave the Mainland.
** {{flagicon|Hong Kong}}{{flagicon|Macau}} ''Hong Kong & Macau'': The [[e-Channel|Automated Passenger Clearance System]] ({{lang-zh|t=自助出入境檢查閘機}}), colloquially known as the e-Channel) is an automated border control facility available at airports in [[Hong Kong International Airport|Hong Kong]] and [[Macau International Airport|Macau]], and at land borders between the mainland and the Special Administrative Regions. It is open to residents in the appropriate regions, and to selected foreign nationals.{{efn|Holders of the following foreign passports are eligible:<ref name=HK>{{cite web |url=https://www.news.gov.hk/eng/2018/09/20180914/20180914_181229_406.html |title=HK, Thailand auto clearance set |date=14 September 2018 |publisher=[[Government of Hong Kong]] |access-date=27 April 2021}}</ref>
{{div col|colwidth=18em}}
* {{flagicon|Australia}} [[Australian passport]]
* {{flagicon|Germany}} [[German passport]]
* {{flagicon|Republic of Korea}} [[Republic of Korea passport]]
* {{flagicon|Singapore}} [[Singapore passport]]
* {{flagicon|Thailand}} [[Thai passport]]
{{div col end}}
}} In Hong Kong, the {{Proper name|eChannel}} is also available to non-residents on departure, without registration, and to registered non-residents who qualify as "frequent travellers", including Chinese citizens from the Mainland, for both arrival and departure. Finally, Hong Kong's and Macau's {{Proper name|eChannel}} systems recognise each other's Permanent Resident ID card, after registration in an automated kiosk at the ferry terminal.
* {{flag|Japan}}: Along with the introduction of [[J-BIS]], an "Automated gate" ({{langx|ja|自動化ゲート}}) was set up at Terminal 1 and 2 at [[Narita Airport]], [[Haneda Airport]], [[Chubu Centrair Airport]] and [[Kansai Airport]].<ref name="his">[http://www.his-j.com/tyo/corp/btc/news/20071106nrt.html 「成田空港、11/20より自動化ゲート導入」] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090225170022/http://www.his-j.com/tyo/corp/btc/news/20071106nrt.html |date=25 February 2009}} H.I.S.海外出張ニュース</ref> With this system, when a person enters or leaves the country, rather than having to be processed by an examiner there, a person can use a machine at the gate, thereby making both entry and departure simpler and easier, as well as more convenient.<ref name="moj">[http://www.moj.go.jp/NYUKAN/nyukan63.html 「自動化ゲートの運用について」] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080821030411/http://www.moj.go.jp/NYUKAN/nyukan63.html |date=21 August 2008}} 法務省入国管理局 2007年11月</ref> Japanese people with valid passports, foreigners with both valid passports (this includes refugees with valid travel certificates and re-entry permits) and re-entry permits can use this system.<ref name="moj"/>
* {{flag|Mexico}}: [[Viajero Confiable]] is a Mexican trusted traveller programme which allows members to pass securely through customs and immigration controls in reduced time,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.viajeroconfiable.inm.gob.mx/index.php/home/aplication|title=Application|website=viajeroconfiable.inm.gob.mx|publisher=Programa Viajero Confiable}}</ref> using automated kiosks at participating airports. Viajero Confiable was introduced in three airports in 2014 and has since expanded to additional sites. Like the NEXUS, Global Entry, and TSA PreCheck programs, Viajero Confiable members traveling via participating airports may use designated lanes which allow them to speedily and securely clear customs, because the Mexican government has already performed a background check on them, and they are considered a trusted traveller. At the participating airports, members may use automated kiosks to scan their passport and fingerprints, and complete an electronic immigration form.{{Citation needed|date=October 2021}} The programme is targeted at Mexican citizens, as well as U.S. or Canadian citizens who are members of the [[Global Entry]] or [[NEXUS]] programme and are lawful permanent residents of Mexico.<ref>{{cite web| url = https://www.gob.mx/inm/acciones-y-programas/viajero-confiable| title = Viajero Confiable México {{!}} Instituto Nacional de Migración {{!}} Gobierno {{!}} gob.mx}}</ref>
* {{flag|New Zealand}}: In New Zealand, a [[SmartGate]] system exists at Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch and Queenstown airports,<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.asmag.com/showpost/21778.aspx |title=Morpho Australasia completes eGate installation in New Zealand airport |date=16 December 2016 |website=asmag |publisher=Messe Frankfurt New Era Business Media Ltd. |access-date=3 July 2018 |quote=Safran Identity & Security, through its subsidiary Morpho Australasia, has completed installing the next generation of eGates into Christchurch Airport.<br /> This installation is part of national upgrade and innovation programme for 51 new generation border processing eGates for the New Zealand Customs Service (NZ Customs). The rollout has seen new generation Safran Identity & Security's eGates installed in Auckland, Wellington, Queenstown and now Christchurch airport.}}</ref> enabling holders of biometric passports issued by New Zealand, Australia, Canada, China, France, Germany, Ireland and the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and America to clear border controls using automated facilities. The system can currently only be used by travellers 12 years of age or older, however a trial is under way that may potentially lower the age of eligibility to use eGate for people with an eligible ePassport from 12 years of age to 10 years of age. New Zealand eGates utilise biometric technology, comparing the picture of your face in your ePassport with the picture it takes of you at the gate in order to confirm your identity. To make sure eGate can do this, travellers must make sure they look as similar to their ePassport photos as possible and remove glasses, scarves and hats that they were not wearing when their passport picture was taken. eGate can handle minor changes in your face, for example if the travellers' weight or hair has changed. Customs, Biosecurity and Immigration officials utilise information provided at eGates, including photos, to clear travellers and their items across New Zealand's border. Biometric information is kept for three months before destruction but other information, including about movements across New Zealand's border is kept indefinitely and handled in accordance with the [[Right to privacy in New Zealand#Privacy Act 1993|Privacy Act 1993]], or as the law authorises. This might include information being used by or shared with other law enforcement or border control authorities. Since 1 July 2019, visitors from the 60 Visa Waiver countries require a New Zealand electronic Travel Authority (NZeTA). This is an online application and a further toolkit and requirements for airlines and travel agents can be downloaded from the New Zealand Immigration website.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.immigration.govt.nz/about-us/what-we-do/our-strategies-and-projects/eta-new-requirements|title=Travelling to New Zealand — new requirements |website=immigration.govt.nz|access-date=25 May 2019}}</ref>
* {{flag|Singapore}}: The enhanced-Immigration Automated Clearance System ({{Proper name|eIACS}}) is available at all checkpoints for Singapore citizens, permanent residents, foreign residents with long-term passes, [[APEC Business Travel Card]] holders, and other registered travellers. Foreign visitors whose fingerprints are registered on arrival may use the {{Proper name|eIACS}} lanes for exit clearance. In addition, the Biometric Identification of Motorbikers (BIKES) System is available for eligible motorcyclists at the land border crossings with Malaysia. Meanwhile, all visitors who have been fingerprinted on entry at a manned counter can use the {{Proper name|eIACS}} to leave Singapore by air. Additionally, nationals of certain countries{{efn|{{div col|colwidth=18em}}
* {{flagicon|Australia}} [[Australian passport]]
* {{flagicon|Hong Kong}} [[Hong Kong Special Administrative Region passport]]
* {{flagicon|Japan}} [[Japan passport]]
* {{flagicon|Malaysia}} [[Malaysia passport]]
* {{flagicon|New Zealand}} [[New Zealand passport]]
* {{flagicon|People's Republic of China}} [[People's Republic of China passport]]
* {{flagicon|Republic of Korea}} [[Republic of Korea passport]]
* {{flagicon|Thailand}} [[Thailand passport]]
* {{flagicon|United Kingdom}} [[United Kingdom passport]]
* {{flagicon|United States of America}} [[United States passport]]
{{div col end}}}} may register to use the {{Proper name|eIACS}} system on entry, provided they meet prescribed conditions.
* {{flag|South Korea}}: South Korea maintains a programme known as the Smart Entry Service, open for registration by [[South Korean nationality law|South Koreans]] aged 7 or above and by registered foreigners{{efn|Foreign passport holders eligible to register include:
{{div col|colwidth=18em}}
* {{flagicon|Hong Kong}} [[Hong Kong Special Administrative Region passport]]
* {{flagicon|Macau}} [[Macao Special Administrative Region passport]]
* {{flagicon|Singapore}} [[Singapore passport]]
* {{flagicon|Republic of China}} [[Republic of China passport]]
* {{flagicon|United States}} [[United States passport]]<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.ses.go.kr/ses/GeApplInfoR_en.ses |title=SeS-GE > What is SeS-GE? |publisher=Smart Entry Service}}</ref>
{{div col end}}
}} aged 17 or above.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.ses.go.kr/error.html|title=시스템 점검|website=ses.go.kr}}</ref> Furthermore, visitors aged 17 or older may use the [https://www.airport.kr/ap_lp/en/arr/process/autimm/autimm.do Smart Entry Service] on exit at international airports, as long as they have provided their biometrics on arrival.
* {{flagicon|Taiwan}} [[Taiwan]]: An automated entry system, eGate, exists in areas administered by the Republic of China{{efn|name=ROC}} providing expedited border control for [[Taiwanese nationality law|ROC nationals]] as well as certain classes of residents and frequent visitors. Users simply scan their travel documents at the gate and are passed through for facial recognition.<ref>{{cite web|title=e-Gate|url=http://www.immigration.gov.tw/egate/|website=immigration.gov.tw|access-date=2 August 2018|archive-date=8 September 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170908023824/http://www.immigration.gov.tw/egate/}}</ref> As of 2019, there have been instances of foreign non-registered travellers allowed to use the eGate system to depart, notably at Taipei Taoyuan Airport Terminal 1, but not Terminal 2, using a passport scan and fingerprints.
* {{flag|Thailand}}: The automated passport control (APC) system, which uses a [[facial recognition system]], has been available for Thai nationals since 2012 and more than 20 million have used it. [[Suvarnabhumi Airport]] opened 8 automated immigration lanes for foreigners, but only Singaporeans were allowed to use the system initially. Since then, Singaporeans and holders of the Hong Kong SAR passport have been allowed to use the system.<ref name=HK /><ref>{{cite news |title=Singaporeans test automated immigration at Suvarnabhumi |url=https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/general/1309287/suvarnabhumi-automating-immigration-lanes |work=Bangkok Post |date=19 August 2017 |location=Bangkok |access-date=20 April 2021}}</ref> Once processed, the foreign travellers can leave the automatic channel and present their passport to a Thai immigration officer to be stamped.<ref name=HK />
* North America: North America has a wide variety of expedited border control programs:
** {{flagicon|United States}} Global Entry: [[Global Entry]] is a programme for frequent travellers that enables them to utilise automated border control facilities and priority security screening. In addition to U.S. citizens and Permanent Residents, the programme is open to Indian,<ref>{{cite news |title=Expedited entry into U.S. for Indian travellers from now on |website=The Times of India |url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/expedited-entry-into-us-for-indian-travellers-from-now-on/articleshow/59336272.cms|access-date=28 June 2017}}</ref> Singaporean,<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/faster-immigration/2908082.html|title=Faster immigration clearance for eligible Singaporeans travelling to US|website=Channel News Asia|access-date=6 July 2016|archive-date=20 April 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170420194708/http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/faster-immigration/2908082.html}}</ref> and South Korean citizens among others. Global Entry members are eligible to use automated Global Entry facilities at certain airports to clear border control more efficiently. Enrolled users must present their [[Machine-readable medium|machine-readable]] passport or [[Permanent residence (United States)|permanent residency card]], and submit their fingerprints to establish identity. Users then complete an electronic [[customs declaration]], and are issued a receipt instructing them to either proceed to [[baggage claim]], or to a normal inspection booth for an interview.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://cbp.gov/xp/cgov/travel/trusted_traveler/global_entry/global_entry_discription.xml |website=CBP |title=How to Use the Kiosk |archive-date=25 June 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090625090904/http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/travel/trusted_traveler/global_entry/global_entry_discription.xml}}</ref> Participants may utilize automated kiosks to clear U.S. border controls at participating airports.{{efn|name=USkiosk|The following airports are equipped with automated kiosks (except where otherwise stated, all participating airports are located in United States or its territories):{{clarify|date=October 2021|reason=This list includes airports outside the U.S.}}<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cbp.gov/travel/trusted-traveler-programs/global-entry/locations|title=Airports with Global Entry Kiosks|publisher=[[U.S. Customs and Border Protection]]}}</ref>
{{div col|colwidth=24em}}
* {{flagicon|UAE}} [[Abu Dhabi International Airport]] (AUH)‡
* Anchorage – [[Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport]] (ANC)
* Atlanta – [[Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport]] (ATL)
* [[Austin-Bergstrom International Airport]] (AUS)
* [[Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport]] (BWI)
* Boston – [[Logan International Airport]] (BOS)
* [[Burlington International Airport]] (BTV)‡
* {{flagicon|CAN}} [[Calgary International Airport]] (YYC)
* [[Charlotte-Douglas International Airport]] (CLT)
* [[Chicago Midway International Airport]] (MDW)‡
* [[Chicago O'Hare International Airport]] (ORD)
* [[Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport]] (CVG)
* [[Cleveland Hopkins International Airport]] (CLE)
* [[Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport]] (DFW)
* [[Daniel K. Inouye International Airport]] (HNL)
* [[Denver International Airport]] (DEN)
* [[Detroit Metropolitan Airport]] (DTW)
* {{flagicon|IRL}} [[Dublin Airport]] (DUB)‡
* {{flagicon|CAN}} [[Edmonton International Airport]] (YEG)
* [[Fairbanks International Airport]] (FAI)
* [[Fort Lauderdale/Hollywood International Airport]] (FLL)
* [[Guam International Airport]] (GUM)
* {{flagicon|CAN}} [[Halifax Stanfield International Airport]] (YHZ)
* [[Houston George Bush Intercontinental Airport]] (IAH)
* [[John F. Kennedy International Airport]], [[New York City]] (JFK)
* [[John Wayne Airport]] (SNA)‡
* [[Lambert-St. Louis International Airport]] (STL)
* [[Los Angeles International Airport]] (LAX)
* [[Luis Muñoz Marín International Airport]] (SJU)
* {{flagicon|BHS}} [[Lynden Pindling International Airport]], [[Bahamas]] (NAS)‡
* [[McCarran International Airport]], [[Las Vegas]] (LAS)
* [[Miami International Airport]] (MIA)
* [[Milwaukee Mitchell International Airport]], [[Milwaukee]] (MKE)
* [[Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport]] (MSP)
* {{flagicon|CAN}} [[Montréal–Pierre Elliott Trudeau International Airport]] (YUL)
* [[Newark Liberty International Airport]] (EWR)
* [[Oakland International Airport]] (OAK)‡
* [[Orlando International Airport]] (MCO)
* [[Orlando-Sanford International Airport]] (SFB)
* {{flagicon|CAN}} [[Ottawa Macdonald–Cartier International Airport]] (YOW)
* [[Philadelphia International Airport]] (PHL)
* [[Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport]] (PHX)
* [[Pittsburgh International Airport]] (PIT)
* [[Portland International Airport]] (PDX)
* {{flagicon|ABW}} [[Queen Beatrix International Airport]], [[Aruba]] (AUA)‡
* [[Raleigh-Durham International Airport]] (RDU)‡
* [[Saipan International Airport]] (SPN)‡
* [[Salt Lake City International Airport]] (SLC)
* [[San Antonio International Airport]] (SAT)
* [[San Diego International Airport]] (SAN)
* [[San Francisco International Airport]] (SFO)
* [[San Jose International Airport]] (SJC)‡
* [[Seattle-Tacoma International Airport]] – SeaTac (SEA)
* {{flagicon|IRL}} [[Shannon Airport]] (SNN)‡
* [[Tampa International Airport]] (TPA)
* {{flagicon|CAN}} [[Toronto Pearson International Airport]] (YYZ)
* {{flagicon|CAN}} [[Vancouver International Airport]] (YVR)
* [[Washington-Dulles International Airport]] (IAD)
* {{flagicon|CAN}} [[Winnipeg James Armstrong Richardson International Airport]] (YWG)
{{div col end}}
The '''‡''' indicates there are no Global Entry enrollment centres at these sites. Enrolment centres in Canada are NEXUS enrolment centres staffed by U.S. and Canadian border control officers}}
** {{flagicon|Canada}} CANPASS: Canadian citizens and Permanent Residents can apply for [[CANPASS]] which, in its present form, provides expedited border controls for individuals entering Canada on [[corporate jet|corporate and private aircraft]].
** {{flagicon|United States}} {{flagicon|Canada}} NEXUS and FAST: [[NEXUS (frequent traveler program)|NEXUS]] is a joint Canadian-U.S. expedited border control programme for low risk travellers holding Canadian or U.S. citizenship or permanent residence. Membership requires approval by Canadian and U.S. authorities and entitles members to dedicated RFID-enabled lanes when crossing the land border. A NEXUS card can also be utilised as a travel document between the two countries and entitles passengers to priority border control facilities in Canada and Global Entry facilities in the U.S. [[Free and Secure Trade]] (FAST) is a similar programme for commercial drivers and approved importers, reducing the amount of customs checks conducted at the border and expediting the border control process. When entering the U.S. by air, holders of NEXUS cards may use Global Entry kiosks to clear border controls at participating airports{{efn|name=USkiosk}}
** {{flagicon|United States}} SENTRI: [[SENTRI]] is a programme similar to NEXUS for U.S. and Mexican citizens that additionally allows members to register their cars for expedited land border controls. Unlike NEXUS, SENTRI is administered solely by the American government and does not provide expedited controls when entering Mexico. When entering United States by land from Canada, it can be used as a NEXUS card, but not the other way around. Individuals holding a NEXUS card may additionally register their cars for expedited land border controls under SENTRI. When entering United States by air, holders of SENTRI cards may use Global Entry kiosks to clear border controls at participating airports{{efn|name=USkiosk}}

===Local border traffic===
{{main|Local border traffic}}
The [[local border traffic]] is the flow of travellers that reside within the area surrounding a controlled international or internal border. In many cases local border traffic is subject to special regulations to expedite  local border traffic.<ref>[[Steve Peers]], ''EU Justice and Home Affairs Law'', [https://books.google.com/books?id=X0YlF7X1mlgC&pg=PA210 p. 210]</ref> Depending on the particular border in question, these measures may be restricted to local 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.

{{flagicon|European Union}} 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.<ref>Corrigendum to Regulation (EC) No 1931/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 laying down rules on local border traffic at the external land borders of the Member States and amending the provisions of the Schengen Convention ([http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32006R1931R%2801%29:EN:NOT OJ L 29, 3 February 2007, p. 3]).</ref> 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===
* {{flag|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.
* {{flagicon|United States}} America: The [[Border Crossing Card]] issued by American authorities to Mexican nationals enables Mexicans to enter border areas without a passport.{{efn|As a standalone document, the BCC allows Mexican citizens to visit border areas in the U.S. when entering by land or sea directly from Mexico for less than 72 hours.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://mx.usembassy.gov/visas/domestic-employees/frequently-asked-questions/?_ga=1.54366443.213467364.1464033918 |title=Frequently Asked Questions |work=U.S. Embassy & Consulates in Mexico |access-date=6 August 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180807002124/https://mx.usembassy.gov/visas/domestic-employees/frequently-asked-questions/?_ga=1.54366443.213467364.1464033918 |archive-date=7 August 2018 }}</ref> The document also functions as a full B1/B2 visa when presented with a valid Mexican passport.<ref name="BCC1">{{Cite web|url=https://help.cbp.gov/s/article/Article-1670|title=CBP Customer Service|website=help.cbp.gov}}</ref>}} Both United States and Bhutan maintain [[#Internal borders|interior checkposts]] to enforce compliance.
* {{flag|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.{{efn|
** The visitor is a national of a country which [[Foreign relations of China|has diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China]]
** The visitor is visiting the Pearl River Delta as part of a tour group organised by a Hong Kong or Macau based travel agency
** The stay is for six days or less
** The visitor stays only within the cities of [[Guangzhou]], [[Shenzhen]], [[Zhuhai]], [[Foshan]], [[Dongguan]], [[Zhongshan]], [[Jiangmen]], [[Zhaoqing]], [[Huizhou]] and [[Shantou]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://au.china-embassy.org/eng/ls/vfc/t1038742.htm |publisher=Embassy of the People's Republic of China in Australia |title=Visa-free Entry into Mainland China}}</ref>}}
* {{flag|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.<ref>{{cite web |title=Lukashenka expands visa-free zone |date=2019-08-08 |website=belsat.eu |url=https://belsat.eu/en/news/lukashenka-expands-visa-free-zone/}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://pravo.by/document/?guid=3961&p0=P31900300&p1=1&p5=0|title=On establishing visa-free order of entry and exit of foreign nationals|date=2019-08-07}}</ref> Visitors are allowed to stay without a visa for 15 days. Entry is possible through designated checkpoints with Poland and Lithuania,{{efn|
** [[Brest, Belarus|Brest]] ([[Terespol]])
** [[Bruzgi]] ([[Kuźnica, Podlaskie Voivodeship|Kuźnica]])
** [[Damačava]] ([[Sławatycze]])
** [[Bieniakoni]] ([[Šalčininkai]])
** [[Vyalikaya Byerastavitsa|Bierastavica]] ([[Bobrowniki, Białystok County|Bobrowniki]])
** [[Piasčatka]] ([[Połowce]])
** [[Pryvalka]] ([[Raigardas]])
** Piareraŭ (Białowieża)
** Liasnaja (Rudawka)
** Pryvalka (Švendubrė)}} Brest-Uschodni Railway Station, Grodno Railway Station, [[Brest Airport]] and [[Hrodna Airport|Grodno Airport]]. Prior to travel, visitors must obtain authorisation from a local travel agency in Belarus.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.government.by/ru/content/9054|title=О порядке посещения гражданами безвизовой территории "Брест – Гродно", а также территорий районов Брестской и Гродненской областей|publisher=[[Government of Belarus|Совет Министров Республики Беларусь]]|date=2019-10-15|access-date=30 October 2021|archive-date=16 October 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191016150145/http://www.government.by/ru/content/9054}}</ref>

<gallery>
File:Heathrow Terminal 4 ePassport gates.jpg|ePassport gates in [[Heathrow Airport]] (Terminal 4)
File:Heathrow Terminal 5 ePassport gates.jpg|ePassport gates in [[Heathrow Airport]] (Terminal 5)
File:Hkairport echannel.JPG|{{Proper name|e-Channel}} machines at Hong Kong International Airport
File:SmartGateDeparturesSYD.jpg|Smartgate Departures at Sydney Airport
File:J-VIS gate E.svg|Automated immigration at Narita Airport
File:Global Entry participants.svg|Countries whose citizens are eligible for Global Entry
File:NEXUSCard.png|Sample NEXUS card
File:NexusLane.JPG|A NEXUS lane at the American side of the [[Ambassador Bridge]]
File:APEC Business Travel Card Member States.svg|alt=Full members of the scheme  Transitional members (America and Canada)|{{legend|green|Full members of the scheme}}{{legend|lime|Transitional members (America and Canada)}}
File:Border Crossing Card.jpg|The front of the updated version of the Border Crossing Card issued to Mexican nationals
</gallery>

==Border control organisations by country==
{{incomplete list|date=March 2022}}
{{main|List of Border control organisations}}
Border control is generally the responsibility of specialised government organisations which oversee various aspects their jurisdiction's border control policies, including [[#Customs|customs]], [[#Immigration law and policy|immigration policy]], [[border guard]], [[#Biosecurity|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.
[[File:CBP female officers going aboard a ship.jpg|thumb|US customs and border officers boarding a ship at the border]]
* {{flag|Australia}}
** [[Australian Border Force]]
* {{flag|Canada}}
** [[Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada]]
** [[Canada Border Services Agency]] (previously [[Canada Customs and Revenue Agency]])
** [[Canadian Air Transport Security Authority]]
* {{flag|China}}
** [[National Immigration Administration]] of [[Ministry of Public Security (China)|Ministry of Public Security]]
** [[People's Armed Police]]
** [[General Administration of Customs]]
** {{flagicon|Hong Kong}} [[Immigration Department (Hong Kong)]]
** {{flagicon|Macau}} [[Public Security Police Force of Macau]]
* {{flag|India}}
** [[Border Security Force]]
** [[The Assam Rifles]]
** [[Indo-Tibetan Border Police]]
* {{flag|Indonesia}}
** [[Directorate General of Immigration (Indonesia)]]
* {{flag|Ireland}}
** [[Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service]]
** [[Garda National Immigration Bureau]]
** [[Revenue Commissioners]]
* {{flag|Iran}}
** The Immigration & Passport Police Office, a subdivision of [[Law Enforcement Force of Islamic Republic of Iran]]
** Islamic Republic of Iran Border Guard Command ("NAJA Border Guard"), a subdivision of [[Law Enforcement Force of Islamic Republic of Iran]]
* {{flag|Malaysia}}
** [[Immigration Department of Malaysia]]
* {{flag|North Korea}}
** Border Security Command
** Coastal Security Bureau
* {{flag|Pakistan}}
** [[Pakistan Rangers]]
** [[Frontier Corps]]
** [[Gilgit−Baltistan Scouts]]
** [[Pakistan Army]]
** [[Pakistan Rangers]]
** [[Pakistan Customs]]
* [[Schengen Area]]
** [[European Border and Coast Guard Agency]] (Frontex)
** {{flag|France}}
*** [[Direction centrale de la police aux frontières]] (a directorate of the [[National Police (France)|French National Police]])
*** [[Direction générale des douanes et droits indirects]] (DGDDI)
** {{flag|Finland}}
*** [[Finnish Border Guard]]
*** [[Finnish Customs]]
** {{flag|Germany}}
*** [[Federal Police (Germany)|Federal Police]]
*** [[Bundeszollverwaltung]]
** {{flag|Italy}}
*** [[Polizia di Stato]]
*** [[Guardia di Finanza]]
*** [[Arma dei Carabinieri]]
** {{flag|Netherlands}}
*** [[Royal Marechaussee|Koninklijke Marechaussee]] ([[English language|English]]: Royal Military Constabulary), a branch of the [[Netherlands Armed Forces|Dutch Armed Forces]]
*** [[Fiscal Information and Investigation Service]]
** {{flag|Spain}}
*** [[National Police Corps (Spain)|Cuerpo Nacional de Policia]]
*** [[Guardia Civil]]
*** [[Customs Surveillance Service]]
** {{flag|Switzerland}}
*** [[Federal Department of Justice and Police]]
**** [[Federal Office of Police]]
*** [[Federal Department of Finance]]
**** [[Swiss Border Guard]]
** {{flag|Sweden}}
*** [[Swedish Police Authority|Swedish Border Police]]
* {{flag|South Korea}}
** Korean Immigration Service, [[Ministry of Justice (South Korea)|Ministry of Justice]]
** [[Korea Customs Service]]
* {{flag|Singapore}}
** [[Immigration and Checkpoints Authority]]
* {{flag|Taiwan}}
** [[National Immigration Agency]]
** [[Customs Administration, Ministry of Finance|Customs Administration]]
* {{Flag|United Kingdom}}
** [[HM Revenue and Customs]]
** [[UK Border Force]]
** [[Immigration Enforcement]]
* {{flag|United States}}
** [[United States Department of Homeland Security|Department of Homeland Security]] (DHS)
** [[U.S. Customs and Border Protection]] (CBP), a division of the [[DHS]]
** [[United States Border Patrol]]
** [[Transportation Security Administration]]
** [[U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement]], or ICE
** [[United States Citizenship and Immigration Services]]

<gallery>
File:CBSA and Vancouver Police.jpg|Canadian Border Security Agency officers and police in Vancouver
File:Self service kiosks yyz.png|Automated passport control kiosks at Toronto Pearson International Airport
File:ROC-MOI National Immigration Agency entry 20170107.jpg|National Immigration Agency headquarters in [[Taipei]]
File:BSF Insignia.svg|Insignia of the Indian Border Security Force
File:Migrant hunting EU agency - Shut Down FRONTEX Warsaw 2008.jpg|Protests against Frontex in [[Warsaw]] in 2008
File:Seal of the United States Department of Homeland Security.svg|Emblem of the Department of Homeland Security, the umbrella agency responsible for border control in the United States
</gallery>

==Controversies==
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.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Tu |first=Trinh |date=June 2025 |title=Global attitudes towards refugees |url=https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2025-06/ipsos-global-attitudes-towards-refugees-2025.pdf |website=Ipsos |at=Q1 (B). We must close our borders to refugees entirely – we can't accept any at this time}}</ref>

* {{flagicon|Australia}} Australia:
** Offshore detention centres: Beginning in 2001, Australia implemented border control policies featuring the [[Pacific Solution|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 [[Manus Regional Processing Centre|Manus Island]] to be unconstitutional.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.paclii.org/pg/cases/PGSC/2016/13.html|title=Namah v Pato [2016] PGSC 13; SC1497 (26 April 2016)|website=paclii.org}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last1=Tlozek|first1=Eric|last2=Anderson|first2=Stephanie (political reporter)|title=PNG finds detention of asylum seekers on Manus Island illegal|url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-26/png-court-rules-asylum-seeker-detention-manus-island-illegal/7360078|access-date=4 August 2018}}</ref> 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.<ref name="abcAUSban">{{cite web| url = https://www.abc.net.au/religion/is-australias-india-travel-ban-legal-moral-just/13335360| title = Australia's decision to ban its citizens from returning from India — Is it legal? Is it moral? Is it just? - ABC Religion & Ethics| website = [[Australian Broadcasting Corporation]]| date = 7 May 2021}}</ref> 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.<ref name="f24AUSban">{{cite web | url=https://www.france24.com/en/asia-pacific/20210406-stranded-abroad-australians-lodge-un-petition-against-govt-for-right-to-return-home | title=Stranded abroad, Australians lodge UN petition against government for 'right to return home' | date=6 April 2021 }}</ref> Australia's policies with regard to 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 the majority of Australian citizens from exiting the country, even if they ordinarily reside overseas.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/aug/06/australians-who-live-overseas-now-unable-to-leave-country-if-they-return-for-visit | title=Australians who live overseas may be unable to leave country if they return for visit | website=[[TheGuardian.com]] | date=7 August 2021 }}</ref>

[[Image:Lotshampa refugees in Beldangi Camp.jpg|thumb|right|[[Bhutanese refugees|Lhotshampa refugees]] in [[Beldangi refugee camps|Beldangi camp]] in [[Nepal]]; the man is holding a [[Bhutanese passport]]]]
* {{flagicon|Bhutan}} 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 [[Bhutanese refugees|refugee crisis]]. This policy shift effectively ended previously liberal immigration policies with regards to Nepalis and counts among the most racialised border control policies in Asia.
* {{flagicon|China}} China: China does not currently [[North Korean defectors#China|recognize 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. This aspect of Chinese border control policy has been criticised by human rights organisations.<ref>{{cite web |title=2013 Update "THE LIST" of North Korean Refugees & Humanitarian Workers Seized by Chinese Authorities |publisher=North Korea Freedom Coalition |date=13 December 2013 |url=http://www.nkfreedom.org/UploadedDocuments/2013.12.10_THE_LIST_ENGLISH.pdf |access-date=13 December 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131213141020/http://www.nkfreedom.org/UploadedDocuments/2013.12.10_THE_LIST_ENGLISH.pdf |archive-date=13 December 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Sign the Petition Calling on China to Stop the Forced Repatriation of North Korean Refugees |work=North Korea Freedom Coalition |date=13 December 2013 |url=http://www.nkfreedom.org/News/Sign-the-Petition-Calling-on-China-to-Stop-Repatriation-of-North-Koreans.aspx |access-date=13 December 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131213141309/http://www.nkfreedom.org/News/Sign-the-Petition-Calling-on-China-to-Stop-Repatriation-of-North-Koreans.aspx |archive-date=13 December 2013}}</ref>
* {{flagicon|Cyprus}} Cyprus: As a result of [[Northern Cyprus]]'s sovereignty dispute with [[Republic of Cyprus|Southern Cyprus]], the South (a member of the [[European Union]]) has imposed restrictions on the North's airports, and pressure from the European Union has resulted in all countries other than Turkey recognising the South's ability to impose a border shutdown on the North, thus negating the right to [[self determination]] of the predominantly Turkish Northern Cypriot population and subjecting their airports to border controls imposed by the predominantly Greek South.<ref>{{cite book|first=Frank|last=Hoffmeister|title=Legal Aspects of the Cyprus Problem: Annan Plan And EU Accession|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=LZXbg3ZwvGoC&pg=PA218|year=2006|publisher=Martinus Nijhoff Publishers|isbn=90-04-15223-7|page=218}}</ref> As a result, Northern Cyprus is heavily dependent on Turkey for economic support and is unable to develop a functioning economy.<ref name=indepuni>{{cite news |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/higher/universities-little-accord-on-the-island-399360.html |work=The Independent |location=London |title=Universities: Little accord on the island |date=8 November 2007 |access-date=20 May 2010}}</ref>
* {{Flagicon|Israel}} Israel: Border control, both on entry and on exit, at Israeli airports rate passengers' potential threat to security using factors including nationality, ethnicity, and race.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://securitysolutions.com/news/security_exposing_hostile_intent|title=What can we learn from Ben Gurion Airport in Israel to help push aviation security in the U.S. to the next level?|publisher=Access Control & Security Systems|access-date=4 May 2007}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |newspaper=USA Today |date=13 September 2001 |url=https://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2001/09/12/israelisecurity.htm |title=Israeli-style security might have averted hijackings |access-date=7 May 2007}}</ref> Instances of discrimination against [[Arabs]], people perceived to be Muslim, and Russian Jews among others have been reported in the media.<ref>{{Cite news |title=What happened to my pro-Israel friends proves there's something rotten in Israeli airport security |website=Haaretz |url=https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-my-friends-were-pro-israel-then-they-met-israeli-airport-security-1.5474044}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |title=Abu Ghosh restaurateur: Airport security humiliated my wife |website=The Times of Israel |url=http://www.timesofisrael.com/abu-ghosh-restaurateur-airport-security-humiliated-my-wife/}}</ref> Security at Tel Aviv's [[Ben Gurion Airport]] relies on a number of fundamentals, including a heavy focus on what Raphael Ron, former director of security at Ben Gurion, terms the "human factor", which he generalised as "the inescapable fact that [[terrorist attack]]s are carried out by people who can be found and stopped by an effective security methodology."<ref>Cited K. C. Khurana, [https://books.google.com/books?id=ESWo4Zl5g1IC&pg=PA271 ''Aviation Management: Global Perspectives''], Global India Publications, 2009 p.271</ref> As part of its focus on this so-called "human factor", Israeli security officers interrogate travellers, [[racial profiling|profiling]] those who appear to be Arab based on name or physical appearance.<ref>{{cite news |newspaper=International Herald Tribune |url=http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/09/09/africa/ME-Israel-Airport-Dance.php |title=Israeli airport security order dancer to prove identity with dance steps |date=9 September 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080914174321/http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/09/09/africa/ME-Israel-Airport-Dance.php|archive-date=14 September 2008|access-date=10 January 2017}}</ref> Even as Israeli authorities argue that [[racial profiling|racist, ethnic, and religious profiling]] are effective security measures, according to [[Boaz Ganor]], Israel has not undertaken any known empirical studies on the efficacy of the technique of racial profiling.<ref>Bernard E. Harcourt, [https://books.google.com/books?id=LuXbBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA93 'Muslim profiles Post-9/11: Is Racial Profiling an effective Counter-terrorist Measure and Does It Violate the Right to be Free fronm Discrimination?'], in Ben Goold, Liora Lazarus (eds.), ''Security and Human Rights'', Bloomsbury Publishing, 2007. pp. 73–98 [93].</ref>
[[File:Texas Photo 1.jpg|thumb|Children detained by the American government pictured in a wire-mesh cage (photo taken by [[United States Customs and Border Protection]])]]
[[File:Crying children who have been separated from their families at the U.S. border.webm|thumbtime=2|thumb|[[ProPublica]] recording of crying children separated from their families]]
* {{flagicon|USA}} United States
** Policies targeting Muslims: Since the implementation of added security measures in the aftermath of the [[9/11|2001 World Trade Centre attacks]], reports of discrimination against people perceived to be Muslim by American border security officers have been prevalent in the media.<ref>{{Cite news |first=Stefano |last=Bonino |title=Analysis &#124; How discrimination against Muslims at airports actually hurts the fight against terrorism |newspaper=The Washington Post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/08/26/how-discrimination-against-muslims-at-airports-actually-hurts-the-fight-against-terrorism/}}</ref> The [[Trump travel ban|travel restrictions]] implemented during the Trump presidency primarily against Muslim majority countries have provoked controversy over whether such measures are a legitimate [[#Border security|Border security]] measure or unethically discriminatory.
** Separation of families seeking asylum: In April 2018, as part of its "[[zero tolerance]]" policy, the American government ordered the separation of the children of refugees and asylum seekers from their parents. As a consequence of popular outrage,{{efn|The policy proved extremely unpopular with the public, with approximately 25% of Americans supporting the policy, less than any recent major piece of legislation.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2018/06/19/the-extraordinary-unpopularity-of-trumps-family-separation-policy-in-one-graph/|title= The extraordinary unpopularity of Trump's family separation policy|author1-link=John M. Sides|last=Sides |first=John|date=19 June 2018|newspaper=The Washington Post|access-date=7 August 2018}}</ref> The detainment of children by the U.S. government has been compared to the [[Nazi concentration camps]] by some observers and politicians.<ref>Mallory Shelbourne. [https://thehill.com/latino/392727-hayden-sees-commonality-between-zero-tolerance-border-policy-and-nazi-germany/ "Hayden sees 'commonality' between zero-tolerance border policy and Nazi Germany"]</ref><ref>Emma Teitel. [https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/2018/06/20/nazi-germany-comparisons-with-family-separation-in-us-are-fair-comment.html "Nazi Germany comparisons with family separation in U.S. are fair comment"]. ''The Star'' (20 June 2018).</ref>}} and criticism from the medical{{efn|The policy has been condemned by the [[American Academy of Pediatrics]], the [[American College of Physicians]] and the [[American Psychiatric Association]].<ref>American Psychological Association. (14 June 2018). [http://www.apa.org/advocacy/immigration/separating-families-letter.pdf "Open Letter to President Donald Trump"].</ref> Together, they represent more than 250,000 doctors in the United States.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/14/health/immigrant-family-separation-doctors/index.html|title=Doctors saw immigrant kids separated from their parents. Now they're trying to stop it.|first=Catherine E.|last=Shoichet|publisher=CNN|date=14 June 2018}}</ref> Irwin Redlener, who co-founded [[Children's Health Fund]], called the policy "dehumanising" and described it as a form of [[child abuse]].<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.msnbc.com/ali-velshi/watch/-this-is-child-abuse-by-government-says-dr-irwin-redlener-1256853059535 |title='This is child abuse by government', says Dr. Irwin Redlener |publisher=MSNBC|date=15 June 2018}}</ref> A number of concerned researchers and clinicians signed an open letter to Homeland Security Secretary Nielsen calling on her to end the migrant child separations, writing, "Decades of psychological and brain research have demonstrated that forced parental separation and placement in incarceration-like facilities can have profound immediate, long-term, and irreparable harm on infant and child development."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://sites.google.com/view/letter-to-secretary-nielsen/home?authuser=0|title=Open Letter from Concerned Scientists on Migrant Child Separation|via=sites.google.com|access-date=7 August 2018}}</ref>}} and religious{{efn|The policy has been condemned or criticised by:
* The [[United States Conference of Catholic Bishops]]
* The [[National Association of Evangelicals]]<ref>{{cite news |url=https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/religious-leaders-implore-trump-white-house-stop-separating/story?id=55905666|title=Religious groups implore Trump White House: Stop separating immigrant families |date=15 June 2018|work=ABC News|access-date=7 August 2018}}</ref>
* The [[Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America]]<ref>{{cite web |last1=Papagermanos |first1=Steve |title=Archdiocese Statement in Defense of Children and Families |url=https://www.goarch.org/-/archdiocese-statement-in-defense-of-children-and-families |publisher=Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America |access-date=7 August 2018}}</ref>
* [[Episcopal Church (United States)|Episcopal Church]]
* [[United Methodist Church]]
* [[African Methodist Episcopal Church]]
* [[Presbyterian Church (USA)|Presbyterian Church]]
* [[Evangelical Lutheran Church in America|Evangelical Lutheran Church]]
* [[The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints]] (LDS Church)<ref>{{cite press release|title=Church Statement on Separation of Families at the US-Mexico Border|url=https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/church-statement-separation-of-families-at-us-mexico-border |publisher=Mormon Newsroom |date=18 June 2018|access-date=7 August 2018}}</ref>}} communities, the policy was put on hold by an [[executive order]] signed by Trump on June 20, 2018. Under the policy, federal authorities separated children from their parents, relatives, or other adults who accompanied them in crossing the border, whether apprehended during an illegal crossing or, in numerous reported cases, legally presenting themselves for [[Asylum in the United States|asylum]].<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/transcript-sen-susan-collins-on-face-the-nation-june-17-2018/|title=Transcript: Senator Susan Collins on "Face the Nation"|date=17 June 2018|work=CBS News|access-date=7 August 2018}}</ref> The policy involved prosecuting all adults detained at the [[Mexico–United States border|Mexican border]], imprisoning parents, and handing minors to the American [[United States Department of Health and Human Services|Department of Health and Human Services]] ({{langx|es|Departamento de Salud y Servicios Sociales de los Estados Unidos}}).<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/sessions-says-justice-dept-will-prosecute-every-person-who-crosses-border-unlawfully/2018/05/07/e1312b7e-5216-11e8-9c91-7dab596e8252_story.html|title=Sessions vows to prosecute all illegal border crossers and separate children from their parents|last1=Horwitz|first1=Sari|date=7 May 2018|newspaper=The Washington Post |last2=Sacchetti |first2=Maria |access-date=7 August 2018}}</ref> The federal government reported that the policy resulted in the separation of over 2300 children from their parents.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/us/politics/trump-immigration-children-executive-order.html|title=Trump Retreats on Separating Families, but Thousands May Remain Apart|work=The New York Times |date=20 June 2018 |access-date=7 August 2018|last1=Shear |first1=Michael D. |last2=Goodnough |first2=Abby |last3=Haberman |first3=Maggie }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/immigration-border-crisis/trump-admin-ran-pilot-program-separating-migrant-families-2017-n887616|title=Trump admin ran 'pilot program' for zero tolerance at border in 2017|publisher=NBC News|access-date=7 August 2018}}</ref> The Trump administration blamed [[United States Congress|Congress]] for the atrocity and labelled the change in policy as "the Democrats' law", even though Congress had been overwhelmingly dominated by Republicans since 2016. Regardless, members of both parties criticised the policy and detractors of the Trump administration emphasise the fact there does not seem to be any written law that required the government to implement such a policy.<ref>{{Cite news|first1=Louise |last1=Radnofsky |first2=Natalie |last2=Andrews |first3=Farnaz|last3=Fassihi|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-administration-defends-family-separation-policy-1529341079#_=_|title=Trump Defends Family-Separation Policy|newspaper=The Wall Street Journal|date=18 June 2018|access-date=7 August 2018}}</ref><ref name="Long">{{Cite news|first=Colleen|last=Long|url=https://www.apnews.com/0bcc5d5d077247769da065864d215d1b/Sessions-cites-Bible-to-defend-separating-immigrant-families|title=Sessions cites Bible to defend separating immigrant families|publisher=Associated Press |date=15 June 2018|access-date=7 August 2018}}</ref> [[United States Attorney General|Attorney General]] [[Jeff Sessions]], in defending the policy, quoted a passage from the [[Bible]], notwithstanding the fact that religious doctrine carries absolutely no weight in American law.<ref name="Long"/> Other officials praised the policy as a deterrent to unlawful immigration.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-defiant-as-crisis-grows-over-family-separation-at-the-border/2018/06/18/210c78ca-730f-11e8-805c-4b67019fcfe4_story.html|title=Trump defiant as crisis grows over family separation at the border |last1=Rucker |first1=Philip|date=18 June 2018|newspaper=The Washington Post |last2=Dawsey |first2=Josh |last3=Kim |first3=Seung Min |access-date=7 August 2018}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-cites-as-a-negotiating-tool-his-policy-of-separating-immigrant-children-from-their-parents/2018/06/15/ade82b80-70b3-11e8-bf86-a2351b5ece99_story.html?noredirect=on|title=Trump cites as a negotiating tool his policy of separating immigrant children from their parents|last1=Scherer|first1=Michael|last2=Dawsey|first2=Josh|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]|access-date=7 August 2018}}</ref> The costs of separating migrant children from their parents and keeping them in "tent cities" are higher than keeping them with their parents in detention centres.<ref name=Ainsley>{{Cite news |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/immigration-border-crisis/trump-admin-s-tent-cities-cost-more-keeping-migrant-kids-n884871 |title=Tent cities cost millions more than keeping migrant kids with parents |publisher=NBC News |first=Julia |last=Ainsley |date=20 June 2018}}</ref> To handle the large amount of immigration charges brought by the Trump administration, federal prosecutors had to divert resources from other crime cases.<ref name=Heath>{{Cite news |url=https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/06/22/zero-tolerance-immigration-crackdown-diverting-resources-drug-cases/727532002/ |title=DOJ: Trump's immigration crackdown 'diverting' resources from drug cases |work=[[USA Today]] |first=Brad |last=Heath |access-date=7 August 2018}}</ref> It costs $775 per person per night to house the children when they are separated but $256 per person per night when they are held in permanent HHS facilities and $298 per person per night to keep the children with their parents in immigration detention centres.<ref name=Ainsley /> The head of the Justice Department's major crimes unit in San Diego diverted staff from drug smuggling cases.<ref name=Heath/> Drug smuggling cases were also increasingly pursued in state courts rather than federal courts, as federal prosecutor were increasingly preoccupied with pursuing charges against illegal border crossings.<ref name=Heath /> The [[Kaiser Family Foundation]] said that costs associated with the policy may also divert resources from programmes within the Department of Health and Human Services.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.kff.org/disparities-policy/fact-sheet/key-health-implications-of-separation-of-families-at-the-border/|title=Key Health Implications of Separation of Families at the Border|date=20 June 2018|work=The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation|access-date=23 June 2018}}</ref> In July 2018, it was reported that HHS had diverted at least $40 million from its health programs to care for and reunify migrant children, and that the HHS was preparing to shift more than $200 million from other HHS accounts.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/18/trump-migrants-health-programs-692955|title=Trump's migrant fiasco diverts millions from health programs|work=Politico|access-date=7 August 2018}}</ref>

==Effects==
Besides hundreds of billions in direct costs to the United States alone,<ref>{{cite web |title=The Cost of Immigration Enforcement and Border Security |url=https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/fact-sheet/the-cost-of-immigration-enforcement-and-border-security/ |website=American Immigration Council |access-date=20 October 2025}}</ref> is estimated 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.<ref>{{cite web |title=Do global migration barriers cost trillions? |url=https://www.aeaweb.org/research/do-global-migration-barriers-cost-trillions |website=[[American Economic Association]] |access-date=15 November 2023 |language=en |archive-date=15 November 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231115185058/https://www.aeaweb.org/research/do-global-migration-barriers-cost-trillions |url-status=live }}</ref> 

Border controls are also associated with more than 63,000 [[Border deaths (disambiguation)|border deaths]] since 2000,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Kiriscioglu |first1=Eda |last2=Ustubici |first2=Aysen |title="At Least, at the Border, I Am Killing Myself by My Own Will": Migration Aspirations and Risk Perceptions among Syrian and Afghan Communities |journal=Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies |date=3 April 2025 |volume=23 |issue=2 |pages=292–306 |doi=10.1080/15562948.2023.2198485|doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Sopke |first1=-Kerstin |title=Project documents more than 63,000 migrant deaths a decade, immense danger of fleeing home |url=https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/project-documents-more-than-63000-migrant-deaths-a-decade-immense-danger-of-fleeing-home |website=PBS News |access-date=20 October 2025 |language=en-us |date=27 March 2024}}</ref><ref name=Dehm/> although scholars believe that border deaths are significantly underestimated.<ref name=Soto/><ref name=Obinna/><ref>{{cite book |last1=Kristof Gombeer, Orçun Ulusoy and Marie-Laure Basilien-Gainche |title=Border Deaths: Causes, Dynamics and Consequences of Migration-related Mortality |date=2019 |publisher=Amsterdam University Press |url=https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/23625 |language=English |chapter=Understanding the Causes of Border Deaths|pages=136–137 |doi=10.5117/9789463722322 |isbn=978-94-6372-232-2 }}</ref> Although states often blame unauthorized border crossers for taking excessive risks,<ref name="Steinhilper">{{cite journal |last1=Steinhilper |first1=Elias |last2=Gruijters |first2=Rob J |title=A Contested Crisis: Policy Narratives and Empirical Evidence on Border Deaths in the Mediterranean |journal=Sociology |date=June 2018 |volume=52 |issue=3 |pages=515–533 |doi=10.1177/0038038518759248}}</ref><ref name=Cuttitta>{{cite book |last1=Paolo Cuttitta |title=Border Deaths: Causes, Dynamics and Consequences of Migration-related Mortality |date=2019 |publisher=Amsterdam University Press |url=https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/23625 |language=English |chapter=Preface|doi=10.5117/9789463722322 |isbn=978-94-6372-232-2 |quote=Even when border deaths appear (or are presented) as 'natural' or 'accidental', they are in fact the result of the structural violence of migration policies... However, states prefer to put the blame elsewhere, be it on criminal groups or on natural conditions, or even on the hazard-taking migrants – on what Horwood (2018a) calls their aspirations and risk-taking behaviour.}}</ref> the resort to dangerous methods of border crossing occurs when safe and legal avenues are closed to prospective migrants.<ref name=Dehm/><ref name="Steinhilper"/><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Laakkonen |first1=Ville |title=Deaths, disappearances, borders: Migrant disappearability as a technology of deterrence |journal=Political Geography |date=1 November 2022 |volume=99 |article-number=102767 |doi=10.1016/j.polgeo.2022.102767 |issn=0962-6298|doi-access=free }}</ref> In some cases, enforcement tactics have rerouted migrants to more dangerous routes with the stated goal to deter border crossers with the increased danger.<ref name=Obinna>{{cite journal |last1=Obinna |first1=Denise N. |title=Death in the Borderlands: Necropolitics and Migration-Related Mortality at the US-Mexico Border |journal=Politics & Policy |date=June 2025 |volume=53 |issue=3 |article-number=e70046 |doi=10.1111/polp.70046}}</ref><ref name=Soto>{{cite journal |last1=Soto |first1=Gabriella |title=The Weight of Numbers: Counting Border Crossing Deaths and Policy Intent |journal=Journal on Migration and Human Security |date=September 2024 |volume=12 |issue=3 |pages=290–309 |doi=10.1177/23315024241268600}}</ref><ref name=Dehm>{{cite book|title=Routledge Handbook of International Law and the Humanities |date=19 May 2021 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-000-38576-2 |last1=Dehm |first1=Sara |language=en |chapter=International law at the border : Refugee deaths, the necropolitical state and sovereign accountability |quote=The International Organization for Migration (IOM) estimates that at least 60,000 people have died since 2000 in the course of 'international journeys' that cross state borders.24 It bears reiterating that there is nothing natural about such deaths. A wealth of empirical evidence has overwhelmingly shown how the actions of state decision-makers, for example, have not only forced migrants to undertake more dangerous and deadly journeys to avoid ever-proliferating state practices of unauthorised migrant detection, interception and deportation, but such state actions have also sought to leverage the physical environment as part of state regimes of border control premised on the logic of deterrence.}}</ref>

Empirical studies in several countries have found that efforts to increase border controls also increase the number of people residing irregularly. This is because the majority of people residing irregularly in many Global North countries arrived legally and overstayed their visa. Efforts to make border crossing more difficult may promote permanent settlement in place of earlier patterns of temporary migration.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Spijkerboer |first1=Thomas |title=The Global Mobility Infrastructure: Reconceptualising the Externalisation of Migration Control |journal=European Journal of Migration and Law |date=2018 |volume=20 |issue=4 |pages=452–469 |doi=10.1163/15718166-12340038 |s2cid=150019997 |issn=1388-364X|doi-access=free }}</ref>

==See also==
* [[Asylum seeker]]
* [[Border barrier]]
* [[Airspace]]
* [[Air sovereignty]]
* [[Illegal entry]]
* [[United States Border Patrol]]
* [[Maritime boundary]]
* [[Freedom of movement]]

==Notes==
{{notelist|36em}}

==References==
{{reflist}}

==Further reading==
{{Wikivoyage|Border crossings}}
{{commons category|Border control}}
* Idrees Kahloon, "Border Control: The economics of immigration vs. the politics of immigration", ''[[The New Yorker]]'', 12 June 2023, pp.&nbsp;65–69. "The limits of immigration are not set by [[economics]] but by [[political psychology]] – by backlash unconcerned with net benefits." (p.&nbsp;65.)
* Susan Harbage Page & Inéz Valdez (17 April 2011). [http://southernspaces.org/2011/residues-border-control "Residues of Border Control"], ''Southern Spaces''
* {{Cite journal |year=2014 |last1=James |first1=Paul |author-link1=Paul James (academic) |title=Faces of Globalization and the Borders of States: From Asylum Seekers to Citizens |url=https://www.academia.edu/7773440 |journal=Citizenship Studies |volume=18 |issue=2 |pages=208–23 |doi=10.1080/13621025.2014.886440 |s2cid=144816686}}
* [[Philippe Legrain]] (2007). ''Immigrants: Your Country Needs Them'', Little Brown, {{ISBN|0-316-73248-6}}
* [[Aristide Zolberg]] (2006). ''A Nation by Design: Immigration Policy in the Fashioning of America'', Harvard University Press, {{ISBN|0-674-02218-1}}
* [[Philippe Legrain]] (2007). ''Immigrants: Your Country Needs Them'', Little Brown, {{ISBN|0-316-73248-6}}
* [[Ruben Rumbaut]] & Walter Ewing (Spring 2007). [https://web.archive.org/web/20070927040544/http://www.ailf.org/ipc/special_report/sr_feb07_resources.shtml "The Myth of Immigrant Criminality and the Paradox of Assimilation: Incarceration Rates among Native and Foreign-Born Men"], The Immigration Policy Center.
* Bryan Balin (2008). [https://jscholarship.library.jhu.edu/bitstream/handle/1774.2/32826/State%20Immigration%20Legislation%20and%20Immigrant%20Flows%20032008.pdf?sequence=4 ''State Immigration Legislation and Immigrant Flows: An Analysis''] The Johns Hopkins University
* Douglas S. Massey (September 2005). [https://web.archive.org/web/20070830210117/http://www.ailf.org/ipc/policy_reports_2005_beyondborder.shtml "Beyond the Border Buildup: Towards a New Approach to Mexico-U.S. Migration"], Immigration Policy Center, the American Immigration Law Foundation
* IPC Special Report (November 2005). [https://web.archive.org/web/20071011192352/http://ailf.org/ipc/special_report/special_report2005_bridging.shtml "Economic Growth & Immigration: Bridging the Demographic Divide"], Immigration Policy Center, the American Immigration Law Foundation
* American Immigration Council (April 2014). [https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/immigrant-women-united-states "Immigrant Women in the United States: A Demographic Portrait"]
* Jill Esbenshade (Summer 2007). [https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/division-and-dislocation-regulating-immigration-through-local-housing-ordinances "Division and Dislocation: Regulating Immigration through Local Housing Ordinances"]. American Immigration Council
* Jeffrey S. Passel & Roberto Suro (September 2005). [http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=53 "Rise, Peak and Decline: Trends in U.S. Immigration"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071231192407/http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=53 |date=31 December 2007 }}. Pew Hispanic Center
* Jeffrey S. Passel (March 2005). [http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=44 "Estimates of the Size and Characteristics of the Undocumented Population"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071231192402/http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=44 |date=31 December 2007 }}. Pew Hispanic Center
* Jeffrey S. Passel (March 2007). [http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=74 "Growing Share of Immigrants Choosing Naturalization"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071228175822/http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=74 |date=28 December 2007 }}. Pew Hispanic Center
* {{CRS |article=Report for Congress: Agriculture: A Glossary of Terms, Programs, and Laws, 2005 Edition |url=http://ncseonline.org/nle/crsreports/05jun/97-905.pdf |first=Jasper|last=Womach}}
* UNCTAD's [http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/ditctab20122_en.pdf Classification of Non-Tariff Measures (2012)] report

==External links==
* ITC's [http://www.macmap.org/ Market Access Map], an online database of customs tariffs and market requirements.

{{Border guards}}
{{commercial aviation|state=collapsed}}{{Immigration}}{{Authority control}}

[[Category:Articles containing video clips]]
[[Category:Border control]]
[[Category:Borders|Control]]
[[Category:Export and import control]]
[[Category:International relations]]
[[Category:International border crossings|Control]]
[[Category:International law]]
[[Category:Travel]]
[[Category:Visas]]