# data[].attributes.body
In early August 1972, the President  of Uganda, Idi Amin, ordered the expulsion of Asian minorities, giving them 90 days to leave the country. There were approximately 80,000 individuals of Indian descent in Uganda, and  23,000 of them had their applications for citizenship both processed and accepted. Although most were ultimately exempted from the expulsion, many chose to leave voluntarily. The reason for the expulsion was that Amin accused a minority of the Asian population of disloyalty, non-integration and commercial malpractice.  After the expulsion the immigrants were invited to Britain

# data[].attributes.body
This is an example of forced migration because the Uganda President gave the minorities a period of time to leave the country

# data[].attributes.body
Even though some citizens were exempt to the expulsion they chose to leave on their own which is voluntary migration.

# data[].attributes.body
Deportation and expulsion are basically the same thing so when Amin had the expulsion he was essentially deporting them because he forced them to leave the country.

# data[].attributes.body
The Ugandan migrants were forced to leave their country and go to another one such as Britain which is a form of international migration.

# data[].attributes.body
Although chain migration is usually ones choice this is kinda like it because the migrants followed each other to other countries even though it was forced

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In 1972, Idi Amin expelled Uganda's Asians, many of whom were British citizens and settled in the UK. At the time, ITN visited Leicester to find out how immigrants were coping.

On 4 August 1972, the then president of Uganda, Idi Amin, gave the Indian and Pakistani minorities in the country 90 days to leave, accusing them of hoarding wealth and sabotaging the economy, writes Ian Searcey.

Many of the displaced were British citizens and as a result emigrated in their thousands to the UK, where they waited in various refugee camps, including Greenham Common in Berkshire and Stradiahall in Suffolk, for new homes and work.

Many headed for Leicester, a key city in the resettlement programme, as it had the largest Asian community in Britain at that time (and still does in relation to its size).

Violently evicted

But this ITN report by Martyn Lewis from 30 August highlighted both the problems for those so swiftly and violently evicted from their homes, businesses and careers, and the difficulties faced by the communities in which they chose to settle.

Former private school teacher Vinya Thakar, still living with a relative and workless after two weeks in Leicester, called upon the volunteers of the British Asian Welfare Society for help.

For their part, despite complaining about the lack of communication or guidance from the government, the society hoped that Leicester would benefit from the arrival of qualified immigrants.

"Engineers, doctors, teachers ... Leicester needs teachers," explained spokesman Harban Singh Ratoo, but he also admitted that the society had no powers to "stop people with no qualifications coming in".

The city council were also worried that they would not be able to cope with the numbers of Ugandan refugees who were expected to move there, with both major parties petitioning the government and planning emergency council sessions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Immigration archive: Ugandan Asians in Leicester (1972)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 1972, Idi Amin expelled Uganda's Asians, many of whom were British citizens and settled in the UK. At the time, ITN visited Leicester to find out how immigrants were coping. On 4 August 1972, the then president of Uganda, Idi Amin, gave the Indian and Pakistani minorities in the country 90 days to leave, accusing them of hoarding wealth and sabotaging the economy, writes Ian Searcey.

# data[].attributes.body
This migration relates to Ravenstein’s first migration law because most migrants move only a short distance.

This migration relates to Ravenstein’s second migration law because there was a process of absorption.

This migration relates to Ravenstein’s third migration law because there was a process of dispersion, which is the inverse of absorption.

This migration relates to Ravenstein’s fourth migration law because each migration flow produced a compensating counter-flow.

This migration relates to Ravenstein’s fifth migration law because long-distance migrants went to one of the great centers of commerce and industry.

This migration relates to Ravenstein’s sixth migration law because natives of towns were less migratory than those from rural areas.

This migration relates to Ravenstein’s seventh migration law because females were more migratory than males.

This migration relates to Ravenstein’s eighth migration law because economic factors were the main cause of migration.

# data[].attributes.body
Transhumance is when ranchers move their livestock’s from place to place so this migration would not be an example of that because they were forced out and do not have any livestock with them