Category Archives: Statements

by | 12 Oct 2010 · 05:23

ECRE Critical of EU Migration Agreement with Libya

ECRE has posted a statement on its web site that is very critical of the recent EU-Libya Migration agreement.  Also posted is an interview with MEP Sylvie Guillaume (S&D, France) who is a member of the LIBE Committee where she discusses the human rights implications of the EU agreement.

Excerpts from ECRE’s Statement:  “It is difficult to understand why the EU is finalising a deal with the political dictatorship in Libya on issues that impact the fundamental rights of thousands of people. In June this year, Tripoli ordered the UN Refugee Agency, UNHCR, to close its offices in the country, a perfect illustration of Libya’s particular understanding of refugee protection and the unreliable nature of the regime under Colonel Gaddafi. Can we honestly think that refugees are safe in Libya? …

Through this ‘migration cooperation agenda’, the EU is trusting Libya to stop irregular migration towards Europe and to decide on the fate of those asylum seekers who will find it now even harder to reach safety in Europe. This follows last year’s highly questionable agreement between Rome and Tripoli to allow Italy to push back migrants to Libya without assessing their need for international protection. Since then, hardly any refugee has managed to reach Italy by sea. The EU Governments and the European Commission have so far turned a blind eye….

In particular, EU representatives have committed to assist Tripoli in reinforcing its capacity to prevent migrants from entering Libya through its Southern borders and in developing its patrolling capacities in its territorial waters and at high sea. The agreement also covers EU’s assistance to Libya in screening migrants in order to identify those in need of international protection. By setting up EU-sponsored asylum processing centres in Libya, EU States would evade their obligations to protect refugees and shift the responsibility to a country with an appalling human rights record….”

Click here for full statement.

Click here (EN) and here (FR) for interview with MEP Sylvie Guillaume.

1 Comment

Filed under European Union, Italy, Libya, Mediterranean, Statements, UNHCR

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

by | 08 Oct 2010 · 03:36

Erika Feller’s Comments Regarding Boat People and Irregular Secondary Movements

During her annual address to the UNHCR’s Executive Committee on 6 October, Assistant High Commissioner for Protection Erika Feller reviewed significant protection issues over the past year, noting also that 2010 marks the 60th anniversary of the founding of the UNHCR in December 1950 and the 59th anniversary of the Refugee Convention.

Among the topics she addressed were the challenges posed by the arrival of irregular secondary movements of migrants, including boat people.  She is critical of interdiction practices being carried out throughout the world and makes the strong point that “[t]he evidence suggests that tough sea policies have not solved, just changed and indeed complicated the dynamics, of irregular movements.”  While Ms. Feller does not identify countries by name, she is apparently referencing increased maritime interdiction in the Aegean Sea and the resulting surge in irregular crossings along Greece’s land borders.  The point could also be made in regard to the Italian push-back practice.

Excerpts from her address:

“Arrivals of undocumented migrants continue to test the capacity of States, with the problem of so-called “irregular secondary movement” exacerbated in recent years by boat arrivals. The Pacific, the Mediterranean, the Caribbean or the Gulf of Aden are all regular theatres, with ‘boatpeople’ being interdicted, intercepted, turned around, ignored by passing ships, shot at, or denied landing. Even when rescued, disembarkation somewhere has no guarantees attached, as an incident currently playing out off the Somalia/Djibouti coasts starkly reminds us.

All this is seriously at odds not only with protection principles but also with the reality that when they manage to gain access to territory and asylum processes, a large percentage of asylum-seekers who come by boat are actually found to be refugees. …

Boat arrivals can provoke fears and high emotions which may be difficult for Governments to manage. However, in our experience, an approach built predominantly around closing borders and trying to prevent movement is not the answer, as it does not work. In fact it can make situations even more difficult to deal with. Developments in relation to one country that has pursued a tough policy towards boats are actually quite revealing. While arrivals by sea are dramatically down, arrivals by land have basically doubled. In addition, while sea arrivals had been able to be concentrated through being channeled to one main reception point, land arrivals now come through multiple crossing points and have been able to disperse more effectively and rapidly through the community, below any radar screen. The evidence suggests that tough sea policies have not solved, just changed and indeed complicated the dynamics, of irregular movements….

The phenomenon of refugees on the move for non-protection reasons is also growing. Numbers and categories vary with the regions but the concern is global. On the African continent, where camps are more the norm than the exception, it is preoccupying that camp environments are starting to be compromised by a form of transit migration to and through them, with refugees, and others, seeking to use their facilities for R&R en route to a more distant destination. Just as concerning has been the misuse of reception centers as way-stations, or even lucrative recruitment opportunities for smugglers and traffickers. These facts are not a rationale for abandoning camps or centers. They are, though, a solid reason to rethink how better to manage them within a burden sharing framework….”

Click here for full address.

2 Comments

Filed under Aegean Sea, European Union, Greece, Italy, Libya, Mediterranean, News, Statements, UNHCR

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by | 01 Oct 2010 · 15:49

Global Migration Group Statement on the Human Rights of Migrants in Irregular Situation

The Global Migration Group (GMG) issued a Statement on the Human Rights of Migrants in Irregular Situation on 30 September.  Excerpts from the Statement follow:

“The Global Migration Group is deeply concerned about the human rights of international migrants in an irregular situation around the globe….

Too often, States have addressed irregular migration solely through the lens of sovereignty, border security or law enforcement, sometimes driven by hostile domestic constituencies. Although States have legitimate interests in securing their borders and exercising immigration controls, such concerns cannot, and indeed, as a matter of international law do not, trump the obligations of the State to respect the internationally guaranteed rights of all persons, to protect those rights against abuses, and to fulfill the rights necessary for them to enjoy a life of dignity and security….

The GMG calls upon States to review the situation of migrants in an irregular situation within their territories and to work towards ensuring that their laws and regulations conform with and promote the realization of the applicable international human rights standards and guarantees at all stages of the migration process. The GMG recognizes the difficulties many States face and stands ready to continue to support them in their efforts to ensure the effective implementation of appropriate legislation, including through capacity development….

The irregular situation which international migrants may find themselves in should not deprive them either of their humanity or of their rights….”

GMG is an inter-agency group bringing together 12 UN agencies, the World Bank, and the International Organization for Migration to promote the application of relevant international instruments and norms relating to migration, and to encourage the adoption of more coherent, comprehensive and better coordinated approaches to the issue of international migration.

(As noted by Prof. William Schabas on his blog.)

Click here for the full Statement.

Leave a comment

Filed under News, Statements, United Nations

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | 15 Sep 2010 · 05:55

ECRE Statement Re EU Conference on Quality and Efficiency in the Asylum Process

ECRE released a statement at the conclusion of this week’s EU Ministerial Conference on Quality and Efficiency in the Asylum Process:

“… Since its peak in the early 1990s, the number of asylum applications lodged within the European Union has experienced a sharp decline, despite the increase in some individual Member States. However, a difficult political and economic environment in Europe is fuelling little appetite for welcoming foreigners, which is translated into a slow progress at the table of negotiations to build a Common European Asylum System.

ECRE believes that initiatives to increase practical cooperation, such as this conference and the establishment of a European Asylum Support Office, which will soon be up and running in Malta, will help to make the asylum system fairer and more efficient. For instance, yesterday’s discussions have provided examples of how to improve the treatment of children or traumatised asylum seekers. Also, pooling resources with regard to information about the home countries of asylum seekers, interpretation services and training can contribute to better decisions.

Bjarte Vandvik, ECRE’s Secretary General, said: ‘The current EU asylum system is failing both Member States and people who arrive to Europe fleeing war or persecution. Practical cooperation is part of the solution but will not be enough. European Member States also need to resolve the impasse in the negotiations and work together to agree on fairer common asylum rules’.

Asylum seekers still have hugely different chances of being granted international protection depending on the EU country that will examine their application. For instance, in 2009, virtually no Iraqis were recognised as refugees in Greece, while in Germany, 77% of Iraqi asylum seekers were granted international protection and could rebuild their lives. A harmonised asylum system with higher standards of protection would not be only fairer; it would also be more efficient and less costly in the longer term.”

Click here for information on the Conference organised by the Belgian Presidency.

Click here for Commissioner Cecilia Malmström’s statement at the conference.

Leave a comment

Filed under European Union, News, Statements

Tagged as , , , , ,

by | 14 Sep 2010 · 06:00

Dutch Govt Position on Asylum Requests Made at Sea

The Dutch Minister of Justice, E.M.H. Hirsch Ballin, recently outlined the Dutch government’s position regarding the proper handling of asylum requests made by migrants who are intercepted at sea during Frontex coordinated operations.  The position is contained in a letter sent by the Justice Minister to the Chairman of the Dutch Senate on 3 September 2010.

This recent statement was brought to my attention by Dr Matteo Tondini, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, who succinctly summarized the Dutch Government’s position as follows:

  1. Dutch vessels are not a portion of Dutch territory;
  2. Asylum requests of migrants made on board Dutch vessels must be assessed by a competent authority (not by Dutch authorities, however, but possibly by the host nation); and
  3. The Netherlands considers this as a conditio sine qua non for its participation in FRONTEX operations at sea.

The Minister’s letter refers to provisions of the Council Decision re Rules for Sea Border Operations Coordinated by Frontex the validity of which is now being consider by the European Court of Justice pursuant to a challenge by the European Parliament.

I reproduce here an English translation of the Justice Minister’s letter provided by Dr  Tondini:

“21 501-28  Defense Council – Nr. 61  Letter from the Minister of Justice

To the President of the House of Representatives, The Hague, September 3, 2010

With this letter I keep my promise, made during the debate on 18 June 2008, to brief your House about the operational requirements for Frontex operations at sea. I also come here after the commitment undertaken by the then State Secretary for European Affairs on 16 June 2009 to your Chamber, about the procedure to be followed if a request for asylum is made on a Dutch ship during Frontex operations at sea.

Introduction

FRONTEX coordinates the operational cooperation between independent States which are competent for the management of external borders. Different operations of member states under the coordination of Frontex have been carried out in this framework. Due to a call by the European Council for clear rules and uniformity in the implementation of Frontex operations at sea, in 2007 the Commission was mandated to draw the requirements for the Agency’s maritime operations.

Operational requirements for Frontex operations at sea

The creation of these rules was a laborious and lengthy process. Based on the results of an extensive debate within a group of experts from the European Commission, the European Commission has drafted rules for Frontex operations at sea in the context of the surveillance of the external borders, in order to prevent illegal migration. The attached decision that embeds these rules, is a supplement to the Schengen Borders Code and applies since 4 May 2010.

In Part I of the Annex, the Decision contains a number of mandatory requirements for the interception of migrants in the contiguous zone and on the high seas. Part II of the Annex to the decision includes a number of non-binding rules on the search and rescue of people in distress during Frontex operations at sea, concerning the safe debarkation of survivors.

These requirements are a specification of the international norms and regulations on the interception and the search and rescue of people in distress at sea, contained in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea and the International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue.

In the Decision it is stated that these requirements are included and elaborated in the operational plans for each operation set up by the Agency. The arrangements for the rescue and debarkation of migrants in distress are also included in the operational plan. Furthermore, Section No. 1.2 of the Annex I to the Decision explicitly indicates the principle of non-refoulement.

The rules contained in the decision will contribute to create a greater uniformity of action between Member States during FRONTEX maritime operations and will make it possible to address Member States when they deviate from the norms concerning the activities related to the interception and the search and rescue of people at sea.

Procedure to request asylum on Dutch ships during Frontex operations at sea

An asylum request can only be submitted to the responsible authority of the state in which territory – including the territorial waters – the application is made. A Dutch ship is not part of the Dutch territory and on a Dutch ship there is no authority responsible for handling applications, being the commander of the ship not entitled to receive them. However, on a Dutch ship the Dutch jurisdiction applies.

In this regard, it is the responsibility of a Dutch ship’s commander that if a migrant on board expresses a wish to submit an application, this is not left without consequences. This requires that an alien who thinks to need protection has to be returned only after his/her request has been assessed and there is no reason to grant the protection in question. These migrants should therefore be given the opportunity to submit an application to a competent authority.

In the operational requirements for Frontex maritime operations it is provided that Member States should clarify in the operational plan for Frontex operations the steps to be taken with regard to intercepted or rescued people who are in need of protection and the place of their debarkation, according to international law and all the applicable bilateral agreements.

This means that the operational plan may include an explicit provision on that it is the host nation which is responsible for handling the applications of intercepted or rescued migrants made on board the Dutch ship. The Netherlands considers the inclusion of this provision as a condition to participate in a Frontex operation.

Member States are always bound by the principle of non-refoulement under the 1951 Refugee Convention and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR).

In addition, during the training provided by Frontex much attention is given to the preparation of border guards in the field of asylum and refugee law, focusing in particular on the identification of asylum seekers within mixed migration flows. Courses are aimed to even better prepare border guards to properly identify the protection needs of refugees.

The Minister of Justice, E.M.H. Hirsch Ballin”

Click here for the Letter (NL).

(I thank Dr Tondini for this information and the translation.  -nwf)

Leave a comment

Filed under European Union, Frontex, Netherlands, News, Statements

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

by | 16 Jul 2010 · 04:59

ECRE’s Recommendations to the Belgian EU Presidency

ECRE issued last week a letter and memorandum setting forth its recommendations to the Belgian EU Presidency in regard to the Common European Asylum System (CEAS), the European Asylum Support Office (EASO), and other related legislative files that will be considered during the Belgian Presidency.

Among the several important recommendations made by ECRE are the following:

“Access to protection – … [C]ooperation between the EASO, FRA and FRONTEX provide opportunities to develop mechanisms at EU level to guarantee that border control mechanisms are protection-sensitive in practice. The recently adopted guidelines for joint sea operations coordinated by FRONTEX restate the international human rights framework governing interception at sea and reaffirm the obligation of Member States to ensure that “no person shall be disembarked in, or otherwise handed over to the authorities of a country in contravention of the principle of non-refoulement, or from which there is a risk of expulsion or return to another country in contravention of that principle.”  They also explicitly require that “the person intercepted or rescued shall be informed in an appropriate way so that they can express any reasons for believing that disembarkation in the proposed place would be in breach of the principle of non-refoulement”. Whereas the guidelines merely restate these principles, they need to be implemented in practice. Given that the actual disembarkation of persons intercepted or rescued in the context of FRONTEX operations is dealt with in the non-binding part of the guidelines, it remains to be seen how effective this tool will be in order to ensure effective access to protection.

Recently the Commission proposed the third substantive revision of FRONTEX’ mandate. The Commission proposal unambiguously asserts that relevant EU standards, as well as international human rights and refugee law, are applicable to all border operations carried out by Member States under the auspices of Frontex and to all other activities entrusted to the Agency, which ECRE welcomes.

At the same time, while the intention of the Commission is to further clarify the role and responsibilities of FRONTEX vis-à-vis the Member States, the fundamental ambiguities about accountability for possible human rights violations during border control operations coordinated by FRONTEX are not resolved. ECRE believes that the respective roles and responsibilities of Member States’ guest officers, host Member State border officers, observers from third countries and FRONTEX personnel in those operations must be clearly established to avoid “accountability shifting” between the various actors involved. The enhanced role of FRONTEX in coordinating joint operations necessarily adds to FRONTEX’ responsibility and therefore further amendments to the Commission proposal are required to reinforce the Agency’s accountability.

Moreover, the proposed expansion of the role of FRONTEX in cooperating with third countries in border management, including through the posting of Immigration Liaison Officers, raises a number of concerns from a fundamental rights perspective, in particular regarding the ability of individuals to flee and find protection from persecution. Consequently, ECRE believes that additional safeguards are needed to ensure that FRONTEX activities will indeed not “prevent access to protection systems by persons in need of international protection” as required by the Stockholm Programme.

ECRE calls upon the Council and the European Parliament in particular to:

  • Support the proposed amendments to the FRONTEX Regulation reasserting the obligations under EU law and fundamental rights which are incumbent upon Member States when taking part in the Agency’s operations.
  • Establish mechanisms to reinforce FRONTEX accountability in view of the increasing responsibilities placed on the Agency.
  • Introduce the necessary safeguards to ensure that FRONTEX enhanced capacity to cooperate with third countries does not prevent access to protection systems by persons in need of international protection.”

Click here for the ECRE Memorandum.

Click here for the ECRE Letter to the Belgian EU Presidency.

Leave a comment

Filed under Belgium, Communiqués, European Union, Frontex, Statements

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

by | 08 Jul 2010 · 06:36

ECRE and CIR: Ill-treatment of Refugees in Libya: the EU, a Silent Accomplice

ECRE and CIR released a statement on 7 July criticising Italy and the EU in regard to the plight of over 200 Eritrean refugees, some of whom may have been subject to Italy’s push-back practice and who are now detained under dangerous conditions in Libya.

The two organisations “call upon all authorities involved to ensure that refugees are not repatriated to Eritrea where they are at risk of torture and ill- treatment. … ‘We strongly repeat our plea to the Italian Government to resettle the refugees to Italy’, says Christopher Hein, Director of the Italian Council for Refugees (CIR). ‘Some of those who are being mistreated now by the Libyan authorities have been pushed back there by Italy one year ago. Refugees are suffering the consequences of Italy’s violation of its legal obligations and EU Member States’ consenting silence’, added Bjarte Vandvik, ECRE’s Secretary General.”

Click here for the full statement.

Leave a comment

Filed under European Union, Italy, Libya, Mediterranean, Statements

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

by | 18 Jun 2010 · 05:26

Frontex: Collaboration With African Countries Contributed to Reduction in Irregular Migrants in 2009

Speaking at a press conference in Athens earlier this week, Gil Arias Fernandez, Frontex’s deputy executive director, credited the global recession as the key factor in 2009 for the reduced numbers of migrants seeking to enter the EU.  He also credited “good collaboration from the African countries where immigrants usually depart[,]” referring to measures taken by Libya, Mauritania and Senegal to prevent migrants from leaving the countries.

Click here and here for articles.

Click here and here for earlier posts on Frontex’s 2009 General Report.

Leave a comment

Filed under Data / Stats, European Union, Frontex, Libya, Mauritania, News, Senegal, Statements

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

by | 17 Jun 2010 · 05:21

ECRE: Can EU Trust Libya With Refugee Protection?

ECRE issued a press release last week regarding Libya’s decision to expel the UNHCR:

“Bjarte Vandvik, Secretary General of the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) said: ‘UNHCR’s expulsion from Libya will hopefully be temporary but it does reveal the unreliability of this regime, as well as its understanding of refugee protection. How will the EU ensure that Libya keeps its word regarding commitments towards human rights? How can the EU trust such a partner?’”

“ECRE calls on the EU to seriously reconsider its cooperation on asylum and refugee issues with Libya, a country that is not a party to the 1951 Geneva Refugee Convention. In particular, negotiations on an EU – Libya framework agreement must now be reviewed, as should any EU funding that supports Libyan authorities in intercepting refugees along their Southern border…. While UNHCR”s presence does not make Libya a safe place for refugees, the decision to prevent UNHCR from operating in the country once again illustrates the real intentions of the Libyan authorities when it comes to refugee protection. The EU cannot simply continue to ignore this reality but should make clear that the protection of refugees is still a fundamental value of the EU.”

(HT to Ana Lopez, ECRE’s Media and Information Officer).

Click here for full ECRE statement.

1 Comment

Filed under European Union, Libya, Mediterranean, Statements, UNHCR

Tagged as , , , ,

by | 15 Apr 2010 · 15:56

COE Committee of Ministers: “Europe’s boat people: mixed migration flows by sea into southern Europe”

The Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers on 31 March adopted its Reply to COE Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1850 (2008) on“Europe’s boat people: mixed migration flows by sea into southern Europe.”

Comments from the COE European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment are attached to the Rely as an Appendix.

The Reply contains an acknowledgement that the Committee of Ministers was not able to reach agreement on the recommendation that guidelines be prepared for minimum standards to be applied to the detention of irregular migrants:

“5. The Committee of Ministers has taken note of the proposal that guidelines be prepared for minimum standards to be applied to the detention of irregular migrants and asylum seekers. However, the Committee of Ministers has not, at the present time, reached a common position with regard to examining possibilities for Council of Europe action in this area. The Committee of Ministers underlines the importance of the relevant instruments of the Council of Europe, such as the European Convention on Human Rights and the recommendations adopted by the Committee of Ministers in this field (see paragraph 9 below), as well as those emerging from the work of the CPT and the Commissioner for Human Rights. It notes the ongoing work in the European Union in this field, including the revision under way of the 2003 directive laying down minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers.”

Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1850 was issued in 2008 prior to the implementation in 2009 of Italy’s push-back practice and the Committee of Ministers’ Reply does not make explicit reference to Italy’s push-back policy.  The Recommendation and Reply are focused on the treatment of irregular migrants as they arrive on the shores of member states.

But there are several statements in the Reply which should apply implicitly to the irregular migrants whether encountered upon arrival on shore or intercepted or rescued in international waters.

For example:

“6. Particularly significant instruments in this field, also to be borne in mind in the framework of any possible activity in this area, include Committee of Ministers’ Recommendation No. R (98) 13 of 18 September 1998 on the right of rejected asylum seekers to an effective remedy against decisions on expulsion in the context of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Recommendation No. R (98) 15 on the training of officials who first come into contact with asylum seekers, in particular at border points and Recommendation Rec(2003)5 on measures of detention of asylum seekers. The Committee of Ministers would also signal the “Twenty guidelines on forced return” adopted on 20 May 2005 and the Guidelines on human rights protection in the context of accelerated asylum procedures adopted on 1 July 2009.”

“7. The Committee of Ministers would also refer to other texts relevant in this area, such as its reply to Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1755 (2006) on “Human rights of irregular migrants” in which it draws attention to the minimum safeguards provided for in the European Convention on Human Rights that can be applied to irregular migrants. It also recalls its Recommendation No. R (2000) 3 to member states on the right to satisfaction of basic material needs of persons in situations of extreme hardship, which provides a minimum threshold of rights which should be recognised regardless of their status.”

“10. The Committee of Ministers would also draw attention to the extensive work of the Commissioner for Human Rights in this field and to his recommendations to member states and his appeals for solidarity within Europe with those countries that are on the frontline and facing a very difficult situation. It also refers to the regular exchanges of views that it holds with the Commissioner during the year. These exchanges are both of a general nature but also concern specific country reports in which he addresses, inter alia, the protection of human rights of immigrants and asylum seekers, including, where relevant, those arriving by sea. [***]”

Click here for the full Committee of Ministers Reply.

1 Comment

Filed under Aegean Sea, Commissioner for Human Rights, Committee of Ministers, Council of Europe, Eastern Atlantic, European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Greece, Italy, Mediterranean, Spain, Statements

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

by | 17 Mar 2010 · 05:08

COE Human Rights Commissioner Expresses Concern to ECtHR Over Greece’s Treatment of Asylum Seekers

Council of Europe Human Rights Commissioner Thomas Hammarberg has made public the third party intervention he submitted to the European Court of Human Rights on 10 March.  The intervention was made at the invitation of the ECtHR pursuant to Article 36, paragraph 2 of the ECHR, and is the first such submission of its kind by the Commissioner.

The intervention was submitted in case 26494/09 AHMED ALI v. the Netherlands and Greece, and thirteen related cases.  The cases all deal with the return of asylum seekers from the Netherlands to Greece pursuant to the EC Dublin Regulation.

The Commissioner’s Office notes in a Press Statement that “[w]ith the entry into force of Protocol No. 14 to the [ECHR], the Commissioner will [now] have the right to intervene proprio motu as third party in the Court’s proceedings.”

Excerpts from the Commissioner’s intervention before the ECtHR:

“Introduction – [***]

3. The protection of the human rights of asylum seekers and refugees is a priority theme of the Commissioner’s present work concerning all Council of Europe member states. The Commissioner has repeatedly stressed the importance of guaranteeing the individual right to seek and enjoy asylum and has addressed a number of relevant recommendations to member states. [***]

I. Observations on the current framework of refugee protection in Greece

6. The Commissioner is fully cognisant of the considerable, mixed migration (immigrants and asylum seekers) flow pressures that have been exerted on Greece, as is the case for other Mediterranean Council of Europe member states, for many years. The increase of irregular migration into Greece that has occurred particularly in the last five years has further strained this country’s resources. Nonetheless, the complex international phenomenon of migration should be dealt with by Greece and all other Council of Europe member states concerned in a manner which is not only efficient but also effectively respectful of the Council of Europe human rights standards.

7. Greece received the sixth largest number of refugee applicants in the EU during the first half of 2009 (9 800 applications).

8. In 2009, a total of 15 928 asylum applications were lodged in Greece; there were 11 recognitions of Convention refugee status and 18 grants of humanitarian status or subsidiary protection. The Commissioner has noted with concern that in 2009 the recognition rate at first instance was 0,04% for Convention refugee status and 0,06% for the other two statuses. The pending applications at first instance in 2009 reached 3 122. As regards asylum appeals in 2009, there were 12 095 appeals, 25 recognitions of Convention refugee status and 11 grants of humanitarian or subsidiary protection. The respective recognition rates on appeal were 2,87% and 1,26%. On 10 February 2010 the Commissioner was informed by the Minister of Citizen Protection of the fact that the total of pending asylum claims in early February 2010 was as high as 44 560, and found this to be worrying.

9. The Commissioner noted that during the first ten months of 2009 Greece received 7 857 applications from other EU member states to receive back refugee applicants under the Dublin Regulation. Of these applications, 2 770 were accepted and 106 rejected. The final transfers to Greece during that period totalled 995. [***]

II. Major issues concerning the asylum procedure in Greece and human rights safeguards

Legal framework  [***]

Asylum seekers’ access to domestic and international remedies

23. The Commissioner recalls his Recommendation concerning the rights of aliens wishing to enter a Council of Europe member State and the enforcement of expulsion orders, where he stresses the need for the right of judicial remedy within the meaning of Article 13 of the Convention not only to be guaranteed in law but also to be granted in practice when a person alleges that the competent authorities have contravened or are likely to contravene a right guaranteed by the Convention. [***]

27. In view of the above, the Commissioner is worried that asylum seekers in Greece face a serious, real risk of being deprived of their right to an effective remedy in respect of the violations of the Convention of which they allege to be victims, which is guaranteed under Article 13 of the Convention and Article 39 of the Directive 2005/85/EC. The notion of an effective remedy under Article 13 requires a scope of review conducted by a domestic court able to address the key elements of whether there has been a violation of the Convention.

28. As regards access to the European Court of Human Rights, although this is guaranteed in principle for every individual within Greece’s jurisdiction, lodging an application before the Court appears to be very difficult in practice. The same applies for requests made under Rule 39 of the Rules of the Court (interim measures): the number of such requests introduced from and against Greece seems to be quite low compared to other state parties, and can be linked to difficulties, described in other parts of the present written submission, in accessing interpretation services and lawyers, in particular for people in detention, and to the lack of proper legal information available in general.

Protection of asylum seekers from refoulement

29. During both his visits the Commissioner was informed by migrants he met and by Greek refugee lawyers about instances of non registration by the Police of asylum claims and of instances of refoulement, especially from Greece to Turkey. Such forced returns have occasionally taken place before the migrants were able to apply for asylum, but also concern ‘pink card’ holders registered as asylum seekers in Greece. Characteristically, during the Commissioner’s discussions with migrant detainees at the Feres border guard station in December 2008, one of them reported that of the group of 65 persons who were arrested in 2008, having crossed the Evros river, 50 of them were ‘immediately deported’. [***]

31. In this context, it is noted that despite the Commissioner’s recommendations, Greece has not as yet acceded to the 1963 Protocol No. 4 to the European Convention on Human Rights which, inter alia, proscribes the collective expulsion of aliens, while Turkey still adheres to the geographical limitation of the 1951 UN Refugee Convention, thus excluding from refugee status persons coming from outside of Europe.

32. During his visit to Greece in February 2010 the Commissioner was informed of and concerned at another reported case of refoulement concerning a group of 43 Kurds who had arrived at the town of Chania, Crete on 18 July 2009; 17 of them applied for refugee status. According to NGO reports, on 27 July 2009 they were all transferred to the aliens’ detention centre of Venna (North East Greece) from where they were subsequently expelled to Turkey. A series of other collective expulsions of migrant groups, ranging from 30 to 120 persons, to Turkey (through the land border of the Evros department) from various eastern Aegean islands were reported by Greek refugee lawyers to have occurred in July and August 2009. The Commissioner was informed by Greek refugee lawyers of more similar collective expulsions that have reportedly occurred in December 2009, January and February 2010.

33. The Commissioner underlines that such practices are not compatible with member states’ obligations recalled by the Committee of Ministers Twenty Guidelines on Forced Returns (especially Guideline 3 – prohibition of collective expulsion) and with the states’ fundamental obligation under the Convention not to return a person to a country where they would face a real risk of being subjected to treatment contrary to Article 3, or even Article 2. The Commissioner is concerned that asylum seekers returning to Greece by virtue of the Dublin Regulation may face such risks, jeopardising the enjoyment by them of their human rights enshrined in the Convention. [***]

Conclusions

47. In conclusion, the Commissioner considers that current asylum law and practice in Greece are not in compliance with international and European human rights standards. In particular:

– access to refugee protection remains highly problematic, notably due to the non-functioning of the first instance Advisory Refugee Committees, lack of proper information on asylum procedures and legal aid that should be available to potential or actual asylum seekers, widely reported instances of refoulement or non-registration of asylum claims;

– the quality of asylum decisions at first instance is inadequate, notably because of structural deficiencies and lack of procedural safeguards, in particular concerning the provision of legal aid and interpretation;

– existing domestic remedy against negative asylum applications is not effective;

– asylum seekers, including persons transferred under the Dublin Regulation, face extremely harsh living conditions in Greece.

48. Since the beginning of his mandate, the Commissioner has been following developments relating to migration, and especially asylum, in Greece. The Commissioner is pleased to note the new Greek government’s decision and willingness, shown to him during his visit in February 2010, to overhaul the refugee protection system and overcome its current serious, chronic and structural deficiencies.

49. The Commissioner fully supports these efforts and has urged the Greek authorities to proceed and engage with determination and commitment in the necessary legislative and administrative changes that would bring the Greek asylum system in line with international and European human rights standards.”

Click here for full submission to ECtHR.

Click here for the Commissioner’s Press Statement.

Leave a comment

Filed under Aegean Sea, European Court of Human Rights, Greece, Judicial, Statements

Tagged as , , , , ,

by | 11 Mar 2010 · 04:35

Réaction du REMDH suite au Sommet UE-Maroc

“Réaction et commentaires du Réseau Euro-Méditerranéen des Droits de l’Homme (REMDH) suite à la Déclaration conjointe publiée lors du premier Sommet UE-Maroc qui s’est tenu les 6 et 7 Mars 2010 à Grenade:

Le REMDH note avec satisfaction que la déclaration conjointe réaffirme les droits de l’Homme comme étant « l’un des piliers fondamentaux du partenariat UE-Maroc ». Il salue l’accent mis sur la nécessité de mettre en œuvre toutes les recommandations de l’Instance Equité et Réconciliation (IER) ainsi que de poursuivre les réformes en matière de justice, de liberté d’expression, de presse et d’association.  Cependant, le REMDH regrette que la Déclaration ne mentionne pas explicitement les droits de l’Homme parmi les domaines qui requièrent une attention particulière comme la réforme de la justice ou les droits des migrants….

Le REMDH exprime par ailleurs sa plus vive inquiétude concernant la volonté réaffirmée de conclure dès que possible un accord de réadmission. La loi relative à l’entrée et au séjour des étrangers au Maroc ne garantit pas la protection des droits de l’Homme, en particulier, le droit à un recours effectif ainsi que la protection contre le retour forcé vers un pays où la sécurité de la personne ne serait pas assurée. Dans ce contexte, le REMDH estime que les droits des migrants, réfugiés et demandeurs d’asile ne sont pas garantis. Il demande à l’UE et au Maroc de respecter leurs engagements internationaux en la matière notamment en interrompant les négociations en cours en vue de la conclusion d’un accord de réadmission…..”

Cliquez ici pour le commentaire complet.

Leave a comment

Filed under Communiqués, Eastern Atlantic, European Union, Mediterranean, Morocco, Statements

Tagged as , , , ,

by | 11 Mar 2010 · 04:12

Déclaration Conjointe Sommet UE-Maroc

Extraits de la Déclaration conjointe Sommet Union Européenne-Maroc Grenade, 7 mars 2010:

“[***] Le Sommet couronne une intense période d’accélération dans les relations UE-Maroc, initiée par l’entrée en vigueur de l’Accord d’association en mars 2000, renforcée par la mise en place du Plan d’Action, dans le cadre de la Politique Européenne de Voisinage, en juillet 2005 et par l’adoption du document conjoint sur le Statut Avancé lors du Conseil d’Association d’octobre 2008.

Ce partenariat qui traduit un processus intense de dialogue couvrant tous les domaines politiques, économiques, sociaux et humains, reflète les aspirations des deux Parties à consolider la spécificité de leur partenariat….

I. L’UNION EUROPEENNE ET LE MAROC PARTENAIRES DANS UN MONDE GLOBAL

[***]  En matière de migration, le Maroc et l’UE conviennent de renforcer les mécanismes de coopération entre les pays d’origine, de transit et de destination, à travers la poursuite du dialogue entre les deux Parties et l’appui au processus de renforcement des capacités des parties concernées en matière de lutte contre l’immigration illégale, promotion de la migration régulière, optimisation de la contribution des migrants au développement et traitement des causes profondes de la migration. Une telle approche globale et équilibrée des questions de migration, incluant aussi une coopération pour le retour et la réadmission des migrants en situation irrégulière, doit constituer un élément fondamental du partenariat entre l’UE et le Maroc.

Le Maroc et l’UE saluent les réalisations du processus euro-africain sur la migration et le développement, lancé à Rabat en juillet 2006 et renforcé à Paris en novembre 2008, processus dans lequel le Maroc a joué un rôle moteur….

II. PREMIERS PAS VERS LA CONSOLIDATION DU STATUT AVANCE

[***]  Dimension humaine.

[***]  Le Maroc et l’UE notent avec satisfaction le consensus qui émerge au niveau international sur la nécessité d’examiner les questions migratoires dans le cadre d’une approche globale basée sur la responsabilité partagée et l’action collective concertée et associant la lutte contre la migration irrégulière, la gestion de la migration régulière et le lien entre migration et le développement.

Le Maroc et l’UE ont convenu de la nécessité de conclure dès que possible la négociation de l’accord de réadmission. La conclusion de cet accord est de nature à développer leur coopération dans le domaine de la migration, leur objectif commun étant de lutter contre la migration irrégulière, de favoriser l’utilisation de canaux réguliers de mobilité et migration, et de promouvoir l’impact positif de la migration sur le développement. La finalisation de la négociation sur l’accord de réadmission permettra une coopération globale sur la migration incluant la facilitation des visas.

III. UN AGENDA OPERATIONNEL POUR L´AVENIR

[***] Nouvel instrument qui prendra le relais du Plan d’action UE-Maroc L’actuel Plan d’action UE-Maroc adopté en 2005 pour une période de 5 ans arrivant à son échéance, les deux parties soulignent l’importance de finaliser le nouvel instrument qui doit être adopté en 2010 et qui prendra le relais du Plan d’action actuel. Ce nouveau document devra donner un contenu opérationnel aux objectifs du Statut avancé en intégrant les réformes agréées et les actions prévues dans le cadre du Plan d’action qui n’ont pas encore été mises  en oeuvre, ainsi que les éléments nouveaux qui sont prévus dans le document conjoint. Il intégrera également les éléments du programme gouvernemental de convergence réglementaire….”

Cliquez ici pour la Déclaration complete.

Leave a comment

Filed under Eastern Atlantic, European Union, Mediterranean, Morocco, Statements

Tagged as , ,

by | 10 Mar 2010 · 05:04

Lettre ouverte au Sommet UE-Maroc relative à l’accord de réadmission UE-Maroc

Une letter de la part des associations défendant les droits des migrants où on recommande l’arrêt de toute négociation allant dans le sens de la conclusion d’un accord de réadmission UE-Maroc:

“Depuis le début des années 2000, l’Union européenne tente d’imposer au Maroc la signature d’un accord de réadmission qui comprendrait la réadmission des ressortissants marocains en situation irrégulière en Europe ainsi que celle de tout étranger ayant transité par le Maroc avant de parvenir sur le sol européen.   A ce jour, le Maroc a pu résister aux pressions de l’Union européenne ….  En effet, les accords de réadmission sont un des instruments centraux de la politique migratoire de l’UE, réitérés dans le Pacte européen sur l’asile adopté par le Conseil européen le 16 octobre 2008. Les négociations entre l’UE et les différents pays se réalisent en général dans l’opacité la plus totale….

Suite à l’adoption du principe d’un Statut avancé pour le Maroc et dans le cadre du premier Sommet UE-Maroc, qui se déroule du 6 au 8 mars à Grenade, nous nous inquiétons des pressions de l’Union européenne sur le Maroc qui semblent de plus en plus fortes. En effet, bien que l’UE déclarait, au sujet du Statut avancé du Maroc, lors du 8ème conseil d’association,  que « ce partenariat renforcé entre l’UE et le Maroc traduit la volonté de l’UE de répondre positivement aux attentes et aux besoins spécifiques du Maroc, afin de l’accompagner dans son processus courageux de modernisation et de démocratisation (…) ». Il est pourtant clair que la signature de l’accord de réadmission UE-Maroc ne répond en rien aux attentes et aux besoins spécifiques du Maroc. Au contraire, l’UE à travers ses politiques migratoires restrictives, notamment celles des visas, a transformé les pays frontaliers de l’UE en pays de transit et cherche aujourd’hui à les ancrer dans ce rôle en expulsant vers ces territoires toute personne en situation irrégulière en Europe ayant transité par ces derniers. …

Nous dénonçons par ailleurs, le rôle ambigu de l’UE qui d’une part déclare encourager le Maroc dans son processus de démocratisation et de promotion des droits humains, tout en le poussant, d’autre part à mettre en place des mesures restrictives de contrôle des frontières et de réadmission qui mettent en péril le respect des droits humains et en particulier celui des migrants tant sur le territoire marocain qu’européen. Pour rappel, cela a été déjà le cas par le passé, notamment lors des événements de Ceuta et Melilla….”

Cliquez ici pour la letter complete.

Leave a comment

Filed under Eastern Atlantic, European Union, Mediterranean, Morocco, Statements

Tagged as , , ,

by | 02 Mar 2010 · 20:49

NGO Statement on Europe for UNHCR’s 47th Standing Committee Meeting

From the ICVA – International Council of Voluntary Agencies.   Excerpts from the NGO Statement:

“Executive Committee of the High Commissioner’s Programme

Standing Committee, 47th Meeting, 2-4 March 2010

NGO Statement on Europe

Agenda Item 3. (a) iii

This statement has been drafted in consultation with, and is delivered on behalf of, a wide range of NGOs and attempts to reflect the diversity of views within the NGO community.

[***] If we look at the asylum policies of the European Union (EU) and neighbouring countries, we detect a hesitation or shift away from the spirit of the 1951 Convention and 1967 Protocol.

In this statement, NGOs would like to draw attention to this trend in three policy areas. These are:

  • The limits on access to refugee protection in Europe;
  • The integration of refugees in European society; and
  • The externalisation of refugee protection.  [***]

Limits on Access to Protection in Europe

Access to territory

[***] EU border policies continue to be obsessed with security and combating irregular migration at the expense of providing access to those in need of international protection. There is now no legal way for an asylum-seeker to enter the EU. NGOs urges the Member States to collaborate with the European Commission, Parliament, Frontex, and the newly established European Asylum Support Office in developing guidelines on identifying those in need of international protection in mixed flows. UNHCR should be closely consulted in this process. [***]

Externalisation of Refugee Protection

[***] The Stockholm Programme raises the issue of external processing of asylum claims in transit countries. Careful consideration must be given to the potential role of UNHCR in joint processing and the responsibility of European countries in resettling those identified as in need of international protection. It should not be assumed that identified refugees will remain in the transit country. There remains significant concern from European NGOs regarding the legal, practical, and moral implications of such external processing if these trends continue.

Bilateral agreements, such as those between Spain and the West African countries of Senegal and Mauritania, do firmly place the burden of hosting refugees with the transit country. This trend is also visible in the agreements between Italy and Libya and the pushbacks in the Mediterranean.

What we can discern from these trends and those above, is that European policies favour refugees remaining in neighbouring regions rather than facilitating their access to Europe. These trends can only be met with condemnation as an obvious breach of human rights and States’ obligations. [***]

Closing Remark

Given the current negative trends in European refugee policies, it is important to look at initiatives that move in the opposite direction. NGOs are greatly supportive of the call in the Stockholm Programme for the EU to seek accession to the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol. This is made possible through the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty that gives the EU a legal personality. As such, we look forward to the different agencies of the EU, including Frontex and European Asylum Support Office, seeking guidance from and collaborating with the UNHCR. [***]”

Click here for full Statement.

Click here for link to other related documents on ICVA web site.

Leave a comment

Filed under European Union, Frontex, Statements, UNHCR

Tagged as , , ,