Participants from Lebanon, Syria and Palestine met in Beirut in early June to discuss protection rights, needs and strategies for Palestinian refugees. Organised by the A'idun Group (Lebanon and Syria) and the Bethlehem-based BADIL Resource Centre for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights, the workshop was hosted by the Institute of Palestine Studies (Beirut).
Debate and discussion focused on clarification of the concept of refugee protection as it applies to Palestinian refugees, the similarities and differences in protection gaps in various host countries and the question of which international body or bodies - the UN Conciliation Committee for Palestine (UNCCP), UNRWA and/or UNHCR - should be responsible for protection of Palestinian refugees and the search for durable solutions.
Specific attention was given to different marginalised groups of Palestinian refugees such as the former inhabitants of Gaza who now live in Jordan, Palestinians in US/UK- occupied Iraq and the Palestinian residents in Egypt who suffer from a protection gap no less serious than that of the better publicised case of Palestinians in Lebanon (see FMR11 pp40-41.)
Participants called for:
For additional information, see
www.badil.org or contact Jaber
Suleiman, A'idun, at jsleiman@inco.com.lb.
Offshore processing: out of sight, out of mind? by Diana Quick
Responding to rising numbers of asylum seekers and growing anti-refugee sentiment in the UK, the British government plans to set up holding centres for would-be immigrants in the regions they are fleeing. Despite opposition expressed by several members of the European Union at the June 2003 European Council meeting, the UK and other interested nations, such as the Netherlands and Denmark, plan to go ahead with pilot 'zones of protection', possibly in the Horn of Africa.
The British government argues that by allowing protection for people in areas where there is a risk of a humanitarian crisis they would be able to return to their homes more easily when it is safe to do so. Failing that, asylum claims could be processed on the spot. People who claim asylum in the UK, including women and children (but not unaccompanied minors), could also be sent to the protection zones.
The idea has, in theory, the support of UNHCR whose proposed 'three-pronged approach' to improve the global asylum system would mean donor states supporting refugees in their original host countries, helping them to return home, to resettle to other countries or start new lives locally. However, the agency has not said whether it will participate in the UK's pilot project.
Opponents, including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the British Refugee Council, have voiced strong opposition, calling it an effort by Britain to dump its responsibilities towards refugees onto poor, distant countries. They have stated that the plan could violate international laws, including the 1951 Refugee Convention, the European Convention on Human Rights and possibly the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. They are also concerned that refugees and asylum seekers in the zones of protection would face protection issues, including sexual assault, gender-based violence, forced recruitment of children by armed militias and people trafficking. (1)
An early draft of the UK proposal suggests it would include primary humanitarian assistance (food, shelter and health services), protection against refoulement and compliance with Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (i.e., no risk of torture, inhuman or degrading treatment). There is no mention, however, of human rights or legal protection. Many questions about the 'zones of protection' remain unanswered. Whose law will run the camps? How can the human rights of refugees be protected? Who will fund the camps and who will monitor them? How long will refugees be required to stay in such zones before decisions are reached on their claims? Details of how claims will be processed, how legal advice will be provided for claimants and whether they will be free to come and go are still unclear.
A recent report by the British Home Office(2) revealed that 'get tough' asylum policies lead to more illegal immigration and people trafficking and that the restrictive measures that were most successful at reducing unfounded claims also forced genuine refugees to go underground.
Diana Quick is Director of Communications, Women's Commission for Refugee Women and Children, www.womenscommission.org. Email: diana@womenscommission.org
Notes: