Lives in danger as European governments deny refugees protection | Amnesty International
19 June 2009
Governments in Europe are putting lives at risk by denying refugees protection, Amnesty International warned on Saturday.
“Refugees are risking their lives to find safety only to be turned away when they reach Europe,” said Nicola Duckworth, Europe and Central Asia Director at Amnesty International.
“Governments must stop putting lives in danger and start meeting their international obligations to protect these vulnerable people.”
Amnesty International’s call for government action comes on World Refugee Day, which is held on 20 June every year. World Refugee Day sees thousands of organizations in hundreds of countries coming together to focus global attention on the plight of refugees and the causes of their exile.
Countries at Europe’s border are showing a flagrant disregard for their international obligations towards refugees:
* Italy is intercepting refugees in international waters and physically transporting them, without assessing their protection needs, to Libya, where migrants, asylum-seekers and refugees are at risk of ill-treatment and forcible return to countries where they risk serious human rights abuses.
* Greece pushes back people at its land border and sea borders with Turkey without first assessing their asylum claims. For those that do enter the country there are many legal obstacles for refugees to gain protection.
* Spain’s bilateral agreements with several countries in Africa are used to justify the arbitrary arrest, detention and deportation of asylum-seekers and migrants in these countries.
* Turkey continues not to recognise people from outside Europe as refugees, meaning thousands of people are denied the protection they need.
On World Refugee Day, Amnesty International warned EU states that their actions are undermining the protection of refugees not only in their own countries but also across the world, by sending a dangerous message on the treatment of refugees.
The organization said that all countries must meet their obligations towards refugees and asylum-seekers not only within their own borders but wherever they exercise effective control.
Reaction to youtube video of expulsion | Amnesty International
19 June 2009
A video posted on Youtube this week graphically brings home the often degrading nature of forced expulsions of irregular migrants. The footage of a man lying on his stomach on the airport tarmac, his arms and legs tied together behind his back and apparently being gagged was shot by a passenger waiting for flight IB3722 to Dakar at Madrid airport on 15 June. Finally, he is picked up off the ground by two police officers, still tied up, and put in the back of the police van, more like a piece of luggage than a human being. It appears that the pilot of the plane refused to transport a man in such conditions, and other passengers refused to travel with him.
At one point in the film it appears that a police officer rests his foot on the man’s back after roughly rolling him onto his stomach. Such an action is clearly an unnecessary use of force, and the officer in question should be disciplined and/or prosecuted accordingly.
However, what is truly shocking about this film is that most of the actions of the police officers are not unlawful under Spanish guidelines. The dehumanising and brutal procedure you see is in line with Spanish police protocol for forced deportations which, contrary to the recommendations of various Council of Europe bodies, does not explicitly prohibit the use of gags or restraint techniques which may cause positional asphyxiation (i.e. suffocate the person being restrained by holding them in a position which blocks their airways, such as lying on the stomach for a prolonged period of time). The protocol also allows the use of handcuffs, reinforced tape, sedatives, masks and immobilising belts. Such restraint techniques not only increase the risk of suffocation to the person being expelled if used inappropriately, but are also a real security risk during take-off and landing. Nervous flyer? You would be.
States have the right to control who is allowed to enter their territory, and are free to expel those present without the proper authorisation. But this must be done in line with basic human rights standards and respect for human dignity. Amnesty International has repeatedly called on EU countries, including Spain, to ensure irregular migrants and rejected asylum-seekers being forcibly returned to their country of origin are not subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, or any excessive use of force. States’ protocols on forced deportations should reflect international human rights standards and be strictly adhered to by law enforcement officials. In fact, the Spanish protocol itself notes that individuals being repatriated should only be restrained in a manner which “does not harm their dignity or personal integrity”. But such wording is meaningless if not respected in practice.
One’s dignity is not the only thing endangered by such treatment : lives can also be lost. On 9 June 2007, almost exactly two years ago, Osamuyia Akpitaye died while being forcibly expelled from Spain to Nigeria. No video is available to show us what happened to him, but witnesses state he was gagged and tied by police officers. He died of suffocation shortly after take-off. Two officers have now been charged with negligent manslaughter and today, two years on, Osamayuia Akpitaye’s family is waiting for a trial date, and justice. The question is, were their actions in line with official protocols? And if so, how long before those protocols are changed?
American Civil Liberties Union : Senate Overturns Obama Decision Wednesday To Rescind Flawed Bush “No-Match” Immigration Rule (7/9/2009)
Vitter Amendment Requires Employers To Fire Workers Unable to Resolve Discrepancies In Social Security Records
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (202) 675-2312; media@dcaclu.org
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Senate passed by voice vote today an amendment offered by Senate David Vitter (R-LA) requiring employers to fire workers, including U.S. citizens, who are unable to resolve discrepancies in their Social Security records. The Senate vote seeks to overturn President Obama’s decision Wednesday to rescind the fatally flawed Bush administration Social Security no-match rule by prohibiting the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) from implementing any changes to it.
In passing the Vitter amendment, the Senate has taken a dangerous step that would threaten the jobs of tens of thousands of U.S. workers at a time when our economy is in great peril. The Social Security no-match rule, promulgated by the Bush administration in 2007, has been strongly opposed by groups across the political spectrum – business, labor, immigration, civil rights, and civil libertarian groups. Due to a federal injunction issued in 2007 as a result of a lawsuit filed on behalf of the ACLU and other groups, the no-match rule has not gone into effect.
“While the Senate might think it has taken a step to fix illegal immigration, it has actually set into motion a rule that will jeopardize the jobs of tens of thousands of U.S. citizens who could be unjustly fired under the rule due to SSA database errors,” said Joanne Lin, ACLU Legislative Counsel.
The no-match rule would unlawfully use the error-ridden Social Security database for immigration enforcement purposes by requiring employers to fire workers, including U.S. citizens, who are unable to resolve discrepancies in their Social Security records within 90 days of receipt of a no-match letter. If an employer does not resolve a data mismatch, DHS may conclude that the employer had “constructive knowledge” that an employee is not authorized to work, and may prosecute the employer accordingly.
“Social Security no-match letters were never designed to be immigration enforcement tools, and they cannot and will not solve the problem of illegal immigration,” added Lin. “Moreover, the no-match rule will harm people with disabilities and senior citizens by forcing them to deal with longer waits and more bureaucratic hassles in order to get their Social Security benefits checks. At a time of great economic instability, the Senate has taken a step towards jeopardizing the livelihood of U.S. workers, senior citizens, and people with disabilities.”
In 2007, a federal court blocked the no-match rule after the ACLU, AFL-CIO, and National Immigration Law Center sued DHS. The court concluded that the no-match rule would affect more than eight million workers nationwide and lead to the firing of tens of thousands of U.S. citizens. According to the Social Security Administration’s own Inspector General, more than 70 percent of the discrepancies in the SSA database belong to U.S. citizens. An economist hired by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce estimates that the total number of authorized workers who will be fired under the no-match rule because of their inability to resolve the data mismatch could top 165,000.
Gaddafi visit to Italy amid protest against countries' 'illegal migration' agreement | Amnesty International
12 June 2009
Libyan leader Mu'ammar al-Gaddafi concludes his three-day visit to Italy on Friday, amid criticism from human rights groups of the irregular migration control co-operation between the two countries and attempts by Italy to "contract out" to Libya its obligations to provide protection to refugees and asylum seekers.
Amnesty International has called on both countries to make human rights an integral part of migration control policies and to uphold the rights of refugees, asylum seekers, and migrants.
In August 2008, both countries agreed a Treaty of Friendship, Partnership and Co-operation, including provision for bilateral efforts to combat "illegal migration" through joint patrolling of the sea.
As part of the treaty, Italy has said it will compensate Libya for its 30-year occupation. The $5bn (£3bn) package involves construction projects, student grants and pensions for Libyan soldiers who served with the Italians during the Second World War.
In return, Libya has agreed, amongst other things, to tighten control of its territorial and international waters and accept disembarkation on its soil of migrants, asylum seekers and refugees intercepted at sea by Italian vessels. Italy has been reported to have also undertaken to provide resources, including technology for control of migrant flows through the southern borders of Libya.
"Italy and Libya should grant protection to those fleeing persecution and conflict, not treat them as mere commodities in deals which aim at avoiding international obligations with regards to the treatment of migrants, asylum-seekers and refugees," said Amnesty International. "Co-operation between the two countries cannot in effect be 'contracting out' to Libya the management of migration flows, especially not when Libya has a poor record when it comes to the treatment of refugees, asylum seekers and migrants.”
In 2008, there were allegations of the torture and other ill-treatment of refugees and asylum-seekers and migrants; which the Libyan authorities failed to investigate. Refugees and asylum-seekers were not afforded protection as required by international law, as Libya has no functioning asylum system.
Against this backdrop, Italy has said it will forcibly return individuals setting off from Libya who are intercepted before they reach Italian shores.
On 6 May, three vessels with an estimated 227 third-country nationals on board sent out distress calls while passing about 50 miles south of the Italian island of Lampedusa. A dispute between the Maltese and Italian government over who had responsibility may have delayed rescue operations.
Eventually, two Italian coastguard vessels took the migrants to Tripoli in Libya, without stopping in an Italian port. The Italian Minister of the Interior Roberto Maroni was reported to have called it "an historical achievement after one year of bilateral negotiations with Libya."
Further interceptions and returns have occurred: according to official information from the Ministry of the Interior in Italy, between 6 and 11 May, around 500 individuals including those from Somalia, Eritrea and other Sub-Saharan African countries were returned to Libya after being intercepted by Italian vessels at sea.
The actions, however, constituted a breach of Italy's obligations, including the duty not to send individuals to a country where they are at risk of persecution (the principle of non refoulement) and to provide access to a fair and satisfactory asylum procedure. These obligations stem from the fact that these individuals were under the effective control of the Italian authorities even though they did not step foot on Italian soil.
The UN refugee agency criticized these actions and urged Italy "to ensure that people rescued at sea and in need of international protection receive full access to territory and asylum procedures."
On 14 May, the Italian government handed over to Libya three patrol boats to monitor its Mediterranean coastline in joint operations with the Italian Navy. A further three boats have been promised.
From 15-23 May, a human rights fact-finding team from Amnesty International visited Libya - the first such visit since 2004.
During their time in Libya, Amnesty International delegates were only allowed to pay a brief visit to the Misratah Detention Centre, some 200 km from Tripoli, in which between 600 and 700 alleged irregular migrants mostly from other African countries are held in severely overcrowded conditions.
Many have been detained since they were intercepted while seeking to make their way to Italy or other countries in southern Europe.
Those held at Misratah may include refugees fleeing persecution, including Eritrean and Somali nationals; but as Libya has no asylum procedure and is not a party to the UN Refugee Convention or its 1967 Protocol, foreign nationals, including those in need of international protection, may find themselves outside the protection of the law.
There is also virtually no opportunity for detainees to lodge complaints of torture and other ill-treatment to competent judicial authorities or to challenge the grounds of their detention. Some of the Eritrean nationals, who comprise a sizeable proportion of those detained at Misratah, told Amnesty International that they had been held there for two years.
In its meetings with government officials, Amnesty International expressed concern about the detention and alleged ill-treatment of hundreds, possibly thousands, of individuals whom the authorities assume to be irregular migrants, and urged them to put in place proper procedures to identify asylum seekers and refugees and afford them appropriate protection.
Amnesty International also urged the Libyan authorities to cease forcible returns of individuals to their countries of origin where they might be at risk of serious human rights violations, and at the very least to find a better alternative to detention for those individuals whom they are not able to return to their countries of origin for this reason.
Pacchetto sicurezza, ong olandese presenta ricorso contro Italia a Consiglio d'Europa - Il Sole 24 ORE11 giugno 2009
di Samantha Agro
Il pacchetto sicurezza e i discorsi razzisti e xenofobi hanno portato a misure contrarie al rispetto dei diritti umani in particolare, ma non solo, di Rom e Sinti in Italia. Questa la tesi sostenuta dall'organizzazione non governativa Cohre, che si occupa di difendere il diritto alla casa e prevenire gli sfratti, nel ricorso collettivo contro l'Italia presentato al Comitato per i diritti sociali, organismo del Consiglio d'Europa incaricato di valutare se gli Stati membri rispettano quanto previsto dalla Carta sociale europea. Nel ricorso, registrato con il numero 58/2009, presentato lo scorso 29 maggio, ma di cui si e' avuta notizia solo oggi, l'organizzazione sostiene che le autorita' italiane hanno violato 5 articoli della Carta sociale europea. Secondo il Cohre, l'Italia avrebbe violato il diritto delle famiglie Rom e Sinti a godere di protezione sociale, legale ed economica (art. 16) e il diritto alla protezione e assistenza dei lavoratori immigrati e delle loro famiglie (art. 19). Inoltre, nel ricorso si sostiene la violazione dell'articolo 30 che impone agli Stati di garantire a Rom e Sinti, cittadini italiani, la protezione contro la poverta' e l'esclusione sociale e dell'articolo 31 che sancisce il diritto alla casa. In ultimo, nei confronti di Rom e Sinti le autorita' avrebbero anche violato il diritto alla non discriminazione come previsto dall'articolo E della versione rivista della Carta sociale europea.
11 giugno 2009
American Civil Liberties Union : Immigration Law Denies Equal Protection For Same-Sex Life PartnersImmigration Law Denies Equal Protection For Same-Sex Life Partners (6/2/2009)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (202) 675-2312; media@dcaclu.org
WASHINGTON – The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing tomorrow on a bill that modifies U.S. immigration law to provide equal protection to same-sex life partners of citizens and permanent legal residents. As part of the hearing, entitled “The United American Families Act: Addressing Inequality in Federal Immigration Law,” the American Civil Liberties Union sent a letter to lawmakers urging the Committee to pass S. 424, “Uniting American Families Act.”
Currently, same-sex partners of U.S. citizens and permanent residents are denied the same rights as married heterosexual couples. Consequently, gay citizens and permanent residents are barred from activities such as sponsoring their foreign partners for permanent residency. U.S. immigration law lags behind the immigration laws of many other democracies that permit equal sponsorship protections including Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Israel, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland.
The following can be attributed to Joanne Lin, ACLU Legislative Counsel:
“U.S. immigration policies lag behind other democracies in extending fair treatment of gay couples. Right now, 18 other countries provide equal protection to partners of gay and lesbian citizens.
“As a result of discriminatory U.S. immigration laws, American families, including U.S. citizen children, are being torn apart permanently. The Uniting American Families Act will fix this patently discriminatory injustice.”
GISTI - Une gestion « concertée » de flux migratoires au détriment des droits des migrants
Les associations appellent les députés à refuser les accords de « gestion concertée » soumis à leur vote le 14 mai
L’Assemblée nationale examinera ce jeudi 14 mai quatre projets de lois autorisant l’approbation des accords relatifs « à la gestion concertée des flux migratoires et au codéveloppement » entre la France et la Tunisie, la République du Congo (Congo-Brazzaville), le Bénin et le Sénégal.
Ce n’est pas la première fois que le Parlement se penche sur de tels accords. Le premier du genre, avec le Gabon, est entré en vigueur le 1er septembre 2008. Ce ne sera pas non plus la dernière : d’autres accords ont été signés mais ne sont pas encore examinés (Cap Vert, Ile Maurice, Burkina Faso), ou bien sont en cours de négociation (Mali, Cameroun, Haïti, Philippines, Egypte). La France s’est fixé pour objectif d’en conclure sept par an d’ici 2011.
Les accords de gestion « concertée » des flux migratoires comprennent trois volets :
* des possibilités de « migration légale » extrêmement limitées et déjà prévues par les dispositifs de droit commun ;
* la lutte contre l’immigration irrégulière, avec des clauses par lesquelles les Etats s’engagent à réadmettre leurs propres ressortissants en situation irrégulière voire, pour certains (Gabon, Congo, Bénin), les ressortissants de pays tiers ayant transité par leur territoire ;
* une politique présentée comme “ambitieuse” en matière de « développement solidaire », mais entièrement subordonnée à la collaboration des pays concernés à la lutte contre l’immigration « illégale ».
Outre que ces accords sont déséquilibrés, conclus essentiellement à l’avantage de la France pour servir ses objectifs de renforcement des contrôles migratoires, ils portent en eux des risques importants de violation des droits des migrants. Le volet consacré à la réadmission des personnes en situation irrégulière soulève les plus grandes inquiétudes : les modalités prévues pour « établir » soit la nationalité de personnes à expulser, soit le transit par le territoire des Etats parties, permettent le renvoi de personnes vers des pays qu’elles ne connaissent pas, sans garantie suffisante de respect des droits fondamentaux. Il existe en outre un risque important de refoulement vers un pays où les droits fondamentaux pourraient être bafoués en violation de l’article 3 de la Convention européenne des droits de l’Homme.
Nous savons aujourd’hui que ces risques sont réels : la mise en œuvre des accords signés par l’Italie avec la Libye, la Tunisie et l’Egypte et ceux signés par l’Espagne, avec des pays d’Afrique subsaharienne (dans le cadre de son « plan Afrique ») a déjà conduit à des renvois massifs et à de graves atteintes aux droits des migrants régulièrement dénoncées par des ONG de défense des droits de l’homme.
En 2008, Amnesty international a rendu public un rapport sur la situation dramatique de migrants expulsés depuis l’Espagne vers la Mauritanie, en exécution d’un accord de réadmission signé en 2003 : pratiques de détention prolongée, mauvais traitements, absence de procédure équitable du droit d’asile, renvoi des mineurs isolés, etc.
Quant au « développement solidaire », il est inacceptable de subordonner l’aide au développement à la « maîtrise des flux migratoires » au prétexte d’un lien de cause à effet, par ailleurs nullement démontré, entre développement et baisse des migrations.
Nous demandons aux membres de l’Assemblée nationale de procéder à un examen approfondi des implications, des conséquences et des risques que font peser ces accords tant sur les droits des personnes que sur les sociétés civiles des pays concernés.
Un tel examen ne pourra conduire qu’à refuser l’approbation de ces accords le 14 mai prochain.
Mardi 12 mai 2009
Organisations signataires : Act-Up Paris, Association des réfugiés sans frontières (ARSF - Cameroun), Association des travailleurs maghrébins de France (ATMF), La Cimade, Collectif Haïti France, Fédération des Tunisiens pour une citoyenneté des deux rives (FTCR), Gisti, Mrap, Plateforme d’associations franco-haïtiennes, Union des associations latino-américaines en France, Un monde Avenir (Cameroun).
A.H.C.S: Immigrati/ Unione forense: Respingimenti? Denunciamo violazione di: In lotta a tratta violate convenzioni internazionali diritti
Roma, 27 mag. (Apcom) - "Abbiamo inoltrato ufficialmente oggi la lettera di denuncia di violazione della Convenzione europea dei diritti umani alla Corte di Strasburgo, in merito ai 24 migranti che sono stati respinti il 7 maggio scorso in Libia": lo dichiara Anton Giulio Lana, membro del direttivo dell'Unione forense per la tutela dei diritti dell'uomo, che collabora con il Consiglio Italiano per i Rifugiati (CIR). "Tredici di loro - sottolinea - provenivano dall'Eritrea e undici dalla Somalia, quindi avevano tutti diritto a chiedere l'asilo politico. L'Eritrea, infatti, è in una condizione di guerra continua con i paesi confinanti e i civili sono chiamati in massa a una leva forzata e illimitata. In Somalia, invece, i miliziani fondamentalisti di al-Shabab hanno lanciato una violenta offensiva contro le forze governative, che nel solo mese di maggio ha causato centinaia di morti e circa 50.000 profughi". "L'articolo 3 della Convenzione europea dei diritti dell'uomo - continua Lana - impedisce il respingimento di persone verso paesi di transito dove possono essere soggetti a trattamenti disumani, come la Libia, o verso i paesi d'origine da cui i profughi sono fuggiti. L'articolo 4 del IV protocollo della stessa Carta, inoltre, vieta i respingimenti collettivi senza preventivo accertamento dell'identità. Siamo fiduciosi - conclude - che la Corte possa accogliere il ricorso dei migranti".
Pubblicato da Agenzia Habeshia per la Cooperazione allo Sviluppo
allAfrica.com: Libya: Catholic Agency Raps Europe for Mistreating Refugees
26 May 2009
Tripoli — Last week's immediate return to Libya of 238 immigrants including women and children rescued in international waters, without consideration of their refugee status or injuries, was a violation of their human dignity, the International Catholic commission for Immigration (ICMC) has said.
ICMC, in a statement, accused Italy and other European nations of contravening the 1951 Refugee Convention, saying that the rejection of human beings in need of basic international protection overshadows calls by these same nations to build more humane societies.
"ICMC deplores the reflex to resort to enforcement-only approaches," said a statement from the secretary general Johan Ketelers. "Such approaches do not work, and there are better alternatives within reach that are more humane and more effective in every way".
The commission added that no political or economic argument could balance or counter the value of a person. While it was fully understood that solutions require sustained and longer-term action, immediate short term responses are also needed to fully respect every human person in his or her profound dignity and rights.
ICMC said that it was not the number of people within the so-called "mixed flows" of migrants and refugees that contributed to a widespread feeling that the arrivals are high and unmanageable; rather, it was the lack of structures to adequately assist them.
In recent years, there has been an increase in numbers of illegal immigrants flocking Europe either in search of political asylum or economic survival. They mostly arrive in make-shift boats. Hundreds have reportedly died after their boats capsized or due to freezing in the high waters.
While initially the immigrants were treated as refugees and given medical attention before being returned to their countries, their influx has led most European countries to return them without any attention.
ICMC called on European government to first provide the voyagers with humanitarian assistance and, upon assessmentparticularly of the refugees, victims of torture, trafficking or trauma, and women or children among themto refer them to the professional structures and services to which their human dignity, basic human decency and international law entitle them.
"Forcibly returning them without such differentiation, assistance or process is a denial not only of their rights and human identity, but of human yearnings we all share".
Le Monde.fr : Imprimez un élément
LEMONDE.FR avec AFP | 19.05.09 | 11h04
Human Rights Watch a accusé, mardi 19 mai, les autorités émiraties de ne pas empêcher les mauvais traitements des travailleurs étrangers, dans un rapport sur une île au large d'Abu Dhabi devant accueillir une antenne du Musée du Louvre qu'Abu Dhabi a rejeté comme "trompeur".
Dans un rapport sur les conditions de travail sur l'île Saadiyat (Bonheur, en arabe) au large d'Abu Dhabi, où sont prévues aussi des antennes du Musée Guggenheim et de la New York University, HRW déplore la persistance des mauvais traitements à l'encontre des ouvriers dans ce riche pays pétrolier du Golfe. "Bien que le gouvernement émirati ait entrepris d'améliorer les conditions de logement et d'assurer le versement à temps des salaires, les mauvais traitements infligés aux travailleurs restent fréquents", écrit l'organisation de défense des droits de l'homme dans un communiqué à l'occasion de la publication de son rapport. Elle estime nécessaire que les institutions internationales concernées par les projets à Saadiyat obtiennent "instamment des garanties formelles engageant les entreprises du bâtiment à protéger les droits fondamentaux des travailleurs" dans l'île.
"AFFIRMATIONS TROMPEUSES"
Intitulé L'Ile du Bonheur : l'exploitation des travailleurs migrants, le rapport évoque "des frais illégaux d'embauche, des promesses de salaire non tenues et un système de parrainage qui donne à l'employeur quasiment pleins pouvoirs sur ses employés", dont la confiscation de leurs passeports. La Compagnie d'Abu Dhabi pour la promotion du tourisme et des investissements (TDIC), un établissement public chargé du développement de Saadiyat, a rejeté le rapport de HRW. "Le rapport a non seulement négligé les mesures et les actions entreprises pour améliorer les conditions de travail (...), mais il contient aussi des affirmations trompeuses et des hypothèses erronées", affirme-t-elle dans un communiqué publié mardi. Elle rejette les griefs formulées par l'organisation, y compris la confiscation des passeports des ouvriers, une mesure "non autorisée" par la loi émiratie selon le communiqué.
Sarah Leah Whitson, directrice de HRW pour le Moyen-Orient et l'Afrique du Nord, appelle les institutions internationales à "montrer qu'elles ne tolèrent pas ou ne profitent pas de l'exploitation grossière des travailleurs migrants".
RAPPORT - REPORT - INFORME - RAPPORTO
Sicurezza: Amnesty preoccupataTimori che ddl possa determinare discriminazioni in Italia
15/05/2009 18:59
(ANSA) - BRUXELLES, 15 MAG - Amnesty International chiede all'Ue di intervenire ''urgentemente'' perche' il ddl sulla sicurezza non determini discriminazioni. L'organizzazione di preoccupa delle minoranze etniche che vivono in Italia, in particolare i nomadi Rom e Sinti. Il direttore dell'ufficio europeo di Amnesty Internation, Nicolas Berger, ha inviato una lettera in tan senso ai commissari Ue Jacques Barrot (liberta', giustizia e sicurezza) e Vladimir Spidla (affari sociali).
Tough new regulations for immigration advisers | Home Office
14 May 2009
Tougher new rules to tackle rogue immigration advisers are to be launched by the government, the Home Office announced today.
The proposals would give greater powers to the Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner (new window) (OISC) to tackle unscrupulous as well as untrained and unqualified advisers. Poor advice can cause distress to individuals, delay hearings, and slow down casework and decision making.
Consultation about immigration advisers
The measures announced today are set out in the Oversight of the Immigration Advisers Sector consultation (new window), giving users and stakeholders an opportunity to give their views on how immigration advisers can be better regulated.
It is the OISC's role to ensure that those giving immigration advice are qualified. It currently regulates over 1,600 organisations and around 4,000 individuals.
As part of a toughening up of the system, the consultation proposals include:
* tightening restrictions on individuals who have provided immigration advice illegally so they cannot own or participate in an immigration advice business
* strengthening the rights of the OISC to access and inspect immigration advisers
* issuing businesses with ‘yellow card’ warnings to say that their practices are not up to scratch. These would act as notice to improve standards and set out any changes required.
Statement from the Border and Immigration Minister
Phil Woolas said, 'The Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner plays a crucial role in making sure that people are getting the right advice on immigration matters and tackling those advisers that play the system and offer false hope.
'Any abuse of our immigration laws will not be tolerated. Attempts to frustrate the system cost the taxpayer money and make it more difficult for people who genuinely need our protection.Those responsible will be investigated and prosecuted. The OISC has already undertaken over 75 successful prosecutions, but we need to help them to take tough action earlier.'
Driving up standards
Since its creation in 2001 the OISC has driven up standards across the immigration advice sector.
It has received over 3,500 complaints about advisers – it has successfully prosecuted 77 organisations and individuals, issued 67 formal cautions. The courts have issued nearly £60,000 in fines and compensation, and awarded around £45,000 in court costs.
Suzanne McCarthy, Immigration Services Commissioner, said, 'The OISC has already created a successful regulatory system and raised the standard of immigration advice available. If these proposals are implemented it will allow the OISC to give greater protection to individuals from unscrupulous advisers and protect the immigration system from abuse. Good immigration is in everyone's interest. Bad advice ruins lives.'
Reforms to the asylum and immigration tribunal
These improvements to the regulation of immigration advisers follow the reforms, announced last week, to the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal. The Tribunal reforms will mean a faster, more efficient system that will save the taxpayer money, speed up the removal of those who are found not to need our protection while integrating genuine asylum seekers quicker.
These changes will help to improve public confidence in the immigration system and are part of the biggest shake-up to the immigration system for a generation. This also includes fingerprint visas and ID cards for foreign nationals that lock people to one identity, and our high-tech electronic border controls that check people against police, immigration and customs watch-lists and will cover even more passenger journeys by the end of this year.
(extract from Home Office's Press Release)
A.H.C.S: Governo: identificare i rifugiati in Libia Proteste della Cei sul sì al ddl sicurezzamercoledì 13 maggio 2009
Roma - La Camera dei Deputati ha approvato il terzo maxiemendamento del governo al ddl sicurezza, sul quale era stata posta la terza fiducia di oggi. La votazione si è conclusa con 315 sì e 237 no. I lavori dell’Aula di Montecitorio proseguiranno con la presentazione e la discussione sugli ordini del giorno. I vescovi: "Nessuna integrazione" Secondo il direttore dell’Ufficio per la pastorale degli immigrati della Cei, Mons. Gianromano Gnesotto, "il grande tema tenuto sotto silenzio" del ddl sicurezza è "il tema dell’integrazione" mentre i suoi effetti sono nella direzione contraria a quella di "una società che vuole essere integrata". Interpellato dall’Ansa sul ddl in votazione alla Camera, l’esponente della Cei spiega che ’questo pacchetto sicurezza "non avrà gli effetti propri di una società che vuole essere integrata". Berlusconi: "Leggi Ue sempre rispettate" Le politiche adottate dal governo italiano sui respingimenti dei clandestini "sono in linea con le direttive Ue, col diritto internazionale, con la legge italiana. Tutto il resto sono cose...". Lo dice il presidente del Consiglio Silvio Berlusconi, lasciando l’aula della Camera dopo il voto di fiducia sul ddl sicurezza. "C’è un’agenzia dell’Onu in Libia - aggiunge Berlusconi - chi vuole venire qui e chiedere di essere accolto perché ha i requisiti per essere considerato persona da accogliere si reca all’agenzia dell’Onu in Libia e lì avrà la ricezione del suo nome. E ricordiamoci che la Libia ha avuto negli ultimi tempi la presidenza del consiglio dell’Onu per i diritti umani". La polemica nella maggioranza Respingimenti. Accoglienza. Rifugiati e acque internazionali. E' la polemica tra Fini e Bossi sui barconi pieni di immigranti a tenere banco. "Cominciamo a respingere, poi si vede". Così il ministro per le Riforme e leader della Lega Nord, Umberto Bossi replica a chi gli chiede dei rilievi dell’Onu al governo per la decisione di respingere i barconi. E poi zittisce Fini che fa notare un "eccesso di propaganda". Maroni: "Rifugiati? Centri di controllo in Libia" "Venerdì ho un incontro con il commissario Jolls, che è il responsabile italiano dell’Unhcr" spiega il ministro dell’Interno, Roberto Maroni, aggiungendo che, in tema di "respingimenti" la proposta italiana non cambia. "Lo vedo - aggiunge - perché le preoccupazioni che vengono sollevate le teniamo in conto, ma la proposta che facciamo non è quella che hanno avanzato loro di accoglierli tutti e poi valutare, ma quella di creare una struttura in Libia per valutare là se qualcuno ha i requisiti per lo status". Fini: centri di identificazione all'estero Il presidente della Camera, Gianfranco Fini, non esclude l’istituzione di centri di identificazione per gli immigrati anche nei Paesi di transito per verificare la presenza tra gli immigrati di coloro che hanno diritto all’asilo politico e in tal senso auspica un coinvolgimento di Onu e Ue. "In caso di respingimento, previsto dal diritto internazionale serve comunque una verifica - spiega Fini - Ci sono le norme di diritto internazionale. Esiste il problema del respingimento dei migranti ed esiste il diritto all’asilo. Solo che va verificato. Il riconoscimento degli immigrati - aggiunge Fini - può avvenire sul suolo nei centri di identificazione o durante il tragitto ma in questo caso deve essere certo che sia fatto in modo esaustivo e completo". Secondo il presidente della Camera, "quindi bisognerebbe pensare ad istituire nei Paesi di transito dei centri coinvolgendo istituzioni internazionali, come l’Onu o l’Unione Europea". "Evitare eccessi di propaganda" Nel dibattito sull’immigrazione "bisogna evitare eccessi propagandistici. Quella di Maroni è una ipotesi tra le tante, non peregrina", aggiunge Fini, conversando con i giornalisti a Montecitorio, a proposito della proposta del ministro dell’Interno di far verificare le richieste di asilo in Libia. A chi gli chiede chi, a suo avviso, avrebbe dovuto evitare eccessi polemici nel dibattito tra il ministro dell’Interno, Roberto Maroni, e le Nazioni Unite sul tema dei respingimenti il presidente della Camera risponde: "Beh, non mi pare che l’Onu sia in campagna elettorale...". Bossi: "Ma siamo in campagna elettorale" "Se non la fai adesso che ci sono le elezioni quando la fai?". Umberto Bossi replica così, alla Camera, ai cronisti che gli chiedono un commento sugli "eccessi propagandistici" da evitare secondo il presidente della Camera in fatto di immigrati. Poi la replica sulla sicurezza: "Chi la dura la vince".
Pubblicato da Agenzia Habeshia per la Cooperazione allo Sviluppo
A.H.C.S: Maroni scommette su Tripolimercoledì 13 maggio 2009
Vuole creare in Libia un centro per verificare lo status di rifugiati politici GUIDO RUOTOLO ROMA Mai come in queste ore si sono intensificati i rapporti tra Roma e Bruxelles, tra il ministro dell’Interno, Roberto Maroni, e il Commissario Ue per la Giustizia, libertà e sicurezza, Jaques Barrot. Chi segue da vicino il dialogo, al ministero dell’Interno, assicura: «Finora, il commissario Barrot ci ha sostenuto. Adesso bisognerà insistere. Se manterremo la nostra posizione, la Ue sarà costretta a muoversi». Parole rassicuranti. Il ministro Maroni vuole convincere il commissario Barrot a sposare la sua proposta: «La Ue stringa un accordo con Tripoli perché commissioni per i richiedenti asilo possano svolgere le loro istruttorie in Libia». Apparentemente, la situazione si presenta bloccata. L’Alto commissariato delle Nazioni Unite per i rifugiati (Unhcr), chiede che il vulnus sia sanato, che gli immigrati respinti in mare e portati in Libia, paese che non ha aderito alla Convenzione di Ginevra, tornino in Italia dove si dovrà svolgere l’istruttoria per verificare le richieste di asilo. Domani, nell’incontro con il ministro Maroni, il responsabile italiano (ma anche di Malta, Cipro, Grecia ed Albania) dell’Alto commissariato delle Nazioni unite per i rifugiati, Lawrence Yolles, porrà questa sorta di pregiudiziale. Naturalmente, ben sapendo che dall’altra parte del tavolo, non sarà raccolta. Il ministro Maroni non ha alcuna intenzione di sconfessare le operazioni di respingimento in mare, ritenendole legittime. L’Unhcr aspetta di confrontarsi su proposte «realistiche». L’oggetto della trattativa ha a che fare con questioni di diritto internazionale e con valori e principi insindacabili. E, dunque, se intesa si deve trovare occorre essere realistici. La Libia è impegnata con l’Italia nell’azione di contrasto ai trafficanti di clandestini e a impedire che gli immigrati arrivino sulle coste siciliane. Nega, Tripoli, che esista la questione di garantire protezione umanitaria ai richiedenti asilo. Vivendo una nuova drammatica emergenza per il sovraffollamento dei suoi Centri di reclusione dei clandestini. Però, ricordano al Viminale, «ha già dato il via libera al trasferimento in Italia di due gruppi di rifugiati eritrei che, nel 2008, sono arrivati in privincia di Rieti». Aggiungono al Viminale: «Abbiamo una terza operazione in corso che riguarda altri 60 eritrei che dovrebbero arrivare in provincia di Benevento e in Calabria». Martedì, il ministro Maroni sarà a Tripoli, per discutere, a questo punto, con il suo omologo libico non più solo dei pattugliamenti misti (le motovedette italiane cedute ai libici salperanno domani dal porto di Gaeta). In Libia, con Maroni, doveva esserci anche il commissario Ue per gli Affari interni, Jaques Barrot. Ma il commissario ha rinunciato. Aspetta il vertice dei Ministri dell’Interno della Ue che si terrà il 5 giugno e che vedrà, all’ordine del giorno, anche il problema dei respingimenti in mare degli immigrati, per avere chiaro il mandato che i ministri Ue gli daranno. Naturalmente, in questa partita gioca un ruolo anche la Farnesina. Dal ministero degli Esteri arrivano conferme all’impostazione del ministro Maroni: «L’Alto commissariato delle Nazioni unite per i rifugiati apprezza il lavoro svolto dalle nostre commissioni per i richiedenti asilo. Se la Libia e la Ue accoglieranno la nostra proposta, si creeranno commissioni per esaminare le domande di asilo». A quel punto, suggeriscono alla Farnesina, «ottenendo lo status di rifugiato, non si porrà il problema dell’ospitalità in Italia o altrove. Le frontiere italiane sono frontiere europee. A chiunque è garantita la libera circolazione in un Paese europeo». E, dunque, occorrerà aspettare l’esito della trattativa tra Roma, Bruxelles e Tripoli.
Pubblicato da Agenzia Habeshia per la Cooperazione allo Sviluppo
LEMONDE.FR avec AFP | 13.05.09 | 20h28
uit associations ont appelé, mercredi 13 mai, les députés à rejeter quatre accords de "gestion concertée des flux migratoires" avec la Tunisie, le Congo-Brazzaville, le Bénin et le Sénégal, estimant que ces textes étaient "déséquilibrés" et comportaient des "risques" pour les migrants. Jeudi, l'Assemblée nationale doit examiner ces quatre projets de lois autorisant l'approbation des accords relatifs "à la gestion concertée des flux migratoires et au codéveloppement".
Act-Up Paris, l'Association des travailleurs maghrébins de France, la Cimade, le collectif Haïti, le Gisti, le MRAP, la Plateforme d'associations franco-haïtiennes et l'Union des associations latino-américaines en France "appellent les députés à refuser" ces accords, dans un communiqué, estimant que la gestion "concertée" des flux migratoires se fait "au détriment des droits des migrants". "Outre que ces accords sont déséquilibrés, conclus essentiellement à l'avantage de la France pour servir ses objectifs de renforcement des contrôles migratoires, ils portent en eux des risques importants de violation des droits des migrants", assurent-elles, mettant notamment l'accent sur le volet consacré à la réadmission des personnes en situation irrégulière qui "soulève les plus grandes inquiétudes".
POUR L'UMP, UN "COMPORTEMENT AUX ACCENTS COLONISATEURS"
Ces associations expliquent que ce volet permet "le renvoi de personnes vers des pays qu'elles ne connaissent pas, sans garantie suffisante de respect des droits fondamentaux", mettant en avant l'exemple des accords conclus entre l'Italie et la Libye par exemple. Elles jugent par ailleurs "inacceptable de subordonner l'aide au développement à la 'maîtrise des flux migratoires'".
Le premier accord de ce type, entre la France et le Gabon, est entré en vigueur en septembre 2008. D'autres accords ont été signés avec le Cap Vert, l'île Maurice, le Burkina Faso ou sont en cours de négociation (Mali, Cameroun, Haïti, Philippines et Egypte). "De quel droit huit associations dont on connaît la mesure dans leurs prises de positions peuvent-elles s'ingérer dans la politique des pays sources d'immigration ?", s'est indignée l'UMP par la voix de son porte-parole Frédéric Lefebvre. "Ce comportement aux accents colonisateurs de la part d'associations qui n'ont pas de dimension internationale est tout simplement inacceptable ! Ces pays sont assez grands pour juger de ce qui est bon pour eux et pour leurs ressortissants."
Italy: Berlusconi Misstates Refugee Obligations | Human Rights Watch
Italy seems to be trying to rewrite international refugee law. Returning people to persecution - whether or not they first set foot on Italian territory - is against the rules.
Bill Frelick, refugee policy director at Human Rights Watch
More Than 500 Sent Back to Libya With No Asylum Hearing Opportunity and Facing Risk of Abuse
May 12, 2009
(Agrigento, Sicily) - Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi of Italy described incorrectly Italy's international legal obligations as Italy summarily returned another 163 boat migrants back to Libya on May 10, Human Rights Watch said today.
This brought to more than 500 the number of migrants forcibly returned without refugee screening in the last five days, according Italian Interior Ministry figures. The prime minister appeared to deny Italy's obligations not to force persons to return to Libya if doing so would put them at risk of persecution.
Italian media quoted Berlusconi as saying: "Our idea is to take in only those citizens who are in a position to request political asylum and who we have to take in as stipulated by international agreements and treaties," referring to "those who put their feet down on our soil, in the sense also of entering into our territorial waters."
"Italy seems to be trying to rewrite international refugee law," said Bill Frelick, refugee policy director at Human Rights Watch. "Returning people to persecution - whether or not they first set foot on Italian territory - is against the rules."
Frelick has spent the past two weeks in Libya, Malta, and Sicily, conducting research on the problems migrants face in Libya and in Italy. "By sending out patrol boats and preventing would-be asylum seekers from landing on Italian soil, Italy does not absolve itself of its responsibilities," he said.
From Human Rights Watch
Posts
