• Sudanese refugees in Niger protest, demand relocation

    December 17, 2019 (KHARTOUM) - Sudanese refugees in Niger have staged a sit-in outside the UNHCR office #Agadez town in central Niger to protest their tough conditions and to demand their relocation from the Sahel country.

    For years Agadez on the edge of the Sahara, has been a key stop for refugees and travellers mostly young men in search of better opportunities abroad heading north Africa countries and Europe.

    In a report released in May 2019, the UNHCR estimated that 1,584 persons, mostly Sudanese, are currently registered by UNHCR in Agadez. 23.8% are minors and 126 are unaccompanied or separated children.

    Rights activists from Agadez told Sudan Tribune that all the Sudanese refugees in the refugees camp 15 km outside Agadez decided to leave their camps and to stage a sit-in at the UNHCR office in the area on Monday, December 16, 2019.

    Since Monday, the refugees say resolved to continue their peaceful protest until the UN refugees agency settle their situation.

    Some of the refugees say they can even accept a return to their areas of origin in Darfur but they would not regain the camp.

    Activists pointed out to their poor living conditions and lack of basic health service and education for the children of the refugees who are in the camp since 2017.

    “There is an increase of chronic and serious diseases, there is racism, corruption, and discrimination against Sudanese refugees and other nationalities from other countries and the delay in the legal procedures for asylum,” wrote in an email sent to the Sudan Tribune on Tuesday.

    Many of the Sudanese refugees fled Libya following the increase of attacks on refugees and foreigners by the various militias and armed gunmen who demand ransom for their release.

    https://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article68720
    #asile #migrations #réfugiés #Niger #réinstallation #manifestation #résistance #réfugiés_soudanais

    ping @isskein @pascaline @karine4

    • Niger : des migrants incendient un centre d’hébergement en signe de protestation

      Des demandeurs d’asile de retour de Libye ont incendié leur centre d’hébergement près d’#Agadez, où vivent un millier de personnes dans l’attente de la délivrance d’une carte de réfugiés.

      Amenés de force après un #sit-in de #protestation de plusieurs jours devant les locaux du Haut-Commissariat des Nations unies pour les refugiés (HCR) d’Agadez, des demandeurs d’asile ont mis le feu à leur #centre_d’hébergement, un camp situé à 15 km d’Agadez et où vivent un millier de personnes dans l’attente d’une éventuelle #carte_de_réfugiés.

      « 80% du #centre_d'accueil détruit par une minorité de réfugiés du Darfour à Agadez qui ne veulent entendre parler que de #réinstallation en Europe. Détruire l’espace d’asile au Niger ou ailleurs est plus facile que de le construire et de le protéger. C’est un triste jour pour la protection des réfugiés au Niger », écrit sur son compte Twitter Vincent Cochetel, envoyé spécial du HCR pour la situation en Méditerranée centrale.


      https://twitter.com/cochetel/status/1213519641563320322?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E12
      http://www.rfi.fr/afrique/20200104-niger-migrants-incendie-camp-hebergement-agadez

      Selon plusieurs sources, les demandeurs d’asile exigent, entre autres, un statut de réfugiés avec délivrance immédiate de leur carte, des soins de qualité et une meilleure collaboration avec le HCR et les autres partenaires humanitaires.

      Le gouverneur d’Agadez estime que les migrants ont posé de « faux problèmes ». Le centre dispose d’eau, de nourriture, d’un médecin. Toujours selon le gouverneur, plus de 160 cartes de réfugiés ont récemment été délivrées. « Le processus de détermination est très avancé », indique le #HCR. D’autres cartes seront bientôt distribuées par les autorités nigériennes, apprend-on.

      Après l’#incendie de ce camp, le gouverneur de la région a dénoncé « l’ingratitude des réfugiés ». Une enquête est en cours pour déterminer l’ampleur des dégâts. Les auteurs de cet acte seront poursuivis. Malgré cet incident, précise une source du HCR, plusieurs centaines de réfugiés à la merci de l’harmattan seront relogés. Il a fait cinq degrés à Agadez ce samedi.

      http://www.rfi.fr/afrique/20200104-niger-migrants-incendie-camp-hebergement-agadez
      #feu

    • Commentaire de #Sophia_Bisio sur FB :

      Non, Monsieur Cochetel, un camp qui brûle n’est pas un jour triste plus triste que les autres pour la protection des réfugiés.

      Comme tout système de camp où l’on trie et isole les indésirables, le camp HCR d’Agadez était une prison à ciel ouvert pour le millier de réfugié.e.s soudanais.es qui y vivaient, ou plutôt y survivaient.

      Car ces camps ne sont pas des lieux de vie mais bien des lieux de survie.

      Lorsque j’avais visité ce camp en décembre 2018, plusieurs centaines de personnes y survivaient péniblement, après avoir fui la guerre dans leur pays et le chaos libyen pour la plupart d’entre elles. Installé en plein désert, isolé de tout, à 15 km de la ville, le camp était exposé au vent et aux tempêtes de sable, déclenchant chez de nombreuses personnes des troubles respiratoires. Les conditions sanitaires étaient épouvantables. Des familles entières s’entassaient sous des tentes en plastiques inadaptées au climat désertique, dans lesquelles, l’été, la température pouvait atteindre 70 degrés. Pas d’eau courante. Pas de travail. Pas d’école pour les enfants. Pas de perspectives d’avenir.

      Déjà en 2018, des résidents du camp se joignaient aux manifestations devant les bureaux du HCR dans la ville d’Agadez pour protester contre leurs conditions de vie et la lenteur de la procédure de réinstallation. En décembre 2019, après un an de plus d’attente dans la poussière du désert, ce sont plusieurs centaines de résident.e.s du camp qui se sont rassemblés pour une grande marche jusqu’au centre-ville afin d’organiser à nouveau un sit-in devant les bureaux du HCR, avant d’être une fois de plus renvoyé.e.s à la poussière.

      Hier, le camp brûlait, incendié, selon la version relayée par le HCR, par une minorité énervée de Soudanais du Darfour. Représentant spécial du Haut Commissariat aux réfugiés pour la Méditerranée centrale, Monsieur Cochetel s’indignait alors contre ces personnes qui « détruisent l’espace d’asile », ajoutant : « c’est un triste jour pour la protection des réfugiés au Niger ».

      Non, Monsieur Cochetel, un camp qui brûle n’est pas un jour triste plus triste que les autres pour la protection des réfugiés.

      C’est un signal.

      Le signal que ces hommes et ces femmes qu’on tente d’invisibiliser et de réduire au silence peuvent encore se rendre visibles.

      Le signal que ces politiques migratoires, par lesquelles l’humanitaire tend à devenir le cheval Troie des pires politiques sécuritaires, doivent être dénoncées et combattues avec celles et ceux qui les subissent.

      https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=2538844326358556&set=a.1562653620644303&type=3&theater
      #Vincent_Cochetel #Cochetel

    • More than a thousand asylum seekers take part in mass sit-in in Niger

      More than a thousand asylum seekers have been taking part in a mass sit-in in front of the offices of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in Agadez in northern Niger since December 16. They are protesting the terrible living conditions that they are forced to endure while waiting for the UNHCR to examine their cases, and are calling for better conditions and an acceleration to the entire process.

      A majority of the residents of the UN camp for asylum seekers in Agadez in northern Niger walked the 15 kilometres into town to take part in a protest on December 16.

      Nearly 1,600 asylum seekers are still waiting for refugee status. The large majority of them — more than 1,400 — are Sudanese. Others hail from the Central African Republic, Chad and Pakistan. Most of them arrived in 2017 and they blame both the UNHCR and Nigerien authorities for the extremely difficult conditions in the camp.

      https://observers.france24.com/en/20191224-niger-asylum-seekers-take-part-mass-sit-protest

    • Thread de Eric Reidy sur twitter, 05.01.2019

      Security forces forcefully dispersed a peaceful sit-in in front of #UNHCR's office in Agadez, Niger yesterday (Jan. 4). Many people were injured & 100s of people’s phones & belongings were confiscated.
      2/ Sudanese asylum seekers, many from Darfur, have staged a sit-in in front of the #UNHCR office in since Dec. 16 when they walked out en masse from a UNHCR administered camp 15km outside of #Agadez.
      3/ In a statement the asylum seekers said they had been completely neglected. Many suffered from psychological conditions & chronic diseases worsened by the harsh desert environment & that treatment by UNHCR staff & the handling of their asylum claims led to a total loss of trust

      4/ The Sudanese asylum seekers started arriving in Agadez in late 2017, seeking safe-haven from war & exploitation in #Libya. The population peeked at around 2,000. Tensions arose w the host population & the Nigerien gov viewed the Sudanese w suspicion & as a security threat.

      5/ In May 2018, the Nigerien gov deported 135 ppl back to Libya in violation of int law. UNHCR lobbied hard to prevent any further deportations & reached an agreement w authorities in #Niger to establish the camp outside of Agadez to reduce tensions

      https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/special-report/2018/07/05/destination-europe-deportation

      6/ At some point, the relationship between the asylum seekers & UNHCR appears to have broken down leading to the recent protests, which have now ended with security forces using violence & the camp outside of #Agadez being burned down.

      7/ I’m still piecing everything together, but it’s important to keep in mind that this is a vulnerable population. Many have been displaced multiple times & experienced violence & tragedy in the past. They have been seeking safety for yrs & still haven’t found it. (Will update)

      https://twitter.com/Eric_Reidy/status/1213802520490831872

    • Niger breaks up Sudanese refugees sit-in as fire destroys their camp
      https://www.sudantribune.com/local/cache-vignettes/L500xH282/agadez_camp_destroyed_by_sudanese_from_darfur_on_4_january_2020_tadres…jpg

      Niger’s authorities forcibly broke up a sit-in of Sudanese refugees outside UNHCR office in the arid area of Agadez, while some of them reportedly set ablaze the camp once returned by the police.

      Hundreds of Sudanese refugees in Niger had staged a sit-in outside the office of the UN agency for refugees in Agadez on 16 December to protest the bad conditions in the camp. Also, they blamed the UNHCR officials for neglecting them pointing to the long delay in the processing of asylum requests.

      For their part, the international officials asked the refugees to end the protest and return to their camps first before to deal with their demands. However, the Sudanese who had fled the insecurity in Libya refused to regain the camp.

      On Saturday morning, local officials and police and security officers surrounded the sit-inners and asked them to take the vehicles they brought with them to return to their camp 15 km from Agadez.

      Refugees who requested anonymity told Sudan Tribune that the security forces beat the refugees and shoved them to the vehicles when they refused the orders to evacuate the site.

      Photos and videos of the raid showed protesters severely injured on the head and legs.

      Aid workers in the area said the local authorities three days ago had informed the UNHRC of their plan to disperse the sit-in.

      Tragic development

      Once the authority forcibly moved the first batch of protesters back to the camp, a huge fire tore through the refugee camp and reduced it to ashes.

      When asked about the authors of the blaze some refugees said “irresponsible” refugees were desperate and set fire on the camp to protest the forced return to the camp.

      The tents were highly flammable, aid workers said.

      For his part, Vincent Cochetel, UNHCR Special Envoy for the Central Mediterranean Situation, said in a tweet on Saturday that the Sudanese refugees destroyed the camp because they demand to be resettled in Europe.

      “80% of the reception centre destroyed by a minority of refugees from Darfur in Agadez who only want to hear about resettlement to Europe,” said Cochetel.

      “Destroying the asylum space in Niger or elsewhere is easier than building and protecting it. It is a sad day for refugee protection in Niger,” he added.

      The authorities arrested many refugees while others fled in the desert and their whereabouts are unknown.

      Also, it is not clear what the Nigerien authorities will do for the over 200 refugees who were waiting outside the UNHCR office to be transported to the camp.

      Refugees say they fear that they would be transported to Madama on the border between Niger and Libya.

      On 7 May 2018, Nigerien police deported 135 Sudanese refugees to Madama and expelled to Libya as they had already protested the bad conditions in Agadez camp. The move had been denounced by critics as a violation of international law.

      https://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article68808

    • Niger: Sudan refugee sit-in violently dispersed

      Niger security forces broke up the sit-in set up by Sudanese refugees in front of the offices of the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) in Agadez on Saturday, reportedly using excessive violence.

      Speaking to Radio Dabanga from Agadez, a refugee reported that 453 refugees were detained. 230 refugees suffered various injuries. Army officers and policemen stole 670 mobile phones from them.

      Their camp reportedly burned down completely. Hundreds of refugees, among them children, women, disabled, and seniors, spent Sunday night in the arid desert in the freezing cold. There are shortages of water, food, and medicines.

      The refugees called on the international community to intervene urgently and save them from the conditions in which they live. They also demand their resettlement procedures be completed.

      Three weeks ago, thousands of refugees left the refugee camp in Agadez in protest against the failure to complete their resettlement procedures and the deteriorating conditions in the camp.

      The Sudanese refugees in Niger have been a topic in the peace talks in Juba during the past weeks.

      Last year, Niger’s authorities sent Sudanese refugees back to Libya, the country they fled from to Niger.

      https://www.dabangasudan.org/en/all-news/article/niger-sudan-refugee-sit-in-violently-dispersed

    • Agadez/Incendie #centre_humanitaire : 335 demandeurs d’asile interpellés

      Après l’incendie du centre d’hébergement survenu hier matin et attribué à un groupe de demandeurs d’asile, M.Seini, Procureur de la République près le tribunal de grande instance d’Agadez a tenu un point de presse auquel la presse privée n’était pas conviée.

      Dans le souci d’informer nos lecteurs, nous vous livrons son contenu.

       » le 16 décembre 2019, plusieurs dizaines de demandeurs d’asile ont entrepris une marche de protestation qui les a conduit devant le bureau local du HCR Agadez. Ils avaient décidé d’occuper illégalement les espaces publics aux abords dudit bureau et maintenu un sit-in qui a perduré jusqu’au 4 janvier 2020.
      Vu qu’ils occupaient ces espaces en violation de la loi, la question a été inscrite au menu de la réunion du conseil de sécurité régional du 2 janvier 2020. Au cours de cette réunion, il a été décidé de faire respecter la loi notamment de les faire déguerpir. Et au besoin de les ramener sur leur site d’hébergement. C’est ainsi que le 4 janvier 2020, les autorités régionales et municipales se sont déplacées sur les lieux accompagnées des forces de sécurité. Après sommation donnée par le maire, les agents de sécurité ayant constaté que ces gens n’ont pas obtempéré, ont alors intervenu pour les embarquer et ramener sur leur site d’hébergement. Une fois là-bas, dès qu’ils étaient descendus des bus et camions qui les transportaient, ils ont mis le feu au centre et en même temps s’en sont pris aux forces de l’ordre en leur jetant des projectiles. Il ressort des constatations faites par les services que sur les 331 habitations qu’ils appellent RHU, 290 sont complétement calcinées. Ainsi que l’infirmerie. Des pare-brises de bus ont été cassés et deux personnes légèrement blessées. 162 téléphones portables, 31 couteaux et 12 barres de fer ont été pris sur les manifestants. Parmi eux, 335 identifiés comme meneurs de l’incendie ont été interpellés et mis à la disposition des enquêteurs de la police.
      Voyez-vous ! Ces gens qui sont sensés être là pour avoir la protection se comportent ainsi jusqu’à commetre des infractions graves à la loi pénale notamment attroupement non armé sur la voie publique, la rébellion, la destruction volontaire des biens meubles et immeubles, publics, et l’incendie volontaire de lieu servant d’habitation.
      Donc, malgré leur nombre très élevé, et au vu de la gravité des faits qui leur sont reprochés, nous avons décidé de les poursuivre pour qu’ils répondent de leurs actes. Compte tenu du fait qu’ils sont des étrangers, des avis de poursuite seront notifiées aux autorités compétentes ».

      A Agadez, beaucoup de gens s’inquiètent du sort de centaines d’autres demandeurs d’asile qui n’ont plus de toit et parmi eux des femmes et des enfants.

      Pour Athan, un de ces demandeurs d’asile : » le Haut Commissariat aux Réfugiés (HCR) d’Agadez est l’unique responsable de ce qui nous arrive à Agadez ».

      La visite prévue demain mardi 7 janvier 2020 à Agadez de Mme Alexandra Morelli, représentante du HCR au Niger apportera t-elle une solution à ce problème ? Attendons de voir.


      https://airinfoagadez.com/2020/01/07/agadez-incendie-centre-humanitaire-335-demandeurs-dasile-interpelles

    • Demandeurs d’asile soudanais à Agadez : La grande désillusion

      L’installation d’une antenne du Haut Commissariat pour les Réfugiés à Agadez en Mai 2016 a contribué fortement à l’afflux de demandeurs d’asile de plusieurs nationalités. La majorité d’entre eux, après avoir fui leur pays en guerre, cas du Darfour au Soudan, se sont retrouvés piégés dans l’imbroglio libyen. C’est ainsi que près de 3000 soudanais ont cherché refuge à Agadez, une ville du nord Niger.
      Sur place, l’espoir d’une vie meilleure s’est peu à peu transformé en un véritable cauchemar. D’aucuns parmi ces prétendants à l’asile, las d’attendre, posent des actes désespérés sous forme des signaux.
      Le 14 avril dernier, un jeune soudanais a tenté de mettre fin à ses jours en se tailladant le cou. D’autres s’attaquent aux biens d’autrui pour se nourrir. Des actes contraires à la loi et au bon sens. Pourquoi et comment en est-on arrivé à ce stade ?
      APAC–Niger a mené l’enquête sur un drame que tente vaille que vaille de minimiser à l’opinion et les autorités en charge de la question et les ONG concernées.

      ----------------

      Depuis la dégradation de la situation sécuritaire en Libye les ressortissants soudanais ont connu des difficultés à mener une vie tranquille, ils ont alors choisi d’immigrer vers le Niger. « Notons que la première grande vague est arrivée à Agadez en 2017. Tous ces migrants ont transité par la frontière du sud libyen, Sebha et Mourzouk en passant par Madama et Dirkou à la frontière avec le Niger », selon M. Soukeyrajou Yacouba, responsable à la Direction régionale d’état civil.
      Dès leur arrivée à Agadez ils ont été pris en charge par l’Organisation Internationale pour la Migration (OIM) et le Haut Commissariat pour les Réfugiés (HCR) appuyés par des ONG comme l’APBE (Action pour le Bien-être) et COOPI une ONG Italienne.
      Après l’enregistrement et l’enrôlement biométrique, dénommé BIMS, les migrants qui le désirent font une demande d’asile au niveau de la Direction de l’état-civil. « L’asile est octroyé par l’état du Niger seul habilité à le faire car le Niger reste souverain sur cette question, les migrants ayant fui la guerre pour des raisons sécuritaires sont priorisés par rapport à ceux qui ont fui pour des raisons économiques, d’autre part les mineurs non accompagnés très vulnérables bénéficient d’un traitement particulier vu leur situation, on trouve très souvent des cas de tortures sur les migrants venant de la Libye », a expliqué à APAC M. Soukeyrajou Yacouba. « C’est un long processus qui demande de la patience », explique un commis du service de l’état-civil. Une patience que n’ont plus aujourd’hui les Soudanais présents à Agadez.

      Déception et désolation au quotidien

      Malgré tous les efforts des ONG pour leur venir en aide, leurs cris de détresse s’amplifient. Ils crient leur ras-le-bol à qui veut les écouter. Dans le camp ou dans les rues d’Agadez. Ils ne s’en cachent point. « Si j’avais su que je me retrouverai dans une telle situation à Agadez, j’aurais préféré rester d’où je viens. Au moins là bas, j’étais dans une communauté humaine, j’avais le moral. A Agadez, nous sommes loin de la ville. Comme si nous sommes des animaux. Nous sommes abandonnés à nous-mêmes ici. On n’a pas accès aux soins les plus élémentaires. On n’a pas une ambulance qui peut rapidement évacuer un malade vers la ville. Chaque soir, nous sommes dans la hantise que Boko Haram nous attaque. », nous a confié Mahmoud H, un jeune soudanais de 22 ans.

      Venus d’abord par petits groupes à Agadez, le nombre de demandeurs d’asile soudanais n’a fait que croitre au fil de mois jusqu’à atteindre presque 3000 personnes. Toutes sont en quête de protection et d’un mieux-être au Niger après avoir fui la guerre au Darfour et les sévices en Libye. Mais hélas, pour beaucoup, c’est la grande désillusion : « nous avons quitté l’enfer libyen pour tomber dans l’enfer d’Agadez. Ici aussi nous sommes mal vus ! C’est la suspicion et la haine dans tous les regards », disent-ils.

      Assis à même le sol d’un des hangars du centre d’accueil pour les réfugiés inauguré en mars 2017, Aly, est démoralisé. Il ne parle pas. Il observe. Dans ses yeux, aucune lueur. Ni de joie, ni d’espoir. Il refuse de regarder ses “ cochambriers”.
      Il nous confie en aparté. “ Ma place n’est pas ici. Pas sous ce hangar. Pas avec ces gens-là. On se bagarre tous les temps. Je ne suis pas comme eux et personne ne veut me comprendre. J’ai un statut que je n’ai pas choisi et qui fait que bien qu’étant homme, ma place n’est pas avec les hommes”.

      L’aveu d’Aly est clair mais non encore avoué. Un de ceux avec qui il partage le hangar balance le secret d’Aly : “ C’est un pédé ! C’est haram ! On ne veut pas de lui sous le même toit que nous”, dit-il rageur. Comble de cynisme ! Summum de l’intolérance, il dit menaçant à notre adresse : “On ne mange pas avec lui ! Il est malade. C’est un fils de Sheitan ! ”.

      Comment se fait-il que Aly, bien qu’ayant un statut particulier soit mis avec des hommes qui n’ont aucun respect pour son choix de vie ? “ Où voulez-vous qu’il soit ? Avec les femmes ? ”, nous répond calmement un agent du centre. “ Est-ce qu’il a même avoué au HCR son statut ! Je ne crois pas ! », a fait remarquer l’agent.
      Joint par le reporter de APAC Niger, le service du HCR Agadez dit ceci : « nous n’avons pas eu de cas pareil ! »

      Assiatou, est elle aussi une jeune femme du Darfour. Sa vie est un drame grandeur nature. Elle a tout perdu au Soudan du sud. Parents et conjoint.
      En Libye, elle a souffert vingt-sept mois les affres de violences sexuelles. “Les hommes sont cruels. Le sexe, partout et toujours le sexe. Comment puis-je me protéger quand on ne te demande aucune permission avant d’abuser de ton propre corps ? Dites-moi comment dire non à un homme drogué et violent qui a le droit de vie et de mort sur toi ? Mon corps de femme m’a permis de survivre jusqu’à aujourd’hui mais au prix de maints viols et supplices. De 2012 à aujourd’hui, j’ai porté trois grossesses que je n’ai jamais désirées. Deux sont mortes en Libye et j’ai le dernier ici avec moi ! Ne me demandez pas qui en est le père, je vous jure que je l’ignore !”.
      Son statut de femme éprouvée et allaitante fait qu’elle est mieux traitée que les autres. « Elle a beaucoup besoin de soutien surtout moral », fait remarquer une volontaire humanitaire trouvée sur place.

      À Agadez, Aly et Assiatou ont trouvé plusieurs centaines d’autres demandeurs d’asile. Tout comme eux, ils ont fui dans la douleur. Le Soudan d’abord, et la Libye ensuite. Hélas, leur rêve de liberté, leur espoir d’un lendemain meilleur se meurt aujourd’hui à Agadez.
      Au contact de dures réalités, Aly et Assiatou ne croient plus aux organisations internationales d’Agadez. « Elles font de la discrimination entre nous et les Erythréens ! Ce n’est pas normal », a fait le jeune soudanais Aly.

      « Ces soudanais ne sont pas reconnaissants…. »

      Ces demandeurs d’asile ignorent-ils que depuis la fin d’année 2017, 1.450 réfugiés, dont 1.292 Soudanais, sont arrivés dans la cité du nord du Niger jusqu’à atteindre le chiffre record de 3000 aujourd’hui ? Bien-sûr que non ! Devant leur afflux, et prises au dépourvu, les organisations humanitaires présentes à Agadez ne savent plus où donner de la tête. « On ne peut que s’occuper des personnes considérées comme « les plus vulnérables ». C’est-à-dire les femmes, les enfants et les malades », explique un agent du HCR en poste à Agadez.

      Et pourtant de l’avis d’un agent de la Direction de l’Etat-civil, « Leur situation s’améliore de plus en plus. Tenez bien ! Au début, les hommes vivaient en pleine rue, juste en face de nos locaux, des fois sous 42° de chaleur. Ils n’avaient même pas accès aux toilettes et faisaient leurs besoins à l’air libre ou dans des parcelles vides. Mais aujourd’hui, ils mangent bien, dorment bien et se promènent sans problème dans la ville d’Agadez ».

      Mais bon nombre de soudanais joints par APAC réfutent ces dires. Ils soulignent « qu’ils manquent de tout : nourriture, soins de santé, espaces sanitaires adéquats et même qu’ils n’ont droit à aucune intimité ».
      « C’est un site temporaire », nous a répondu à ce sujet Davies Kameau, chef de bureau UNHCR Agadez. « Nous attendons que les soudanais soient d’abord reconnus comme demandeurs d’asile par le Niger », a t-il poursuivi.

      Pour beaucoup de ces soudanais, le droit à l’asile leur est refusé au Niger et : « ce n’est pas normal. C’est un déni de droit clair et simple ! On fait des faveurs aux autres mais pas nous ! », a dénoncé lui aussi Hadji, un soudanais trentenaire.

      Le statut de réfugié peine à leur être accordé

      « Vous n’êtes pas sans savoir qu’il n’y a pas encore eu de session de la Commission nationale d’éligibilité (CNE) pour le cas d’Agadez mais il y a eu une commission d’éligibilité délocalisée à Tahoua pour statuer sur le cas de demandes jugées urgentes. Six ont été accordées et une rejetée. (…). C’est vrai que les gens ont l’impression que ça traîne mais en vérité c’est le souci de bien faire qui fait que le processus prend du temps », affirme. Soukeyrajou Yacouba à APAC.

      D’après nos sources jusqu’à à cette date, le Niger refuse de se prononcer sur la finalité de ces demandes d’asile.
      Pourquoi alors ? Joint par le reporter de APAC, Lawali Oudou, acteur de la société civile d’Agadez a expliqué : « Cela fait plusieurs mois que les négociations concernant le statut à accorder aux soudanais peinent à aboutir. C’est parce que les autorités du Niger ont peur de prendre cette lourde responsabilité surtout au sujet d’Agadez, une région instable et qui a connu deux rébellions armées ».
      En effet, le prétexte de la sécurité explique le refus de l’Etat du Niger d’accorder le droit d’asile à ces soudanais. « Ils sont en lien avec des pays en guerre : la Libye, le Tchad, le Soudan. Ils sont arabophones, tout comme la majorité des terroristes. On a peur qu’ils installent des bases terroristes ici », a affirmé à notre confrère Le Point le député Mano Aghali. « Les populations d’Agadez commencent à manifester contre la présence de ces gens dans la ville d’Agadez. C’est pourquoi nous prions le HCR d’accélérer le processus pour trouver une solution », s’est alarmé quant à lui Rhissa Feltou, alors maire d’Agadez.
      Mansour B. un jeune nigérien qui habite non loin du centre pour les réfugiés fait partie de ceux qui ne veulent plus des soudanais à Agadez. Et il le dit sans ambages : « ces soudanais ne sont pas reconnaissants vis-à-vis du Niger ». Il explique qu’ : « ils doivent remercier le Niger car aucun pays ne peut accepter ce qu’ils font ici à Agadez. Ils draguent nos femmes et nos filles souvent devant nos yeux ; ils coupent nos arbres et partent vendre le bois au marché pour acheter de l’alcool et de la drogue. Trop, c’est trop ! ».

      Des griefs infondés selon les soudanais

      Pour les soudanais, tous ces griefs sont infondés. « Nous sommes des civils et non des militaires. Nous n’avons aucun contact avec des groupes mafieux. Les autorités et même les populations locales nous comparent à des rebelles soudanais, pas comme des réfugiés. Si nous étions des combattants, on allait rester au pays pour nous défendre mais pas fuir comme des lâches », explique Al-Hassan.
      En attendant que leur cas soit clair, les soudanais se rongent les ongles à une quinzaine de kilomètres d’Agadez. Des couacs surviennent des fois entre eux mais aussi avec les populations riveraines du centre.

      Jusqu’à quand cette situation peut-elle tenir ? Un vent nouveau souffle au Soudan avec le changement de régime survenu. Peut-il augurer un lendemain meilleur pour tous ces jeunes soudanais bloqués aujourd’hui à Agadez ? L’Europe leur ouvrira t-elle un jour les bras ? Seront-ils laissés à Agadez pour qu’au fil du temps ils puissent se fondre à la population ?
      Telles sont les questions qui taraudent les esprits à Agadez et auxquelles des réponses doivent être données.


      https://airinfoagadez.com/2019/08/29/demandeurs-dasile-soudanais-a-agadez-la-grande-desillusion

    • Refugees in Niger Protest Against Delay of Resettlement and Dire Conditions

      Almost 1000 people have protested in front of the office of the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) in Agadez, Niger, against the poor conditions in the UNHCR-run facility and the delay of resettlement procedures. The systemic isolation in the centre is considered a model for “outsourcing of the asylum system outside Europe”.

      Hundreds of people, among them many refugees from Sudan, marched 18 km from the humanitarian centre where they are accommodated to the UNHCR headquarters to submit a memorandum bearing their demands to expedite their resettlement procedures and denounce the deteriorating humanitarian conditions in the facility. The march turned into a sit-in and is part of on-going series of refugee protests in Niger since early 2019.

      According to one of the protesters the facility is located in the middle of the desert lacking “the simplest means of life” as well as adequate education. Chronic disease is spreading among the refugees, many of which are unaccompanied who have been waiting in the facility for over two years, he added.

      In 2017, UNHCR established an Emergency Transit Mechanism (ETM) in Niger for the evacuation of vulnerable people from Libya identified for resettlement to Europe and elsewhere. As of November 2019, 2,143 out of 2,913 of those evacuated by UNHCR have been resettled.

      An increasing number of self-evacuated refugees have also arrived in Agadez from Libya with the hope of being resettled. Niger agreed to the ETM under the condition that all refugees would be resettled in Europe. However, as stated in a MEDAM police brief, for the self-evacuees, resettlement becomes increasingly unlikely and they were moved to a refugee camp outside the capital, which hampers local integration and their economic autonomy.

      The network Alarm Phone Sahara commented. “This situation occurs in a context where European states are seeking to outsource the processing of cases of refugees, who have fled wars and persecution in countries like in East Africa, to countries far from the borders of Europe. The state of Niger is currently serving as a model for the outsourcing of the asylum system towards outside Europe, receiving considerable amounts of money from EU member states.”

      Since 2017, a total of 4,252 persons have been evacuated from Libya: 2,913 to Niger, 808 to Italy and 531 to through the Emergency Transit Centre to Romania.

      https://www.ecre.org/refugees-in-niger-protest-against-delay-of-resettlement-and-dire-conditions

    • Agadez/Incendie centre humanitaire : » Je me suis sentie trahie… », affirme #Alexandra_Morelli, représentante du HCR au Niger

      En visite ce matin à Agadez, Mme Alexandra Morelli, représentante du HCR au Niger a répondu aux questions de Aïr Info :

      Extrait :


       » Je suis ici à Agadez pour apporter toute ma solidarité aux autorités locales et pour gérer ensemble cette crise. Pour comprendre profondément la nature et s’assurer qu’on continue à s’assurer qu’on continue à protéger et à donner de l’assistance aux victimes même parmi les soudanais de cet acte de vandalisme qui n’a pas de commentaires. Après l’incendie du site humanitaire ma réaction est celle d’une femme, d’une mère qui a cru en ses enfants, qui a tout fait avec le gouvernement du Niger pour leur garantir un espace de paix et de protection. Je me suis sentie trahie. C’est la première émotion humaine que j’ai eue, une émotion de douleur. Mais aujourd’hui, nous mettons les émotions de côté et on travaille avec le pragmatisme et la lucidité guidés par la solidarité et la loi du Niger ».

      Interview réalisée par
      Anicet Karim

      https://airinfoagadez.com/2020/01/07/agadez-incendie-centre-humanitaire-je-me-suis-sentie-trahie-affirme-a

    • A protest dispersed, a camp burned: Asylum seekers in Agadez face an uncertain future

      ‘Nobody can believe this is happening… because there [are] children, there are women that are sleeping inside the camp.’

      Early in the morning on 4 January, security forces carrying long, wooden sticks arrived outside the office of the UN refugee agency (UNHCR) in the city of Agadez, Niger: 600 or more asylum seekers, mostly from Sudan, were gathered in the street in front of the office.

      Since mid-December, they had been staging a sit-in to protest what they said was UNHCR’s “complete neglect” of their living conditions and the slow processing and mishandling of their asylum cases.

      By the end of the day, security forces had dispersed the sit-in, dozens of demonstrators were allegedly injured, more than 330 were arrested, and the camp set up to house asylum seekers outside the city was almost entirely burned to the ground.

      The events were only the latest in the more than two-year saga of the Sudanese in Agadez – a story that has always been part of a bigger picture.

      The arrival of the Sudanese to the long-time migration hub in northern Niger, beginning in November 2017, followed on the heels of European policies aimed at curbing the movement of people from West Africa to Libya and onward to Italy, as well as the initiation of a programme by the EU and UNHCR – the Emergency Transit Mechanism (ETM) – to evacuate people from Libyan detention centres, bringing them to Niamey, Niger’s capital, to await resettlement to Europe.

      Against this backdrop, some Sudanese in Libya, facing violence, rampant abuse, exploitation, and even slavery, turned south to escape, spurred on by rumours of aid and safety in Niger, and the vague possibility of a legal way to reach Europe. But authorities in Niger, itself focal point of EU efforts to stem migration in recent years, were not enthusiastic about the arrival of the Sudanese and worried that the presence of UNHCR in Agadez was acting as a “pull factor”, attracting people to the city from Libya.

      UNHCR is in a complicated position in Niger, according to Johannes Claes, an independent consultant and migration researcher who has followed the situation in Agadez since 2017.

      The organisation has had to navigate between allaying government fears of a “pull factor” while providing protection and services to the Sudanese, running the ETM – the “human face” of the EU’s otherwise harsh migration policies – and responding to a growing number of refugees and Nigeriens displaced by conflicts along the country’s borders. “It hasn’t been easy for them to manage this,” Claes said. “That is quite obvious.”

      Underlying the entire situation is a global shortage of refugee resettlement spots. UNHCR projects that 1.4 million refugees are in need of resettlement this year out of a population of nearly 26 million refugees worldwide. Last year, around 63,000 refugees were resettled through UNHCR-facilitated programmes, down from a high of 126,000 in 2016.

      “UNHCR everywhere is just overwhelmed by the numbers because they are completely dependent on slots allocated in Europe and North America, and those are really very, very few,” said Jérôme Tubiana, an independent researcher focusing on conflict and refugees in Sudan and Niger.
      Global resonance, local grievance

      Caught between restrictive EU migration policies and the global lack of resettlement spots, UNHCR’s struggle to provide services, protection, and long-term stability to asylum seekers and refugees has not been limited to Niger.

      In the past year, asylum seekers and refugees have protested in front of UNHCR offices in Libya, Lebanon, and elsewhere, and African asylum seekers in particular, including many Sudanese from Darfur, have accused UNHCR of discrimination and neglect. “[The protest in Agadez] was part of… a global story of frustration and a feeling of being, really, not treated as victims of war or mass crimes,” Tubiana said.

      Despite the global resonance, the trigger for the protest in Agadez appears to have been a local incident that took on symbolic significance as it spun through the rumour mill of a population that was already angry about the slow pace at which their asylum cases were being heard and desperate for information about their futures.

      “The core of the problem is why the procedures are slow and why some people were informed… that their files had been lost,” a Sudanese asylum seeker in Agadez told TNH on 17 December, the day after around 600 people walked out of the camp where they were housed and set up the sit-in in front of the UNHCR office. “There is a complete lack of credibility… represented by the loss of the files,” the protesters said in a statement that circulated via text message.

      “We know that these people are fighters, soldiers, and they came here because now they expect to go to Europe.”

      UNHCR Niger confirmed that the government agency responsible for processing asylum requests had misplaced around five files several months earlier, but it said the files had been reconstituted and resubmitted for consideration. “From UNHCR’s side, we can strongly confirm that no registration files nor resettlement requests have been lost and that no one has to re-conduct interviews,” UNHCR Niger told TNH.

      But by the time news about the files spread, the Sudanese had already been growing frustrated, disillusioned, and distrustful for quite some time, and UNHCR’s reassurances fell on deaf ears.
      A shaky beginning

      From the beginning, the position of the Sudanese in Agadez has rested on shaky ground.

      Hundreds of thousands of West Africans, sharing a common language and cultural background with Nigeriens, have passed through the city en route to Libya over the years.

      The Sudanese were the first group of outsiders to turn south from Libya in search of protection, and Nigerien authorities didn’t trust their motives. “We know that these people are fighters, soldiers, and they came here because now they expect to go to Europe,” Niger’s minister of interior, Mohamed Bazoum, told TNH in 2018.

      But UNHCR has maintained that the Sudanese are not fighters. For the most part, they had been driven from their homes in Darfur by conflict and government-sponsored ethnic cleansing that began in the early 2000s. They had lived in camps for the displaced in Sudan or Chad before humanitarian funding ebbed or conflict followed them and they began criss-crossing the region in search of safety, stable living conditions, and better prospects for their futures. In the process, many had been tortured, trafficked, raped, or had witnessed and suffered various forms of violence.

      At the peak in 2018, there were nearly 2,000 Sudanese in Agadez, and tensions with the local community simmered as they filled up limited UNHCR housing in the city and spilled into the streets. At the beginning of May, authorities arrested more than 100 of the Sudanese, trucked them to the Niger-Libya border, dropped them in the desert, and told them to leave.

      The incident was a major violation of the international laws protecting asylum seekers, and in its aftermath, UNHCR, which had been caught off guard by the arrival of the Sudanese in the first place, scrambled to make sure it wouldn’t happen again and to carve out a space where the Sudanese and other asylum seekers would be safe.
      ‘It was a bit existential’

      The government and UNHCR settled on a plan to open the camp – which UNHCR calls a humanitarian centre – 15 kilometres outside Agadez to de-escalate tensions, and the government eventually agreed to start hearing asylum claims from the Sudanese and others. But a message had already been sent: the number of Sudanese coming to Agadez slowed to a trickle and several hundred ended up returning to Libya or headed elsewhere on their own.

      By last December, there were around 1,600 asylum seekers, mostly Sudanese, in Agadez, and 1,200 of them were housed at the humanitarian centre. According to UNHCR, 223 people had already received refugee status in Niger, and around 500 were set to have their cases heard in the coming months. Thirty-one of the most vulnerable had been transferred to Italy as part of a humanitarian corridor, and around 100 others were in line for refugee resettlement or other humanitarian programmes that would take them out of Niger.

      “It’s not a humane situation.”

      “It was slowly, slowly ongoing, but there was a process,” Alessandra Morelli, UNHCR’s head of office in Niger, told TNH. “Nothing was in the air or in… limbo.”

      “We managed to stabilise a little bit a large group of people that for years were going from one place to another in [search] of protection,” Morelli added. “I think that was the success.”

      But many of the Sudanese in Agadez saw the situation differently. The humanitarian centre was isolated and on the edge of the desert. In the summer, the weather was very hot and in the winter, very cold. There was little shade, and the insides of the tents boiled. Storms carrying billowing clouds of sand would blow out of the desert, blocking out visibility and blanketing everything in dust. Attempts to drill wells for water failed. “It’s not a humane situation,” one asylum seeker told TNH last April. “The way they treat us here they wouldn’t treat any person.”

      “We saw… very high rates of mental illness, numerous suicide attempts, women miscarrying on a regular basis or having very, very… low-weight babies; people were wandering off into the middle of the desert due to mental illness or desperation,” a former UNHCR staff member, who worked for the organisation on and off for six years and spent eight months in Agadez, told TNH on condition of anonymity. “It was a bit existential.”

      UNHCR partnered with organisations to provide psychological support and medical care to the asylum seekers. “[But] the level of service and the treatment that these people have been receiving… has been very low,” said Claes, the migration researcher. “It is very hard to service that camp. It is not an easy area to be operating, but it’s also not impossible,” he added.
      Protest and dispersal

      The low level of service, slow processing of asylum requests and lack of clear information about what was happening with people’s cases grated on the Sudanese.

      “This is not the first time that people are expressing themselves as unhappy,” Claes said. “This was obviously the worst that we’ve seen so far, but it was not entirely unexpected that this would at some point get out of hand.”

      When the sit-in began, UNHCR in Niger said the asylum seekers were pushing to be resettled to Europe. “Resettlement is a protection tool for the most vulnerable, not a right,” UNHCR Niger told TNH. “Most asylum seekers currently in Agadez are not among the most vulnerable refugees, and other more vulnerable cases will be privileged for resettlement.”

      The claim that the protest was only about resettlement prompted the former UNHCR employee to speak out. “They keep rolling out resettlement as this kind of strawman to distract from the fact that these people have been neglected,” the former employee said. “They’ve been neglected because they’re not a priority for anybody.”

      As the sit-in wore on, the governor of Agadez, Sadou Soloke, warned in a radio broadcast that the sit-in would be dispersed – forcibly if necessary – if the protesters did not return to the camp outside the city. “We can no longer stand by and watch them trample on our laws while they are being hosted by us,” the governor said of the asylum seekers.

      The protesters did not seek the required authorisation before the sit-in began and “rejected any proposal for a friendly settlement”, Agadez mayor Maman Boukari told TNH in writing. “In accordance with the provisions of the law, we ordered the police to move the refugees,” he said.

      “Nobody can believe this is happening… because there [are] children, there are women that are sleeping inside the camp.”

      But the asylum seekers at the sit-in had no intention of returning to the camp before their grievances were addressed. The way they saw things, going back to the camp would only mean more waiting and uncertainty. “We expect disaster at any time because we have lost trust in the government and employees of UNHCR,” one demonstrater told TNH via text message on 3 January, anticipating the dispersal.

      The following morning, security forces arrived with lorries and buses to take people back to the camp.
      Aftermath

      As the smoke settled from the fire at the humanitarian site, different versions of what transpired emerged.

      According to asylum seekers at the sit-in, security forces forced people into the vehicles, beating those who didn’t comply, and severely injuring many. Mayor Boukari told TNH that no force was used to disperse the demonstration and that there were no recorded cases of injury.

      Cell phone videos taken by asylum seekers show several instances of security forces hitting people with sticks or batons, and dragging them across the ground. Photos taken afterward show people with bloody wounds on their heads and bandaged limbs. But it is unclear from the videos and photos how widespread or severe the violence was, or what injuries people sustained.

      Despite the different versions of events, one thing is certain: once back at the camp, a confrontation broke out between security forces and some of the asylum seekers. It appears – from accounts given to TNH by the mayor, UNHCR, and at least three asylum seekers – that an unknown number of people, angry at the dispersal of the sit-in, then started a blaze and burned most of the camp to the ground. Other accounts, that seem less credible, suggest the government used teargas at the camp and started the fire.

      “The discussion of what Agadez will become is still on going with the government.”

      “[Security forces] beat them… too much. When they’re back [from the sit-in], they hate everything and destroy it,” said one asylum seeker, who didn’t participate in the protest but was in the camp during the fire. “This is [a] crazy idea. Nobody can accept [it]. Nobody can believe this is happening… because there [are] children, there are women that are sleeping inside the camp,” the asylum seeker added.

      Miraculously, no one was seriously injured in the fire.

      In its aftermath, 336 people were arrested for arson and planning the sit-in. As of 30 January, 196 were still being held in custody, of which 61 had been formally charged, according to UNHCR. Other Sudanese who are not currently in custody are also expected to receive judicial summons, UNHCR added.

      After several weeks, the government gave UNHCR permission to install temporary shelter for the people still staying at the camp – they had been sleeping outside in rough shelters they cobbled together or in communal buildings on the site that survived the fire.

      But the future of the effort to create a space to protect asylum seekers and refugees in Agadez is still uncertain. UNHCR is transferring some asylum seekers from Agadez to housing in Niamey and another UNHCR centre near the capital. “The discussion of what Agadez will become is still on going with the government,” Morelli said.

      In the meantime, the asylum seekers still don’t have any more certainty about their futures than they did before the protest started, and some have told TNH they feel even more vulnerable and disillusioned. UNHCR said the government will respect the status of people who have already been recognised as refugees and continue to review asylum claims from people who have submitted files.

      That process has already dragged on for more than two years, and ambiguity about why it is taking so long and where exactly it is heading was at the root of the protest to begin with. Following the dispersal, one Sudanese asylum seeker told TNH that he feared persecution by authorities in Niger and had returned to Libya with two of his friends. Others do not want to return to the violence and chaos of Libya and feel they have no option but to stay in Niger.

      “I’m still in UNHCR’s hands. What they tell me, I’m ready,” one asylum seeker told TNH. “People, they hate the situation… [but] there’s no other choice.”

      https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news-feature/2020/02/10/Sudanese-asylum-seekers-Niger-Agadez-protest-EU-migration-policy

  • Moins de 5% des besoins mondiaux pour la réinstallation de réfugiés satisfaits en #2018 (#HCR)

    De nouvelles statistiques publiées par l’Agence des Nations Unies pour les réfugiés (HCR), indiquent que malgré un niveau sans précédent de déplacements forcés à travers le monde, seulement 4,7% des besoins mondiaux en matière de réinstallation de réfugiés ont été satisfaits en 2018.

    Selon les statistiques publiées ce mois-ci sur les départs facilités par le HCR vers des pays de réinstallation et parmi 1,2 million de réfugiés qui en avaient besoin en 2018, seuls 55.692 d’entre eux ont été effectivement réinstallés.

    La majorité des départs facilités par le HCR vers des pays de réinstallation se sont effectués depuis les principaux pays d’accueil de réfugiés, dont le Liban (9.800), la Turquie (9.000), la Jordanie (5.100) et l’Ouganda (4.000).

    Sur un total de 81.310 personnes dont la candidature avait été recommandée, la majorité des réfugiés qui avaient besoin d’être réinstallés étaient originaires de Syrie (28.200), de République démocratique du Congo (21.800), d’Érythrée (4.300) et d’Afghanistan (4.000).

    L’année dernière, 68% des dossiers de candidature pour la réinstallation concernaient des survivants de violences et de torture, des personnes ayant besoin de protection juridique et physique ainsi que des femmes et des jeunes filles dont la vie était menacée. Plus de la moitié (52%) des demandes de réinstallation présentées en 2018 concernaient des enfants.
    Peu de réinstallation des réfugiés

    La réinstallation des réfugiés - en provenance d’un pays d’asile et à destination d’un pays tiers qui a accepté de les accueillir et de leur accorder l’installation permanente - n’est accessible qu’à une part limitée de la population réfugiée à travers le monde. En règle générale, moins d’un pour cent sont réinstallés parmi les 19,9 millions de réfugiés relevant de la compétence du HCR à travers le monde.

    Selon le HCR, la réinstallation demeure un mécanisme vital qui permet d’assurer la protection aux personnes les plus exposées. Grâce à ce dispositif concret en matière de protection, les gouvernements et les communautés à travers le monde peuvent partager la responsabilité dans les efforts de réponse aux crises de déplacement forcé. La réinstallation et d’autres voies complémentaires d’admission constituent un objectif clé du Pacte mondial sur les réfugiés qui vise à réduire l’impact, sur les pays hôtes, de situations de réfugiés majeures.

    Selon les estimations pour 2019, 1,4 million de réfugiés actuellement hébergés dans 65 pays d’accueil à travers le monde auront besoin d’être réinstallés.

    Parmi eux se trouvent des réfugiés syriens actuellement hébergés dans des pays du Moyen-Orient et en Turquie (43%) ainsi que des réfugiés se trouvant dans des pays d’asile et de transit situés le long de l’itinéraire de la Méditerranée centrale (22%), où les mouvements vers l’Europe génèrent un lourd bilan en termes de pertes en vies humaines.

    Le Pacte mondial sur les réfugiés appelle les États à offrir davantage de places de réinstallation, via le lancement de nouveaux programmes ou l’extension de ceux qui existent déjà.

    Le HCR travaille actuellement avec les États et ses partenaires à l’élaboration d’une stratégie triennale concernant la réinstallation et les voies complémentaires d’admission - afin d’accroître le nombre de places de réinstallation, d’encourager davantage de pays à participer aux efforts mondiaux en matière de réinstallation et d’améliorer l’accès des réfugiés aux voies complémentaires d’admission.

    https://news.un.org/fr/story/2019/02/1036661
    #réinstallation #statistiques #chiffres #asile #migrations #réfugiés

  • Rwanda to receive over 500 migrants from Libya

    Rwanda and Libya are currently working out an evacuation plan for some hundreds of migrants being held in detention centres in the North African country, officials confirmed.

    Diyana Gitera, the Director General for Africa at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation told The New Times that Rwanda was working on a proposal with partners to evacuate refugees from Libya.

    She said that initially, Rwanda will receive 500 refugees as part of the commitment by President Paul Kagame in late 2017.

    President Kagame made this commitment after revelations that tens of thousands of different African nationalities were stranded in Libya having failed to make it across the Mediterranean Sea to European countries.

    “We are talking at this time of up to 500 refugees from Libya,” Gitera said, without revealing more details.

    She however added that the exact timing of when these would be brought will be confirmed later.

    It had earlier been said that Rwanda was ready to receive up to 30,000 immigrants under this arrangement.

    Rwanda’s intervention came amid harrowing revelations that the migrants, most of them from West Africa, are being sold openly in modern-day slave markets in Libya.

    The immigrants are expected to be received under an emergency plan being discussed with international humanitarian agencies and other partners.

    Gitera highlighted that the process was being specifically supported by the African Union (AU) with funding from European Union (EU) and the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR).

    The proposal comes as conflict in war-torn North African country deepens.

    The United Nations estimates almost 5,000 migrants are in detention centres in Libya, about 70 per cent of them refugees and asylum seekers, most of whom have been subjected to different forms of abuse.

    This is however against the backdrop of accusations against the EU over the plight of migrants.

    Already, thousands of the migrants have died over the past few years while trying to cross the Mediterranean Sea to European countries where they hope for better lives.

    Human rights groups have documented multiple cases of rape, torture and other crimes at the facilities, some of which are run by militias.

    Rwanda hopes to step in to rescue some of these struggling migrants in its capacity.

    The Government of Rwanda has been generously hosting refugees for over two decades and coordinates the refugee response with UNHCR, as well as providing land to establish refugee camps and ensuring camp management and security.

    Generally, Rwanda offers a favourable protection environment for refugees.

    They have the right to education, employment, cross borders, and access to durable solutions (resettlement, local integration and return) is unhindered.

    Camps like Gihembe, Kigeme, Kiziba, Mugombwa and Nyabiheke host thousands of refugees, especially from the Democratic Republic of Congo and Burundi where political instabilities have forced people to leave their countries.

    https://www.newtimes.co.rw/news/rwanda-receive-over-500-migrants-libya
    #Libye #évacuation #Rwanda #asile #migrations #réfugiés #union_africaine #plan_d'urgence #UE #EU #externalisation #Union_européenne #HCR #UNHCR

    via @pascaline

    • Europe Keeps Asylum Seekers at a Distance, This Time in Rwanda

      For three years, the European Union has been paying other countries to keep asylum seekers away from a Europe replete with populist and anti-migrant parties.

      It has paid Turkey billions to keep refugees from crossing to Greece. It has funded the Libyan Coast Guard to catch and return migrant boats to North Africa. It has set up centers in distant Niger to process asylum seekers, if they ever make it that far. Most don’t.

      Even as that arm’s-length network comes under criticism on humanitarian grounds, it is so overwhelmed that the European Union is seeking to expand it, as the bloc aims to buttress an approach that has drastically cut the number of migrants crossing the Mediterranean.

      It is now preparing to finish a deal, this time in Rwanda, to create yet another node that it hopes will help alleviate some of the mounting strains on its outsourcing network.
      Sign up for The Interpreter

      Subscribe for original insights, commentary and discussions on the major news stories of the week, from columnists Max Fisher and Amanda Taub.

      Critics say the Rwanda deal will deepen a morally perilous policy, even as it underscores how precarious the European Union’s teetering system for handling the migrant crisis has become.

      Tens of thousands of migrants and asylum seekers remain trapped in Libya, where a patchwork of militias control detention centers and migrants are sold as slaves or into prostitution, and kept in places so packed that there is not even enough floor space to sleep on.

      A bombing of a migrant detention center in July left 40 dead, and it has continued to operate in the months since, despite part of it having been reduced to rubble.

      Even as the system falters, few in the West seem to be paying much attention, and critics say that is also part of the aim — to keep a problem that has roiled European politics on the other side of Mediterranean waters, out of sight and out of mind.

      Screening asylum seekers in safe, remote locations — where they can qualify as refugees without undertaking perilous journeys to Europe — has long been promoted in Brussels as a way to dismantle smuggler networks while giving vulnerable people a fair chance at a new life. But the application by the European Union has highlighted its fundamental flaws: The offshore centers are too small and the pledges of refugee resettlement too few.

      European populists continue to flog the narrative that migrants are invading, even though the European Union’s migration policy has starkly reduced the number of new arrivals. In 2016, 181,376 people crossed the Mediterranean from North Africa to reach Italian shores. Last year, the number plummeted to 23,485.

      But the bloc’s approach has been sharply criticized by humanitarian and refugee-rights groups, not only for the often deplorable conditions of the detention centers, but also because few consigned to them have any real chance of gaining asylum.

      “It starts to smell as offshore processing and a backdoor way for European countries to keep people away from Europe, in a way that’s only vaguely different to how Australia manages it,” said Judith Sunderland, an expert with Human Rights Watch, referring to that country’s policy of detaining asylum seekers on distant Pacific islands.

      Such criticism first surfaced in Europe in 2016, when the European Union agreed to pay Turkey roughly $6 billion to keep asylum seekers from crossing to Greece, and to take back some of those who reached Greece.

      On the Africa front, in particular in the central Mediterranean, the agreements have come at a lower financial cost, but arguably at a higher moral one.
      Image
      A migrant detention center in Tripoli, Libya, in 2015.

      Brussels’ funding of the Libyan Coast Guard to intercept migrant boats before they reach international waters has been extremely effective, but has left apprehended migrants vulnerable to abuses in a North African country with scant central governance and at the mercy of an anarchic, at-war state of militia rule.

      A handful are resettled directly out of Libya, and a few thousand more are transferred by the United Nations refugee agency and its partner, the International Organization for Migration, to a processing center in Niger. Only some of those have a realistic shot at being granted asylum in Europe.

      With many European Union member states refusing to accept any asylum seekers, Brussels and, increasingly, President Emmanuel Macron of France have appealed to those willing to take in a few who are deemed especially vulnerable.

      As Italy has continued to reject migrant rescue vessels from docking at its ports, and threatened to impose fines of up to 1 million euros, about $1.1 million, on those who defy it, Mr. Macron has spearheaded an initiative among European Union members to help resettle migrants rescued in the Mediterranean. Eight nations have joined.

      But ultimately, it’s a drop in the bucket.

      An estimated half a million migrants live in Libya, and just 51,000 are registered with the United Nations refugee agency. Five thousand are held in squalid and unsafe detention centers.

      “European countries face a dilemma,” said Camille Le Coz, an expert with the Migration Policy Institute in Brussels. “They do not want to welcome more migrants from Libya and worry about creating pull factors, but at the same time they can’t leave people trapped in detention centers.”
      Editors’ Picks
      25 Years Later, It Turns Out Phoebe Was the Best Friend
      Following the Lead of the Diving Girl
      The Perfect Divorce

      The United Nations refugee agency and the International Organization for Migration, mostly using European Union funding, have evacuated about 4,000 people to the transit center in Niger over the past two years.

      Niger, a country that has long served as a key node in the migratory route from Africa to Europe, is home to some of the world’s most effective people-smugglers.

      The capacity of the center in Agadez, where smugglers also base their operations, is about 1,000. But it has at times held up to three times as many, as resettlement to Europe and North America has been slack.

      Fourteen countries — 10 from the European Union, along with Canada, Norway, Switzerland and the United States — have pledged to resettle about 6,600 people either directly from Libya or from the Niger facility, according to the United Nations refugee agency.

      It has taken two years to fulfill about half of those pledges, with some resettlements taking up to 12 months to process, a spokesman for the agency said.

      Some countries that made pledges, such as Belgium and Finland, have taken only a few dozen people; others, like the Netherlands, fewer than 10; Luxembourg has taken none, a review of the refugee agency’s data shows.

      Under the agreement with Rwanda, which is expected to be signed in the coming weeks, the east African country will take in about 500 migrants evacuated from Libya and host them until they are resettled to new homes or sent back to their countries of origin.

      It will offer a way out for a lucky few, but ultimately the Rwandan center is likely to run into the same delays and problems as the one in Agadez.

      “The Niger program has suffered from a lot of setbacks, hesitation, very slow processing by European and other countries, very low numbers of actual resettlements,” said Ms. Sunderland of Human Rights Watch. “There’s not much hope then that the exact same process in Rwanda would lead to dramatically different outcomes.”

      https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/08/world/europe/migrants-africa-rwanda.html

    • Vu des États-Unis.L’UE choisit le Rwanda pour relocaliser les demandeurs d’asile

      L’Union européenne va conclure un accord avec le Rwanda pour tenir les demandeurs d’asile à l’écart de ses frontières. Déchirée sur la question des migrants, l’Europe poursuit une politique déjà expérimentée et critiquée, analyse The New York Times.

      https://www.courrierinternational.com/article/vu-des-etats-unis-lue-choisit-le-rwanda-pour-relocaliser-les-

    • Le Rwanda, un nouveau #hotspot pour les migrants qui fuient l’enfer libyen

      Comme au Niger, le Haut-commissariat aux réfugiés de l’ONU va ouvrir un centre de transit pour accueillir 500 migrants détenus en Libye. D’autres contingents d’évacués pourront prendre le relais au fur et à mesure que les 500 premiers migrants auront une solution d’installation ou de rapatriement.

      Quelque 500 migrants actuellement enfermés en centres de détention en Libye vont être évacués vers le Rwanda dans les prochaines semaines, en vertu d’un accord signé mardi 10 septembre par le gouvernement rwandais, le Haut-commissariat aux réfugiés de l’ONU (HCR), et l’Union africaine (UA).

      Il s’agira principalement de personnes originaires de la corne de l’Afrique, toutes volontaires pour être évacuées vers le Rwanda. Leur prise en charge à la descente de l’avion sera effectuée par le HCR qui les orientera vers un centre d’accueil temporaire dédié.

      Situé à 60 km de Kigali, la capitale rwandaise, le centre de transit de Gashora a été établi en 2015 “pour faire face, à l’époque, à un afflux de migrants burundais” fuyant des violences dans leur pays, explique à InfoMigrants Elise Villechalane, représentante du HCR au Rwanda. D’une capacité de 338 places, l’édifice implanté sur un terrain de 26 hectares a déjà accueilli, au fil des années, un total de 30 000 Burundais. “Des travaux sont en cours pour augmenter la capacité et arriver à 500 personnes”, précise Elise Villechalane.

      Les premiers vols d’évacués devraient arriver dans les prochaines semaines et s’étaler sur plusieurs mois. Le HCR estime que le centre tournera à pleine capacité d’ici la fin de l’année. À l’avenir, d’autres contingents d’évacués pourront prendre le relais au fur et à mesure que les 500 premiers migrants quitteront les lieux.

      Certains réfugiés "pourraient recevoir l’autorisation de rester au Rwanda"

      “Une fois [les migrants] arrivés sur place, nous procéderons à leur évaluation [administrative] afin de trouver une solution au cas par cas”, poursuit Elise Villechalane. “En fonction de leur parcours et de leur vulnérabilité, il pourra leur être proposé une réinstallation dans un pays tiers, ou dans un pays où ils ont déjà obtenu l’asile avant de se rendre en Libye, mais aussi un retour volontaire dans leur pays d’origine quand les conditions pour un rapatriement dans la sécurité et la dignité sont réunies.”

      Dans des cas plus rares, et si aucune solution n’est trouvée, certains réfugiés "pourraient recevoir l’autorisation de rester au Rwanda", a indiqué Germaine Kamayirese, la ministre chargée des mesures d’Urgence, lors d’une déclaration à la presse à Kigali.

      Le Rwanda a décidé d’accueillir des évacués de Libye à la suite d’un discours du chef de l’État rwandais Paul Kagame le 23 novembre 2017, peu après la diffusion d’un document choc de CNN sur des migrants africains réduits en esclavage en Libye. “Le président a offert généreusement d’accueillir des migrants, ce qui a, depuis, été élargi pour inclure les réfugiés, les demandeurs d’asile et toutes les autres personnes spécifiées dans le mémorandum d’accord”, affirme Olivier Kayumba, secrétaire du ministère chargé de la Gestion des situations d’urgence, contacté par InfoMigrants.

      Le pays reconnaît, en outre, qu’il existe actuellement en Libye “une situation de plus en plus complexe et exceptionnelle conduisant à la détention et aux mauvais traitements de ressortissants de pays tiers”, continue Olivier Kayumba qui rappelle qu’en tant que signataire de la Convention de 1951 relative au statut des réfugiés, son pays s’est senti le devoir d’agir.

      Le Rwanda prêt à accueillir jusqu’à 30 000 africains évacués

      Plus de 149 000 réfugiés, principalement burundais et congolais, vivent actuellement au Rwanda qui compte une population de 12 millions d’habitants. “Les Rwandais sont habitués à vivre en harmonie avec les réfugiés”, ajoute Olivier Kayumba. “Grâce à la mise en place d’une stratégie d’inclusion, les enfants de réfugiés vont à l’école avec les locaux, les communautés d’accueil incluent aussi les réfugiés dans le système d’assurance maladie et d’accès à l’emploi.”

      Le gouvernement rwandais se dit prêt à accueillir jusqu’à 30 000 Africains évacués de Libye dans son centre de transit, mais uniquement par groupes de 500, afin d’éviter un engorgement du système d’accueil.

      "C’est un moment historique, parce que des Africains tendent la main à d’autres Africains", s’est réjouie Amira Elfadil, commissaire de l’Union africaine (UA) aux Affaires sociales, lors d’une conférence de presse. "Je suis convaincue que cela fait partie des solutions durables".

      L’UA espère désormais que d’autres pays africains rejoindront le Rwanda en proposant un soutien similaire aux évacués de Libye.

      https://www.infomigrants.net/fr/post/19455/le-rwanda-un-nouveau-hotspot-pour-les-migrants-qui-fuient-l-enfer-liby

    • Signing of MoU between the AU, Government of Rwanda and UNHCR

      Signing of the MoU between the @_AfricanUnion, the Government of #Rwanda and the United Nations High Commissioner for @Refugees (UNHCR) to establish an Emergency Transit Mechanism #ETM in Rwanda for refugees and asylum-seekers stranded in #Libya

      https://twitter.com/_AfricanUnion/status/1171307373945937920?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E11
      Lien vers la vidéo:
      https://livestream.com/AfricanUnion/events/8813789/videos/196081645
      #Memorandum_of_understanding #signature #vidéo #MoU #Emergency_Transit_Mechanism #Union_africaine #UA

    • Le HCR, le Gouvernement rwandais et l’Union africaine signent un accord pour l’évacuation de réfugiés hors de la Libye

      Le Gouvernement rwandais, le HCR, l’Agence des Nations Unies pour les réfugiés, et l’Union africaine ont signé aujourd’hui un mémorandum d’accord qui prévoit de mettre en œuvre un dispositif pour évacuer des réfugiés hors de la Libye.

      Selon cet accord, le Gouvernement rwandais recevra et assurera la protection de réfugiés qui sont actuellement séquestrés dans des centres de détention en Libye. Ils seront transférés en lieu sûr au Rwanda sur une base volontaire.

      Un premier groupe de 500 personnes, majoritairement originaires de pays de la corne de l’Afrique, sera évacué. Ce groupe comprend notamment des enfants et des jeunes dont la vie est menacée. Après leur arrivée, le HCR continuera de rechercher des solutions pour les personnes évacuées.

      Si certains peuvent bénéficier d’une réinstallation dans des pays tiers, d’autres seront aidés à retourner dans les pays qui leur avait précédemment accordé l’asile ou à regagner leur pays d’origine, s’ils peuvent le faire en toute sécurité. Certains pourront être autorisés à rester au Rwanda sous réserve de l’accord des autorités compétentes.

      Les vols d’évacuation devraient commencer dans les prochaines semaines et seront menés en coopération avec les autorités rwandaises et libyennes. L’Union africaine apportera son aide pour les évacuations, fournira un soutien politique stratégique en collaborant avec la formation et la coordination et aidera à mobiliser des ressources. Le HCR assurera des prestations de protection internationale et fournira l’aide humanitaire nécessaire, y compris des vivres, de l’eau, des abris ainsi que des services d’éducation et de santé.

      Le HCR exhorte la communauté internationale à contribuer des ressources pour la mise en œuvre de cet accord.

      Depuis 2017, le HCR a évacué plus de 4400 personnes relevant de sa compétence depuis la Libye vers d’autres pays, dont 2900 par le biais du mécanisme de transit d’urgence au Niger et 425 vers des pays européens via le centre de transit d’urgence en Roumanie.

      Néanmoins, quelque 4700 personnes seraient toujours détenues dans des conditions effroyables à l’intérieur de centres de détention en Libye. Il est urgent de les transférer vers des lieux sûrs, de leur assurer la protection internationale, de leur fournir une aide vitale d’urgence et de leur rechercher des solutions durables.


      https://www.unhcr.org/fr/news/press/2019/9/5d778a48a/hcr-gouvernement-rwandais-lunion-africaine-signent-accord-levacuation-refugie

    • ‘Life-saving’: hundreds of refugees to be evacuated from Libya to Rwanda

      First group expected to leave dire detention centres in days, as UN denies reports that plan is part of EU strategy to keep refugees from Europe

      Hundreds of African refugees and asylum seekers trapped in Libyan detention centres will be evacuated to Rwanda under a “life-saving” agreement reached with Kigali and the African Union, the UN refugee agency said on Tuesday.

      The first group of 500 people, including children and young people from Somalia, Eritrea and Sudan, are expected to arrive in Rwanda over the coming days, out of 4,700 now estimated to be in custody in Libya, where conflict is raging. The measure is part of an “emergency transit mechanism”, to evacuate people at risk of harm in detention centres inside the county.

      Babar Baloch, UNHCR spokesman in Geneva, said the agreement was “a life-line” mechanism to allow those in danger to get to a place of safety.

      “This is an expansion of the humanitarian evacuation to save lives,” said Baloch. “The focus is on those trapped inside Libya. We’ve seen how horrible the conditions are and we want to get them out of harm’s way.”

      More than 50,000 people fleeing war and poverty in Africa remain in Libya, where a network of militias run overcrowded detention centres, and where there are reports that people have been sold as slaves or into prostitution.

      The UN denied reports the European Union were behind the agreement, as part of a strategy to keep migrants away from Europe. Vincent Cochetel, the special envoy for the UNHCR for the central Mediterranean, told Reuters the funding would mainly come from the EU, but also from the African Union which has received $20m (£16m) from Qatar to support the reintegration of African migrants. But he later said on Twitter that no funding had yet been received and that he was working on it “with partners” (https://twitter.com/cochetel/status/1171400370339373057).

      Baloch said: “We are asking for support from all of our donors, including the EU. The arrangement is between UNHCR, the African Union and Rwanda.”

      The EU has been criticised for funding the Libyan coastguard, who pick up escaped migrants from boats in the Mediterranean and send them back to centres where they face beatings, sexual violence and forced labour according to rights groups.

      In July, the bombing of a migrant detention centre in Tripoli left 44 people dead, leading to international pressure to find a safe haven for refugees.
      Fear and despair engulf refugees in Libya’s ’market of human beings’
      Read more

      Under the agreement, the government of Rwanda will receive and provide protection to refugees and asylum seekers in groups of about 50, who will be put up in a transit facility outside the capital of Kigali. After their arrival, the UNHCR will continue to pursue solutions for them. Some will be resettled to third countries, others helped to return to countries where asylum had previously been granted and others will stay in Rwanda. They will return to their homes if it is safe to do so.

      Cochetel said: “The government has said, ‘If you [UNHCR] think the people should stay long-term in Rwanda, no problem. If you think they should be reunited with their family, they should be resettled, no problem. You [UNHCR] decide on the solution.’”

      “Rwanda has said, ‘We’ll give them the space, we’ll give them the status, we’ll give them the residence permit. They will be legally residing in Rwanda as refugees.’”

      Rwanda, a country of 12 million, is the second African country to provide temporary refuge to migrants in Libya. It already supports around 150,000 refugees from neighbouring Democratic Republic of the Congo and Burundi.

      UNHCR has evacuated more than 2,900 refugees and asylum seekers out of Libya to Niger through an existing emergency transit mechanism. Almost 2,000 of them have been resettled, to countries in Europe, the US and Canada, the agency said, with the rest remaining in Niger.

      https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2019/sep/10/hundreds-refugees-evacuated-libya-to-rwanda?CMP=share_btn_fb

    • INTERVIEW-African refugees held captive in Libya to go to Rwanda in coming weeks - UNHCR

      Hundreds of African refugees trapped in Libyan detention centres will be evacuated to Rwanda within the next few weeks as part of increasingly urgent efforts to relocate people as conflict rages in north African nation, the United Nations said on Tuesday.

      Vincent Cochetel, special envoy for the central Mediterranean for the U.N. refugee agency (UNHCR), said 500 refugees will be evacuated to Rwanda in a deal signed with the small east African nation and the African Union on Tuesday.

      “The agreement with Rwanda says the number can be increased from 500 if they are satisfied with how it works,” Cochetel told the Thomson Reuters Foundation in an interview ahead of the official U.N. announcement.

      “It really depends on the response of the international community to make it work. But it means we have one more solution to the situation in Libya. It’s not a big fix, but it’s helpful.”

      Libya has become the main conduit for Africans fleeing war and poverty trying to reach Europe, since former leader Muammar Gaddafi was toppled in a NATO-backed uprising in 2011.

      People smugglers have exploited the turmoil to send hundreds of thousands of migrants on dangerous journeys across the central Mediterranean although the number of crossings dropped sharply from 2017 amid an EU-backed push to block arrivals.

      Many are picked up at sea by the EU-funded Libyan Coast Guard which sends them back, often to be detained in squalid, overcrowded centres where they face beatings, rape and forced labour, according to aid workers and human rights groups.

      According to the UNHCR, there are about 4,700 people from countries such as Eritrea, Somalia, Ethiopia and Sudan currently held in Libya’s detention centres, which are nominally under the government but often run by armed groups.

      A July air strike by opposition forces, which killed dozens of detainees in a centre in the Libyan capital Tripoli, has increased pressure on the international community to find a safe haven for the refugees and migrants.

      https://news.yahoo.com/interview-african-refugees-held-captive-100728525.html?guccounter=1&guce

    • Accueil de migrants évacués de Libye : « Un bon coup politique » pour le Rwanda

      Le Rwanda a signé il y a quelques jours à Addis-Abeba un accord avec le Haut-commissariat pour les réfugiés (HCR) et l’Union africaine (UA) en vue d’accueillir des migrants bloqués dans l’enfer des centres de détention libyens. Camille Le Coz, analyste au sein du think tank Migration Policy Institute, décrypte cette annonce.

      Cinq cent personnes vont être évacuées de Libye vers le Rwanda « dans quelques semaines », a précisé mardi Hope Tumukunde Gasatura, représentante permanente du Rwanda à l’UA, lors d’une conférence de presse à Addis-Abeba où avait lieu la signature de l’accord.

      RFI : Le Rwanda accueille déjà près de 150 000 réfugiés venus de RDC et du Burundi. Et ce n’est pas vraiment la porte à côté de la Libye. Sans compter que le régime de Paul Kagame est régulièrement critiqué pour ses violations des droits de l’homme. Alors comment expliquer que cet État se retrouve à prendre en charge des centaines de migrants ?

      Camille Le Coz : En fait, tout commence en novembre 2017 après la publication par CNN d’une vidéo révélant l’existence de marchés aux esclaves en Libye. C’est à ce moment-là que Kigali se porte volontaire pour accueillir des migrants bloqués en Libye. Mais c’est finalement vers l’Europe et le Niger, voisin de la Libye, que s’organisent ces évacuations. Ainsi, depuis 2017, près de 4 000 réfugiés ont été évacués de Libye, dont 2 900 au Niger. La plupart d’entre eux ont été réinstallés dans des pays occidentaux ou sont en attente de réinstallation. Mais du fait de la reprise des combats en Libye cet été, ce mécanisme est vite apparu insuffisant. L’option d’organiser des évacuations vers le Rwanda a donc été réactivée et a donné lieu à des discussions avec Kigali, le HCR, l’UA mais aussi l’UE sur les aspects financiers.

      Quel bénéfice le Rwanda peut-il tirer de cet accord ?

      Pour le Rwanda, faire valoir la solidarité avec les migrants africains en Libye est un bon coup politique, à la fois sur la scène internationale et avec ses partenaires africains. La situation des migrants en Libye est au cœur de l’actualité et les ONG et l’ONU alertent régulièrement sur les conditions effroyables pour les migrants sur place. Donc d’un point de vue politique, c’est très valorisant pour le Rwanda d’accueillir ces personnes.

      Que va-t-il se passer pour ces personnes quand elles vont arriver au Rwanda ?

      En fait, ce mécanisme soulève deux questions. D’une part, qui sont les migrants qui vont être évacués vers le Rwanda ? D’après ce que l’on sait, ce sont plutôt des gens de la Corne de l’Afrique et plutôt des gens très vulnérables, notamment des enfants. D’autre part, quelles sont les solutions qui vont leur être offertes au Rwanda ? La première option prévue par l’accord, c’est la possibilité pour ces personnes de retourner dans leur pays d’origine. La deuxième option, c’est le retour dans un pays dans lequel ces réfugiés ont reçu l’asile dans le passé. Cela pourrait par exemple s’appliquer à des Érythréens réfugiés en Éthiopie avant de partir vers l’Europe. Ces deux options demanderont néanmoins un suivi sérieux des conditions de retour : comment s’assurer que ces retours seront effectivement volontaires, et comment garantir la réintégration de ces réfugiés ? La troisième option, ce serait la possibilité pour certains de rester au Rwanda mais on ne sait pas encore sous quel statut. Enfin, ce que l’on ne sait pas encore, c’est si des États européens s’engageront à relocaliser certains de ces rescapés.

      Cet accord est donc une réplique de celui conclu avec le Niger, qui accueille depuis 2017 plusieurs milliers de réfugiés évacués de Tripoli ?

      L’approche est la même mais d’après ce que l’on sait pour l’instant, les possibilités offertes aux réfugiés évacués sont différentes : dans le cas du mécanisme avec le Niger, les pays européens mais également les États-Unis, le Canada, la Norvège et la Suisse s’étaient engagés à réinstaller une partie de ces réfugiés. Dans le cas du Rwanda, on n’a pas encore eu de telles promesses.

      Cet accord est-il la traduction de l’évolution de la politique migratoire européenne ?

      Aujourd’hui, près de 5 000 migrants et réfugiés sont dans des centres de détention en Libye où les conditions sont horribles. Donc la priorité, c’est de les en sortir. Les évacuations vers le Rwanda peuvent participer à la résolution de ce problème. Mais il reste entier puisque les garde-côtes libyens, financés par l’Europe, continuent d’intercepter des migrants qui partent vers l’Italie et de les envoyer vers ces centres de détention. En d’autres termes, cet accord apporte une réponse partielle et de court terme à un problème qui résulte très largement de politiques européennes.

      On entend parfois parler d’« externalisation des frontières » de l’Europe. En gros, passer des accords avec des pays comme le Rwanda permettrait aussi d’éloigner le problème des migrants des côtes européennes. Est-ce vraiment la stratégie de l’Union européenne ?

      Ces évacuations vers le Rwanda sont plutôt un mécanisme d’urgence pour répondre aux besoins humanitaires pressants de migrants et réfugiés détenus en Libye (lire encadré). Mais il est clair que ces dernières années, la politique européenne a consisté à passer des accords avec des pays voisins afin qu’ils renforcent leurs contrôles frontaliers. C’est le cas par exemple avec la Turquie et la Libye. En échange, l’Union européenne leur fournit une assistance financière et d’autres avantages économiques ou politiques. L’Union européenne a aussi mis une partie de sa politique de développement au service d’objectifs migratoires, avec la création d’un Fond fiduciaire d’urgence pour l’Afrique en 2015, qui vise notamment à développer la capacité des États africains à mettre en œuvre leur propre politique migratoire et à améliorer la gestion de leurs frontières. C’est le cas notamment au Niger où l’Union européenne a soutenu les autorités pour combattre les réseaux de passeurs et contrôler les passages vers la Libye.

      Justement, pour le Rwanda, y a-t-il une contrepartie financière ?

      L’accord est entre le HCR, l’UA et le Rwanda. Mais le soutien financier de l’Union européenne paraît indispensable pour la mise en œuvre de ce plan. Reste à voir comment cela pourrait se matérialiser. Est-ce que ce sera un soutien financier pour ces 500 personnes ? Des offres de relocalisation depuis le Rwanda ? Ou, puisque l’on sait que le Rwanda a signé le Pacte mondial sur les réfugiés, l’Union européenne pourrait-elle appuyer la mise en œuvre des plans d’action de Kigali dans ce domaine ? Ce pourrait être une idée.

      La commissaire de l’UA aux affaires sociales Amira El Fadil s’est dite convaincue que ce genre de partenariat pourrait constituer des solutions « durables ». Qu’en pensez-vous ?

      C’est un signe positif que des pays africains soient plus impliqués sur ce dossier puisque ces questions migratoires demandent une gestion coordonnée de part et d’autre de la Méditerranée. Maintenant, il reste à voir quelles solutions seront offertes à ces 500 personnes puisque pour l’instant, le plan paraît surtout leur proposer de retourner dans le pays qu’elles ont quitté. Par ailleurs, il ne faut pas perdre de vue que la plupart des réfugiés africains ne sont pas en Libye, mais en Afrique. Les plus gros contingents sont au Soudan, en Ouganda et en Éthiopie et donc, les solutions durables sont d’abord et avant tout à mettre en œuvre sur le continent.

      ■ Un geste de solidarité de la part du Rwanda, selon le HCR

      Avec notre correspondant à Genève, Jérémie Lanche

      D’après le porte-parole du HCR Babar Baloch, l’accueil par Kigali d’un premier contingent de réfugiés est une « bouée de sauvetage » pour tous ceux pris au piège en Libye. L’Union européenne, dont les côtes sont de plus en plus inaccessibles pour les candidats à l’exil, pourrait financer une partie de l’opération, même si rien n’est officiel. Mais pour le HCR, l’essentiel est ailleurs. La vie des migrants en Libye est en jeu, dit Babar Baloch :

      « Il ne faut pas oublier qu’il y a quelques semaines, un centre de détention [pour migrants] a été bombardé en Libye. Plus de 50 personnes ont été tuées. Mais même sans parler de ça, les conditions dans ces centres sont déplorables. Il faut donc sortir ceux qui s’y trouvent le plus rapidement possible. Et à part le Niger, le Rwanda est le deuxième pays qui s’est manifesté pour nous aider à sauver ces vies. »

      Les réfugiés et demandeurs d’asile doivent être logés dans des installations qui ont déjà servi pour accueillir des réfugiés burundais. Ceux qui le souhaitent pourront rester au Rwanda et y travailler selon Kigali. Les autres pourront être relocalisés dans des pays tiers voire dans leur pays d’origine s’ils le souhaitent. Le Rwanda se dit prêt à recevoir en tout dans ses centres de transit jusqu’à 30 000 Africains bloqués en Libye.

      "Depuis un demi-siècle, le Rwanda a produit beaucoup de réfugiés. Donc le fait qu’il y ait une telle tragédie, une telle détresse, de la part de nos frères et soeurs africains, cela nous interpelle en tant que Rwandais. Ce dont on parle, c’est un centre de transit d’urgence. Une fois [qu’ils seront] arrivés au Rwanda, le HCR va continuer à trouver une solution pour ces personnes. Certains seront envoyés au pays qui leur ont accordé asile, d’autres seront envoyés aux pays tiers et bien sûr d’autres pourront retourner dans leur pays si la situation sécuritaire le permet. Bien sûr, ceux qui n’auront pas d’endroits où aller pourront rester au Rwanda. Cela devra nécessiter bien sûr l’accord des autorités de notre pays." Olivier Nduhungirehe, secrétaire d’État en charge de la Coopération et de la Communauté est-africaine

      http://www.rfi.fr/afrique/20190912-accord-accueil-migrants-rwanda-libye-politique

    • ‘Maybe they can forget us there’: Refugees in Libya await move to Rwanda

      Hundreds in detention centres expected to be transferred under deal partly funded by EU

      Hundreds of refugees in Libya are expected to be moved to Rwanda in the coming weeks, under a new deal partly funded by the European Union.

      “This is an expansion of the humanitarian evacuation to save lives,” said Babar Baloch, from the United Nations Refugee Agency. “The focus is on those trapped inside Libya. We’ve seen how horrible the conditions are and we want to get them out of harm’s way.”

      Many of the refugees and migrants expected to be evacuated have spent years between detention centres run by Libya’s Department for Combatting Illegal Migration, and smugglers known for brutal torture and abuse, after fleeing war or dictatorships in their home countries.

      They have also been victims of the European Union’s hardening migration policy, which involves supporting the Libyan coast guard to intercept boats full of people who try to cross the Mediterranean Sea to Europe, returning those on board to indefinite detention in a Libya at war.
      Apprehension

      In Libyan capital Tripoli, refugees and migrants who spoke to The Irish Times by phone were apprehensive. They questioned whether they will be allowed to work and move freely in Rwanda, and asked whether resettlement spaces to other countries will be offered, or alternative opportunities to rebuild their lives in the long-term.

      “People want to go. We want to go,” said one detainee, with slight desperation, before asking if Rwanda is a good place to be. “Please if you know about Rwanda tell me.”

      “We heard about the evacuation plan to Rwanda, but we have a lot of questions,” said another detainee currently in Zintan detention centre, where 22 people died in eight months because of a lack of medical care and abysmal living conditions. “Maybe they can forget us there.”

      In a statement, UNHCR said that while some evacuees may benefit from resettlement to other countries or may be allowed to stay in Rwanda in the long term, others would be helped to go back to countries where they had previously been granted asylum, or to their home countries, if safe.

      The original group of evacuees is expected to include 500 volunteers.

      Rwanda’s government signed a memorandum of understanding with the United Nations Refugee Agency and the African Union on September 10th to confirm the deal.

      In 2017, a year-long investigation by Foreign Policy magazine found that migrants and refugees were being sent to Rwanda or Uganda from detention centres in Israel, and then moved illegally into third countries, where they had no rights or any chance to make an asylum claim.

      Officials working on the latest deal say they are trying to make sure this doesn’t happen again.

      “We are afraid, especially in terms of time,” said an Eritrean, who witnessed a fellow detainee burn himself to death in Triq al Sikka detention centre last year, after saying he had lost hope in being evacuated.

      “How long will we stay in Rwanda? Because we stayed in Libya more than two years, and have been registered by UNHCR for almost two years. Will we take similar time in Rwanda? It is difficult for asylum seekers.”

      https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/africa/maybe-they-can-forget-us-there-refugees-in-libya-await-move-to-rwanda-1.

    • Le Rwanda accueille des premiers migrants évacués de Libye

      Le Rwanda a accueilli ce jeudi soir le premier groupe de réfugiés et demandeurs d’asile en provenance de Libye, dans le cadre d’un accord signé récemment entre ce pays, le Haut Commissariat aux réfugiés et l’Union africaine.

      L’avion affrété par le Haut Commissariat aux réfugiés a atterri à Kigali cette nuit. À son bord, 59 hommes et 7 femmes, en grande majorité Erythréens, mais aussi Somaliens et Soudanais. Le plus jeune migrant en provenance des centres de détention libyens est un bébé de 2 mois et le plus âgé un homme de 39 ans.

      Ils ont été accueillis en toute discrétion, très loin des journalistes qui n’ont pas eu accès à l’aéroport international de Kigali. « Ce ne sont pas des gens qui reviennent d’une compétition de football avec une coupe et qui rentrent joyeux. Non, ce sont des gens qui rentrent traumatisés et qui ont besoin d’une certaine dignité, de respect. Ils étaient dans une situation très chaotique », justifie Olivier Kayumba, secrétaire permanent du ministère en charge de la gestion des Urgences.

      Des bus les ont ensuite acheminés vers le site de transit de Gashora, à quelque 60 km au sud-est de Kigali. Une structure qui peut accueillir pour le moment un millier de personnes, mais dont la capacité peut être portée rapidement à 8 000, selon le responsable rwandais.

      Des ONG ont accusé le Rwanda d’avoir monté toute cette opération pour redorer l’image d’un régime qui viole les droits de l’homme. Olivier Kayumba balaie cette accusation. « Nous agissons pour des raisons humanitaires et par panafricanisme », explique-t-il. Selon les termes de l’accord, 500 migrants coincés dans les camps en Libye doivent être accueillis provisoirement au Rwanda, avant de trouver des pays d’accueil.


      http://www.rfi.fr/afrique/20190927-rwanda-accueille-premiers-migrants-evacues-libye

    • Évacués au Rwanda, les réfugiés de Libye continuent de rêver d’Europe

      Le Rwanda accueille depuis quelques semaines des demandeurs d’asile évacués de Libye, dans le cadre d’un accord avec le Haut Commissariat des Nations unies pour les réfugiés et l’Union africaine signé le mois dernier. Un programme d’urgence présenté comme une réponse à la crise des quelque 4 700 réfugiés et migrants bloqués dans ce pays en guerre. Reportage.

      Le centre de #Gashora est en pleine effervescence. Situé dans la région du #Bugesera, au sud de Kigali, il accueillait auparavant des réfugiés venus du Burundi. Aujourd’hui, des équipes s’affairent pour rénover et agrandir les structures afin d’héberger les quelque 500 réfugiés évacués de Libye que le Rwanda a promis d’accueillir dans un premier temps.

      Les 189 demandeurs d’asile déjà arrivés sont logés dans de petites maisons de briques disséminées dans les bois alentour. Un groupe de jeunes en jogging et baskets se passent la balle sur un terrain de volley. D’autres, le regard fuyant, parfois égaré, sont assis sur des bancs à l’ombre.

      « Je n’ai pas encore réalisé mon rêve »

      Rodouane Abdallah accepte de parler aux journalistes, arrivés en groupe dans un bus acheminé par le gouvernement rwandais. Originaire du Darfour, ce jeune homme de 18 ans au regard doux a posé le pied en Libye en 2017. Il a tenté sept fois de traverser la Méditerranée. Il a survécu par miracle.

      Aujourd’hui, il se souvient encore de toutes les dates avec précision : le nombre de jours et d’heures passées en mer, les mois en détention. Deux ans entre les mains de geôliers ou de passeurs. « Là bas, vous êtes nourris seulement une fois par jour, vous buvez l’eau des toilettes, vous ne pouvez pas vous doucher et vous devez travailler gratuitement sinon vous êtes battus », se souvient-il.

      Rodouane est aujourd’hui logé et nourri à Gashora. Il bénéficie également de soins médicaux et psychologiques. Cependant, il voit le Rwanda comme une simple étape : « Je suis heureux d’avoir eu la chance de pouvoir venir ici. C’est mieux qu’en Libye. Mais je ne suis pas arrivé à la fin de mon voyage, car je n’ai pas encore réalisé mon rêve. Je veux aller en Europe et devenir ingénieur en informatique », assure-t-il. Ce rêve, cette idée fixe, tous la martèlent aux journalistes. Pourtant les places en Europe risquent d’être limitées.

      « #Emergency_Transit_Mechanism »

      Dans le cadre de l’Emergency Transit Mechanism (#ETM), le nom donné à ce programme d’#évacuation d’urgence, les réfugiés de Gashora ont aujourd’hui plusieurs possibilités. Ils peuvent soit faire une demande d’asile dans un pays occidental, soit rentrer chez eux si les conditions sécuritaires sont réunies, soit bénéficier d’un processus de réinstallation dans un pays tiers sur le continent africain. Les mineurs non accompagnés pourraient ainsi rejoindre leur famille et les étudiants s’inscrire dans des universités de la région selon le HCR.

      « Ils ont beaucoup souffert pour atteindre l’Europe, c’est donc un objectif qui est encore très cher à leur cœur. Mais maintenant qu’ils sont au Rwanda, nous essayons d’identifier avec eux toute une palette de solutions », explique Élise Villechalane, chargée des relations extérieures du HCR au Rwanda.

      Mais la démarche inquiète déjà certains réfugiés : « Les pays européens dépensent beaucoup d’argent pour nous éloigner de la mer Méditerranée. Et si c’est pour cela qu’on a été amenés ici, ce serait honteux. La seule chose que je pourrais faire serait de retourner en Libye et de tenter de traverser la Méditerranée », explique un jeune Érythréen, qui préfère garder l’anonymat.

      Une solution viable ?

      Le Rwanda n’est pas le premier pays à mettre en place ce type de mécanisme. Le Niger a lui aussi lancé un ETM en 2017. Depuis, environ 2 900 réfugiés y ont été évacués de Libye. Environ 1 700 d’entre eux ont été réinstallés dans des pays occidentaux à ce jour. Aujourd’hui, l’Union africaine et le HCR appellent d’autres pays africains à suivre l’exemple. Mais certaines ONG sont sceptiques quant à la viabilité du système.

      Au Niger, le traitement des dossiers est long, ce qui crée des tensions. Le #Mixed_Migration_Center, un centre de recherche indépendant, rapporte que des réfugiés auraient ainsi attaqué un véhicule du HCR en signe de protestation dans le centre de transit d’Hamdallaye en juin dernier.

      Plus généralement, Johannes Claes, chef de projet Afrique de l’Ouest au MMC, dénonce une externalisation des obligations des pays occidentaux en matière de droit d’asile : « Avec ce type schéma, l’UE délègue une part de sa responsabilité au continent africain. C’est d’autant plus cynique quand on sait que l’Union européenne finance les garde-côtes libyens qui interceptent les migrants avant de les envoyer en centre de détention », explique-t-il.

      Du côté des signataires de l’accord, on présente le projet sous un jour différent : « Ce qui compte aujourd’hui, c’est que ces personnes sont en sécurité le temps que leurs dossiers soient traités. Et je suis fière que le Rwanda se soit porté volontaire », indique Hope Tumukunde, représentante permanente du Rwanda à l’Union africaine.

      Début septembre, au moment de la signature de l’accord, Vincent Cochetel, l’envoyé spécial du HCR pour la situation en Méditerranée, assurait à Reuters que la plus grande partie du financement de ce mécanisme d’évacuation d’urgence viendrait de l’Union européenne. Il est depuis revenu sur ces déclarations. Pour le moment, c’est le HCR qui assure la totalité du financement de l’opération.

      http://www.rfi.fr/afrique/20191103-rwanda-refugies-libye-hcr-ua

    • Norway opens its doors to 600 people evacuated from Libya to Rwanda

      Refugees and asylum seekers who found respite in Rwanda camp after escaping conflict in Libya will be resettled in Norway.
      Hundreds of refugees and asylum seekers evacuated from Libyan detention centres to a transit camp in Rwanda are to be resettled this year in Norway, according to Rwanda’s foreign minister.

      Speaking at a news conference in Kigali on Wednesday, Rwanda’s foreign minister Vincent Biruta said the African nation was currently hosting more than 300 refugees and asylum seekers at the Gashora transit centre south of Kigali, most of whom hail from Somalia, Sudan and Eritrea, according to CGTN Africa.

      Only Norway and Sweden had so far agreed to resettle people from the camp, Biruta added. Norway agreed to resettle 600 people, while Sweden had so far accepted seven, according to Biruta.

      Rwanda signed a deal with the UN and African Union in September aimed at resettling people who had been detained in Libya while trying to reach Europe. More than 4,000 people are believed to still be living in Libyan detention centres, according to the latest figures.

      In a statement to Reuters, Norwegian justice minister Jøran Kallmyr said the plan to resettle 600 people proved that “we don’t support cynical people smugglers, and instead bring in people who need protection in an organised manner”.

      Kallmyr added: “A transit camp like the one in Rwanda will contribute to that effort.”

      Norway’s four-party government coalition agreed last year to accept a total of 3,000 refugees from UN camps in 2020.

      The UN in Libya has come under intense criticism for complying with EU migration policy, which entails funding the Libyan coastguard to intercept boats with refugees and migrants destined for Europe. Many people end up detained in militia-run centres and subjected to grave human rights abuses, including sexual abuse, denial of food and water, and forced recruitment into the on-going Libyan conflict.

      Elisabeth Haslund, Nordic spokesperson for the UN refugee agency, said that of the 4,000-plus people estimated to still be detained in Libyan centres, roughly 2,500 people are refugees and asylum-seekers.

      “As the violence and unrest have been intensifying in Libya and thousands of refugees are still at risk in the country, the evacuations of the most vulnerable refugees are more urgent than ever,” said Haslund.

      “UNHCR very much welcomes Norway’s decision to resettle refugees who have been evacuated to Rwanda and also notes the important and valuable financial contributions from Norway to help support the operation of the transit centre in Gashora.”

      As the 600 people who are expected to be resettled this year in Norway had not yet been chosen, Haslund added, it was impossible to give details on their age, gender or country of origin.

      https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2020/jan/10/norway-opens-its-doors-to-600-people-evacuated-from-libya-to-rwanda

      ping @reka

    • Países europeos acogerán a más de 500 refugiados evacuados de Libia a Ruanda

      Noruega, Suecia y Francia han prometido acoger a más de medio millar de refugiados y solicitantes de asilo que fueron evacuados de Libia y están alojados de forma temporal en Ruanda, confirmaron hoy a Efe fuentes oficiales ruandesas.

      «Actualmente, tenemos a 306 que van a ser reubicados en Noruega, Suecia y Francia», dijo a Efe el ministro de Asuntos Exteriores de Ruanda, Vincent Biruta.

      Después de esa primera tanda, Ruanda enviará al siguiente grupo.

      Según Biruta, Noruega ha aceptado alojar a 500, Suecia a siete y Francia también acogerá a algunos (sin especificar la cifra).

      La reubicación producirá después de que Ruanda firmara el año pasado un acuerdo con la Agencia de Refugiados de la ONU (Acnur) y la Unión Africana (UA) para alojar temporalmente a refugiados y solicitantes de asilo que estaban atrapados en centros de detención en Libia.

      Los evacuados, incluidos bebés, procedían principalmente de la zona occidental de África -de naciones como Somalia, Sudán o Eritrea- y quedaban alojados en Ruanda bajo un Mecanismo de Tránsito de Emergencia.

      Ya en Ruanda, los refugiados podrían ser voluntariamente reubicados en terceros países, viajar a aquellos donde el asilo les haya sido concedido o regresar a sus naciones en caso de que se tratase de una alternativa segura.

      También se podían quedar a vivir en Ruanda si conseguían el permiso de las autoridades de este país, que acoge a más de 145.000 refugiados y solicitantes de asilo (principalmente de Burundi y de la República Democrática del Congo), según cifras de Acnur.

      «Hemos recibido compromisos de Francia, Noruega y Suecia. Siete personas ya se marcharon a Suecia en diciembre», confirmó a Efe Elise Villechalane, portavoz de Acnur en Kigali.

      También explicó que no está claro que la oferta de Noruega se refiera específicamente al grupo de rescatados de libia, aunque expresó esperanzas de que la mayor parte de plazas sean destinadas a ellos.

      «Lo que hacemos es procesar los casos, hacer entrevistas con ellos y, entonces, los casos son propuestos y enviados a Noruega. Pero, al final, la decisión la toma el Gobierno noruego», detalló.

      La prioridad será, según Villechalane, reubicar a 168 menores no acompañados que están bajo el Mecanismo de Tránsito de Emergencia ruandés, siempre que se haya determinado previamente que no hay alternativas mejores, como encontrar a sus padres.

      «Aunque algunos países han pedido específicamente a los menores no acompañados, tenemos que averiguar que sea en lo mejor para ellos», precisó la portavoz.

      El Mecanismo de Tránsito de Emergencia ruandés se estableció para dar alojamiento temporal a los evacuados de Libia, a la espera de encontrar soluciones duraderas para ellos, tales como la repatriación o la reubicación.

      Libia es un Estado fallido, víctima del caos y la guerra civil, desde que hace ocho años la OTAN contribuyera militarmente a la victoria de los heterogéneos grupos rebeldes sobre la dictadura de Muamar el Gadafi.

      https://www.lavanguardia.com/vida/20200109/472795695059/paises-europeos-acogeran-a-mas-de-500-refugiados-evacuados-de-libia-a-
      #Norvège #Suède #France

    • Le Rwanda reçoit des réfugiés évacués de Libye, « solution africaine aux problèmes africains »

      Depuis septembre 2019, 500 demandeurs d’asile ont atterri dans le petit Etat d’Afrique centrale en attendant que leur dossier soit traité dans un pays occidental.

      Autour d’un baby-foot, une dizaine de jeunes Erythréens luttent contre l’ennui, en savourant une liberté retrouvée. Il y a quatre mois encore, ils étaient en détention en Libye, sur la route de l’Europe, et les voilà redescendus 4 000 kilomètres plus au sud, dans un centre de transit du district de Gashora, dans l’est du Rwanda.

      Selon un accord signé en septembre 2019 avec le Haut-Commissariat des Nations unies pour les réfugiés (HCR) et l’Union africaine, ce petit pays d’Afrique centrale s’est engagé à accueillir un premier contingent de 500 réfugiés évacués de Libye, jusqu’à ce que leur demande d’asile soit traitée. Dans le cadre de ce programme appelé « Mécanisme de transit d’urgence » (ETM), ils pourront bénéficier de l’asile dans un pays occidental, être rapatriés dans leur pays d’origine, réinstallés dans un pays de la région ou rester au Rwanda. En 2017, le gouvernement rwandais s’était dit prêt à recevoir jusqu’à 30 000 migrants africains sur son sol, mais uniquement par groupe de 500, afin d’éviter tout débordement.
      Protéger des persécutions

      Ce système est présenté par le HCR comme une réponse à la crise des réfugiés en Libye : plus de 40 000 sont enregistrés dans le pays et quelque 4 000, parmi eux, sont actuellement bloqués dans des centres de détention, où l’accès des travailleurs humanitaires est restreint. « Notre but est de les protéger des persécutions dont ils sont victimes là-bas et de leur éviter une traversée dangereuse de la Méditerranée tout en leur proposant une palette de solutions », explique Elise Villechalane, porte-parole de l’agence onusienne à Kigali.

      Pour le Rwanda, qui accueille déjà 150 000 réfugiés venus principalement de la République démocratique du Congo (RDC) et du Burundi, c’est une manière de soutenir des « solutions africaines aux problèmes africains », l’un des mantras du président Paul Kagame. « C’est une question d’humanité. Nous portons une assistance aux autres Africains qui souffrent en Libye », ajoutait récemment Olivier Kayumba, secrétaire permanent au ministère de la gestion des urgences (Minema), lors d’une visite du centre de Gashora.

      Auparavant destiné à l’accueil de réfugiés burundais, le centre, situé dans la région du Bugesera, au sud de Kigali, a donc fait peau neuve. Les petites maisons de briques disséminées dans les bois hébergent 300 demandeurs d’asile, majoritairement originaires d’Erythrée, de Somalie, d’Ethiopie et du Soudan. Ils sont libres de se rendre dans les villages alentour, peuvent suivre des cours de langue et bénéficient d’un suivi psychologique et médical.

      Quatre mois après la première évacuation, sept réfugiés ont déjà bénéficié d’un processus de réinstallation vers la Suède, une trentaine d’autres se préparent à les suivre et deux ont fait une demande de retour vers la Somalie, leur pays d’origine. Les autres attendent d’être fixés sur leur sort. Parfois avec inquiétude.

      « Ils nous disent que certains vont rester au Rwanda, lâche Robiel, un jeune Erythréen de 24 ans, mais le Rwanda, ce n’est pas ma destination. J’ai trop souffert, perdu trop d’argent et trop de temps pour arriver en Europe. » Assis sur un banc, il écoute ses amis jouer du krar, un instrument à cordes traditionnel de la Corne de l’Afrique. Le regard fuyant, il égrène les innombrables étapes d’une errance de plus de quatre ans qui a coûté 14 000 dollars (12 700 euros) à sa famille. Son départ d’Erythrée en bateau vers Port-Soudan, puis l’Egypte, où il est emprisonné sept mois avant d’être renvoyé en Ethiopie. Un nouveau départ vers le Soudan, puis la Libye et sa tentative de traversée de la Méditerranée. Après vingt-trois heures en mer, son bateau est intercepté par des gardes-côtes libyens et il est envoyé en centre de détention.

      « Là-bas, c’est l’enfer sur Terre. Il y a beaucoup de maladies. J’ai vu des gens se faire torturer. Les policiers prennent des drogues la nuit et viennent pour battre les détenus », se souvient-il. Au terme de trois ans de détention, il est finalement sélectionné par le HCR pour être évacué au Rwanda, un pays encore plus éloigné des frontières de l’espace Schengen que son point de départ.
      Gérer les frustrations

      Le Rwanda n’est pas le premier pays à mettre en place ce type de mécanisme. Depuis le mois de novembre 2017, le Niger en a déjà accueilli environ 3 000 dans le cadre d’un accord similaire avec le HCR. Parmi eux, 2 300 ont bénéficié d’une réinstallation dans un pays occidental. « Cependant, le traitement des dossiers peut prendre beaucoup de temps, ce qui pose la question de la capacité qu’ont ces pays de transit à accueillir les réfugiés sur le long terme et à gérer les frustrations qui vont avec », tempère Johannes Claes, expert sur les migrations en Afrique de l’Ouest.

      Le Mixed Migration Centre, un centre de recherche indépendant, rapporte que, lors de la Journée mondiale des réfugiés, le 20 juin 2019, des demandeurs d’asile évacués de Libye en 2017 ont attaqué des véhicules du HCR en signe de protestation contre leur situation, dans le centre de transit d’Hamdallaye, à 40 kilomètres de Niamey. « Avec ce système, les pays occidentaux délèguent leurs responsabilités en termes d’asile à d’autres Etats et c’est une tendance inquiétante », conclut Johannes Claes.

      A ce jour, quatre pays ont promis d’accueillir des réfugiés de Gashora : la France (100), la Suède (150), le Canada (200) et la Norvège (450). Le programme a obtenu le soutien de l’Union européenne, qui a promis une participation à hauteur de 10 millions d’euros. La Norvège finance également une partie des frais du centre de transit. Joran Kallmyr, membre du Parti du progrès norvégien, une mouvance populiste et anti-immigration qui vient de quitter le gouvernement, est d’ailleurs venu au centre de Gashora en janvier.

      Celui qui était alors ministre norvégien de la justice et de l’immigration a salué l’initiative rwandaise. « C’est très bien que le Rwanda accueille les réfugiés les plus vulnérables afin que leur demande d’asile soit examinée ici, sur le continent africain, plutôt que les migrants viennent en Europe déposer leur demande et que la plupart d’entre eux soient finalement renvoyés en Afrique », a-t-il déclaré, semblant ainsi plaider pour une généralisation du système.

      Alors que plus de 1 000 migrants sont morts en 2019 en tentant de traverser la Méditerranée, les signataires de l’accord insistent, quant à eux, sur les vies sauvées. « Ce qui compte, aujourd’hui, c’est que ces personnes sont en sécurité le temps que leur dossier soit traité. Et je suis fière que le Rwanda se soit porté volontaire », avait déclaré Hope Tumukunde, représentante permanente du Rwanda à l’Union africaine, à la suite des premières évacuations à la fin du mois de septembre.

      https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2020/01/29/le-rwanda-recoit-des-refugies-evacues-de-libye-solution-africaine-aux-proble

    • Rwanda : la nouvelle vie des réfugiés sortis de l’enfer libyen

      Depuis quelques mois, le Rwanda accueille des réfugiés exfiltrés des camps en Libye. Souvent très jeunes, ils réapprennent à vivre, sans oublier leurs traumatismes, en attendant un éventuel départ vers l’Europe. Reportage à Gashora, au sud du pays, qui a lui-même longtemps connu le drame de l’exil forcé.

      « Je veux quitter l’Afrique ! Je n’y ai connu que la mort et la violence. En Europe, je pourrais peut-être étudier ? Apprendre la sociologie ? » suggère Mati, 16 ans, la tête couronnée de petites dreadlocks. Voilà déjà plus de trois ans qu’il a quitté son pays natal, le Soudan du Sud dévasté par la guerre, laissant derrière lui la maison familiale calcinée à Bentiu, ville martyre décimée par les combats entre fractions rivales. Sa fuite l’a conduit en Libye, et ce fut un autre enfer. Après avoir échoué à traverser la Méditerranée, suite à une panne de moteur, il finit par se retrouver dans le sinistre camp de détention de Tadjoura. N’échappant que par miracle au bombardement du 2 juillet 2019 qui y a fait plusieurs dizaines de morts. Un carnage dont la responsabilité a été attribuée à « un avion étranger », selon les conclusions de l’enquête de l’ONU rendue publique lundi.

      En ce mois de janvier pourtant, Mati sourit enfin : la Libye n’est plus qu’un mauvais souvenir. Il en a été évacué en novembre, non pas vers l’Europe mais au Rwanda. Se retrouver au cœur de l’Afrique des Grands Lacs ? Ce n’est pas exactement ce qu’il avait envisagé. « Mais le Rwanda m’a sauvé la vie. En Libye, on était traités comme des animaux », reconnaît-il.

      C’est en 2017, peu après la diffusion d’un reportage de CNN accusant les Libyens de « vendre » les réfugiés sur des marchés aux esclaves, que le président rwandais Paul Kagame s’était engagé à accueillir dans son pays, par vagues successives, jusqu’à 30 000 Africains détenus en Libye. Fin 2019, un accord avec l’Union européenne a permis d’exfiltrer vers le Rwanda quelque 300 réfugiés, tous ressortissants de cinq pays africains : la Somalie, l’Erythrée, l’Ethiopie, le Soudan et le Soudan du Sud.
      Rêves d’Europe

      Le deal est simple : avec une aide 10 millions d’euros de la part de l’UE, le Rwanda s’engage à héberger des groupes de réfugiés choisis en Libye parmi les plus vulnérables, et qui auront désormais le choix entre rester en Afrique ou postuler pour une demande d’asile dans des pays européens volontaires pour les accueillir. Comme Mati, tous veulent retenter leur chance vers l’Europe. Sept d’entre eux sont déjà partis en Suède. La France s’est engagée à en accueillir 100, le Canada 200 et la Norvège 450. En attendant d’autres propositions. L’accord a suscité quelques critiques : n’est-ce pas encore une façon pour l’Europe de se défausser ? En délocalisant en Afrique la gestion de ces migrations, comme ce fut déjà le cas lors d’un deal équivalent conclu avec le Niger ? Et si l’Europe ne tient pas ses promesses, que deviendront ces réfugiés qui n’ont pas renoncé à leurs rêves ?

      Ils sont pour la plupart très jeunes, plus de la moitié sont même encore mineurs. Et dans l’immédiat, leur soulagement est palpable à Gashora, petite localité du sud du Rwanda où ils ont été installés. Une mélodie éthiopienne s’échappe de l’un des bâtiments en briques du camp qui a longtemps servi de centre de transit pour des réfugiés venus du Burundi voisin. Plus loin, un groupe d’ados, agglutinés autour d’un baby-foot, hèlent avec des accents taquins deux jeunes filles en leggings qui minaudent en agitant leurs longs cheveux bouclés. « Ils se comportent enfin comme tous les jeunes gens de leur âge », murmure, en les observant, Elysée Kalyango, le directeur du centre. « Quand ils sont arrivés ici, ils avaient l’air si traumatisés. Maigres, avec des yeux exorbités. Petit à petit, ils ont repris des forces, ils ont tous grossi ! » souligne-t-il.
      Hanté par « les images de la vie d’avant »

      Les souffrances ne sont pas effacées pour autant. Seul Sud-Soudanais évacué au Rwanda, Mati ne parvient pas à oublier ses compatriotes restés en Libye : « Je pense sans cesse à eux qui continuent à subir les coups et les menaces. Il faut les évacuer eux aussi ! » plaide-t-il. Dalmar, lui, reste hanté par « les images de la vie d’avant ». Ce jeune Somalien de 21 ans, originaire de la ville de Baled Hawa à la frontière avec le Kenya, a vu son père et son frère tués sous ses yeux par les chebabs, ces milices jihadistes qui sèment toujours la terreur dans son pays. Chaque soir, il redoute presque de s’endormir et d’ouvrir ainsi la porte à ses cauchemars. Mais désormais il peut aussi rêver à haute voix de devenir footballeur professionnel.

      Lui, comme les autres réfugiés, connaît peu l’histoire du Rwanda, encore marqué par le génocide des Tutsis en 1994. Ils ne savent pas non plus qu’avant même cette tragédie, les massacres récurrents de Tutsis avaient poussé plusieurs générations de Rwandais sur les routes de l’exil. L’actuel président lui-même avait dû fuir son pays à l’âge de 4 ans, et a grandi dans un camp en Ouganda. La crise des réfugiés rwandais des années 60 fut d’ailleurs la première à laquelle le Haut Commissariat pour les réfugiés (HCR), créé en 1950, fut confronté en Afrique subsaharienne. Cette mémoire collective explique peut-être aussi la main tendue à ceux qui subissent désormais le même sort, alors que ce petit pays, l’un des plus densément peuplés du continent (463 habitants au km2) accueille déjà près de 150 000 réfugiés burundais et congolais.

      A Gashora, les jeunes venus de Libye découvrent peu à peu leur nouvel environnement, libres de se balader dans le village de Gashora. Mais ils ignorent certainement ce que signifie le nom de la localité la plus proche, Nyabagendwa, en kinyarwanda, la langue nationale du Rwanda : « Soyez les bienvenus. »

      https://www.liberation.fr/planete/2020/01/30/rwanda-la-nouvelle-vie-des-refugies-sortis-de-l-enfer-libyen_1776007

    • Europe’s Harsh Border Policies Are Pushing Refugees All the Way to Rwanda

      EU funds for Libyan militias forced thousands of migrants into dangerous Libyan detention centers. Now, after being evacuated, some of them are stuck as far away as Rwanda—with no idea if they will ever be resettled.

      GASHORA, Rwanda—Until the day before he left Libya in October 2019, Alex was enslaved by a militia aligned with the United Nations-backed, Tripoli-based Government of National Accord. For months, the young Eritrean had been moving weapons and ammunition, cleaning, and even building a shelter for horses owned by Mohammed al-Khoja, the deputy head of the Government of National Accord’s Department for Combating Illegal Migration.

      He worried about airstrikes and drones: The buzzing sound made him run for cover. He also stressed about potentially brutal punishments from men commanded by Khoja, who was also known as a vicious militia leader, making Alex frightened to disobey them. Alex, whose name has been changed for his safety, knew his proximity to fighters made him both a human shield and a target in Tripoli’s ongoing war.

      Alex’s story is an illustration of the impacts of hardening European Union border policy, which forces refugees back to a dangerous country where they live at the mercy of Libyan militias. It demonstrates the traumas an asylum-seeker can go through before getting the chance to make a legal claim for protection, and how even the small number of people eventually chosen for evacuation from Libya suffer from long-term consequences and ongoing instability.

      Like huge numbers of his countryfolk, Alex fled indefinite national service in Eritrea’s dictatorship and traveled to Libya in the hope of reaching Europe and finding “freedom.” A U.N. commission of inquiry has previously accused the leadership of Eritrea of carrying out crimes against humanity, while describing the national service system as “slavery-like.”

      After paying $16,000 in smugglers’ fees borrowed from family and friends, Alex tried to cross the Mediterranean Sea to Europe, but the rubber boat he was on was intercepted by the EU-backed Libyan coast guard.

      For more than a year after that, Alex was held in Triq al-Sikka detention center, the de facto headquarters of the Department for Combating Illegal Migration, which ostensibly oversees many of Libya’s migrant detention centers. (The department did not respond to a request for comment.)

      After war broke out in April 2019, militiamen brought Alex across the road to work in an area they were using as a base, located in the outer perimeter of a center set up by the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to house refugees before they were legally evacuated (Alex’s story was collaborated by the accounts of other refugees. Aid officials who visit Triq al-Sikka told Foreign Policy they have noticed certain detainees are often missing. UNHCR said it had heard allegations of detainees being used as forced labor in the Gathering and Departure Facility, but it could not verify them.)

      In the months afterward, Alex returned to detention only for his meetings with UNHCR staff. He was interviewed and fingerprinted, and finally given good news: He would be evacuated to Rwanda.

      A boda boda driver drives down the main road in Gashora, Rwanda, where hundreds of refugees are now being sheltered after they were evacuated from Libya, on Nov. 28, 2019. Sally Hayden for Foreign Policy

      Over the past three years, the EU has allocated nearly 100 million euros, around $100 million, to spend on the Libyan coast guard, with the aim of intercepting and stopping boats of migrants and refugees who are trying to reach Europe. Tens of thousands of people who could have their asylum claims assessed if they managed to reach European soil have instead been returned to Libya to spend months or years in for-profit detention centers where sexual violence, labor exploitation, torture, and trafficking have been repeatedly documented. They wait, in the unlikely hope of being selected for a legal route to safety.

      When questioned about the ramifications of their policy, EU spokespeople regularly say they are funding the U.N. to improve conditions for refugees and migrants. UNHCR, in turn, has said it cannot provide safety for refugees in Libya, meaning their only real hope is evacuation.

      EU spokespeople regularly say they are funding the U.N. to improve conditions for refugees and migrants. UNHCR, in turn, has said it cannot provide safety for refugees in Libya, meaning their only real hope is evacuation.

      Those numbers are low, though: 2,427 people last year got the option to go with UNHCR either directly to European countries or to a transit country where their cases can be considered for resettlement to Europe or North America. In contrast, nearly 1,000 refugees and migrants were returned to Libya in the first two weeks of 2020 alone.

      Both Niger and Romania have previously been used as transit countries, though the number of people going to Niger have slowed because of problems processing cases. This past September, Rwanda announced it will also begin to take evacuees, following negotiations and a deal signed with the African Union and UNHCR. “Africa itself is also a source of solutions,” said Rwandan President Paul Kagame, speaking about the agreement at the U.N. General Assembly last year.

      The Rwandan government did not respond to multiple requests for interviews and a list of emailed questions, while African Union spokespeople did not respond to an interview request.

      UNHCR is still appealing for funding, saying it hopes to evacuate 1,500 people to Rwanda by the end of 2020, with the program expected to cost nearly $27 million by then. So far, according to numbers provided by UNHCR, the EU has pledged 10 million euros, Norway just over 5 million euros, and Malta 50,000.

      From the Rwandan capital of Kigali, it takes two buses and a motorbike drive to reach Gashora, 40 miles southeast of the capital city, where hundreds of evacuees from Libya are now staying. There is no fence around the refugee camp, and it seems like it would be easy just to walk in, avoiding a gate where guards stand watch. “It’s an invisible wall,” one Eritrean said, laughing.

      I wasn’t allowed inside. Though a relatively secure country with much-lauded economic development, Rwanda is also a dictatorship and police state with a tightly controlled media.

      Though a relatively secure country with much-lauded economic development, Rwanda is also a dictatorship and police state with a tightly controlled media.

      After several ignored emails over two months, as well as five days of waiting at the Ministry of Emergency Management when I visited in November 2019, a communications official told me journalists can’t visit alone. I would be invited back on a future group trip instead, he said, as I already had media accreditation.

      “They gave you accreditation, because we believe you will write good stories about us,” the Rwandan official told me in a candid moment. “We deny some people accreditation, I think you know that.” The invitation to join the group trip never came.

      Instead, in a small, bare room in a bar outside the camp that same month, a group of refugees gathered to tell me their stories. For more than a year, they had been sending me evidence of human rights abuses from a network of Libyan detention centers, using a series of phones they kept hidden throughout.

      Now they say they are grateful to be in Rwanda, but they also resent the time they spent locked up. They’re worried about their own futures and about everyone they have left behind.

      Evacuees came from Libyan detention centers including Zintan, Ain Zara, Abu Salim, Triq al-Sikka, and Sabaa, where they experienced an array of horrors. They witnessed deaths from medical negligence and suffered through deliberate food deprivation, torture, and forced recruitment.

      Alex—who was present in Triq al-Sikka when a hopeless Somali detainee set himself on fire in 2018—showed me how his nail was still cracked from being forced to lift heavy weapons. Some of the migrants had contracted tuberculosis, while others were battling trauma. “Most of our minds are completely spoilt. We’re afraid of motorbikes, of helicopters,” one Eritrean told me.

      The trauma could last a long time. Speaking about the “precarious living conditions” and “grave human rights violations” refugees in Libya’s detention system have gone through, Sonal Marwah, a humanitarian affairs manager with Doctors Without Borders, said survivors suffer from emotional and psychological problems, such as anxiety and depression.

      Now, the refugees in Rwanda are struggling with their new reality. A young woman said she has gone on a diet and is only eating one meal a day so she can “regain” her “figure,” after spending so long in detention without being able to move around. Some minors are battling addictions or have begun patronizing the influx of Rwandan prostitutes they say arrived in Gashora shortly after them. Two refugees who stayed out late drinking were robbed. “It’s like a baby who walks when he’s not old enough. It’s like a new planet for us,” said an Eritrean man.

      They feel they can’t trust anyone anymore, convinced everyone around them has tried to profit from them: whether Libyan authorities, smugglers, the U.N., or the Rwandan government.

      All 15 refugees I interviewed in Rwanda say they believed they would be resettled onward, to countries in Europe or North America. Some said that it was only when they signed documents on the night before they left Libya that UNHCR staff informed them they might have to stay in Rwanda for longer. There were consequences for backing out at that stage, too. UNHCR confirmed a “very small number” of refugees in Libya refused to go to Rwanda, meaning the agency will not consider them for resettlement or evacuation again.

      While I was in Rwanda, there was tension in Gashora camp after refugees kicked over chairs at a meeting with authorities, protesting changes to food distribution they believed were designed to keep them there long-term. Afterward, they said, the camp’s guards told them they were no longer allowed gather in big groups. “They think they can teach us how to survive—we should be teaching them,” Alex said about the dispute.

      In November, evacuees got another shock when UNHCR’s special envoy for the Mediterranean, Vincent Cochetel, tweeted that refugees in Rwanda have “wrong” expectations. “We have no obligation to resettle all refugees in/from Libya,” he wrote. “They can locally integrate in Rwanda if they want, [while] learning and mentally accepting that there is not just a ‘Europe option.’”

      Those who spoke to me said they felt this was just another disregard for what they have been through, with some saying they would rather have paid smugglers to try to cross the Mediterranean Sea again rather than being moved somewhere they see no future, and are willing to go back to Libya and try again. Others accused UNHCR of using their evacuations as a public relations coup to show the agency is doing something, while promoting the Rwandan government’s charity, instead of prioritizing evacuees’ welfare.

      Some evacuees accused UNHCR of using their evacuations as a public relations coup to show the agency is doing something, while promoting the Rwandan government’s charity, instead of prioritizing their welfare.

      “From the outside, the evacuations to Rwanda seem as a great solution to those detained in Libya, but if you dig deeper you’ll find many unanswered questions, like who gets to be evacuated out of the total 40,000+ registered asylum-seekers and refugees in Libya,” Amera Markous, a Libyan migration researcher wrote in a text message.

      “What is the level of understanding of these terms before they evacuate them, and how ‘voluntary’ are they, if they are explained inside detention centers, where refugees can’t even have a private place for such interviews that determine their future?” she asked. “If I went through tragic journeys and finally left a place like Libya, I’d be expecting UNHCR or any responsible entity to provide a durable solution which fits my aspirations, not just getting me out of Libya to repeat it all again.”

      Matteo de Bellis, a migration researcher at Amnesty International, said while any effort to bring refugees to safety should be welcomed, “only a reduced number of people have been able to benefit from this opportunity, as most countries—including EU countries that have cooperated with Libya to contain refugees and migrants there—are offering very few places for resettlement.”

      The evacuation program “risks exacerbating a situation where the vast majority of refugees continue to be hosted in developing countries, while richer ones spend their resources on keeping people out at any cost,” he said. This means refugees’ welfare can stay tied to ever-shifting donor funding, and they can struggle to find stability.

      In January, Cochetel seemingly backtracked, telling an audience in Berlin the “vast majority” of evacuees will be resettled, but it will take about a year.

      In response to questions from Foreign Policy, UNHCR spokeswoman Elise Villechalane said everyone evacuated to Rwanda was informed that resettlement is not guaranteed. “While for the first Rwanda flights the counselling was in some instances provided closer to the time of departure, it is usually provided about two weeks before,” she said. “Refugees are asked to sign a document … stating they understand the implications of the process.”

      UNHCR said it has received 1,150 resettlement pledges from other countries for refugees in Rwanda, with Norway alone pledging to take in 600 refugees (not all of them from Libya). Some Libya evacuees have already been accepted to go to Sweden. The number of available places is still “far outstripped by the needs,” Villechalane said.

      This all raises the question: At what point does the EU become responsible for refugees it has forced from its borders through externalization policies? How much suffering can they go through before European officials recognize some obligation? More than 2,500 miles south of Europe’s borders, Rwanda’s new arrivals are wondering just that, while waiting to find out their futures. At some moments, Alex said, he feels suicidal, while at others he feels a glimmer of hope. He’s haunted by the memories of others who died in Libya. “We are really tired,” he said in a message in January. “We are nothing to them, nothing at all, they could leave us here. There is nothing we could do.”

      At what point does the EU become responsible for refugees it has forced from its borders through externalization policies?

      “Africa is Africa,” he has repeated throughout months of contact from both Libya and Rwanda, saying he’s worried about corruption, repression, exploitation, a lack of freedom, and a lack of opportunity in his birth continent. In Europe, Alex believes, refugees “can start a new life, it’s like we [will be] born again. All the suffering and all the torture, this only makes us stronger.”

      His experience over the past few years has convinced him he won’t feel secure until he has the same rights as a European and the same freedom to travel if something goes wrong, wherever he may end up.

      “Still no one really feels or understands what we’ve been through. We resisted all the suffering and torture … only to get our goal” of reaching safety, he said. “We trusted UNHCR, we trusted the European countries, and we came here. They owe us.”

      https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/02/20/europes-harsh-border-policies-are-pushing-refugees-all-the-way-to-rwa

  • Tunisia prepares to host refugees fleeing Libya

    Officials working for international organizations and institutions have visited Tunisia’s border areas with Libya to evaluate the resources available ahead of the potential arrival of refugees fleeing armed clashes in Libya.

    Representatives for the World Health Organization (WHO) and the UN Refugee Agency UNHCR and the regional directorate of the Tunisian health ministry on Thursday visited the border delegations of Dehiba and Ramada, in the governorate of Tataouine near the border with Libya. Officials visited the locations to examine the resources available ahead of the potential mass arrival of refugees fleeing armed clashes in Libya.

    Visit to prevent humanitarian crisis

    The visit was aimed at preventing a possible humanitarian crisis like the one reported in 2011, which required international aid, given a situation in Libya considered critical by humanitarian agencies. The inspection was used to identify logistical needs and intervention strategies to deal in the best way possible with the potential arrival of refugees. Concern over the situation in Libya and its consequences on Tunisia was expressed by the UN High commissioner for Refugees in Tunisia, Mazen Abu Shanab, who stressed that assistance efforts need to be intensified due to an increase in the number of Libyan migrants in Tunisia, an estimated 300 a month.

    Amnesty documents ’war crimes’ in Tripoli

    Amnesty International has gathered witness testimony and analyzed satellite imagery that documented attacks that could constitute “war crimes” in areas of Tripoli where an offensive conducted by the troops of General Khalifa Haftar has been ongoing since the beginning of April, according to a statement released by the human rights organization. These attacks could be examined by the international judiciary, Amnesty stressed, highlighting the case of three residential areas in the Abu Salim district of Tripoli that were “indiscriminately attacked with rockets during an episode of intense fighting between April 15-17” (Hay al-Intissar, Hay Salaheddin and the so-called “Kikla buildings”).

    The organization also said in the statement that it documented attacks that endangered the lives of hundreds of refugees and migrants, including an air raid on May 7 that hit an area some 100 meters from the migrant detention center of Tajoura, wounding two detainees.


    https://www.infomigrants.net/en/post/16979/tunisia-prepares-to-host-refugees-fleeing-libya
    #OMS #HCR #asile #migrations #Libye #réfugiés #migrerrance #externalisation #Ramada #camps #camps_de_réfugiés

    Les personnes qui fuient les affrontements en Libye passent la frontière avec la Tunisie et sont installées dans #camp_de_réfugiés à #Dehiba, en plein désert, à quelques km de la frontière avec la Libye...

    Le commentaire de #Vincent_Cochetel :

    #Tunisia, we should not panic, but prepare. 120 arrivals (non-Libyans) this week. Reception capacity must improve. Working on it with partners and with very limited resources

    https://twitter.com/cochetel/status/1134456403115094017?s=19

    ping @_kg_ @isskein @reka

  • Detainees Evacuated out of Libya but Resettlement Capacity Remains Inadequate

    According to the United Nations Refugee Agency (#UNHCR) 262 migrants detained in Libya were evacuated to Niger on November 12- the largest evacuation from Libya carried out to date. In addition to a successful airlift of 135 people in October this year, this brings the total number of people evacuated to more than 2000 since December 2017. However Amnesty International describes the resettlement process from Niger as slow and the number of pledges inadequate.

    The evacuations in October and November were the first since June when the Emergency Transit Mechanism (ETM) centre in Niger reached its full capacity of 1,536 people, which according to Amnesty was a result of a large number of people “still waiting for their permanent resettlement to a third country.”

    57,483 refugees and asylum seekers are registered by UNHCR in Libya; as of October 2018 14,349 had agreed to Voluntary Humanitarian Return. Currently 3,886 resettlement pledges have been made by 12 states, but only 1,140 have been resettled.

    14,595 people have been intercepted by the Libyan coast guard and taken back to Libya, however it has been well documented that their return is being met by detention, abuse, violence and torture. UNHCR recently declared Libya unsafe for returns amid increased violence in the capital, while Amnesty International has said that “thousands of men, women and children are trapped in Libya facing horrific abuses with no way out”.

    In this context, refugees and migrants are currently refusing to disembark in Misrata after being rescued by a cargo ship on November 12, reportedly saying “they would rather die than be returned to land”. Reuters cited one Sudanese teenager on board who stated “We agree to go to any place but not Libya.”

    UNHCR estimates that 5,413 refugees and migrants remain detained in #Directorate_for_Combatting_Illegal_Migration (#DCIM) centres and the UN Refugee Agency have repetedly called for additional resettlement opportunities for vulnerable persons of concern in Libya.

    https://www.ecre.org/detainees-evacuated-out-of-libya-but-resettlement-capacity-remains-inadequate
    #réinstallation #Niger #Libye #évacuation #asile #migrations #réfugiés #HCR #détention #centres_de_détention #Emergency_Transit_Mechanism (#ETM)

    • ET DES INFORMATIONS PLUS ANCIENNES DANS LE FIL CI-DESSOUS

      Libya: evacuations to Niger resumed – returns from Niger begun

      After being temporarily suspended in March as the result of concerns from local authorities on the pace of resettlement out of Niger, UNHCR evacuations of vulnerable refugees and asylum seekers from Libya through the Emergency Transit Mechanism has been resumed and 132 vulnerable migrants flown to the country. At the same time the deportation of 132 Sudanese nationals from Niger to Libya has raised international concern.

      Niger is the main host for refugees and asylum seekers from Libya evacuated by UNHCR. Since the UN Refugee Agency began evacuations in cooperation with EU and Libyan authorities in November 2017, Niger has received 1,152 of the 1,474 people evacuated in total. While UNHCR has submitted 475 persons for resettlement a modest 108 in total have been resettled in Europe. According to UNHCR the government in Niger has now offered to host an additional 1,500 refugees from Libya through the Emergency Transit Mechanism and upon its revival and the first transfer of 132 refugees to Niger, UNHCR’s Special Envoy for the Central Mediterranean Situation, Vincent Cochetel stated: “We now urgently need to find resettlement solutions for these refugees in other countries.”

      UNHCR has confirmed the forced return by authorities in Niger of at least 132 of a group of 160 Sudanese nationals arrested in the migrant hub of Agadez, the majority after fleeing harsh conditions in Libya. Agadez is known as a major transit hub for refugees and asylum seekers seeking passage to Libya and Europe but the trend is reversed and 1,700 Sudanese nationals have fled from Libya to Niger since December 2017. In a mail to IRIN News, Human Rights Watch’s associate director for Europe and Central Asia, Judith Sunderland states: “It is inhuman and unlawful to send migrants and refugees back to Libya, where they face shocking levels of torture, sexual violence, and forced labour,” with reference to the principle of non-refoulement.

      According to a statement released by Amnesty International on May 16: “At least 7,000 migrants and refugees are languishing in Libyan detention centres where abuse is rife and food and water in short supply. This is a sharp increase from March when there were 4,400 detained migrants and refugees, according to Libyan officials.”

      https://www.ecre.org/libya-evacuations-to-niger-resumed-returns-from-niger-begun

    • Libya: return operations running but slow resettlement is jeopardizing the evacuation scheme

      According to the International Organization for Migration (IOM) 15.000 migrants have been returned from Libya to their country of origin and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has assisted in the evacuation of more than 1,300 refugees from Libya thereby fulfilling the targets announced at the AU-EU-UN Taskforce meeting in December 2017. However, a modest 25 of the more than 1000 migrants evacuated to Niger have been resettled to Europe and the slow pace is jeopardizing further evacuations.

      More than 1000 of the 1300 migrants evacuated from Libya are hosted by Niger and Karmen Sakhr, who oversees the North Africa unit at the UNHCR states to the EU Observer that the organisation: “were advised that until more people leave Niger, we will no longer be able to evacuate additional cases from Libya.”

      During a meeting on Monday 5 March with the Civil Liberties Committee and Foreign Affairs Committee MEPs, members of the Delegation for relations with Maghreb countries, Commission and External Action Service representatives on the mistreatment of migrants and refugees in Libya, and arrangements for their resettlement or return, UNHCR confirmed that pledges have been made by France, Switzerland, Italy, Norway, Sweden and Malta as well as unspecified non-EU countries but that security approvals and interviewing process of the cases is lengthy resulting in the modest number of resettlements, while also warning that the EU member states need to put more work into resettlement of refugees, and that resettlement pledges still fall short of the needs. According to UNHCR 430 pledges has been made by European countries.

      An estimated 5000 people are in government detention and an unknown number held by private militias under well documented extreme conditions.

      https://www.ecre.org/libya-return-operations-running-but-slow-resettlement-is-jeopardizing-the-evac

    • Libya: migrants and refugees out by plane and in by boat

      The joint European Union (EU), African Union (AU) and United Nations (UN) Task Force visited Tripoli last week welcoming progress made evacuating and returning migrants and refugees out of Libya. EU has announced three new programmes, for protecting migrants and refugees in Libya and along the Central Mediterranean Route, and their return and reintegration. Bundestag Research Services and NGOs raise concerns over EU and Member State support to Libyan Coast Guard.

      Representatives of the Task Force, created in November 2017, met with Libyan authorities last week and visited a detention centres for migrants and a shelter for internally displaced people in Tripoli. Whilst they commended progress on Voluntary Humanitarian Returns, they outlined a number of areas for improvement. These include: comprehensive registration of migrants at disembarkation points and detention centres; improving detention centre conditions- with a view to end the current system of arbitrary detention; decriminalizing irregular migration in Libya.

      The three new programmes announced on Monday, will be part of the European Union Emergency Trust Fund for Africa. €115 million will go towards evacuating 3,800 refugees from Libya, providing protection and voluntary humanitarian return to 15,000 migrants in Libya and will support the resettlement of 14,000 people in need of international protection from Niger, Chad, Cameroon and Burkina Faso. €20 million will be dedicated to improving access to social and protection services for vulnerable migrants in transit countries in the Sahel region and the Lake Chad basin. €15 million will go to supporting sustainable reintegration for Ethiopian citizens.

      A recent report by the Bundestag Research Services on SAR operations in the Mediterranean notes the support for the Libyan Coast Guard by EU and Member States in bringing refugees and migrants back to Libya may be violating the principle of non-refoulement as outlined in the Geneva Convention: “This cooperation must be the subject of proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights, because the people who are being forcibly returned with the assistance of the EU are being inhumanely treated, tortured or killed.” stated Andrej Hunko, European policy spokesman for the German Left Party (die Linke). A joint statement released by SAR NGO’s operating in the Mediterranean calls on the EU institutions and leaders to stop the financing and support of the Libyan Coast Guard and the readmissions to a third country which violates fundamental human rights and international law.

      According to UNHCR, there are currently 46,730 registered refugees and asylum seekers in Libya. 843 asylum seekers and refugees have been released from detention so far in 2018. According to IOM 9,379 people have been returned to their countries of origin since November 2017 and 1,211 have been evacuated to Niger since December 2017.

      https://www.ecre.org/libya-migrants-and-refugees-out-by-plane-and-in-by-boat

      Complément de Emmanuel Blanchard (via la mailing-list Migreurop):

      Selon le HCR, il y aurait actuellement environ 6000 personnes détenues dans des camps en Libye et qui seraient en attente de retour ou de protection (la distinction n’est pas toujours très claire dans la prose du HCR sur les personnes à « évacuer » vers le HCR...). Ces données statistiques sont très fragiles et a priori très sous-estimées car fondées sur les seuls camps auxquels le HCR a accès.

    • First group of refugees evacuated from new departure facility in Libya

      UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, in coordination with Libyan authorities, evacuated 133 refugees from Libya to Niger today after hosting them at a Gathering and Departure Facility (GDF) in Tripoli which opened on Tuesday.

      Most evacuees, including 81 women and children, were previously detained in Libya. After securing their release from five detention centres across Libya, including in Tripoli and areas as far as 180 kilometres from the capital, they were sheltered at the GDF until the arrangements for their evacuation were concluded.

      The GDF is the first centre of its kind in Libya and is intended to bring vulnerable refugees to a safe environment while solutions including refugee resettlement, family reunification, evacuation to emergency facilities in other countries, return to a country of previous asylum, and voluntary repatriation are sought for them.

      “The opening of this centre, in very difficult circumstances, has the potential to save lives. It offers immediate protection and safety for vulnerable refugees in need of urgent evacuation, and is an alternative to detention for hundreds of refugees currently trapped in Libya,” said UN High Commissioner for Refugees Filippo Grandi.

      The centre is managed by the Libyan Ministry of Interior, UNHCR and UNHCR’s partner LibAid. The initiative is one of a range of measures needed to offer viable alternatives to the dangerous boat journeys undertaken by refugees and migrants along the Central Mediterranean route.

      With an estimated 4,900 refugees and migrants held in detention centres across Libya, including 3,600 in need of international protection, the centre is a critical alternative to the detention of those most vulnerable.

      The centre, which has been supported by the EU and other donors, has a capacity to shelter up to 1,000 vulnerable refugees identified for solutions out of Libya.

      At the facility, UNHCR and partners are providing humanitarian assistance such as accommodation, food, medical care and psychosocial support. Child friendly spaces and dedicated protection staff are also available to ensure that refugees and asylum-seekers are adequately cared for.

      https://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2018/12/5c09033a4/first-group-refugees-evacuated-new-departure-facility-libya.html

    • Migration : à Niamey, des migrants rapatriés de Libye protestent contre leurs conditions de séjour

      Les manifestants protestent contre leur détention de vie qu’ils jugent « déplorables » et pour amplifier leurs mouvements, ils ont brandi des pancartes sur lesquelles ils ont écrit leurs doléances. Les migrants manifestant s’indignent également de leur séjour qui ne cesse de se prolonger, sans véritable alternatives ou visibilité sur leur situation. « Ils nous ont ramené de la Libye pour nous laisser à nous-mêmes ici », « on ne veut pas rester ici, laisser nous partir là où on veut », sont entre autres les slogans que les migrants ont scandés au cours de leur sit-in devant les locaux de l’agence onusienne. Plusieurs des protestataires sont venus à la manifestation avec leurs bagages et d’autres avec leurs différents papiers, qui attestent de leur situation de réfugiés ou demandeurs d’asiles.

      La situation, quoique déplorable, n’a pas manqué de susciter divers commentaires. Il faut dire que depuis le début de l’opération de rapatriement des migrants en détresse de Libye, ils sont des centaines à vivre dans la capitale mais aussi à Agadez où des centres d’accueil sont mis à leurs dispositions par les agences onusiennes (UNHCR, OIM), avec la collaboration des autorités nigériennes. Un certain temps, leur présence de plus en plus massive dans divers quartiers de la capitale où des villas sont mises à leur disposition, a commencé à inquiéter les habitants sur d’éventuels risques sécuritaires.

      Le gouvernement a signé plusieurs accords et adopté des lois pour lutter contre l’immigration clandestine. Il a aussi signé des engagements avec certains pays européens notamment la France et l’Italie, pour l’accueil temporaire des réfugiés en provenance de la Libye et en transit en attendant leur réinstallation dans leur pays ou en Europe pour ceux qui arrivent à obtenir le sésame pour l’entrée. Un geste de solidarité décrié par certaines ONG et que les autorités regrettent presque à demi-mot, du fait du non-respect des contreparties financières promises par les bailleurs et partenaires européens. Le pays fait face lui-même à un afflux de réfugiés nigérians et maliens sur son territoire, ainsi que des déplacés internes dans plusieurs régions, ce qui complique davantage la tâche dans cette affaire de difficile gestion de la problématique migratoire.

      Le Niger accueille plusieurs centres d’accueil pour les réfugiés et demandeurs d’asiles rapatriés de Libye. Le 10 décembre dernier, l’OFPRA français a par exemple annoncé avoir achevé une nouvelle mission au Niger avec l’UNHCR, et qui a concerné 200 personnes parmi lesquelles une centaine évacuée de Libye. En novembre dernier, le HCR a également annoncé avoir repris les évacuations de migrants depuis la Libye, avec un contingent de 132 réfugiés et demandeurs d’asiles vers le Niger.

      Depuis novembre 2017, le HCR a assuré avoir effectué vingt-trois (23) opérations d’évacuation au départ de la Libye et ce, « malgré d’importants problèmes de sécurité et les restrictions aux déplacements qui ont été imposées ». En tout, ce sont 2.476 réfugiés et demandeurs d’asile vulnérables qui ont pu être libérés et acheminés de la Libye vers le Niger (2.069), l’Italie (312) et la Roumanie (95).


      https://www.actuniger.com/societe/14640-migration-a-niamey-des-migrants-rapatries-de-libye-protestent-contr

      Je découvre ici que les évacuations se sont faites aussi vers l’#Italie et... la #Roumanie !

    • Destination Europe: Evacuation. The EU has started resettling refugees from Libya, but only 174 have made it to Europe in seven months

      As the EU sets new policies and makes deals with African nations to deter hundreds of thousands of migrants from seeking new lives on the continent, what does it mean for those following dreams northwards and the countries they transit through? From returnees in Sierra Leone and refugees resettled in France to smugglers in Niger and migrants in detention centres in Libya, IRIN explores their choices and challenges in this multi-part special report, Destination Europe.

      Four years of uncontrolled migration starting in 2014 saw more than 600,000 people cross from Libya to Italy, contributing to a populist backlash that is threatening the foundations of the EU. Stopping clandestine migration has become one of Europe’s main foreign policy goals, and last July the number of refugees and migrants crossing the central Mediterranean dropped dramatically. The EU celebrated the reduced numbers as “good progress”.

      But, as critics pointed out, that was only half the story: the decline, resulting from a series of moves by the EU and Italy, meant that tens of thousands of people were stuck in Libya with no way out. They faced horrific abuse, and NGOs and human rights organisations accused the EU of complicity in the violations taking place.

      Abdu is one who got stuck. A tall, lanky teenager, he spent nearly two years in smugglers’ warehouses and official Libyan detention centres. But he’s also one of the lucky ones. In February, he boarded a flight to Niger run (with EU support) by the UN’s refugee agency, UNHCR, to help some of those stranded in Libya reach Europe. Nearly 1,600 people have been evacuated on similiar flights, but, seven months on, only 174 have been resettled to Europe.

      The evacuation programme is part of a €500-million ($620-million) effort to resettle 50,000 refugees over the next two years to the EU, which has a population of more than 500 million people. The target is an increase from previous European resettlement goals, but still only represents a tiny fraction of the need – those chosen can be Syrians in Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon as well as refugees in Libya, Egypt, Niger, Chad, Sudan, and Ethiopia – countries that combined host more than 6.5 million refugees.

      The EU is now teetering on the edge of a fresh political crisis, with boats carrying people rescued from the sea being denied ports of disembarkation, no consensus on how to share responsibility for asylum seekers and refugees within the continent, and increasing talk of further outsourcing the management of migration to African countries.

      Against this backdrop, the evacuation and resettlement programme from Libya is perhaps the best face of European policy in the Mediterranean. But, unless EU countries offer more spots for refugees, it is a pathway to safety for no more than a small handful who get the luck of the draw. As the first evacuees adjust to their new lives in Europe, the overwhelming majority are left behind.

      Four months after arriving in Niger, Abdu is still waiting to find out if and when he will be resettled to Europe. He’s still in the same state of limbo he was in at the end of March when IRIN met him in Niamey, the capital of Niger. At the time, he’d been out of the detention centre in Libya for less than a month and his arms were skeletally thin.

      “I thought to go to Europe [and] failed. Now, I came to Niger…. What am I doing here? What will happen from here? I don’t know,” he said, sitting in the shade of a canopy in the courtyard of a UNHCR facility. “I don’t know what I will be planning for the future because everything collapsed; everything finished.”
      Abdu’s story

      Born in Eritrea – one of the most repressive countries in the world – Abdu’s mother sent him to live in neighbouring Sudan when he was only seven. She wanted him to grow up away from the political persecution and shadow of indefinite military service that stifled normal life in his homeland.

      But Sudan, where he was raised by his uncle, wasn’t much better. As an Eritrean refugee, he faced discrimination and lived in a precarious legal limbo. Abdu saw no future there. “So I decided to go,” he said.

      Like so many other young Africans fleeing conflict, political repression, and economic hardship in recent years, he wanted to try to make it to Europe. But first he had to pass through Libya.

      After crossing the border from Sudan in July 2016, Abdu, then 16 years old, was taken captive and held for 18 months. The smugglers asked for a ransom of $5,500, tortured him while his relatives were forced to listen on the phone, and rented him out for work like a piece of equipment.

      Abdu tried to escape, but only found himself under the control of another smuggler who did the same thing. He was kept in overflowing warehouses, sequestered from the sunlight with around 250 other people. The food was not enough and often spoiled; disease was rampant; people died from malaria and hunger; one woman died after giving birth; the guards drank, carried guns, and smoked hashish, and, at the smallest provocation, spun into a sadistic fury. Abdu’s skin started crawling with scabies, his cheeks sank in, and his long limbs withered to skin and bones.

      One day, the smuggler told him that, if he didn’t find a way to pay, it looked like he would soon die. As a courtesy – or to try to squeeze some money out of him instead of having to deal with a corpse – the smuggler reduced the ransom to $1,500.

      Finally, Abdu’s relatives were able to purchase his freedom and passage to Europe. It was December 2017. As he finally stood on the seashore before dawn in the freezing cold, Abdu remembered thinking: “We are going to arrive in Europe [and] get protection [and] get rights.”

      But he never made it. After nearly 24 hours at sea, the rubber dinghy he was on with around 150 other people was intercepted by the Libyan Coast Guard, which, since October 2016, has been trained and equipped by the EU and Italy.

      Abdu was brought back to the country he had just escaped and put in another detention centre.

      This one was official – run by the Libyan Directorate for Combating Irregular Migration. But it wasn’t much different from the smuggler-controlled warehouses he’d been in before. Again, it was overcrowded and dirty. People were falling sick. There was no torture or extortion, but the guards could be just as brutal. If someone tried to talk to them about the poor conditions “[they are] going to beat you until you are streaming blood,” Abdu said.

      Still, he wasn’t about to try his luck on his own again in Libya. The detention centre wasn’t suitable for human inhabitants, Abdu recalled thinking, but it was safer than anywhere he’d been in over a year. That’s where UNHCR found him and secured his release.

      The lucky few

      The small village of Thal-Marmoutier in France seems like it belongs to a different world than the teeming detention centres of Libya.

      The road to the village runs between gently rolling hills covered in grapevines and winds through small towns of half-timbered houses. About 40 minutes north of Strasbourg, the largest city in the region of Alsace, bordering Germany, it reaches a valley of hamlets that disrupt the green countryside with their red, high-peaked roofs. It’s an unassuming setting, but it’s the type of place Abdu might end up if and when he is finally resettled.

      In mid-March, when IRIN visited, the town of 800 people was hosting the first group of refugees evacuated from Libya.

      It was unseasonably cold, and the 55 people housed in a repurposed section of a Franciscan convent were bundled in winter jackets, scarves, and hats. Thirty of them had arrived from Chad, where they had been long-time residents of refugee camps after fleeing Boko Haram violence or conflict in the Sudanese region of Darfur. The remaining 25 – from Eritrea, Ethiopia, and Sudan – were the first evacuees from Libya. Before reaching France, they, like Abdu, had been flown to Niamey.

      The extra stop is necessary because most countries require refugees to be interviewed in person before offering them a resettlement spot. The process is facilitated by embassies and consulates, but, because of security concerns, only one European country (Italy) has a diplomatic presence in Libya.

      To resettle refugees stuck in detention centres, UNHCR needed to find a third country willing to host people temporarily, one where European resettlement agencies could carry out their procedures. Niger was the first – and so far only – country to volunteer.

      “For us, it is an obligation to participate,” Mohamed Bazoum, Niger’s influential interior minister, said when interviewed by IRIN in Niamey. Niger, the gateway between West Africa and Libya on the migration trail to Europe, is the top recipient of funds from the EU Trust Fund for Africa, an initiative launched in 2015 to “address the root causes of irregular migration”.

      “It costs us nothing to help,” Bazoum added, referring to the evacuation programme. “But we gain a sense of humanity in doing so.”

      ‘Time is just running from my life’

      The first evacuees landed in Niamey on 12 November. A little over a month later, on 19 December, they were on their way to France.

      By March, they had been in Thal-Marmoutier for three months and were preparing to move from the reception centre in the convent to individual apartments in different cities.

      Among them, several families with children had been living in Libya for a long time. But most of the evacuees were young women who had been imprisoned by smugglers and militias, held in official detention centres, or often both.

      “In Libya, it was difficult for me,” said Farida, a 24-year-old aspiring runner from Ethiopia. She fled her home in 2016 because of the conflict between the government and the Oromo people, an ethnic group.

      After a brief stay in Cairo, she and her husband decided to go to Libya because they heard a rumour that UNHCR was providing more support there to refugees. Shortly after crossing the border, Farida and her husband were captured by a militia and placed in a detention centre.

      “People from the other government (Libya has two rival governments) came and killed the militiamen, and some of the people in the prison also died, but we got out and were taken to another prison,” she said. “When they put me in prison, I was pregnant, and they beat me and killed the child in my belly.”

      Teyba, a 20-year-old woman also from Ethiopia, shared a similar story: “A militia put us in prison and tortured us a lot,” she said. “We stayed in prison for a little bit more than a month, and then the fighting started…. Some people died, some people escaped, and some people, I don’t know what happened to them.”

      Three months at the reception centre in Thal-Marmoutier had done little to ease the trauma of those experiences. “I haven’t seen anything that made me laugh or that made me happy,” Farida said. “Up to now, life has not been good, even after coming to France.”

      The French government placed the refugees in the reception centre to expedite their asylum procedures, and so they could begin to learn French.

      Everyone in the group had already received 10-year residency permits – something refugees who are placed directly in individual apartments or houses usually wait at least six months to receive. But many of them said they felt like their lives had been put on pause in Thal-Marmoutier. They were isolated in the small village with little access to transportation and said they had not been well prepared to begin new lives on their own in just a few weeks time.

      “I haven’t benefited from anything yet. Time is just running from my life,” said Intissar, a 35-year-old woman from Sudan.

      A stop-start process

      Despite their frustrations with the integration process in France, and the still present psychological wounds from Libya, the people in Thal-Marmoutier were fortunate to reach Europe.

      By early March, more than 1,000 people had been airlifted from Libya to Niger. But since the first group in December, no one else had left for Europe. Frustrated with the pace of resettlement, the Nigerien government told UNHCR that the programme had to be put on hold.

      “We want the flow to be balanced,” Bazoum, the interior minister, explained. “If people arrive, then we want others to leave. We don’t want people to be here on a permanent basis.”

      Since then, an additional 148 people have been resettled to France, Switzerland, Sweden and the Netherlands, and other departures are in the works. “The situation is improving,” said Louise Donovan, a UNHCR communications officer in Niger. “We need to speed up our processes as much as possible, and so do the resettlement countries.”

      A further 312 people were evacuated directly to Italy. Still, the total number resettled by the programme remains small. “What is problematic right now is the fact that European governments are not offering enough places for resettlement, despite continued requests from UNHCR,” said Matteo de Bellis, a researcher with Amnesty International.
      Less than 1 percent

      Globally, less than one percent of refugees are resettled each year, and resettlement is on a downward spiral at the moment, dropping by more than 50 percent between 2016 and 2017. The number of refugees needing resettlement is expected to reach 1.4 million next year, 17 percent higher than in 2018, while global resettlement places dropped to just 75,000 in 2017, UNHCR said on Monday.

      The Trump administration’s slashing of the US refugee admissions programme – historically the world’s leader – means this trend will likely continue.

      Due to the limited capacity, resettlement is usually reserved for people who are considered to be the most vulnerable.

      In Libya alone, there are around 19,000 refugees from Eritrea, Ethiopia, Somalia, and Sudan registered with UNHCR – a number increasing each month – as well as 430,000 migrants and potential asylum seekers from throughout sub-Saharan Africa. Many have been subjected to torture, sexual violence, and other abuses. And, because they are in Libya irregularly, resettlement is often the only legal solution to indefinite detention.

      In the unlikely scenario that all the sub-Saharan refugees in Libya were to be resettled, they would account for more than one third of the EU’s quota for the next two years. And that’s not taking into account people in Libya who may have legitimate grounds to claim asylum but are not on the official radar. Other solutions are clearly needed, but given the lack of will in the international community, it is unclear what those might be.

      “The Niger mechanism is a patch, a useful one under the circumstance, but still a patch,” de Bellis, the Amnesty researcher, said. “There are refugees… who cannot get out of the detention centres because there are no resettlement places available to them.”

      It is also uncertain what will happen to any refugees evacuated to Niger that aren’t offered a resettlement spot by European countries.

      UNHCR says it is considering all options, including the possibility of integration in Niger or return to their countries of origin – if they are deemed to be safe and people agree to go. But resettlement is the main focus. In April, the pace of people departing for Europe picked up, and evacuations from Libya resumed at the beginning of May – ironically, the same week the Nigerien government broke new and dangerous ground by deporting 132 Sudanese asylum seekers who had crossed the border on their own back to Libya.

      For the evacuees in Niger awaiting resettlement, there are still many unanswered questions.

      As Abdu was biding his time back in March, something other than the uncertainty about his own future weighed on him: the people still stuck in the detention centres in Libya.

      He had started his travels with his best friend. They had been together when they were first kidnapped and held for ransom. But Abdu’s friend was shot in the leg by a guard who accused him of stealing a cigarette. When Abdu tried to escape, he left his friend behind and hasn’t spoken to him or heard anything about him since.

      “UNHCR is saying they are going to find a solution for me; they are going to help me,” Abdu said. “It’s okay. But what about the others?”

      https://www.irinnews.org/special-report/2018/06/26/destination-europe-evacuation

    • Hot Spots #1 : Niger, les évacués de l’enfer libyen

      Fuir l’enfer libyen, sortir des griffes des trafiquants qui séquestrent pendant des mois leurs victimes dans des conditions inhumaines. C’est de l’autre côté du désert, au Niger, que certains migrants trouvent un premier refuge grâce à un programme d’#évacuation d’urgence géré par les Nations Unies depuis novembre 2017.

      https://guitinews.fr/video/2019/03/12/hot-spots-1-niger-les-evacues-de-lenfer-libyen

      Lien vers la #vidéo :

      « Les gens qu’on évacue de la Libye, ce sont des individus qui ont subi une profonde souffrance. Ce sont tous des victimes de torture, des victimes de violences aussi sexuelles, il y a des femmes qui accouchent d’enfants fruits de cette violences sexuelles. » Alexandra Morelli, Représentante du HCR au Niger.

      https://vimeo.com/323299304

      ping @isskein @karine4

  • Tunisia: #OIM usa il teatro per far riflettere su migrazioni

    Con la messa in scena al cinema «Le Rio» di Tunisi della pièce teatrale «#Le_radeau» (La zattera) di #Cyrine_Gannoun e #Majdi_Boumatar, è iniziato ieri sera un tour che porterà questo spettacolo sulla migrazione a Medenine il 1 novembre, Sfax il 2 novembre e Seliana il 4. Si tratta della prima attività di una campagna di sensibilizzazione pubblica che durerà diversi mesi sui rischi e i miti associati alla migrazione irregolare, coordinata dall’Organizzazione internazionale per le migrazioni (Oim) e dal teatro di El Hamra, in collaborazione con i ministeri tunisini dell’Istruzione superiore e della ricerca scientifica e degli Affari culturali, attraverso i delegati regionali alla cultura di Medenine, Seliana e Sfax. Durante la rappresentazione di «Le radeau», il pubblico è invitato a proiettarsi nell’avventura di otto personaggi che condividono un momento cruciale nella loro vita: la traversata del Mar Mediterraneo. La zattera è dunque un luogo in cui si incontrano tragedie, speranze, illusioni e disillusioni di migranti in cerca di una vita migliore. Il teatro della migrazione, si legge in un comunicato dell’Oim, diventa una metafora grazie alla quale è possibile riflettere sulla questione migratoria mettendo al centro l’umanità, un’espressione culturale che porta la voce dei migranti oltre l’aspetto politico, economico e mediatico. Il tutto con il fine di promuovere migrazioni sicure, umane, nell’interesse di tutti e con l’ambizione di creare momenti conviviali per rendere più fruttuosi i dibattiti sul tema migratorio. Aperti a tutti, giovani e meno giovani, e gratuiti, questi incontri, secondo l’Oim, permetteranno di discutere insieme le opportunità e le sfide sulla migrazione.


    http://www.ansamed.info/ansamed/it/notizie/rubriche/cultura/2018/10/29/tunisiaoim-usa-il-teatro-per-far-riflettere-su-migrazioni_3313bf27-dee4-4c
    #théâtre #IOM #migrations #dissuasion #Tunisie

    Petit commentaire:

    L’#OIM ne serait-il pas en train de convaincre, via une représentation théâtrale et ludique, les jeunes à ne pas partir ? Au lieu de faire un plaidoyer pour l’ouverture des frontières ? Je pose juste la question. J’aimerais bien voir la pièce pour juger de moi-même. Car, comment dire, je n’ai quand même pas trop confiance en l’OIM...

    #propagande

    cc @_kg_

  • EU leaders consider centers outside bloc to process refugees

    Draft conclusions for the European Council summit next week propose the creation of ‘disembarkation platforms.’

    European Council President Donald Tusk has proposed that EU leaders create “regional disembarkation platforms” outside the European Union, where officials could quickly differentiate between refugees in need of protection and economic migrants who would potentially face return to their countries of origin.

    The proposal is an effort to break the acute political crisis over migration and asylum that has bedeviled EU leaders since 2015 — and even threatened in recent days to topple the German government — even as the numbers of arrivals have plummeted since the peak of the crisis.

    The disembarkation platform concept — which officials said would have to be implemented in cooperation with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the International Organization for Migration (IOM) — could create a formal mechanism by which the EU can bridge the divide between hard-line leaders calling for tough border controls and those insisting that EU nations obey international law and welcome refugees in need of protection.

    But the idea could also open EU leaders to criticism that they are outsourcing their political problem by creating centers for people seeking entry in countries on the periphery of the bloc. Among the potential partner nations are Tunisia and Albania, but officials say it is far too soon to speculate.

    The idea to create such facilities was suggested in 2016 by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, the strongest critic of the EU’s policies on migration — especially on the relocation of refugees across Europe.

    More recently, French President Emmanuel Macron has endorsed the idea, and on Sunday Italian Foreign Minister Enzo Moavero said Italy wants to officially put the idea on the table at the European Council summit.

    According to the draft guidelines, the new sites would “establish a more predictable framework for dealing with those who nevertheless set out to sea and are rescued in Search And Rescue Operations.”

    The conclusions state: “Such platforms should provide for rapid processing to distinguish between economic migrants and those in need of international protection, and reduce the incentive to embark on perilous journeys.”
    https://www.politico.eu/article/regional-disembarkation-platforms-eu-leaders-consider-camps-outside-bloc-to

    Nouveau #mots, nouvelle absurdité #disembarkation_platform...!!!
    #tri #migrations #migrants_économiques #réfugiés #catégorisation #hotspots #externalisation #novlangue
    #regional_disembarkation_platforms #Tunisie #Albanie #plateformes_régionales_de_désembarquement

    cc @reka @isskein @i_s_

    • European Council meeting (28 J une 2018) – Draft conclusions

      In order to establish a more predictable framework for dealing with those who nevertheless set out to sea and are rescued in Search And Rescue Operations, the European Council supports the development of the concept of regional disembarkation platforms in close cooperation with UNHCR and IOM. Such platforms should provide for rapid processing to distinguish between economic migrants and those in need of international protection , and reduce the incentive to embark on perilous journeys.

      https://g8fip1kplyr33r3krz5b97d1-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/draftEucoConclusionsJune.pdf
      #HCR #OIM #IOM

    • Une idée qui vient de la Hongrie...

      From protest to proposal : Eastern Europe tries new migration tactic

      “Asylum procedures should be completed outside the EU in closed and protected hotspots before the first entry on the territory of the EU,” states Orbán’s plan. “Third countries should be supported in establishing a system of reception and management of migratory flows … which should foresee careful on-site screening of refugees and economic migrants,” reads Renzi’s.

      https://www.politico.eu/article/viktor-orban-hungary-slovakia-from-protest-to-propose-eastern-europe-tries-

    • La UE estudia instalar centros de clasificación de inmigrantes en el norte de África

      Un borrador de documento para la cumbre afirma que la idea podría facilitar «un procesamiento rápido que distinga entre migrantes económicos y refugiados»

      La Unión Europea estudia la idea de construir centros para el procesamiento de inmigrantes en el norte de África en un intento por disuadir a la gente de emprender viajes a través del Mediterráneo que puedan poner en riesgo su vida, según indica un documento al que ha tenido acceso The Guardian.

      El Consejo Europeo de líderes de la UE «apoya el desarrollo del concepto de plataformas de desembarque regional», según señala un borrador de conclusiones de la cumbre europea que se llevará a cabo la próxima semana.

      La UE quiere estudiar la viabilidad de instalar estos centros en el norte de África, donde comienza la mayoría de los viajes de los inmigrantes que quieren llegar a suelo europeo. «Estas plataformas podrían facilitar un procesamiento rápido que distinga entre migrantes económicos y aquellos que necesitan protección internacional, y así reducir los incentivos a embarcarse en viajes peligrosos», sostiene el documento.

      La inmigración es un tema prioritario en la agenda de la próxima cumbre de dos días que se iniciará el 28 de junio. Los líderes de la UE intentarán llegar a un consenso sobre cómo manejar la crisis de los miles de refugiados e inmigrantes que llegan a Europa cada mes.

      Los líderes de Alemania y Francia, Angela Merkel y Emmanuel Macron, se han reunido este martes cerca de Berlín para fijar una posición común respecto a la inmigración y la eurozona, en medio de los temores sobre el desmoronamiento del proyecto europeo.

      Antes de la reunión, el ministro de Hacienda francés, Bruno Le Maire, afirmó que Europa está «en proceso de desintegración». «Vemos Estados que se están cerrando, intentando encontrar soluciones nacionales a problemas que requieren soluciones europeas», señaló. Así, llamó a construir «un nuevo proyecto europeo sobre inmigración», así como sobre asuntos económicos y financieros «que consoliden a Europa en un mundo en el que Estados Unidos está a un lado, China al otro y nosotros quedamos atrapados en el medio».

      El ministro de Interior alemán, Horst Seehofer, de línea dura, está presionando a la canciller Angela Merkel para que diseñe un plan europeo para finales de mes. Alemania sigue siendo el país europeo que más solicitudes de asilo recibe. Si no hay avance a nivel europeo, Seehofer quiere que la policía de las fronteras alemanas comience a negar la entrada a los inmigrantes.

      No queda claro cómo se llevaría a la práctica la propuesta europea de «plataformas de desembarque regional», o dónde se instalarían.

      En 2016, la UE llegó a un acuerdo con Turquía que redujo drásticamente el flujo migratorio, pero al bloque le ha resultado más difícil trabajar con los gobiernos del norte de África, especialmente con Libia, punto de partida de la mayoría de las embarcaciones que intentan llegar a Europa por el Mediterráneo.

      La Comisión Europea ha rechazado la posibilidad de llegar a un acuerdo con Libia parecido al de Turquía, debido a la inestabilidad del país. Sin embargo, el anterior Gobierno de Italia pactó con las milicias y tribus libias y colaboró para reconstituir la guardia costera libia. Estas acciones han contribuido a reducir drásticamente el número de personas que intenta cruzar el Mediterráneo, pero los críticos han denunciado un aumento en las violaciones de los derechos humanos.

      Según el documento filtrado, la UE prefiere construir los centros en colaboración con ACNUR, la agencia de la ONU para los refugiados, y con la Organización Internacional para la Migración, otro organismo relacionado con la ONU que con anterioridad ha criticado la escasez de rutas legales que tienen los inmigrantes y refugiados africanos para llegar a Europa.

      https://www.eldiario.es/theguardian/UE-instalar-procesamiento-inmigrantes-Africa_0_783922573.html

    • Commentaire d’Emmanuel Blanchard, via la mailing-list Migreurop :

      Au contraire de ce que suggère le titre choisi par ce journaliste (article ci-dessous), la proposition de créer ces plateformes de débarquement n’est pas vraiment « étonnante » tant elle ressemble aux « #processings_centers » et autres « #centres_d'identification » dont les projets ressurgissent régulièrement depuis le début des années 2000. Il y a cependant des évolutions (ces centres étaient pensés pour cantonner les exilés avant qu’ils prennent la mer et pas pour débarquer les boat-people secourus en mer) et le danger se rapproche : maintenant que ces camps existent sous le nom de hotpsots dans les iles grecques, il apparaît possible de les étendre dans des pays extérieurs ayant besoin du soutien financier ou politique de l’UE.

      #camps #cpa_camps

    • Europe Pushes to Outsource Asylum, Again

      With Dublin reform stalled, European leaders began to cast around for new ideas to solve the ongoing political crisis on migration and settled on a recurring proposition: the creation of asylum processing centres beyond the (strengthened) borders of the European Union.

      What exactly is up for discussion remains unclear. The plans championed by various EU leaders are diverse, yet the details remain fuzzy. What they have in common is a near-universal focus on shifting responsibility for dealing with refugees and migrants upstream. The idea of external processing looks good on paper, particularly in demonstrating to skeptical voters that governments have control over migration flows. But leaders also hope that by reducing inflows to the European Union, they will face less pressure to compromise on sharing responsibility for asylum within the bloc.

      The devil is in the detail. Proposals to externalize the processing of asylum claims are not new, but have largely fallen flat. Previous leaders balked at the idea of such elaborate constructions, especially when confronted with their significant practical complications. But public pressure to further slow arrivals of refugee and migrant boats has mounted in many countries, and leaders feel compelled to find an agreement. The result is a debate on migration increasingly divorced from reality.

      But before sitting down to the negotiating table, EU leaders may want to reflect on the exact model they wish to pursue, and the tradeoffs involved. Critically, does the concept of “regional disembarkation platforms” set out in the draft European Council conclusions offer a potential solution?

      Key Design Questions

      From Austria’s so-called Future European Protection System, to the “centres of international protection in transit countries” suggested by Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte, to an outlier idea from the Danish Prime Minister to create centres to host failed asylum seekers in “undesirable” parts of Europe —a variety of models for externalization have been floated in recent weeks.

      Several proposals also envisage the simultaneous creation of joint processing centres within the European Union, coupled with the use of reception centres that restrict residents’ freedom of movement. While it is still unclear how such a plan would unfold, this commentary focuses on the external dimension alone.

      Where Would People Be Stopped and Processed?

      The proposals differ regarding where in the journey they would stop migrants and potential asylum seekers. French President Emmanuel Macron has vaguely referred to centres in key transit countries, such as Niger, Libya, and Chad, as well as closer to regions of origin. Others have focused more squarely on the North African coast.

      Centres operating far away from the European Union would likely function as a form of resettlement, stopping people en route (or even prior to the journey), and offering selected individuals an additional channel of EU entry in hopes that this would discourage the use of smugglers. Indeed, nascent EU efforts to resettle refugees evacuated from Libya to Niger (under the Evacuation Transit Mechanism, or ETM), demonstrate how this might work. At the other extreme, the model championed by Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz would see migrants and refugees returned to “safe zones” in Africa, where they would stay, even after arriving at the external EU border.

      The latter concept is problematic under current EU and international law. By returning arrivals to third countries without giving them the opportunity to submit an asylum claim, governments would be likely to run afoul of the EU Asylum Procedures Directive, as well as the European Convention on Human Rights, which prohibits signatories from the “collective expulsion of aliens.” European Court of Human Rights case law also precludes the pushback of migrants rescued by European boats while crossing the Mediterranean. Conversely, however, if migrants and potential asylum seekers are stopped before entering EU waters, and without the involvement of European-flagged vessels, then no EU Member State has formal legal responsibility.

      A framework for regional cooperation on the disembarkation of migrant boats—being developed by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) —may offer a middle ground. While details are scarce, it seems likely that the proposal would focus first on the development of a system for determining who would rescue migrants crossing the Mediterranean, and where they would be landed. Absent consensus within the European Union on responsibility sharing for asylum claims, UNHCR would attempt to create a new framework for responsibility sharing with both Northern and Southern Mediterranean states on search and rescue. However, to prove palatable to partners, such a scheme would require strong EU support, not least through the creation of regional disembarkation centres across North Africa where migrants and refugees “pulled back” from their journey would be sent. This approach would sidestep the application of EU law. To be viable, the European Union would likely need to offer North African partner states some assurance of support, including resettling some of those found in need of protection (as with the Niger ETM).

      Who Would Do the Processing?

      Once asylum seekers are pulled back, there is the question of who would make determinations regarding their protection. There are three options.

      First, Member States’ own asylum agencies could adjudicate protection claims, as Macron has occasionally suggested. Aside from the logistical challenges of seconding officials outside Europe, the question quickly arises as to who would adjudicate which applications? Member States have very different asylum systems, which produce markedly different outcomes for applicants, and would need extensive coordination.

      As a result, there is growing interest in developing an EU asylum agency capable of undertaking assessments on behalf of Member States. This appears a neat solution. However, governments would have to agree joint procedures and standards for processing claims and have confidence in the decisions made by through a joint processing arrangement. This is, if anything, an option only in the long term, as it would be years before any such agency is operational.

      Should the regional disembarkation idea gain ground, the European Union would have no legal responsibility to undertake assessment. Most Member States would be likely to consider UNHCR a key partner to manage any external process. But doing so could require UNHCR to redeploy limited staff resources from existing resettlement operations or from pressing humanitarian situations elsewhere. Moreover, outsourcing to UNHCR could still raise the issue of trust and transferability of decisions. Many Member States remain reluctant to rely solely on UNHCR to select refugees for resettlement, preferring to send their own teams to do the final selection.

      What Happens Next?

      The issue of what happens to people after their protection claims are assessed remains at the crux of questions around the feasibility of external processing. Proposals here differ starkly.

      On the one hand, some proposals would allow those recognized as in need of protection to subsequently enter the European Union. This is the option that—even if the European Union has circumvented any legal responsibility—would be deemed necessary to host countries as it would give them assurance that they are not overly burdened with providing protection. But doing so would require Member States to agree on some sort of distribution system or quotas for determining who would be settled where—crashing back into a responsibility-sharing problem that has plagued the European Union.

      By contrast, proposals that would explicitly not allow entry to anyone who had attempted to travel to Europe via the Mediterranean, taking a page from Australia’s playbook, are meant to assuage fears that such centres would become magnets for new travellers. Those with protection needs brought to such centres would be settled in countries outside the bloc. The challenges with this model centre squarely on the difficulty finding a “safe” country that would allow the settlement of potentially unlimited number of protection beneficiaries. Neither is likely to be the case in any arrangements the European Union would seek to make with external countries.

      Finally, there is the troubling question of what to do with those denied status or resettlement in the European Union. While the International Organization for Migration (IOM) or another agency might be able to help facilitate voluntary return, some might not be able to return home or may have been denied resettlement but nonetheless have protection needs. They are at risk of becoming a population in limbo, with long-term implications for their well-being and for the host country.


      https://www.migrationpolicy.org/news/europe-pushes-outsource-asylum-again
      #schéma #visualisation

    • "L’UE devrait demander à la Tunisie ou l’Algérie d’accueillir des migrants"

      Afin d’éviter toute complicité des ONG, #Stephen_Smith propose notamment une participation des pays du sud de la Méditerranée. « L’Europe se bat un peu la coulpe et a l’impression que tout est pour elle. Or, la Libye a beaucoup de pays voisins. Pourquoi n’a-t-on pas songé à demander le soutien de la Tunisie ou de l’Algérie ? Habituellement, en cas de naufrage, la règle veut que les voyageurs soient transportés vers la prochaine terre sûre. Et, à partir de la Libye, cette terre n’est pas l’Italie. »

      http://www.rts.ch/info/monde/9678271--l-ue-devrait-demander-a-la-tunisie-ou-l-algerie-d-accueillir-des-migran
      #Tunisie #Algérie

    • Macron y Pedro Sánchez proponen «centros cerrados de desembarco» para los inmigrantes que lleguen a Europa

      Con el apoyo de Pedro Sánchez, el presidente francés expone su apuesta para la gestión de las llegadas de migrantes a las costas del sur de Europa

      En estos centros se tratarían los expedientes de los demandantes de asilo o se tramitaría su devolución a los países de origen

      https://www.eldiario.es/desalambre/Macron-propone-centros-desembarco-inmigrantes_0_785321746.html
      #Espagne

    • EU admits no African country has agreed to host migration centre

      The European Union’s most senior migration official has admitted that no north African country has yet agreed to host migrant screening centres to process refugee claims.

      Details of an EU plan to prevent migrants drowning at sea emerged on Thursday after Italy criticised the agenda of an emergency summit for not offering enough to help it cope with arrivals.

      Dimitris Avramopoulos, the European commissioner for migration, said the EU wanted to “intensify cooperation” with Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Niger and Morocco, as he announced the intention to create a “regional disembarkation scheme”.
      Malta’s ’barbaric’ finch traps ruled illegal by EU court
      Read more

      So far no African country had agreed to host screening centres, he confirmed. “It has to be discussed with these countries, he said. “An official proposal has not been put on the table.”

      The idea for offshore migrant processing centres remains sketchy, with numerous political, practical and legal questions unanswered. It remains unclear, for example, whether migrants on a rescue ship in European waters could be returned to a north African country.

      Tahar Cherif, the Tunisian ambassador to the EU said: “The proposal was put to the head of our government a few months ago during a visit to Germany, it was also asked by Italy, and the answer is clear: no!

      “We have neither the capacity nor the means to organise these detention centres. We are already suffering a lot from what is happening in Libya, which has been the effect of European action.”

      He said his country was facing enough problems with unemployment, without wishing to add to them while Niger said its existing centres taking migrants out of detention camps in Libya are already full.

      The idea for the centres was thrown into the mix of EU migration policy before a series of crucial summits on migration in the next week.

      About 10 EU leaders will meet in Brussels on Sunday in a hastily convened emergency meeting aimed at preventing the collapse of the German coalition government.

      But the Italian government has been angered by draft conclusions for the summit, which stress the need to counter “secondary movements” – an issue that affects Germany.

      Under EU rules, a member state usually has responsibility for asylum seekers who have arrived in its territory, a regulation that has put frontline states Italy and Greece under huge pressure.

      But claimants often move to a second EU state, seeking a faster decision or to unite with family members.

      So-called “secondary movements” is the issue driving a wedge between Germany’s ruling coalition. The Bavarian CSU party has set the chancellor, Angela Merkel, a deadline of two weeks to find a solution. The interior minister, Horst Seehofer, has threatened to send away migrants at the border – a breach of EU rules that threatens to unravel the common asylum system.

      Tensions are running high after Italy’s prime minister, Giuseppe Conte, said he was not ready to discuss secondary movements “without having first tackled the emergency of ‘primary movements’ that Italy has ended up dealing with alone”.

      Italy’s far-right interior minister, Matteo Salvini, said: “If anyone in the EU thinks Italy should keep being a landing point and refugee camp, they have misunderstood.”

      The election of a populist government in Italy, combined with tensions in Germany’s ruling coalition, has created a political storm over migration despite the sharp fall in arrivals. In the first six months of this year 15,570 people crossed into Italy, a 77% drop on last year.

      The European commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, reluctantly agreed to host the weekend summit to help Merkel, after her governing coalition came close to breaking point.

      Avramopoulos stressed that the summit would be about “consultations” to prepare the ground for decisions to be taken by all 28 EU leaders at a European council meeting next Thursday.

      Warning that the future of the EU’s border-free travel area was at stake, Avramopoulos said: “The European leadership of today will be held accountable in the eyes of future generations if we allow all these forces of populism to blow up what has been achieved”.

      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/21/eu-admits-no-african-country-has-agreed-to-host-migration-centre
      #cpa_camps

    • IOM-UNHCR Proposal to the European Union for a Regional Cooperative Arrangement Ensuring Predictable Disembarkation and Subsequent Processing of Persons Rescued at Sea

      Approximately 40,000 refugees and migrants have arrived in Europe via maritime routes in 2018 to date. This is almost six times less than over the same period in 2016, following a peak in arrivals by sea in 2015. According to EUROSTAT, approximately 30 per cent of those arriving on the European shores were in need of international protection; moreover, some have faced extreme hardship and abuse at the hands of unscrupulous traffickers during the journey.

      Despite the reduced arrival rates, new challenges resulting from divergent EU Member State views have revealed a need to revisit regional arrangements to relieve front line states from having the sole responsibility for the disembarkation and further processing of people rescued at sea.

      IOM and UNHCR stand ready to support a common approach, and call on all countries in the Mediterranean region to come together to implement a predictable and responsible disembarkation mechanism in a manner that prioritizes human rights and safety first, delinked from the subsequent processing of status and related follow-up responsibilities, post-disembarkation, for those rescued in international waters.

      It is increasingly recognized that disembarkation cannot be the sole responsibility of one country or regional grouping. It should be a shared responsibility across the Mediterranean Basin, with due respect for the safety and dignity of all people on the move. A comprehensive approach is required to realize effective and sustainable responses.

      People on the move to and through the Mediterranean have different migratory status, with the majority of them not qualifying for international or subsidiary protection. Addressing the drivers of forced displacement and irregular migration needs to be given renewed attention through effective conflict-prevention and crisis settlement processes, strengthening good governance, rule of law, and respect for human rights efforts, stabilization and recovery, as well as poverty reduction.

      Priority efforts need to focus on strengthening protection capacities in regions of origin, including through developing sustainable asylum systems; providing sufficient needs-based support for humanitarian operations and adopting a development-oriented approach to assistance; as well as expanding opportunities for resettlement, family reunification and safe pathways for refugees which are currently well below existing needs and pledges being made. Efforts toward opening safe and regular pathways for migrants need also to be undertaken (family reunification, labour and education opportunities, humanitarian visas for vulnerable migrants).

      Against this background, with a focus on the immediate disembarkation concerns at hand, the current proposal for a regional disembarkation mechanism aims to ensure that:

      People rescued-at-sea in international waters are quickly disembarked in a predictable manner in line with international maritime law, in conditions that uphold respect for their rights including non-refoulement, and avoid serious harm or other risks;
      Responsible post-disembarkation processing, supported – as appropriate- by IOM and UNHCR, leads to rapid and effective differentiated solutions and reduces onward movement through an effective cooperative arrangement.

      Functioning of the mechanism is premised on a set of principles and common objectives:

      The effective functioning of maritime commerce requires ships’ masters to have full confidence in prompt and predictable disembarkation;
      Efforts to reduce loss of life at sea are maximized, in line with existing international obligations and frameworks, and saving lives remains the international community’s priority;
      Strengthened efforts to build the capacity of Coast Guards in Mediterranean countries (not just in Libya) to perform effective rescue operations in their respective SAR;
      National Maritime Rescue Coordination Centres (MRCC) are able to carry out their work effectively for the purposes of search and rescue operations based on long- standing and effective practices to save lives;
      People rescued at sea in the Mediterranean are quickly disembarked in safe ports in a predictable manner in line with established rescue at sea arrangements and international maritime law, coordinated through the responsible MRCCs;
      Measures for cooperative arrangements to support States providing for disembarkation are well-established;
      The right to seek asylum is safeguarded, and the human rights of all individuals such as non-refoulement are respected, including the right not to be disembarked in or transferred to a place where there is a risk of persecution, torture, or other serious harm;
      Efforts to address human smuggling and trafficking are reinvigorated, including measures to ensure protection and/or referrals for victims of trafficking and ensuring the effective prosecution of those involved in / or facilitating human trafficking or smuggling;
      Rescue at sea capacity coordinated by effective MRCCs that operate in accordance with international law is reinforced.

      As such, the proposal does not affect existing legal norms and responsibilities applicable under international law (Note 1) Rather it seeks to facilitate their application in accordance with a regional collaborative approach and the principle of international cooperation. This proposal relies on functional arrangements for intra-EU solidarity in managing all consequences of rescue, disembarkation and processing. It also relies on operational arrangements which would need to be sought and formalised through a set of understandings among all concerned States.

      https://www.iom.int/news/iom-unhcr-proposal-european-union-regional-cooperative-arrangement-ensuring-pre

      Question : c’est quoi la différence entre la proposition IOM/HCR et la proposition UE ?

    • THE LEGAL AND PRACTICAL FEASIBILITY OF DISEMBARKATION OPTIONS

      This note presents a first assessment of the legal and practical feasibility of the three different scenarios on disembarkation presented at the Informal Working Meeting of 24 June 2018. Under international maritime law, people rescued at sea must be disembarked at a place of safety. International law sets out elements of what a place of safety can be and how it can be designated, without excluding the possibility of having regional arrangements for disembarkation.


      https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/migration-disembarkation-june2018_en.pdf
      #scénario

    • #Palerme :
      ❝La Commission régionale de l’Urbanisme a rejeté le projet de pré-faisabilité du « #hotspot » à Palerme, confirmant l’avis du Conseil municipal de Palerme. L’avis de la Commission régionale reste technique. Le maire de Palerme a rappelé que "la ville de Palerme et toute sa communauté sont opposés à la création de centres dans lesquels la dignité des personnes est violée (...). Palerme reste une ville qui croit dans les valeurs de l’accueil, de la solidarité et des rencontres entre les peuples et les cultures, les mettant en pratique au quotidien. En cela, notre « non » à l’hotspot n’est pas et ne sera pas seulement un choix technique, mais plutôt un choix relatif à des principes et des valeurs".
      > Pour en savoir plus (IT) : http://www.palermotoday.it/politica/hotspot-zen-progetto-bocciato-regione.html

      –-> Reçu via la mailing-list Migreurop

    • Ne dites pas que ce sont des #camps !

      Les camps devraient être la solution. C’est en Afrique, peut-être en Libye ou au Niger, que les migrants seront arrêtés avant qu’ils puissent commencer leur dangereux voyage en mer vers l’Europe. Ainsi l’a décidé l’UE. Des camps attendront également les réfugiés qui réussiraient toutefois à arriver dans un pays de l’UE. Des camps sur le sol européen. Où seront-ils établis ? Cela n’est pas encore défini, mais ce seront des installations fermées et surveillées parce que les détenus devront être « enregistrés » et les personnes non autorisées seront expulsées. Ils ne pourront pas s’enfuir.

      L’intérêt pour les camps concerne également les responsables politiques allemands. Le gouvernement allemand veut élargir le no man’s land à la frontière germano-autrichienne afin que les réfugiés puissent être arrêtés avant d’entrer officiellement en Allemagne et avoir ainsi droit à une procédure d’asile régulière. Une « fiction de non-entrée » est créée, comme le stipule précisément l’accord. Un État qui magouille. Pendant ce temps, la chancelière Angela Merkel a déclaré que personne ne sera détenu plus de quarante-huit heures, même dans le no man’s land. Il reste encore à voir si l’Autriche y accédera. Le plan est pour l’instant plus un fantasme qu’une politique réalisable, ce qui est bien pire. Bien sûr, tous ces centres fermés de rassemblement de migrants ne peuvent pas être appelés camps. Cela évoquerait des images effrayantes : les camps de concentration nazis, le système des goulags soviétiques, les camps de réfugiés palestiniens de plusieurs générations, le camp de détention de Guantánamo.

      Non, en Allemagne, ces « non-prisons » devraient être appelées « centres de transit ». Un terme amical, efficace, pratique, comme la zone de transit d’un aéroport où les voyageurs changent d’avion. Un terme inventé par les mêmes personnes qui désignent le fait d’échapper à la guerre et à la pauvreté comme du « tourisme d’asile ». Les responsables politiques de l’UE sont encore indécis quant à la terminologie de leurs camps. On a pu lire le terme de « centres de protection » mais aussi celui de « plateformes d’atterrissage et de débarquement », ce qui fait penser à une aventure et à un voyage en mer.

      Tout cela est du vernis linguistique. La réalité est que l’Europe en est maintenant à créer des camps fermés et surveillés pour des personnes qui n’ont pas commis de crime. Les camps vont devenir quelque chose qui s’inscrit dans le quotidien, quelque chose de normal. Si possible dans des endroits lointains et horribles, si nécessaire sur place. Enfermer, compter, enregistrer.

      La facilité avec laquelle tout cela est mis en œuvre est déconcertante. Deux ans seulement après que le public européen a condamné l’Australie pour ses camps brutaux de prisonniers gérés par des sociétés privées sur les îles de Nauru et Manus, dans l’océan Pacifique, nous sommes prêts à abandonner nos inhibitions. Pourquoi ne pas payer les Libyens pour intercepter et stocker des personnes ?

      Derrière le terme allemand « Lager » (« camp ») se cache un ancien mot correspondant à « liegen », qui signifie « être allongé ». Les camps sont ainsi faits pour se reposer. Aujourd’hui, le terme de « camp » implique quelque chose de temporaire : un camp n’est que pour une courte période, c’est pourquoi il peut aussi être rustique, comme un camp de vacances pour les enfants ou un dortoir. Des camps d’urgence sont mis en place après des catastrophes, des inondations, des glissements de terrain, des guerres. Ils sont là pour soulager les souffrances, mais ne doivent pas être permanents.

      Si les responsables politiques participent activement à l’internement de personnes dans des camps en l’absence de catastrophe, alors il s’agit d’autre chose. Il s’agit de contrôle, d’#ordre, de #rééducation, de #domination. Les puissances coloniales tenaient des camps, depuis les camps de barbelés des Britanniques au Kenya jusqu’aux camps de Héréros dans le Sud-Ouest africain. C’est dans des camps que les États-Unis ont enfermé des Américains d’origine japonaise pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale. Les responsables de ces camps n’avaient pas pour préoccupation le logement, mais bien la garde et la gestion de « personnes problématiques ».

      Dans de tels camps, la #violence extrême et la #déshumanisation des détenus allaient et vont généralement de pair avec une gestion froide. Exploiter un camp nécessite de l’#organisation. La technologie de #contrôle à distance aide le personnel à commettre des atrocités et transforme des gens ordinaires en criminels. Dans son essai controversé « Le siècle des camps », le regretté sociologue #Zygmunt_Bauman qualifie le camp de symptôme de #modernité. Pour lui, l’association d’une #exclusion_brutale et d’une #efficacité dans l’ordre semblable à celle d’un jardinier est une caractéristique de notre époque.

      Que Bauman fasse des camps de concentration nazis un « distillat » d’un problème majeur et moderne pour sa thèse lui a justement valu des critiques. Il ignore la singularité de l’Holocauste. Contrairement aux camps coloniaux, les camps de concentration étaient en effet des camps d’extermination qui n’avaient plus pour fonction d’apprêter des groupes ou de les rééduquer, ni même de les dissuader. Il s’agissait de « violence pour elle-même », comme l’écrit le sociologue #Wolfgang_Sofsky, de folie de la #pureté et d’éradication des personnes #indésirables.

      L’Europe croit être à l’abri de cette folie. Pour les gouvernants allemands, le slogan « Plus jamais de camps en Allemagne » est un slogan ridicule parce qu’il évoque des images qui n’ont rien à voir avec le présent. Dans les différents camps de migrants en Europe et à l’extérieur, il n’est certes pas question d’une extermination mais « seulement » de contrôle de l’accès et de #dissuasion. C’est ce dernier objectif qui est explicitement recherché : répandre dans le monde l’idée de camps de l’horreur au lieu du paradis européen.

      Mais il n’y a pas de raison de maintenir la sérénité. L’analyse de Zygmunt Bauman parlait de la mince couche de #civilisation par-dessus la #barbarie. La leçon tirée de l’expérience des camps du XXe siècle est la suivante : « Il n’y a pas de société ordonnée sans #peur et sans #humiliation ». La #pensée_totalitaire peut à nouveau prospérer, même dans les sociétés apparemment démocratiques.

      https://www.tdg.ch/monde/europe/dites-camps/story/31177430
      #totalitarisme

      Et ce passage pour lequel je suis tentée d’utiliser le tag #frontières_mobiles (#Allemagne et #Autriche) :

      L’intérêt pour les camps concerne également les responsables politiques allemands. Le gouvernement allemand veut élargir le no #man’s_land à la frontière germano-autrichienne afin que les réfugiés puissent être arrêtés avant d’entrer officiellement en Allemagne et avoir ainsi droit à une procédure d’asile régulière. Une « #fiction_de_non-entrée » est créée, comme le stipule précisément l’accord.

      Et sur la question de la #terminologie (#mots #vocabulaire) :

      Bien sûr, tous ces #centres_fermés de rassemblement de migrants ne peuvent pas être appelés camps. Cela évoquerait des images effrayantes : les camps de concentration nazis, le système des goulags soviétiques, les camps de réfugiés palestiniens de plusieurs générations, le camp de détention de Guantánamo.

      Non, en Allemagne, ces « #non-prisons » devraient être appelées « #centres_de_transit ». Un terme amical, efficace, pratique, comme la zone de transit d’un aéroport où les voyageurs changent d’avion. Un terme inventé par les mêmes personnes qui désignent le fait d’échapper à la guerre et à la pauvreté comme du « #tourisme_d’asile ». Les responsables politiques de l’UE sont encore indécis quant à la terminologie de leurs camps. On a pu lire le terme de « #centres_de_protection » mais aussi celui de « #plateformes_d’atterrissage_et_de_débarquement », ce qui fait penser à une aventure et à un voyage en mer.

      Tout cela est du #vernis_linguistique. La réalité est que l’Europe en est maintenant à créer des camps fermés et surveillés pour des personnes qui n’ont pas commis de crime. Les camps vont devenir quelque chose qui s’inscrit dans le quotidien, quelque chose de normal. Si possible dans des endroits lointains et horribles, si nécessaire sur place. Enfermer, compter, enregistrer.

      #shopping_de_l'asile #normalisation
      #cpa_camps

    • L’#Autriche veut proscrire toute demande d’asile sur le territoire de l’Union européenne

      A la veille d’une réunion, jeudi, entre les ministres de l’intérieur de l’UE sur la question migratoire, Vienne déclare vouloir proposer un changement des règles d’asile pour que les demandes soient étudiées hors d’Europe.

      https://mobile.lemonde.fr/europe/article/2018/07/10/l-autriche-veut-proscrire-toute-demande-d-asile-sur-le-territoire-de-

    • Record deaths at sea: will ‘regional disembarkation’ help save lives?
      ❝What is the aim of European policy on Mediterranean migration?

      Europe’s strategic ambition is clear: reduce the number of people who embark on journeys across the Mediterranean by boat. The more European countries struggle to share responsibility for those who are rescued at sea and brought to Europe, the stronger the desire to dissuade migrants from getting on a boat in the first place. Moreover, stemming the departures is said to be the only way of reducing the death toll.

      The challenge, as the European Council put it, is to ‘eliminate the incentive to embark’ on journeys across the Mediterranean. And the new migration agreement proposes a solution: setting up ‘regional disembarkation platforms’ outside the European Union. The logic is that if people rescued at sea are sent back to the coast they left, nobody will take the risk and pay the cost of getting on smugglers’ boats.
      Would this even work?

      Addressing the challenges of irregular migration is truly difficult. Still, it is baffling how the proposal for regional disembarkation platforms is embroiled in contradictions. The agreement itself is scant on specifics, but the challenges will surface as the policy makers have to make key decisions about how these platforms would work.

      First, will they be entry points for seeking asylum in Europe? The agreement suggests that the platforms might play this role. But if the platforms are entry points to the European asylum procedure, they will attract thousands of refugees who currently have no other option to apply for asylum in Europe than paying smugglers to set out to sea.

      This scenario raises a second question: what will be the possible ways of accessing the platforms? If they are reserved for refugees who have paid smugglers and are rescued at sea, access to protection will be just as reliant on smugglers as it is today. But if anyone can come knocking on the gate to the platforms, without having to be rescued first, the asylum caseload would swell. Such an outcome would be unacceptable to EU member states. As a recent EC note remarked, ‘to allow individuals to “apply” for asylum outside the EU […] is currently neither possible nor desirable.

      These two questions lay out the basic scenarios for how the regional disembarkation platforms would operate. Thinking through these scenarios it’s not clear if these platforms can ever be workable. Moreover, putting these platforms in place directly contradicts the European Council’s stated objectives:

      – dissuading smuggling journeys
      – distinguishing individual cases in full respect of international law
      – not creating a pull factor

      How does this relate to broader EU policies on migration?

      In some way, regional disembarkation platforms are a logical next step along the course the EU has been pursuing for years now. To stop refugees and other migrants from reaching its shores, the EU has been using a multi-pronged approach. On the one hand, the bloc has increased the use of aid to tackle the ‘root causes’ of migration – the logic being that if potential migrants are given other opportunities (e.g. skills training), they will be deterred from leaving. Similarly, information campaigns targeting aspiring migrants seek to deter people from setting out on dangerous journeys.

      Another major focus has been that of externalisation of border management – basically shifting border management to countries outside the EU: a key component of the EU-Turkey Deal is Turkey agreeing to take back refugees who crossed into Greece. Externalisation serves two purposes: keeping migrants physically out of Europe, but also as a deterrence measure sending potential migrants the implicit message that it won’t be easy to come to Europe.

      Regional disembarkation platforms are part of this process of externalisation. But there are key differences that make this proposal more extreme than policies pursued so far. Other externalization measures have aimed at preventing potential asylum seekers from reaching the point where they become eligible to launch a claim in Europe. The platforms will apparently serve a different role, by enabling the physical return of asylum seekers who have become Europe’s responsibility after being rescued by European ships in international waters.
      What do we know about efforts to deter irregular migration?

      The dim outlook for regional disembarkation platforms reflects more general limitations of deterrence measures in migration policy. Using decades worth of data, Michael Clemens and colleagues have shown that along the US-Mexico border greater deterrence and enforcement efforts have only reduced irregular migration when accompanied by greater legal migration pathways. Research by ODI has shown that information about deterrence measures and anti-migration messages rarely featured in migrant decision-making process. We will explore this further in our upcoming MIGNEX research project, which includes large-scale analyses of the drivers of migration in ten countries of origin and transit.
      Blocking access to asylum is not a life-saving measure

      The European Council presents regional disembarkation platforms as a strategy for ‘preventing tragic loss of life’. The irony of this argument is that these platforms will only deter sea crossings if they are dead ends where people who are rescued at sea are barred from seeking asylum in Europe. It is difficult to see how such a setup would be legally feasible, or indeed, ‘in line with our principles and values’, as the Council states.

      If the legal obstacles were overcome, there may indeed be fewer deaths at sea. But some of the deaths would simply occur out of sight instead. Refugees flee danger. Blocking access to seeking asylum puts more lives at risk and cannot be justified as a measure to save lives at sea.

      For now, the European Council glosses over the dilemmas that the regional disembarkation platforms will create. Facing the realities of the situation would not make perfect solutions appear, but it would enable an open debate in search of a defensible and effective migration policy.


      $https://blogs.prio.org/2018/07/record-deaths-at-sea-will-regional-disembarkation-help-save-lives

    • Austrian Presidency document: “a new, better protection system under which no applications for asylum are filed on EU territory”

      A crude paper authored by the Austrian Presidency of the Council of the EU and circulated to other Member States’s security officials refers disparagingly to “regions that are characterised by patriarchal, anti-freedom and/or backward-looking religious attitudes” and calls for “a halt to illegal migration to Europe” and the “development of a new, better protection system under which no applications for asylum are filed on EU territory,” with some minor exceptions.

      See: Austrian Presidency: Informal Meeting of COSI, Vienna, Austria, 2-3 July 2018: Strengthening EU External Border Protection and a Crisis-Resistant EU Asylum System (pdf): http://www.statewatch.org/news/2018/jul/EU-austria-Informal-Meeting-%20COSI.pdf

      The document was produced for an ’Informal Meeting of COSI’ (the Council of the EU’s Standing Committee on Operational Cooperation on Internal Security) which took place on 2 and 3 July in Vienna, and the proposals it contains were the subject of numerous subsequent press articles - with the Austrian President one of the many who criticised the government’s ultra-hardline approach.

      See: Austrian president criticises government’s asylum proposals (The Local, link); Austrian proposal requires asylum seekers to apply outside EU: Profil (Reuters, link); Right of asylum: Austria’s unsettling proposals to member states (EurActiv, link)

      Some of the proposals were also discussed at an informal meeting of the EU’s interior ministers on Friday 13 July, where the topic of “return centres” was also raised. The Luxembourg interior minister Jean Asselborn reportedly said that such an idea “shouldn’t be discussed by civilized Europeans.” See: No firm EU agreement on Austrian proposals for reducing migration (The Local, link)

      The Austrian Presidency paper proposes:

      "2.1. By 2020

      By 2020 the following goals could be defined:

      Saving as many human lives as possible;
      Clear strengthening of the legal framework and the operational capabilities of FRONTEX with respect to its two main tasks: support in protecting the Union’s external border and in the field of return;
      Increasing countering and destruction of people smugglers’ and human traffickers‘ business models;
      Significant reduction in illegal migration;
      More sustainable and more effective return measures as well as establishment of instruments that foster third countries’ willingness to cooperate on all relevant aspects, including the fight against people smuggling, providing protection and readmission;
      Development of a holistic concept for a forward-looking migration policy (in the spirit of a “whole of government approach“) and a future European protection system in cooperation with third countries that is supported by all and does not overburden all those involved – neither in terms of resources nor with regard to the fundamental rights and freedoms they uphold.

      2.2. By 2025

      By 2025 the following goals could be realised:

      Full control of the EU’s external borders and their comprehensive protection have been ensured.
      The new, better European protection system has been implemented across the EU in cooperation with third countries; important goals could include:
      no incentives anymore to get into boats, thus putting an end to smuggled persons dying in the Mediterranean;
      smart help and assistance for those in real need of protection, i.e. provided primarily in the respective region;
      asylum in Europe is granted only to those who respect European values and the fundamental rights and freedoms upheld in the EU;
      no overburdening of the EU Member States’ capabilities;
      lower long-term costs;
      prevention of secondary migration.
      Based on these principles, the EU Member States have returned to a consensual European border protection and asylum policy.”

      And includes the following statements, amongst others:

      “...more and more Member States are open to exploring a new approach. Under the working title “Future European Protection System” (FEPS) and based on an Austrian initiative, a complete paradigm shift in EU asylum policy has been under consideration at senior officials’ level for some time now. The findings are considered in the “Vienna Process” in the context of which the topic of external border protection is also dealt with. A number of EU Member States, the EU Commission and external experts contribute towards further reflections and deliberations on these two important topics.”

      “...ultimately, there is no effective EU external border protection in place against illegal migration and the existing EU asylum system does not enable an early distinction between those who are in need of protection and those who are not.”

      “Disembarkment following rescue at sea as a rule only takes place in EU Member States. This means that apprehensions at sea not only remain ineffective (non-refoulement, examination of applications for asylum), but are exploited in people smugglers’ business models.”

      “Due to factors related to their background as well as their poor perspectives, they [smuggled migrants] repeatedly have considerable problems with living in free societies or even reject them. Among them are a large number of barely or poorly educated young men who have travelled to Europe alone. Many of these are particularly susceptible to ideologies that are hostile to freedom and/or are prone to turning to crime.

      As a result of the prevailing weaknesses in the fields of external border protection and asylum, it is to be expected that the negative consequences of past and current policies will continue to be felt for many years to come. As experience with immigration from regions that are characterised by patriarchal, anti-freedom and/or backward-looking religious attitudes has shown, problems related to integration, safety and security may even increase significantly over several generations.”

      See: Austrian Presidency: Informal Meeting of COSI, Vienna, Austria, 2-3 July 2018: Strengthening EU External Border Protection and a Crisis-Resistant EU Asylum System (pdf)

      http://www.statewatch.org/news/2018/jul/eu-austrian-pres-asylum-paper.htm

    • Libya rejects EU plan for refugee and migrant centres

      Blow to Italy as Tripoli snubs proposal to set up processing centres in Africa

      Libya has rejected a EU plan to establish refugee and migrant processing centres in the country, adding that it would not be swayed by any financial inducements to change its decision.

      The formal rejection by the Libyan prime minister, Fayez al-Sarraj, is a blow to Italy, which is regarded as being close to his Tripoli administration.

      In June, Italy proposed reception and identification centres in Africa as a means of resolving divisions among European governments.

      The impasse came as the EU said it was willing to work as a temporary crisis centre to oversee the distribution of refugees and migrants from ships landing in Europe from Libya. Italy has said it is not willing to open its ports and may even reject those rescued by the EU Sophia search and rescue mission, a position that has infuriated other EU states.

      Speaking to the German newspaper Bild, Serraj said: “We are absolutely opposed to Europe officially wanting us to accommodate illegal immigrants the EU does not want to take in.”

      He dismissed accusations that Libya’s coastguard had shot at aid workers in ships trying to rescue people from the Mediterranean.

      “We save hundreds of people off the coast of Libya every day – our ships are constantly on the move,” he said. In practice, Libya is already running detention camps, largely as holding pens, but they are not run as EU processing centres for asylum claims.

      European foreign ministers agreed at a meeting on Monday to do more to train the Libyan coastguard by setting up the EU’s own training team inside Libya.

      The European parliament president, Antonio Tajani, said after a trip to Niger, one of the chief funnels for people into Libya, that the EU needed to plough more money into the Sahel region to reduce the need to leave the area. He said the number of people reaching Libya from Niger was collapsing.

      Tajani said: “Until 2016, 90% of irregular migrants travelled through the Niger to Libya and Europe. In just two years, Niger reduced migration flows by 95%, from over 300,000 to about 10,000 in 2018.”

      He said he would host a European conference in Brussels in October to support democratic elections in Libya scheduled for December.

      At the same time, Italy is to host a further conference in Rome in September seen as a follow-on to a conference held in May by the French president, Emmanuel Macron, that led to a commitment to hold elections this year.

      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/20/libya-rejects-eu-plan-for-migrant-centres?CMP=Share_iOSApp_OtherSpeakin

    • UNHCR ed OIM discutono con la Commissione europea sulle piattaforme di sbarco, ma gli stati dicono no.

      Lunedì 30 luglio si svolgerà a Ginevra un incontro di rappresentanti dell’UNHCR e dell’OIM con la Commissione Europea per discutere sulle piattaforme di sbarco che Bruxelles vorrebbe imporre nei paesi di transito, come gli stati nordafricani, e negli stati di sbarco, soprattutto in Italia. Per selezionare rapidamente migranti economici e richiedenti asilo, e dunque procedere al respingimento immediato dei primi, senza alcuna garanzia di difesa, ed all’avvio delle procedure di asilo, per gli altri, senza alcuna garanzia di resettlement o di relocation ( ricollocazione) in un paese diverso da quello di primo ingresso. La Commissione dichiara che, soltanto dopo avere trovato un “approccio comune a livello europeo “, si rivolgeranno proposte ai paesi terzi. Gli stati nordafricani hanno però respinto in blocco questa proposta, e le autorità locali dei paesi di primo ingresso più interessati dagli sbarchi, confernano la loro opposizione a nuovi Hotspot. Le risorse previste per questa esternalizzazione delle frontiere sono ridicole. Per non parlare dei costi in termini di vite e di sfregio dei diritti umani.

      Un progetto che si salda strettamente con l’incremeno degli aiuti alla sedicente Guardia costiera “libica”, alla quale si affida già adesso, nella prassi quotidiana, un numero sempre più elevato di intercettazioni in acque internazionali, di fatto respingimenti collettivi, perchè realizzati con il coordinamento e l’assistenza di unità militari della Marina italiana che ha una base a Tripoli, nell’ambito della missione Nauras. Intanto la accresciuta assistenza italiana alla Marina ed alla Guardia costiera di Tripoli rischia di contribuire all’inasprimento del conflitto tra le diverse milizie ed allontana le probabilità di una reale pacificazione, premessa indispensabile per lo svolgimento delle elezioni. Le stesse milizie che continuano a trattenere in Libia, in condizioni disumane, centinaia di migliaia di persone.

      Dietro la realizzazione delle “piattaforme di sbarco” in Nordafrica, proposte anche dal Consiglio europeo del 28 giugno scorso, il ritiro dalle responsabilità di coordinamento dei soccorsi in acque internazionali da parte degli stati che fin qui ne sono stati responsabili in conformità al diritto internazionale generalmente riconosciuto. Per ragioni diverse, nè la Tunisia, ne la Libia, possono essere riconosciuti come “paesi terzi sicuri” con porti di sbarco che siano qualificabili come place of safety. Come avveniva fino a qualche mese fa, secondo il diritto internazionale, dopo i soccorsi in acque internazionali, i naufraghi vanno sbarcati non nel porto più vicino, na nel porto sicuro più vicino. Ma questa regola, a partire dal caso della nave Aquarius di SOS Mediterraneè, il 10 giugno scorso, è stata continuamente violata dal governo italiano e dalle autorità amministrative e militari che questo governo controlla. Molto grave, ma prevedibile, il comportamento di chiusura da parte di Malta, che continua a trattenere sotto sequstro due navi umanitarie, la Lifeline e la Seawatch. Sempre più spesso le dispute tra stati che negano a naufraghi un porto sicuro di sbarco rischiano di fare altre vittime

      La soluzione che si prospetta adesso con la nave SAROST 5,dopo gli appelli delle ONG tunisine, lo sbarco a Zarzis dei migranti soccorsi il 15 luglio, un caso eccezionale ben diverso da altri soccorsi operati in precedenza in acque internazionali, non costituisce un precedente, perchè la SAROST 5 batte bandiera tunisina. Dunque i naufraghi a bordo della nave si trovavano già in territorio tunisino subito dopo il loro recupero in mare. In futuro, quando i soccorsi in acque internazionali saranno comunque operati da imbarcazioni miitari o private ( incluse le ONG) con diversa bandiera, il problema del porto sicuro di sbarco si proporrà in termini ancora più gravi, con un ulteriore incremento delle vittime e delle sofferenze inflitte ai sopravvissuti, a fronte dei dinieghi degli stati che non rispettano il diritto internazionale ed impediscono la individuazione, nei tempi più rapidi, di un vero “place of safety”.

      Nel 2013 il caso del mercantile turco SALAMIS, che sotto cooordinamento della Centrale operativa (IMRCC) di Roma, aveva soccorso naufraghi a sud di Malta, in acque internazionali, si era concluso con lo sbarco in Italia, in conformità del diritto internazionale. Con lo sbarco dei migranti soccorsi dalla SAROST 5 nel porto di Zarzis,in Tunisia, per ragioni di emergenza sanitaria, si consuma invece una ennesima violazione del diritto internazionale, dopo i rifiuti frapposti dalle autorità italiane e maltesi. Stati che creano sofferenze, come strumento politico e di propaganda, fino al punto da costringere i comandanti delle navi a dichiarare lo stato di emergenza. Alla fine il governo tunisino, nel giorno della fiducia al governo e dell’insediamento del nuovo ministro dell’interno, ha ceduto alle pressioni internazionali, ed ha accettato per ragioni umanitarie lo sbarco di persone che da due settimane erano bloccate a bordo di un rimorchiatore di servizio ad una piattaforma petrolifera, in condizioni psico-fisiche sempre più gravi. Un trattamento inumano e degradante imposto da quelle autorità e di quegli stati che, immediatamente avvertiti dal comandante della SAROST 5 quando ancora si trovava in acque internazionali, hanno respinto la richiesta di garantire in tempi più rapidi ed umani un porto di sbarco sicuro.

      Di fronte al probabile ripetersi di altri casi di abbandono in acque internazionali, con possibili pressioni ancora più forti sulla Tunisia, è importante che l’UNHCR e l’OIM impongano agli stati membri ed all’Unione Europea il rispetto del diritto internazionale e l’obbligo di soccorso in mare, nel modo più immediato. Le prassi amministraive di “chiusura dei porti” non sono sorrette ada alcuna base legale, e neppure sono concretizzate in provvedimenti amministrativi, motivati ed impugnabili davanti ad una qualsiasi autorità giurisdizionale. Non si può continuare a governare tratendo in inganno il corpo elettorale, distorcendo persino le posizioni delle grandi organizzazioni internazionali. Fino ad un mese fa sia l’UNHCR che l’OIM avevano respinto la proposta della Commissione che voleva creare piattaforme di sbarco al di fuori dei confini europei. Una proposta che adesso viene ripresentata con vigore ancora maggiore, sotto la presidenza UE affidata all’Austria di Kurz, con la spinta di Orban e di Salvini verso la “soluzione finale” verso migranti ed ONG.

      Le Nazioni Unite conoscono bene la situazione in Libia. Occorre garantire a tutti i naufraghi soccorsi in acque internazionali un porto sicuro di sbarco, che non deve essere quello più vicino, se non offre la piena garanzia di una tutela effettiva dei diritti fondamentali e del diritto di chiedere asilo delle persone sbarcate. Non basta la presenza fisica di operatori dell’UNHCR e dell’OIM in alcuni punti di sbarco, come si sta verificando da mesi in Tripolitania, per riconoscere l’esistenza di un place of safety in paesi che anche secondo le grandi istituzioni internazionali, come per i tribunali italiani, non sono in grado di garantire place of safety in conformità alle Convenzioni internazionali.

      Se si dovesse decidere di riportare i migranti intercettati in acque internazionali e sbarcati nei paesi nordafricani, ammesso che posa succedere( anche se i migranti considerati “illegali” in Nordafrica saranno costretti a firmare una richiesta di resettlement, se non di rimpatrio volontario), magari per essere riportati indietro in un campo profughi in Niger, sarebbero violati i principi base di protezione delle persone, in quanto eseri umani, ai quali si ispirano le Convenzioni internazionali e la Costituzione italiana. La Convenzione di Ginevra non esclude il diritto dei richeidenti asilo a rivolgersi ad paese piuttosto che ad un altro. L’evacuazione dalle aree di crisi non esclude il diritto di accesso alle frontiere di un paese europeo perchè la richiesta di asilo sua valutata con le garanzie sostanziali e procedurali previste dalla normativa interna e sovranazionale.

      Se l’UNHCR e l’OIM cederanno alle pressioni dei governi, diventeranno complici degli abusi che i migranti continuano a subire nei paesi del nordafrica nei quali vengono respinti e detenuti.

      Le Organizzazioni non governative che, insieme ai naufraghi che soccorrono, continuano ad essere bersaglio di una campagna di odio che non accenna ad attenuarsi, continueranno, nei limiti dei propri mezzi a denunciare quanto accade ed a soccorrere le persone che in acque internazionali potranno raggiungere prima che facciano naufragio. La loro attività di ricerca e salvataggio appare tuttavia fortemente ridotta, anche per la illegittima “chiusura dei porti” decisa dal governo italiano, in assenza di qualsiasi provvedimento che ne fornisca una base legale, tale almeno da potere essere impugnato. Una lesione forse irreversibile dello stato di diritto (rule of law) alle frontiere marittime.Una responsabilità ancora maggiore per le autorità militari alle quali sarebbe affidato il coordinamento delle attività di ricerca e soccorso in mare (SAR). La percentuale delle vittime calcolate sul numero dei migranti che ancora riescono a fuggire dalla Libia non è mai stata tanto alta. Non si deve ridurre il valore del rispetto della vita umana alla riduzione numerica degli arrivi o dei soccorsi in mare.

      Dietro la conclamata esigenza di contrastare i trafficanti si cela una micidiale arma elettorale che sta permettendo il capovolgimento della narrazione dei fatti e la criminalizzazione della solidarietà. Il ruolo delle città dell’accoglienza e dei rappresentanti politici che ancora si oppongono a questa deriva disumana contro i migranti e le ONG, devono passare dalle parole ai fatti e dare concretezza alle dichiarazioni di solidarietà ed all’impegno di aprire i porti, ed aprire le città. Tutti i cittadini solidali sono chiamati ad esporsi in prima persona, saldando il ruolo delle autonomie locali con la capacità di autorganizzazione. Sarà una stagione lunga e dolorosa di conflitto, senza una rappresentanza polkitica capace di praticare una vera opposizione. Ma non ci sono possibilità di mediazione con chi dimostra di valutare una parte dell’umanità come “untermenschen” ( sottouomini), praticando l’abbandono in mare ed il respingimento collettivo verso luoghi di internamento e tortura, in modo da creare le premesse per una discriminazione istituzionale che nei territori si sta già traducendo in una violenza diffusa contro i più deboli. Oggi tocca ai migranti, dai naufraghi a quelli accolti nei centri in Italia, domani saranno nel mirino le componenti minoritarie dell’intera popolazione.

      https://www.a-dif.org/2018/07/29/unhcr-ed-oim-discutono-con-la-commissione-europea-sulle-piattaforme-di-sbarco

    • Libya rejects establishment of reception centres for irregular migrants on its territory

      Foreign Minister of the Presidential Council’s government Mohamed Sayala said Libya refuses the idea of setting up reception centres for irregular migrants on its territory, as did Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco.

      “The country’s immigrant housing centres are sheltering around 30,000 immigrants, and Libya has cooperated with the European Union to return migrants to their countries of origin, but some countries refused to receive them,” Sayala said to the Austrian newspaper Die Presse.

      “Libya has signed agreements with Chad, Niger and Sudan to enhance the security of the crossing borders in order to curb the flow of migrants,” the Foreign Minister added.

      https://www.libyaobserver.ly/inbrief/libya-rejects-establishment-reception-centres-irregular-migrants-its-t

    • Juncker says N.Africa migrant “camps” not on EU agenda

      European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said on Friday that a suggestion that the European Union might try to set up migrant camps in North Africa was no longer on the agenda.

      EU member states are in disagreement over how the bloc should deal with tens of thousands of migrants arriving every year in Europe, the bulk of them by sea from Turkey and North Africa.

      In June, a summit of all EU leaders asked the Commission to study ways to set up “regional disembarkation platforms” in North African countries, including Tunisia, for migrants rescued by European vessels in the Mediterranean.

      However, there has been little appetite in Africa and EU officials have long questioned the legality and practicality of such camps — a view underlined in Juncker’s blunt reply.

      “This is no longer on the agenda and never should have been,” Juncker told a news conference in Tunis with Tunisian Prime Minister Youssef Chahed.

      http://news.trust.org/item/20181026131801-1t7he
      #cpa_camps

    • Juncker says North Africa migrant ’camps’ not on EU agenda

      European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said on Friday that a suggestion that the European Union might try to set up migrant camps in North Africa was no longer on the agenda.

      EU member states are in disagreement over how the bloc should deal with tens of thousands of migrants arriving every year in Europe, the bulk of them by sea from Turkey and North Africa.

      In June, a summit of all EU leaders asked the Commission to study ways to set up “regional disembarkation platforms” in North African countries, including Tunisia, for migrants rescued by European vessels in the Mediterranean.

      However, there has been little appetite in Africa and EU officials have long questioned the legality and practicality of such camps — a view underlined in Juncker’s blunt reply.

      “This is no longer on the agenda and never should have been,” Juncker told a news conference in Tunis with Tunisian Prime Minister Youssef Chahed.


      https://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-africa/juncker-says-north-africa-migrant-camps-not-on-eu-agenda-idUSKCN1N01TU

    • Refugee centers in Tunisia ’out of the question’, president says

      The Tunisian President, Beji Caid Essebsi, has said his country will not host EU refugee reception centers. He also told DW that Tunisia was a safe country, despite a terrorist attack in the capital earlier this week.

      President Essebsi made the statement in Berlin, where he attended Chancellor Angela Merkel’s African business summit. In an interview with DW’s Dima Tarhini, the 91-year-old leader said opening refugee reception centers in countries such as Tunisia was “out of the question.”

      “Tunisia has much more experience with refugees than many European countries. After the Libyan revolution, more than 1.3 million refugees from various countries streamed into Tunisia. Fortunately, most of them returned to their home countries with our help. Europe has never experienced anything comparable. And we, unlike Europe, do not have the capacities to open reception centers. Every country needs to pull its own weight on this issue.”

      The European Union wants greater cooperation on migration with North African nations Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Niger and Morocco. Earlier this year, the EU migration commissioner announced a plan for a “regional disembarkation scheme”. Under the proposed deal, African countries would host migrant screening centers to process refugee claims. The Tunisian government has already expressed opposition to the idea.

      Despite terrorism, a ’safe country’

      During President Essebsi’s visit to Berlin, a 30-year-old woman blew herself up with a homemade bomb in the Tunisian capital, injuring at least eight people.

      “We thought we had eradicated terrorism, but it turns out that it still exists and that it can strike in the heart of the capital,” President Essebsi said in a statement to the press.

      The suicide attack led to renewed questions about whether Tunisia should be considered a safe country of origin for asylum seekers.

      Tarhini: In Germany, in the context of repatriating asylum-seekers, it has been questioned just how safe Tunisia really is. Tunisia is considered a safe North African country. What is your opinion on this?

      Beji Caid Essebsi: "Tunisia is a safe country; that is the truth. It is much safer than many other countries. Regarding refugees and the problem that they pose for Europe and other regions: Tunisia guarantees the freedom of its citizens, no matter what their conduct. If Tunisians abroad do something wrong and are sent back, then we will take them in. But not citizens of other countries.

      http://www.infomigrants.net/en/post/13062/refugee-centers-in-tunisia-out-of-the-question-president-says?ref=tw
      #Tunisie
      ping @_kg_

    • Les plateformes de débarquement pour migrants enterrées ?

      « Les Plateformes de débarquement en Afrique ne sont plus à l’ordre du jour et n’auraient jamais dû l’être », a déclaré le président de la Commission européenne Juncker, ce 26 octobre, lors d’une conférence de presse à Tunis avec le Premier ministre tunisien, Youssef Chahed .

      Etonnant ? Rembobinons la bande-son 4 mois en arrière...

      Les plateformes de débarquement sont une proposition de la Commission européenne faite, à Bruxelles, le 28 juin lors d’un Conseil européen. Son objectif était d’empêcher l’arrivée des personnes migrantes, dites irrégulières, sur le sol européen. Comment ? En les bloquant, en amont, dans des centres fermés, le temps d’examiner leur profil et demande. Et en y débarquant systématiquement les naufragés repêchés en Méditerranée. Ces plates-formes seraient situées sur les côtes africaines notamment en Tunisie et au Maroc. L’Egypte a été également évoquée.

      Cette proposition s’inscrivait dans l’approche dominante de « l’externalisation » de la gestion des frontières prônée de façon croissante par les institutions européennes et ses membres depuis une vingtaine d’années. Depuis 2015, cette approche constitue l’une des orientations majeures des politiques migratoires européennes.

      Pourquoi dès lors, la Commission fait-elle marche arrière quant à ce projet ? Plusieurs raisons peuvent être avancées.

      La première réside dans le fait que cette approche n’atteint pas ses objectifs (endiguer les départs et augmenter les expulsions des personnes en situation irrégulière). Il suffit de voir la situation dans les hotspots d’Italie et de Grèce depuis 2015. A Moria, sur l’île de Lesbos, MSF parle de crise humanitaire due au surpeuplement, aux infrastructures et conditions d’accueil déplorables, ainsi qu’à l’insécurité mettant à mal l’ensemble des droits fondamentaux des personnes, notamment ceux des femmes et des mineurs. Les plus vulnérables se retrouvent dans un cul-de-sac.
      « Moria est devenu pour beaucoup un lieu de transit prolongé le temps que leur demande d’asile soit étudiée », souligne Dimitris Vafeas, le directeur adjoint du camp de Moria. D’autres exemples sont ceux du Niger ou encore de la Libye qui laissent les personnes migrantes dans une situation « d’encampement » permanent ou d’errance circulaire sans fin, faute de voies légales de migrations.

      La seconde explication trouve sa source dans le fait que cette approche ne respecte pas le droit international. En effet, d’une part, selon la Convention de Genève, chacun a le droit de quitter son pays et de demander l’asile dans un pays où sa sécurité sera assurée. Le droit international, s’il autorise un pays à refuser l’immigration, prohibe l’instauration du délit d’émigration : la Déclaration universelle des droits de l’homme stipule ainsi en son article 13 le droit de « quitter tout pays y compris le sien ». De plus, le droit maritime prévoit que tout naufragé sauvé en mer doit être conduit vers le port proche le plus sûr, ce qui implique que les personnes rescapées au large des côtes européennes doivent y être conduite. Enfin, plusieurs pays, à commencer par la Libye, ne représentent en aucun cas des « lieux sûrs », au regard des conditions auxquelles y font face les migrants. Même au Maroc, il y a quelques semaines, le GADEM, association marocaine de défense des droits de l’homme, sortait un rapport dramatique faisant état des violences multiples qu’encourent les personnes migrantes au Maroc.

      La troisième raison est que la majorité des pays en développement ne veulent pas entendre parler de ces plates-formes. Ils accueillent déjà 85 % des personnes réfugiées alors que l’Europe n’en accueille que 6%. Les pays africains tentent donc de faire bloc afin d’installer un rapport de force face aux Européens. Ils savent qu’ils sont désormais des acteurs incontournables du dossier migratoire sur la scène internationale. Cependant, les sommes mises sur la table, tels que les budgets de l’APD, risquent à terme d’effriter ce bloc d’argile, même si ces montants doivent être mis en regard des transferts des diasporas (remittances), nettement plus importants et qui rendent donc les dirigeants des pays d’origine enclins à favoriser les migrations.

      Il est donc temps, vu cet échec, que la Commission européenne change de cap et axe ses politiques non pas sur l’externalisation des questions de l’asile et de la migration, mais sur le renforcement de la solidarité intra-européenne dans l’accueil et sur la mise en œuvre de nouvelles voies sûre et légales de migration. Cela lui permettrait, enfin, de respecter le droit international et de consacrer son APD à la réalisation des Objectifs de développement plutôt qu’à la lutte contre les migrations, fussent-elles irrégulières.

      https://www.cncd.be/Les-plateformes-de-debarquement

    • L’UE bat partiellement en retraite sur les hotspots en Afrique

      Le Conseil voulait débarquer les migrants sauvés en Méditerranée sur les côtes africaines. Face à l’opposition des États africains, le projet a été abandonné, mais l’UE fait toujours pression sur les pays de transit.

      Au sommet du Conseil de juin dernier, les dirigeants européens ont demandé à la Commission d’étudier la possibilité d’instaurer des « plateformes de débarquement régionales » en Afrique, afin d’y envoyer les migrants repêchés par des bateaux européens en Méditerranée.

      L’initiative a tourné court. Dans les jours qui ont suivi le sommet, le Maroc et l’Union africaine se sont mobilisés pour assurer un rejet généralisé des « hotspots » sur les territoires africains.

      Nasser Bourita, le ministre marocain aux Affaires étrangères, a accusé les dirigeants européens de réagir de manière excessive, et souligné que le nombre de migrants tentant d’entrer en Europe a largement chuté. À ce jour, ils sont 80 000 à être arrivés cette année, contre 300 000 en 2016.

      La société civile s’est aussi opposée au projet, estimant que ces camps de migrants seraient contraires aux engagements de l’UE en termes de droits de l’Homme.

      Lors d’une visite en Tunisie le 26 octobre, Jean-Claude Juncker, président de la Commission européenne, a assuré que l’UE ne tentait pas de mettre en place des camps de réfugiés dans le nord de l’Afrique. « Ce n’est plus au programme, et ça n’aurait jamais dû l’être », a-t-il indiqué lors d’une conférence de presse avec le Premier ministre tunisien, Youssef Chahed.

      Une semaine après, la porte-parole de la Commission, Natasha Bertaud, a expliqué que l’exécutif européen préférait à présent parler d’« arrangements de débarquement régionaux ». L’UE a donc commencé à préparer des accords spécifiques avec chacun des pays concernés, dont un échange de financements contre un meilleur contrôle migratoire. Le but est ainsi d’empêcher les migrants d’arriver en Europe.

      Accords en négociations

      Depuis le mois de septembre, des discussions sont en cours entre Bruxelles et le gouvernement égyptien d’Abdel Fattah al-Sissi. Un accord « cash contre migrants » devrait être finalisé avant le sommet UE-Ligue arabe qui aura lieu en février au Caire.

      S’il parait évident que l’Europe ne répétera pas son offre de 4 milliards à la Turquie, l’Égypte devrait demander une aide considérable et des prêts avantageux en échange d’un durcissement du contrôle migratoire. Des accords similaires devraient être conclus avec le Maroc, la Tunisie et la Libye.

      Le timing n’est pas dû au hasard, puisque Abdel Fattah al-Sissi succédera en janvier au Rwandais Paul Kagame à la présidence de l’Union africaine, et que le sommet de février sera centré sur l’immigration.

      Ce n’est pourtant pas parce que l’idée des « hotspots » a été abandonnée que les pays africains échappent aux pressions européennes.

      Le 1er novembre, Reuters indiquait que le ministère marocain des Affaires étrangères avait mis en place une nouvelle obligation pour les ressortissants du Congo Brazzaville, de Guinée et du Mali, qui devront à présent demander un permis de voyage quatre jours avant leur arrivée au Maroc. La plupart des migrants espérant atteindre l’Europe via le Maroc sont guinéens ou maliens.

      L’Espagne fait en effet pression sur Rabat pour réduire le nombre d’arrivées de migrants, notamment via ses enclaves de Ceuta et Melilla.

      Redéfinitions à venir

      Par ailleurs, les conditions de renvoi des migrants seront redéfinies dans le texte qui remplacera l’accord de Cotonou, mais il est clair que l’Europe ne voudra pas les rendre plus strictes. Les discussions entre l’UE et les pays d’Afrique, des Caraïbes et du Pacifique, viennent de commencer.

      L’accord, qui expire en 2020, prévoit que les États africains réintègrent les migrants qui n’obtiennent pas l’autorisation de rester en Europe, une mesure qui n’a cependant pas été mise en pratique. « Les dirigeants africains ne respecteront jamais ces articles sur la migration », indique une source proche des négociations.

      L’Union africaine n’est pas parvenue à unir ses membres pour négocier le successeur de l’accord de Cotonou sur la base d’une position commune face à l’UE, mais les avis sont plus convergents sur la question migratoire. Selon une représentante de la société civile, son plan d’action sur l’immigration est « l’un des meilleurs documents sur la migration ».

      Contrairement à l’UE, divisée entre des pays plutôt accueillants et d’autres comme la Hongrie, la Pologne ou l’Italie, qui défendent des règles extrêmement strictes, les membres de l’Union africaine sont sur la même longueur d’onde sur le sujet. « L’UE n’est pas en position de négocier sur l’immigration, mais l’Union africaine l’est », conclut cette même source.

      Pour montrer à ses citoyens qu’elle agit, l’UE pourrait donc finir par mettre en place des arrangements de contrôle migratoire fragmentés et chers.

      https://www.euractiv.fr/section/migrations/news/eu-lowers-its-ambitions-on-african-migration-control

    • EP lawyers back EU plans for migrant centres in Africa

      Lawyers working at the European Parliament on Tuesday (27 November) struggled to provide a detailed analysis of whether stalled EU plans to offload rescued migrants in north Africa were legal - but ultimately backed the controversial concept.

      “It was at least a brave attempt to piece together, sort of like bits of circumstantial evidence from a kind of a crime scene, to see what the hell this is,” British centre-left MEP Claude Moraes said of their efforts.

      Speaking at the parliament’s civil liberties committee, a lawyer from the legal service was only able to provide an oral summary of their report, citing confidentiality issues.

      But EUobserver has obtained a full copy of the 10-page confidential report, which attempted to provide a legal analysis of stalled EU plans to set up so-called ’regional disembarkation platforms’ in north Africa and controlled centres in Europe.

      The report broadly rubber stamps the legality of both concepts, but with conditions.

      It says “controlled centres and/or disembarkation platforms of a similar nature could be, in principle, lawfully established in the European Union territory.”

      It states disembarkation platforms “could lawfully be established outside of the European Union, in order to receive migrants rescued outside the territory of the Union’s member states.”

      It also says EU law does not apply to migrants rescued at high sea, even with a boat flying an EU-member state flag.

      “We can’t consider a vessel flying a flag of a member state to be an extension of a member state,” the lawyer told the MEPs.

      EU law is also not applied if the migrant is rescued in the territorial waters of an African coastal state, states the report.

      It also notes that people rescued in EU territorial waters cannot then be sent to disembarkation platforms in an non-EU state.

      Morocco and other bordering coastal states must apply the 1951 Geneva Convention and must be considered safe before allowing them to host any disembarkation platform.

      Earlier this year, the European Commission tasked the EU’s asylum support office to analyse the safety of both Morocco and Tunisia.

      But neither country has voiced any interest in hosting such platforms.

      The two countries were then presented over the summer by EU heads of state and government as a possible solution to further stem boat migrants from taking to the seas in their efforts to reach Europe.

      The concepts, initially hatched by the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) and the UN refugee agency (UNHCR), were met with disdain by north African states, who viewed them as a veiled attempt by the EU to outsource its problem back onto them.

      Furthermore, not a single EU state has expressed any interest to host a controlled centre.

      Human rights defenders have also raised alarm given the poor treatment of thousands of refugees and migrants stuck in over-crowded camps on the Greek islands.

      Attempting to replicate similar camps or centres elsewhere has only heightened those fears.

      But the EU says it is pressing ahead anyway.

      “The disembarkation arrangement, the discussion, is proceeding in the Council,” said Vincet Piket, a senior official in the EU’s foreign policy branch, the EEAS.

      https://euobserver.com/migration/143513

    • Et il y a des personnes, qui travaillent pour le HCR, ici #Vincent_Cochetel, qui croient en les plateformes de désembarquement évidemment...

      Good statement of search and rescue organisations, but I would like to see the same advocacy efforts with North African countries. A predictable regional disembarkation mechanism must be a shared responsibility on both sides of the Mediterranean.

      https://twitter.com/cochetel/status/1073190725473484801?s=19

    • African Union seeks to kill EU plan to process migrants in Africa

      Exclusive: Leaked paper shows determination to dissuade coastal states from cooperating.

      The African Union is seeking to kill off the EU’s latest blueprint for stemming migration, claiming that it would breach international law by establishing “de facto detention centres” on African soil, trampling over the rights of those being held.

      A “#common_African_position_paper” leaked to the Guardian reveals the determination of the 55-member state body, currently headed by Egypt, to dissuade any of its coastal states from cooperating with Brussels on the plan.

      The EU set plans for “regional disembarkation platforms” in motion last summer to allow migrants found in European waters to have their asylum requests processed on African soil.

      Brussels has a similar arrangement in place with Libya, where there are 800,000 migrants, 20,000 of whom are being held in government detention centres. The Libyan authorities have been accused of multiple and grave human rights abuses. A UN report recently stated that migrants in the country faced “unimaginable horrors”.

      Some northern states, including Morocco, have already rejected the EU’s proposal over the new “platforms”, but there are concerns within the African Union (AU) that other member governments could be persuaded by the offer of development funds.

      Italy’s far-right interior minister Matteo Salvini has called for the centres to be based around the Sahel region, in Niger, Chad, Mali and Sudan. An inaugural summit between the EU and the League of Arab States is being held in Sharm el-Sheikh in Egypt on Sunday and Monday, and migration is expected to be discussed.

      “When the EU wants something, it usually gets it,” said a senior AU official. “African capitals worry that this plan will see the establishment of something like modern-day slave markets, with the ‘best’ Africans being allowed into Europe and the rest tossed back – and it is not far from the truth.”

      They added: “The feelings are very, very raw about this. And it feels that this summit is about the EU trying to work on some countries to cooperate. Bilaterally, some countries will always look at the money.”

      EU officials, in turn, have been coy about the purposes of the summit, insisting that it is merely an attempt to engage on issues of joint importance.

      The leaked draft joint position of the AU notes that Brussels has yet to fully flesh out the concept of the “regional disembarkation platforms”. But it adds: “The establishment of disembarkation platforms on the African Continent for the processing of the asylum claims of Africans seeking international protection in Europe would contravene International Law, EU Law and the Legal instruments of the AU with regard to refugees and displaced persons.

      “The setup of ‘disembarkation platforms’ would be tantamount to de facto ‘detention centres’ where the fundamental rights of African migrants will be violated and the principle of solitary among AU member states greatly undermined. The collection of biometric data of citizens of AU Members by international organisations violates the sovereignty of African Countries over their citizens.”

      The AU also criticises Brussels for bypassing its structures and warns of wider repercussions. “The AU views the decision by the EU to support the concept of ‘regional disembarkation platforms’ in Africa and the ongoing bilateral consultation with AU member states, without the involvement of the AU and its relevant institutions, as undermining the significant progress achieved in the partnership frameworks and dialogues between our two unions,” the paper says.

      Confidential legal advice commissioned by the European parliament also raises concerns about the legality of establishing processing centres on African soil for those found in European waters.

      The paper, seen by the Guardian, warns that “migrants, after they have been rescued (or a fortiori after they have been brought back on to European Union territory), could not be sent to platforms outside of the European Union without being granted access to the EU asylum procedures and without being granted the possibility to wait for the complete examination of their request”.

      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/24/african-union-seeks-to-kill-eu-plan-to-process-migrants-in-africa