#1

  • Prendre une « année de repos et de détente » avec Ottessa Moshfegh
    https://www.mediapart.fr/journal/culture-idees/110919/prendre-une-annee-de-repos-et-de-detente-avec-ottessa-moshfegh

    Ottessa Moshfegh est une écrivaine à la réputation sulfureuse aux États-Unis et son nouveau roman, « Mon année de repos et de détente », n’est pas près d’arranger son cas. Tant mieux pour nous, car ce drôle de récit aux allures punk est aussi un très beau livre de deuil, qui bute sur le 11-Septembre.

    #La_rentrée_littéraire_de_septembre_2019 #11_Septembre,_Rentrée_littéraire_2019,_littérature_américaine,_Ottessa_Moshfegh

  • Liste des personnes en situation migratoire mortes à la frontière dite « haute » (#Mongenèvre, #Val_Susa, #Col_de_l'Echelle, #Bardonecchia, #Oulx, #Briançon) entre la #France et l’Italie ces dernières années.

    Selon les informations collectées par Eva Ottavy et Lydie Arbogast, qui ont fait une mission de collecte d’info en octobre 2019 dans le cadre du projet de La Cimade « Personnes décédées et disparues aux frontières françaises » :

    5 cas de personnes décédées à la frontière franco-italienne haute ont été recensés dont 3 côté français (Matthew Blessing le 07/05/2018, #Mamadi_Condé le 18/05/2018 et Tamimou Derman le 07/02/2019) et 2 côté italien (Mohamed Fofana le 25/05/2018 et une personne non identifiée le 07/09/2019)

    Mise en garde des deux personnes qui ont fait un rapport intermédiaire de leur mission :

    Il est possible que ce chiffre soit en deçà de la réalité d’une part (difficultés pour mener de recherches dans la zone, possibilité que des personnes aient disparu sans laisser de trace…) et qu’un certain nombre de décès et/ou disparition ont pu être prévenus grâce aux maraudes

    Elles mentionnent notamment le cas d’une personne (nom mentionné dans le rapport, mais je ne le mets pas ici) :
    « Suite à l’appel de deux proches, inquiets d’être sans nouvelle de leur ami depuis le 15/11/2019 (date du dernier contact, lors duquel la personne disparue se trouvait à Oulx en Italie), la disparition de XXX a été signalée au procureur de la république à Gap (France) par l’’association Tous Migrants et au Comando del carabinieri à Oulx (Italie) par une militante italienne. Les recherches menées par les équipes de secours italiennes n’ont rien donné. A ce stade, aucune information n’a été transmise sur les suites données à ce signalement. »

    #frontières #mourir_aux_frontières_alpines #morts #décès #migrations #asile #réfugiés #Alpes #montagne #mourir_aux_frontières #violent_borders #frontière_sud-alpine

    Je vais ajouter à cette métaliste sur les morts à la frontière sud-alpine :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/758646

    • Sur les morts du printemps 2018...

      Tre morti in tre settimane, scoperto il cadavere di un altro migrante in Val di Susa

      Ancora un corpo che spunta tra le neve sporca e i detriti all’Orrido del Frejus.

      Le peggiori previsioni fatte nell’inverno si stanno rivelando fondate. Si scioglie la neve, si contano i cadaveri. È il terzo morto in poche settimane causato dalla militarizzazione della frontiera operata dalle forze dell’ordine in questi ultimi mesi, da quando la chiusura del passaggio di Ventimiglia ha spostato i flussi verso i valichi alpini. Archiviati i dissapori causati dall’invasione di campo della gendermerie a Bardonecchia, ormai dai due lati della frontiera è caccia al nero, con gendarmerie e polizia unite per respingere in Italia i migranti che vogliono arrivare in Francia. Anche a costo di ucciderli. Vittime collaterali dello spettacolo della frontiera, messo su per compiacere l’Unione europea e qualche cinico politico.

      Prima Blessing, una ragazza di 21 anni morta sulle sponde della Durance. Gli amici che erano con lei hanno raccontato che la gendarmeria francese l’ha inseguita di notte per i sentieri scoscesi fino a quando non è caduta nel torrente. Il suo corpo è stato ritrovato a valle qualche giorno dopo. Mamadou, un signore senegalese, invece è morto di sfinimento in montagna. Aveva provato a passare come i suoi coetanei con la pelle bianca in autobus ma la polizia l’ha rispedito indietro, con il nipote ha dovuto inerpicarsi sulla montagna per sfuggire alla battuta di caccia che i gendarmi lanciano ogni giorno e ogni notte, con visori notturni e motoslitte. Da aprile ad aiutare gli agenti sono arrivati i fascisti di Generation identitiare, che con droni ed elicotteri hanno messo in scena un blocco delle frontiere prima che un corteo di trecento valsusini li ridicolizzasse passando la frontiera con qualche decina di migranti. Sotto l’occhio benevole delle autorità francesi e col tifo dei fascisti nostrani, ora continuano di tanto in tanto le loro azioni spot, respingendo i migranti, obbligandoli a percorsi sempre più impervi e a rischiare la vita fino a perderla.

      Durante l’inverno tanti abitanti delle valli frontaliere hanno setacciato i sentieri ed accolto le persone in transito, dando informazioni, soccorrendo chi era in difficoltà anche a costo di denunce e processi. Tre di loro, Bastien, Théo ed Eleonora, sono ancora sottoposti a controllo giudiziario in Francia dopo un passaggio di diverse settimane nel carcere di Marsiglia, in attesa de loro processo che comincerà il 31 maggio. Chi quei sentieri li conosce aveva avvertito: la frontiera uccide. Voleva essere una denuncia, a fare qualcosa prima che fosse troppo tardi. Si è trasformata in una previsione che in questi giorni si è fatta dolorosa realtà.

      Dai due lati della frontiera è stato lanciato un appuntamento per una risposta collettiva, domenica 27 maggio alle 12:30 a Claviere, al rifugio autogestito chez jesus. Non vogliamo contare i corpi, non vogliamo che la Val di susa si trasformi in un cimitero a cielo aperto. Restiamo umani.

      https://www.infoaut.org/migranti/tre-morti-in-tre-settimane-scoperto-il-cadavere-di-un-altro-migrante-in-val

    • #Mohamed_Ali_Bouhamdi , citoyen tunisien, 37 ans.

      Septembre 2019, #Bardonecchia, corps d’un homme retrouvé dans la rivière #Dora :
      https://seenthis.net/messages/800830

      –-> Selon une personne avec qui j’ai discuté et qui habite dans la région et qui s’intéresse à la question, Mohamed ne serait pas décédé parce qu’il est tombé dans la rivière, mais il a probablement été tué ailleurs (crime raciste ? règlement de comptes ?) et son cadavre jeté dans la rivière.

    • Une 5ème victime de la frontière dans les Alpes (passage Bardonneccia/Briançon col de l’Echelle).

      Hier le corps d’un homme a été retrouvé dans le fleuve Dora, près de Bardonnecchia. C’est la cinquième personne tentant de traverser cette frontière, au niveau du col de l’échelle, qui est retrouvé décédée.

      « Ces dernières années tous les moyens ont été mis en place pour que ce genre de chose arrive : militaire en poste dans les forts autrefois abandonnés, gendarmes, police, douane, police en civils, laisser-passer pour les fascistes de génération identitaire venus épauler la flicaille. Les frontières se sont fermées pour les hommes et les femmes non-blanches.
      Les compagnon.n.e.s anarchistes subissent là-haut une répression féroce, les militant.e.s solidaires sont harcelé.e.s.

      All Cops Are Borders
      Burn the borders »

      https://www.facebook.com/collectifmigrants13/posts/2085425978430142?__xts__[0]=68.ARC3SUc6HicLfWSZMxbdmmf_CxCNvhE5BUP-usMmqYF

    • 15.02.2020

      Un groupe de migrants « disparus » récupérés grâce à un dispositif de secours...

      Montgenèvre : les Italiens déploient un important dispositif pour secourir des migrants

      Un groupe de migrants s’est perdu dans la montagne, samedi 15 février, en tentant de traverser la frontière franco-italienne, entre Claviere et Montgenèvre.

      Selon la presse transalpine, ces migrants portés disparus ont été retrouvés et récupérés à la mi-journée sur le sol français alors qu’un important dispositif de recherche avait été déclenché en Italie, dans la Val Susa : sapeurs-pompiers et bénévoles de la Croix-Rouge au sol appuyés dans les airs par l’hélicoptère Dragon pour inspecter les secteurs les plus hauts.

      https://www.ledauphine.com/faits-divers-justice/2020/02/16/montgenevre-les-italiens-deploient-un-important-dispositif-pour-secourir

    • Juin 2021, disparition d’un Soudanais :

      Une enquête pour « disparition inquiétante » a été ouverte vendredi après plus de 48 heures de recherches infructueuses près de Briançon (Hautes-Alpes) pour retrouver un migrant soudanais qui arrivait d’Italie, a annoncé le parquet de Gap.

      Il faisait partie d’un groupe de quatre « jeunes hommes » partis dimanche du village italien d’Oulx pour passer la frontière, a expliqué Didier Fassin, sociologue français présent à Briançon pour aider les migrants et mener des travaux de recherche. C’est lui qui a alerté les secours.

      https://seenthis.net/messages/922630

      Les personnes solidaires à Briançon espèrent qu’il soit en vie :

      Nous avons l’espoir qu’elle a poursuivie sa route car elle n’avait pas de téléphone et donc pas de moyen de se signaler.

    • 06.02.2022, commémor’action des mortEs aux frontières à #Briançon, #La_Vachette :

      La Vachette, Hautes-Alpes, 6 février 2022 : Commémoration des migrant.e.s mort.e.s à la frontière entre l’Italie et la France suite à l’appel collectif à mobilisations dans plusieurs pays à l’occasion de la journée mondiale de lutte contre le régime de mort aux frontières et pour exiger la vérité, la justice et la réparation pour les victimes de la migration et leurs familles.


      https://hanslucas.com/jbenard/photo/52306
      photos de #Julien_Benard

    • Confine italo-francese: una frontiera dove si continua a morire. Appello alle autorità (11.02.2022)

      Le recenti morti di Fathallah Balafhail, 31enne di origine marocchina, trovato senza vita nei primi giorni di gennaio non lontano da Modane, in Francia, Ullah Rezwan Sheyzad, quindicenne proveniente dall’Afghanistan, e della persona deceduta a Latte, la cui identità non può essere accertata a causa delle modalità del decesso, testimoniano con forza la necessità di un cambio di rotta nella gestione dei confini. Le associazioni si appellano alle autorità francesi, italiane e locali attraverso un documento che denuncia la realtà della situazione al confine italo-francese.

      Questi episodi dimostrano chiaramente che malgrado l’aumento dei controlli, la volontà di portare a termine il progetto migratorio spinge le persone a individuare nuove rotte migratorie, a discapito della propria sicurezza, trovando anche la morte.

      Quanto accade nelle aree di frontiera, incluse le recenti morti, è secondo le associazioni firmatarie effetto collaterale di precise scelte politiche adottate tanto a livello locale e nazionale quanto a livello europeo. È necessario ed urgente un cambio di approccio al sistema di gestione delle frontiere interne ed esterne europee che faccia della tutela dei diritti fondamentali e del diritto di asilo il principio giuridico intorno a cui ripensare le politiche migratorie.

      Alle frontiere vengono lesi il diritto di asilo, anche di minori e soggetti vulnerabili, e altri diritti fondamentali quali il diritto alla salute e quello a poter avere accesso ad una anche minima forma di accoglienza così da evitare gravi forme di emarginazione. Viene inoltre leso il diritto alla verità nel momento in cui le persone decedute rimangono senza identità.

      Le organizzazioni firmatarie esprimono il loro sincero ed incondizionato sostegno alle famiglie dei defunti ed invitano le organizzazioni della società civile a promuovere ogni azione utile a contrastare le modifiche del Codice frontiere Schengen e, in senso più ampio, gli ulteriori strumenti previsti dalla Strategia Schengen che siano potenzialmente lesivi dei diritti fondamentali dei cittadini stranieri.

      Chiedono inoltre:

      – alle autorità italiane e francesi di modificare le politiche relative alla gestione delle frontiere interne, con particolare riferimento alle modalità con le quali i controlli di polizia e di frontiera vengono svolti, garantendo il pieno rispetto dei diritti fondamentali e dei principi riconosciuti, in particolare, dalla Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell’Unione europea nonché degli obblighi in materia di protezione internazionale e di non respingimento;

      – alle autorità locali di predisporre servizi adeguati a rispondere alle esigenze e al bisogno di protezione dei migranti presenti nei luoghi di frontiera garantendo in primo luogo accoglienza anche alle persone in transito.

      https://www.asgi.it/primo-piano/confine-italo-francese-una-frontiera-dove-si-continua-a-morire-appello

      –-

      Si ritorna a morire alla frontiera Nord Ovest delle Alpi

      Fathallah Balafhail, 31 anni, è stato trovato morto il 2 gennaio 2022 al Barrage del Freney non lontano da Modane dopo aver cercato di varcare a piedi le Alpi. Veniva dal Marocco, anche lui aveva tentato il giro più lungo passando dalla Turchia e aveva attraversato i Balcani. Aveva vissuto per un certo tempo a Crescentino, paese vicino a Vercelli, poi la partenza, due tentativi falliti di arrivare in Francia, passando da Ventimiglia, e infine l’arrivo in Valle di Susa. L’ultimo suo messaggio alla famiglia risale alle 23.54 dalla stazione di Oulx. Forse aveva trovato un passeur per arrivare dall’altro lato del confine con una macchina. Il tentativo non è coronato da successo e forse matura lì la scelta del cammino in montagna, un percorso lungo e pericoloso, già sperimentato in anni passati e in seguito abbandonato per gli evidenti rischi. Rimane un buco di tre giorni prima del ritrovamento del cadavere. Molti particolari rimangono oscuri e inquietanti. I parenti non hanno avuto accesso ai risultati dell’autopsia. Anche il rimpatrio in Marocco è avvenuto frettolosamente senza attenzione alcuna alla sensibilità della famiglia e ai rituali funerari del paese d’origine. Si rimane invisibili anche dopo la morte. Poche righe su un giornale locale francese hanno liquidato il caso. Nonostante la presenza ricorrente di giornalisti in Alta Valle di Susa, il fatto è rimasto sotto silenzio.

      #Ullah_Rezwan_Sheyzad, 15 anni, afgano: come molti aveva lasciato la sua terra prima della frettolosa ritirata occidentale. Anche per lui, bambino, c’è un cammino lungo che lo porta ad attraversare l’Iran, la Turchia e da lì la scelta, perlopiù effettuata dai giovani che viaggiano soli, di attraversare la Bulgaria, la Serbia, la Croazia e la Slovenia fino ad arrivare in Italia. Come nel caso precedente il percorso scelto è quello più veloce, ma anche viabile solo per giovani o per piccoli gruppi. In meno di un anno arriva in Italia, viene fermato e accolto a Cercivento nella comunità Bosco di Museis, indi riprende il cammino e transita per la Valle di Susa: la meta è il ricongiungimento con la sorella a Parigi. Viene trovato il 26 gennaio 2022, travolto da un treno, lungo le rotaie che collegano Salbertrand a Oulx. Un ragazzo di 15 anni è dunque morto sotto un treno anche se poteva per legge valicare il confine e chiedere legittimamente protezione.

      Non sono la montagna e neppure i treni responsabili di queste morti, ma la frontiera con le sue ramificazioni che non si scollano dalla pelle di chi è catalogato migrante e da chi non può più tornare indietro e non ha terra che lo accolga. Nel 2021 possiamo indicare 15.000 presenze a Oulx; senza contare le persone che sono state registrate più volte dopo i respingimenti in frontiera, possiamo azzardare il passaggio di più di 10.000 persone. Da dicembre dello stesso anno al primo mese di gennaio del nuovo sicuramente i flussi sono diminuiti. I confini si sono moltiplicati anche in relazione a una congiuntura complessa. Le temperature artiche e le tensioni politiche nei Balcani, le difficoltà nell’utilizzo dei trasporti e le norme anticovid hanno sicuramente rallentato momentaneamente l’esodo. Soprattutto hanno reso più difficoltosi gli spostamenti per le famiglie numerose. Tuttavia, la tragedia attuale trova ragione nella militarizzazione alla frontiera e nella caccia all’uomo che si scatena ogni giorno sulle nostre montagne. Una farsa tragica che non ferma i passaggi, ma obbliga le persone in cammino a scegliere vie e strategie che mettono a rischio la vita. I più deboli vengono perlopiù respinti: famiglie numerose, donne gravide, nuclei parentali con bambini piccoli o con anziani. Non bisogna però dimenticare la criticità costantemente presente di un’urgenza vitale delle persone di passare nonostante problemi di salute e vulnerabilità. Nel 2021 abbiamo potuto documentare donne incinte al nono mese, persone con una sola gamba e con stampelle, anziani con problemi sanitari pregressi, donne con neonati che non hanno esitato a sfidare ogni rischio pur di continuare il cammino (si vedano i report precedenti di Medu sulla frontiera alpina del Nord Ovest). È inoltre opportuno ricordare le reiterate volte in cui persone, ancora in attesa di referti e di analisi mediche, sono scappate dagli ospedali pur di non prolungare le permanenze.

      In questo primo mese del 2022, coloro che sono morti di frontiera sono però giovani, che proprio in ragione della loro età e della loro prestanza fisica, credono di poter superare le prove più pericolose. Con il dispiegamento militare sul versante francese e la collaborazione tra polizie di frontiera (accordi europei e tra Italia-Francia), il risultato è stato quello di sponsorizzare l’attività degli smugglers (trafficanti), che in questi mesi sono pericolosamente ricomparsi o, addirittura, hanno occupato la scena. Mentre al rifugio “Fraternità Massi” di Oulx diminuivano le presenze, si consolidava la constatazione di nuove vie che si aprivano. Non si fermano i flussi che, come acque sorgive, quando incontrano sbarramento, deviano e trovano nuovi canali. Così la stazione di servizio di Salbertrand sull’autostrada, a sette chilometri da Oulx, è divenuta luogo per imbarcarsi sui Tir che lì sostano. Con ugual prospettiva, vie impervie sulle montagne a partire da Bardonecchia si sono riaperte. Anche la morte del giovane Ullah racconta come in un luogo geograficamente insensato per passare la frontiera si possa morire. Forse dopo un tentativo fallimentare di trovare un passaggio nel non lontano autogrill di Salbertrand, forse per evitare possibili controlli o forse addirittura nascosto sotto un treno merci, così come è uso fare nei Balcani, è maturato il tragico incidente. Di fatto ci tocca prendere atto che la militarizzazione e il moltiplicarsi degli sbarramenti hanno prodotto illegalità e morte.

      Il caso di Ullah apre un’altra questione, forse non nuova, ma di certo poco analizzata. Scappare dalla guerra gettata addosso e sopravvivere alla guerra che poi l’Europa continua ad effettuare contro chi fugge producono disastri a catena. Abbiamo documentato come con i flussi provenienti dai Balcani dal 2020 ad oggi si siano verificati cambiamenti significativi nella composizione di questi popoli in viaggio: famiglie allargate e presenza plurigenerazionale dei nuclei domestici. Il dato trascurato riguarda però la polverizzazione delle reti familiari e la loro disseminazione in tante nazioni. La disaggregazione di questi nuclei durante il cammino è un elemento significativo e aggiunge apprensione e urgenza nelle persone. Per essere più chiari vale la pena riportare un esempio tra i tanti: un padre con il figlio arriva a Oulx e poi dice a una volontaria “Ti affido il mio bambino di 14 anni affinché possa continuare il viaggio come minore, (consegnandosi alla gendarmerie, n.d.r.), e io ritorno in Grecia a prendere l’altra parte della mia famiglia”. Il viaggio può costare ai singoli e ancor di più alle famiglie cifre ingenti. Per esemplificare 8.000 euro per persona dalla Turchia all’Italia in barcone, 4.000 euro dalla Bosnia a Trieste, dai 20.000 ai 50.000 euro per famiglia dall’Afghanistan al nostro paese (la famiglia di Ullah aveva investito 6.000 euro, dato a reti di trafficanti, per permettere la partenza del figlio anche se ancora tanto giovane). Così alcuni passano prima, altri aspettano e confidano nell’aiuto che proviene da chi è arrivato. A volte sono le donne e i più vulnerabili ad aprire il cammino, altre volte può essere un minore che viene mandato fin dalla terra d’origine a cercare un altro orizzonte di vita. Sempre più spesso raccogliamo memoria di persone che arrivano e che hanno lasciato indietro parenti e non sempre il nucleo che approda alle Alpi è composto solo da consanguinei o affini, ma da aggregazioni solidali. Chi parte ha il peso e la responsabilità di una famiglia e non può fermarsi: è un’Odissea senza che si sappia se davvero esista in qualche luogo una Itaca. Così si muore, invisibili al mondo, sotto le ruote di un treno o scivolando in un lago montano.

      Molti sono i minori non accompagnati che scelgono di non presentarsi alla Paf (Polices aux frontieres) con la conseguente protezione umanitaria che a loro spetta per legge e decidono di affrontare la traversata in modo clandestino pur di non perdere l’ausilio dei compagni di viaggio. L’esperienza insegna che non si deve rimanere mai soli. Quando i minori vengono “catturati” in montagna dalla gendarmerie, il respingimento è prassi. Non v’è spazio né volontà per accertamenti. La situazione si complica ancora, quando, così come abbiamo potuto documentare, il minore, nel porto italiano di entrata, viene indotto dalla polizia con maniere minacciose, a sottoscrivere la sua maggiore età, nonostante i suoi documenti provino il contrario. Il caso è stato vagliato anche dallo sportello legale della diaconia valdese in Oulx.

      Non è da sottovalutare il problema dei green pass e delle vaccinazioni. Istituzioni ed anche ONG spesso non affrontano con abbastanza decisione la questione. La mancanza di attestati che dimostrino il vaccino rende complicati i trasferimenti e, soprattutto, induce le persone in cammino ad accelerare il passo, accettando qualsiasi costo o rischio, pur di non rischiare di rimanere intrappolati e bloccati in tempi di attesa, vuoti quanto indefiniti. Rispetto al problema sostanziale dell’essere senza vaccino, tristemente s’afferma la prassi delle vite diseguali, anche quando in gioco non c’è solo la salute del “migrante” ma quella della collettività. Non ci dimentichiamo quando l’Italia era in fascia rossa e ogni assembramento era vietato per legge mentre in un container presso la stazione di Oulx di circa 18 metri quadrati si accalcavano più di 30 persone. Nessuno ha mai pensato di intervenire o di trovare soluzioni. Poi le persone tornavano al rifugio con rischi di contagio per tutti. Oggi vaccini e documentazione relativa sono una necessità inderogabile. Già solo il fatto che si obblighi a livello nazionale alla vaccinazione e ce ne si dimentichi per coloro che sono in cammino è indicativo di quanto con la categoria migrante pensiamo a “non persone”.

      In questo specchio di frontiera –e la valle di Susa ripropone logiche che si moltiplicano dal Mediterraneo al deserto, dai Balcani alla Libia,-scopriamo quanto valgono gli enunciati sui diritti umani, qui a casa nostra. Il reiterarsi di casi tragici lascia senza parole: arriva notizia di altra persona morta carbonizzata a seguito di folgorazione sul tetto di un treno a Ventimiglia: un’altra vittima che si aggiunge a quelle che hanno insanguinato la frontiera del Nord Ovest (https://www.ansa.it/liguria/notizie/2022/02/01/migrante-muore-folgorato-su-un-treno-per-la-francia_a16cb44f-ba45-4e7f-bff0-811; https://www.avvenire.it/attualita/pagine/migrante-muore-folgorato-su-treno-per-la-francia ).

      Medici per i Diritti umani:

      Chiede alle istituzioni e a tutti gli attori presenti in frontiera di intervenire affinché vengano rispettati i diritti umani delle persone in transito e garantita la loro incolumità e sicurezza.

      Auspica una collaborazione allargata per il monitoraggio dei diritti umani in frontiera.

      Denuncia che la condizione dei minori non accompagnati è affrontata non in base alla legge e alle convenzioni internazionali europee ma spesso con prassi tollerate che le violano.

      Chiede che i vaccini e i green pass siano garantiti alle persone migranti. Le istituzioni e tutti gli attori presenti sul territorio devono occuparsi della vaccinazione. La mancanza di questa non deve essere un’altra frontiera.

      https://mediciperidirittiumani.org/si-ritorna-a-morire-alla-frontiera-nord-ovest-delle-alpi

      –—

      Ritorno sulla rotta alpina, dove il confine continua a uccidere

      Al confine tra Italia e Francia parte l’ultima tappa, la più dura, di un viaggio iniziato migliaia di chilometri prima e che spesso si chiude in tragedia. Come a Oulx dove, nelle ultime settimane, sono morte due persone nel tentativo di attraversare la frontiera. Ci torniamo insieme a Christian Elia per capire come sono cambiate le cose dopo un anno dalla nostra ultima visita.

      Fathallah aveva 31 anni, veniva dal Marocco. Ullah era afghano, aveva 15 anni. Sono morti di frontiera, al confine tra Italia e Francia.

      Il corpo di Balafhail è stato ritrovato il 2 febbraio scorso, al Barrage del Freney, nei pressi di Modane, in Francia. Un volo dal Marocco alla Turchia, che non richiede visti, per affrontare la rotta balcanica. Per un periodo, in questo viaggio che ti lascia scegliere solo l’inizio, si era anche fermato in Italia, in provincia di Vercelli, per tirare il fiato. Un sms alla famiglia, il 30 gennaio alle 23.54 dalla stazione di Oulx, è il suo ultimo segnale di vita. Poi il silenzio, il tentativo di passare a piedi le montagne, la morte di freddo.

      Ullah era ancora un bambino, ma con un’età adulta e feroce, costruita in frontiera. Iran, Turchia, Bulgaria, Serbia, Croazia e Slovenia prima di giungere in Italia, un viaggio lungo più di un anno, per raggiungere Parigi, dove vive sua sorella. È stato trovato il 26 gennaio, sui binari della linea ferroviaria tra Salbertrand e Oulx.

      Un anno fa Open Migration ha raccontato quella frontiere, le vite che la abitano, migranti e volontari che tentano di rendere umano l’inevitabile, di fronte a un discorso istituzionale che continua a negare quella che non è un’emergenza, ma resta una ferita dei sistemi democratici.

      https://twitter.com/MEDUonlus/status/1489615389172674562

      “Non sono la montagna e neppure i treni responsabili di queste morti, ma la frontiera con le sue ramificazioni che non si scollano dalla pelle di chi è catalogato migrante e da chi non può più tornare indietro e non ha terra che lo accolga. Nel 2021 possiamo indicare 15.000 presenze a Oulx; senza contare le persone che sono state registrate più volte dopo i respingimenti in frontiera, possiamo azzardare il passaggio di più di 10.000 persone. Da dicembre dello stesso anno al primo mese di gennaio del nuovo sicuramente i flussi sono diminuiti. I confini si sono moltiplicati anche in relazione a una congiuntura complessa. Le temperature artiche e le tensioni politiche nei Balcani, le difficoltà nell’utilizzo dei trasporti e le norme anti-covid hanno sicuramente rallentato momentaneamente l’esodo. Soprattutto hanno reso più difficoltosi gli spostamenti per le famiglie numerose. Tuttavia, la tragedia attuale trova ragione nella militarizzazione alla frontiera e nella caccia all’uomo che si scatena ogni giorno sulle nostre montagne. Una farsa tragica che non ferma i passaggi, ma obbliga le persone in cammino a scegliere vie e strategie che mettono a rischio la vita. I più deboli vengono perlopiù respinti: famiglie numerose, donne gravide, nuclei parentali con bambini piccoli o con anziani”, racconta l’ultimo rapporto di MEDU (Medici per i Diritti Umani): https://mediciperidirittiumani.org/si-ritorna-a-morire-alla-frontiera-nord-ovest-delle-alpi.

      Un sistema che offende nella sua inutile ferocia. Mentre ovunque, dalla Libia alla Turchia, si sommergono di denaro istituzioni compromesse per motivi molto differenti, che non rispettano i diritti umani, mentre si definiscono ‘paesi sicuri’ Afghanistan e Siria, riprendendo a espellere le persone verso la guerra, non si fa nulla per rendere meno pericolose rotte sempre più costose, sempre più pericolose.

      A Oulx convive una piccola comunità di persone che non lo accettano, connessi con altre realtà solidali della regione, e dell’altro versante della frontiera. Persone con storie differenti, che vengono dall’area antagonista, come dal mondo del volontariato cattolico, ma di fronte al loro impegno quotidiano c’è un silenzio assordante delle istituzioni e un atteggiamento sempre più duro di criminalizzazione della solidarietà.

      Non dimentichiamo mai che si parla di persone, siano essi volontari o migranti, che non hanno mai commesso alcun reato. Sono uomini e donne, vecchi e bambini in viaggio e in fuga. E volontari che portano loro aiuto, ristoro, scarpe per la neve e mappe per non farli smarrire e, di inverno, morire di freddo.

      “Abbiamo documentato come con i flussi provenienti dai Balcani dal 2020 ad oggi si siano verificati cambiamenti significativi nella composizione di questi popoli in viaggio: famiglie allargate e presenza plurigenerazionale dei nuclei domestici. Il dato trascurato riguarda però la polverizzazione delle reti familiari e la loro disseminazione in tante nazioni. La disaggregazione di questi nuclei durante il cammino è un elemento significativo e aggiunge apprensione e urgenza nelle persone. Per essere più chiari vale la pena riportare un esempio tra i tanti: un padre con il figlio arriva a Oulx e poi dice a una volontaria “Ti affido il mio bambino di 14 anni affinché possa continuare il viaggio come minore, (consegnandosi alla gendarmerie, n.d.r.), e io ritorno in Grecia a prendere l’altra parte della mia famiglia” – denuncia MEDU – Il viaggio può costare ai singoli e ancor di più alle famiglie cifre ingenti. Per esemplificare 8.000 euro per persona dalla Turchia all’Italia in barcone, 4.000 euro dalla Bosnia a Trieste, dai 20.000 ai 50.000 euro per famiglia dall’Afghanistan al nostro paese (la famiglia di Ullah aveva investito 6.000 euro, dato a reti di trafficanti, per permettere la partenza del figlio anche se ancora tanto giovane). Così alcuni passano prima, altri aspettano e confidano nell’aiuto che proviene da chi è arrivato. A volte sono le donne e i più vulnerabili ad aprire il cammino, altre volte può essere un minore che viene mandato fin dalla terra d’origine a cercare un altro orizzonte di vita. Sempre più spesso raccogliamo memoria di persone che arrivano e che hanno lasciato indietro parenti e non sempre il nucleo che approda alle Alpi è composto solo da consanguinei o affini, ma da aggregazioni solidali. Chi parte ha il peso e la responsabilità di una famiglia e non può fermarsi: è un’Odissea senza che si sappia se davvero esista in qualche luogo una Itaca. Così si muore, invisibili al mondo, sotto le ruote di un treno o scivolando in un lago montano”.

      Una ferocia che sta segnando generazioni intere, a volte nate e cresciute sulle frontiere. “Figli che ormai conoscono più il cammino che la terra d’origine, una costruzione di umanità e di emozioni itinerante, che conoscono un’altra geografia, che non si limita agli stati nazionali”, raccontava a OM Piero Gorza, antropologo, in una breve pausa nel suo moto perpetuo tra la stazione di Oulx e il Rifugio Massi, o la Casa Cantoniera occupata, sgomberata con violenza, ma che ha dato un letto, un tetto e un pasto caldo a tanti Fatallah e Ullah. “E Oulx, di base, sta a guardare, senza eccessi di rifiuto o di accoglienza. Le persone passano, non si fermano. Portano con loro le relazioni del cammino, con quelle continuano per la loro meta, con la fretta di chi ha impegnato tutto, compresa la rete parentale, per quel cammino.”

      Un’indifferenza che non è solo di Oulx, che non riguarda solo imprenditori del turismo della zona che non vogliono avere lo stigma della ‘Lampedusa delle Alpi’, ma che riguarda tutti noi, come società civile, a Oulx e ovunque. Perché nel 2022 si muore di freddo e di frontiera, come i migranti di Pietro Germi nel film Il cammino della speranza, del 1950, solo che quei migranti erano italiani, ma avevano la stessa fame di futuro di Fathallah e Ullah.

      https://openmigration.org/analisi/ritorno-sulla-rotta-alpina-dove-il-confine-continua-a-uccidere

    • 31.05.2023 :
      NB : Attention : selon les dernières nouvelles reçues oralement par mes contacts à la frontière, personne ne serait décédé. Le corps n’a jamais été trouvé, malgré les recherches. Probablement le migrant qui a signalé le cadavre n’a vu que des habits.
      TRAGEDIA, MIGRANTE MUORE SULLE MONTAGNE TRA LA VALSUSA E LA FRANCIA, ALTRI 9 RECUPERATI DAI SOCCORRITORI
      https://seenthis.net/messages/1004806

  • #métaliste autour de la Création de zones frontalières (au lieu de lignes de frontière) en vue de refoulements

    Je viens de lire dans un compte-rendu de réunion qui a eu lieu à Milan en juin 2019, ce commentaire, sur la situation à la #frontière italo-slovène :

    Gianfranco Schiavone :

    «Quello che sicuramente dovrebbe diventare una questione delicata é l’annunciato avvio delle pattuglie italo slovene in frontiera con l’obiettivo dichiarato alla stampa di bloccare gli arrivi. Con riammissione senza formalita’ delle persone irregolari intercettate nella fascia dei 5 km dalla frontiera . Queste sono le dichiarazioni pubbliche di questi giorni»

    Une #zone_frontalière de #5_km dans laquelle ont lieu des #refoulements directs.

    #Italie #Slovénie #frontière_sud-alpine #migrations #réfugiés #asile #frontière_mobile #bande_frontalière #frontières_mobiles #zone_frontalière #zones_frontalières #zone-frontière

    Ceci me rappelle d’autres cas, en Europe et ailleurs, dans lesquels des procédures semblables (la frontière n’est plus une #ligne, mais une #zone) ont été mises en place, j’essaie de les mettre sur ce fil de discussion.
    Si quelqu’un a d’autres cas à signaler, les contributions sont bienvenues...

    ping @reka @simplicissimus @karine4 @isskein

    • A la frontière entre franco-italienne :

      Dans un amendement, l’élu a proposé « une zone limitée aux communes limitrophes ou une bande de 10 kms par rapport à la frontière. » Le gouvernement en a accepté le principe, mais « le délimitera de manière précise par décret pour coller à la réalité du terrain. »

      http://alpesdusud.alpes1.com/news/locales/67705/alpes-du-sud-refus-d-entree-pour-les-migrants-vers-une-evolution-
      #France #Italie #frontière_sud-alpine

    • L’article 10 de la loi renforçant la sécurité intérieure et la lutte contre le terrorisme modifie l’article 78-2 du Code de procédure pénale relatif aux contrôles d’identités. Il permet ainsi des contrôles aux frontières pour une durée de douze heures consécutives (contre six auparavant). Il les élargit « aux abords » de 373 gares et dans un rayon de dix kilomètres des ports et aéroports au nombre des points de passage frontaliers. Bien au-delà des simples frontières de l’Hexagone, c’est une partie importante du territoire français qui est ainsi couvert, dont des villes entières comme Paris, Lyon, Toulouse, Marseille, etc.

      source, p.25 : https://www.lacimade.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/La_Cimade_Schengen_Frontieres.pdf
      #France

    • Frontière entre #Italie et #Slovénie :

      This month saw the introduction of joint Slovenian and Italian police patrols on their mutual border, raising concerns about the retrenchment of national boundaries contra the Schengen Agreement. The collaboration between authorities, due to be implemented until the end of September, mobilises four joint operations per week, with respective police forces able to enter 10km into the territory of their neighboring state in order to apprehend migrants. Mixed operations by member states signifies a growing trend towards the securitization of the EU’s internal borders, and in this case a tightening of controls on the departure point from the West Balkan route.

      The patrols aim at stemming the transit of migrants from the western Slovenian regions of #Goriška and #Obalno-kraška, into the eastern region of Friuli Venezia Giulia, Italy. Given the extensive pushback apparatus being employed by Slovenian and Croatian officials, arrival in Italy has often been the first place where persons-in-transit can apply for international protection without the threat of summary removal. However, these developments in cross border patrols highlight a growing effort on the part of the Italian government to prevent people seeking sanctuary on its territory.

      (p.15-16)

      https://www.borderviolence.eu/wp-content/uploads/July-2019-Final-Report.pdf

      –—

      While the exact number of persons arriving via the Slovenian-Italian border is unknown, there has been a sharp rise since April (http://www.regioni.it/dalleregioni/2020/11/09/friuli-venezia-giulia-immigrazione-fedriga-ripensare-politiche-di-controllo-) of people entering Italy from the Balkan route. Not only in Trieste, but also around the province of #Udine, arrivals have increased compared to last year. In Udine, around 100 people (https://www.ansa.it/friuliveneziagiulia/notizie/2020/11/30/migranti-oltre-cento-persone-rintracciate-nelludinese_9fdae48d-8174-4ea1-b221-8) were identified in one day. This has been met with a huge rise in chain pushbacks, initiated by Italian authorities via readmissions to Slovenia. From January to October 2020, 1321 people (https://www.rainews.it/tgr/fvg/articoli/2020/11/fvg-massimiliano-fedriga-migranti-arrivi-emergenza-98da1880-455e-4c59-9dc9-6) have been returned via the informal readmissions agreement , representing a fivefold increase when compared with the statistics from 2019.

      But instead of dealing with this deficit in adherence to international asylum law, in recent months Italian authorities have only sought to adapt border controls to apprehend more people. Border checks are now focusing on trucks, cars and smaller border crossings (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fu4es3xXVc8&feature=youtu.be

      ), rather than focusing solely on the military patrols of the forested area. This fits into a strategy of heightened control, pioneered by the Governor of the Friuli Venezia Giulia Region Massimiliano Fedriga who hopes to deploy more detection equipment at the border. The aim is to choke off any onward transit beyond the first 10km of Italian territory, and therefore apply the fast tracked process of readmission to the maximum number of new arrivals.

      https://seenthis.net/messages/892914

      #10_km

    • Kuster Backs Bill To Reduce 100-Mile Zone for Border Patrol Checkpoints

      Congresswoman Ann McLane Kuster is cosponsoring legislation to reduce border zones from 100 to 25 miles from the border (https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/3852?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22border+zone%22%5D%7D&s=1&r=1), within which U.S. Customs and Border Patrol can set up immigration checkpoints.

      Congressman Peter Welch of Vermont is the prime sponsor of the legislation.

      Kuster was stopped at one such immigration checkpoint in June of this year. The checkpoint, on I-93 in Woodstock, around 90 miles from the border, resulted in 29 tickets for alleged immigration violations.

      The violations were for legal visitors who did not have appropriate paperwork on them, according to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

      According to a map from CityLabs, the entire state of New Hampshire falls within a border zone (which includes coastal borders).

      “I think it has a chilling effect,” says Kuster. “It’s not the free and open America that we know.”

      Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy introduced a similar bill to the Senate.

      https://www.nhpr.org/post/kuster-backs-bill-reduce-100-mile-zone-border-patrol-checkpoints#stream/0
      #USA #Etats-Unis

    • Inside the Massive U.S. ’Border Zone’

      All of Michigan, D.C., and a large chunk of Pennsylvania are part of the area where Border Patrol has expanded search and seizure rights. Here’s what it means to live or travel there.

      https://cdn.citylab.com/media/img/citylab/2018/05/03_Esri_Map/940.png?mod=1548686763

      https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/05/who-lives-in-border-patrols-100-mile-zone-probably-you-mapped/558275
      #cartographie #visualisation
      #100-Mile_Zone

      déjà signalé sur seenthis par @reka en 2018 :
      https://seenthis.net/messages/727225

    • En #Hongrie, les pushbacks, largement pratiqués depuis des années, ont été légalisés en mars 2017 par de nouvelles dispositions permettant aux forces de l’ordre de refouler automatiquement toute personne interpellée sur le territoire hongrois et considérée en situation irrégulière. Ces personnes sont ramenées jusqu’à la clôture et renvoyées de l’autre côté. Si elles manifestent leur volonté de demander l’asile, on leur signifie qu’elles doivent repartir en Serbie et passer par les zones de transit. Pourtant, se trouvant géographiquement et juridiquement en Hongrie (le mur étant situé à 1,5 mètre à l’intérieur du tracé officiel de la frontière), les autorités ont l’obligation de prendre en compte ces demandes d’asile en vertu des conventions européennes et des textes internationaux dont la Hongrie est signataire.

      Tiré du rapport de La Cimade (2018), pp.37-38 :
      https://www.lacimade.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/La_Cimade_Schengen_Frontieres.pdf

    • Le zone di transito e di frontiera – commento dell’ASGI al decreto del Ministero dell’Interno del 5 agosto 2019

      Il 7 settembre 2009 sulla Gazzetta Ufficiale n. 210 (https://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2019/09/07/19A05525/sg) è stato pubblicato il decreto del Ministero dell’Interno del 5 agosto 2019 che individua le zone di transito e di frontiera dove potrà trovare applicazione la procedura accelerata per l’esame nel merito delle domande di protezione internazionale e istituisce due nuove sezioni delle Commissioni territoriali , come previsto dall’art. 28 bis co. 1 quater del D.lgs. n. 25/2008, introdotto dal d.l. n. 113/2018.

      Le zone di frontiera o di transito sono individuate in quelle esistenti nelle seguenti province:

      –Trieste e Gorizia;

      –Crotone, Cosenza, Matera, Taranto, Lecce e Brindisi;

      –Caltanissetta, Ragusa, Siracusa, Catania, Messina;

      –Trapani, Agrigento;

      –Città metropolitana di Cagliari e Sud Sardegna.

      Il decreto ministeriale istituisce altresì due nuove sezioni , Matera e Ragusa, le quali operano rispettivamente nella commissione territoriale per il riconoscimento dello status di rifugiato di Bari, per la zona di frontiera di Matera, e nella commissione territoriale di Siracusa, per la zona di frontiera di Ragusa.

      Nel commento qui pubblicato ASGI sottolinea come le nuove disposizioni paiono contrastare con le norme dell’Unione Europea perché si riferiscono in modo assolutamente generico alle “zone di transito o di frontiera individuate in quelle esistenti nelle province” e non ad aree delimitate, quali ad esempio i porti o le aree aeroportuali o altri luoghi coincidenti con frontiere fisiche con Paesi terzi non appartenenti all’Unione europea.

      ASGI evidenzia come “l’applicazione delle procedure accelerate alle domande presentate nelle zone individuate nel decreto ministeriale comporta una restrizione dell’effettivo esercizio dei diritti di cui ogni straniero è titolare allorché manifesta la volontà di presentare la domanda di asilo e una conseguente contrazione del diritto di difesa, in ragione del dimezzamento dei termini di impugnazione e dell’assenza di un effetto sospensivo automatico derivante dalla proposizione del ricorso previsti, in modo differente per le varie ipotesi specifiche, dall’art. 35 bis D. Lgs. 25/08”.

      A tal fine ASGI ricorda che:

      – ai cittadini di Paesi terzi o apolidi tenuti in centri di trattenimento o presenti ai valichi di frontiera, comprese le zone di transito alla frontiere esterne, che desiderino presentare una domanda di protezione internazionale, gli Stati membri devono garantire l’informazione, anche sull’accesso procedura per il riconoscimento della protezione internazionale, adeguati servizi di interpretariato,
      nonché l’effettivo accesso a tali aree alle organizzazioni e alle persone che prestano consulenza e assistenza ai richiedenti asilo (art. 8 Direttiva 2013/32/UE);

      – gli Stati membri devono provvedere affinché l’avvocato o altro consulente legale che assiste o rappresenta un richiedente possa accedere alle aree chiuse, quali i centri di trattenimento e le zone di transito (art. 23 par. 2) e analoga possibilità deve essere garantita all’UNHCR (art. 29, par. 1);

      – ai sensi dell’art. 46 par. 1 il richiedente ha diritto a un ricorso effettivo dinanzi a un giudice anche nel caso in cui la decisione sulla domanda di protezione internazionale venga presa in frontiera o nelle zone di transito.

      E’ evidente, conclude ASGI nel commento al Decreto, che vi sia il rischio che lo straniero espulso o respinto e che abbia presentato domanda di protezione internazionale dopo l’espulsione o il respingimento in una zona di frontiera tra quelle indicate nel nuovo decreto ministeriale si veda esaminata la sua domanda in modo sommario mentre è trattenuto in condizioni e luoghi imprecisati e inaccessibili di fatto a difensori e organizzazioni di tutela dei diritti.

      Occorre invece ribadire che la presentazione della domanda di protezione internazionale in frontiera riguarderà spesso persone rese ulteriormente vulnerabili dalle condizioni traumatiche del viaggio ed alle quali andrà perciò in ogni caso garantito un esame adeguato della domanda di protezione internazionale e l’applicazione delle garanzie e dei diritti previsti a tutela dei richiedenti protezione internazionale dalle disposizioni nazionali e dell’Unione Europea.

      https://www.asgi.it/asilo-e-protezione-internazionale/asilo-zone-transito-frontiera

    • La loi renforçant la lutte contre le terrorisme étend à nouveau les contrôles d’identités frontaliers

      Avant l’entrée en vigueur de la loi du 30 octobre 2017, les #contrôles_frontaliers étaient autorisés dans les espaces publics des #gares, #ports et #aéroports ouverts au trafic international (désignés par un arrêté ministériel) et dans une zone située entre la frontière terrestre et une ligne tracée de 20 kilomètres en deçà. Le législateur avait étendu les zones frontalières, notamment dans les territoires ultra-marins (où la convention de Schengen n’est pourtant pas applicable).

      https://www.editions-legislatives.fr/actualite/la-loi-renforcant-la-lutte-contre-le-terrorisme-etend-a-nouvea
      #France #20_km #20_kilomètres #espace_public #gares_internationales

    • The Grand Chamber Judgment in Ilias and Ahmed v Hungary: Immigration Detention and how the Ground beneath our Feet Continues to Erode

      The ECtHR has been for a long time criticized for its approach to immigration detention that diverts from the generally applicable principles to deprivation of liberty in other contexts. As Cathryn Costello has observed in her article Immigration Detention: The Ground beneath our Feet, a major weakness in the Court’s approach has been the failure to scrutinize the necessity of immigration detention under Article 5(1)(f) of the ECHR. The Grand Chamber judgment in Ilias and Ahmed v Hungary delivered on 21 November 2019 has further eroded the protection extended to asylum-seekers under the Convention to the point that restrictions imposed upon asylum-seekers might not even be qualified as deprivation of liberty worthy of the protection of Article 5. The Grand Chamber overruled on this point the unanimously adopted Chamber judgment that found that the holding of asylum-seekers in the ‘transit zone’ between Hungary and Serbia actually amounts to deprivation of liberty.

      In this blog, I will briefly describe the facts of the case, the findings of the Grand Chamber under Article 3 ECHR that was also invoked by the applicants and then I will focus on the reasoning as to the applicability of Article 5.

      The case concerned two Bangladeshi nationals who transited through Greece, the Republic of Northern Macedonia (as it is now known) and Serbia before reaching Hungary, where they immediately applied for asylum. They found themselves in the transit zone on the land border between Hungary and Serbia, where they were held for 23 days pending the examination of their asylum applications. The applications were rejected on the same day on the ground that the applicants had transited through Serbia that, according to Hungary, was a safe third country. The rejections were confirmed on appeal, an order for their expulsion was issued, the applicants were escorted out of the transit zone and they crossed back into Serbia.

      Procedural Breach of Article 3 ECHR

      The Grand Chamber established that Hungary ‘failed to discharge its procedural obligation under Article 3 of the Convention to assess the risks of treatment contrary to that provision before removing the applicants from Hungary’ to Serbia (para 163). No finding was made on the issue as to whether Hungary was substantively in breach of the right not to be subjected to refoulement given the conditions in Serbia and the deficiencies in the Serbian asylum procedures that might lead to chain refoulement. This omission follows a trend in the Court’s reasoning that can be described as a procedural turn: focus on the quality of the national decision making processes rather than on the substantive accuracy of the decisions taken at national level.[1] This omission, however, had important consequences for the application of Article 5 to the applicants’ case, the most controversial aspect in the Grand Chamber’s reasoning.

      The Chamber’s reasoning under Article 5 ECHR

      On this aspect, the Grand Chamber departed from the Chamber’s conclusion that the applicants were deprived of their liberty. The fundamental question here is whether ‘the stay’ (Hungary used the term ‘accommodation’) of asylum-seekers in the ‘transit zone’ with an exit door open to Serbia, but closed to Hungary, amounts to deprivation of liberty (i.e. detention) in the sense of Article 5 ECHR. Asylum seekers in the transit zone were denied access to the Hungarian territory,[2] but they could leave to Serbia. This creates a complex intertwinement between deprivation of liberty (Article 5(1)(f)) normally understood as not allowing somebody to leave a place, on the one hand, and not allowing somebody to enter a place. Entering a State can be very relevant from the perspective of the obligation upon this State not to refoule, which necessitates a procedure for determining whether there is a risk of refoulement.

      In its judgment from 14 March 2017 the Chamber unanimously answered in positive: by holding them in the transit zone, Hungary deprived the applicants from their liberty, which was in violation of Article 5(1)(f) since this measures had no legal basis in the national law. The Chamber clarified that‘[t]he mere fact that it was possible for them to leave voluntarily returning to Serbia which never consented to their readmission cannot rule out an infringement of the right to liberty.’ (para 55). In this way the Chamber reaffirmed the reasoning in Amuur v France where the Court observed ‘[…] this possibility [to leave voluntary the country] becomes theoretical if no other country offering protection comparable to the protection they expect to find in the country where they are seeking asylum is inclined or prepared to take them in.’ (para 48) It follows that although the transit zone at the French airport was, as France argued, “open to the outside”, the applicants were still considered as having been detained since this ‘outside’ did not offer a level of protection comparable to the one in France.

      The Chamber followed this reasoning from Amuur v France in Ilias and Ahmed v Hungary, which led to the recognition that ‘[…] the applicants could not have left the transit zone in the direction of Serbia without unwanted and grave consequences, that is, without forfeiting their asylum claims and running the risk of refoulement’ (para 55). The Chamber also added that ‘To hold otherwise would void the protection afforded by Article 5 of the Convention by compelling the applicants to choose between liberty and the pursuit of a procedure ultimately aimed to shelter them from the risk of exposure to treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention.’ (para 56)

      The ‘practical and realistic’ approach of the Grand Chamber under Article 5 ECHR

      The Grand Chamber in its reasoning broke precisely this linkage between the applicability of Article 5 (the qualification of a treatment as deprivation of liberty) and Article 3 (protection from refoulement). The Grand Chamber performed the following important moves to achieve this. First, it stated that ‘its approach should be practical and realistic, having regard to the present-day conditions and challenges’, which implied that States were not only entitled to control their borders, but also ‘to take measures against foreigners circumventing restrictions on immigration.’ (para 213). With Ilias and Ahmed v Hungary the Court has thus added another nuance to its well-established point of departure in cases dealing with migrants. This point of departure has been that States are entitled, subject to their treaty obligations, to control their borders. The new addition introduced with Ilias and Ahmed v Hungary and also repeated in Z.A. and Others v Russia, a Grand Chamber judgment issued on the same day, concerns States’ right to prevent ‘foreigners circumventing restrictions on immigration’. This addition, however, does not seem appropriate given that the applicants themselves in Ilias and Ahmed v Hungary never circumvented any immigration control restrictions. They applied immediately for asylum.

      This ‘practical and realistic approach’ also implied an endorsement of the representation of the situation as one of ‘crisis’:[3] ‘the Court observes that the Hungarian authorities were in conditions of a mass influx of asylum-seekers and migrants at the border, which necessitated rapidly putting in place measures to deal with what was clearly a crisis situation.’ (para 228) In the same paragraph, the Grand Chamber went on to almost praise Hungary for having processed the applicants’ claims so fast event though it was ‘a crisis’: ‘Despite the ensuring very significant difficulties, the applicants’ asylum claims and their judicial appeals were examined within three weeks and two days.’ It appears as if the Grand Chamber at this stage had already forgotten its findings made earlier in the judgment under Article 3 that the national procedure for examining the applicants’ claims was deficient. This ultimately gave the basis for the Grand Chamber to find a violation of Article 3.

      The distinction based on how asylum-seekers arrive and the type of border they find themselves at

      The second move performed by the Grand Chamber implied the introduction of a distinction between ‘staying at airport transit zones’ (para 214) and at reception centers located on islands (para 216), on the one hand, and a transit zone located on the land border between two Council of Europe Member States (para 219). This meant, as the Court reasoned, that the applicants did not have to take a plane to leave the zone, they could simply walk out of the zone. In other words, it was practically possible for them to do it on their own and they did not need anybody’s help. As the Court continued to reason in para 236, ‘Indeed, unlike the case of Amuur, where the French courts described the applicants’ confinement as an “arbitrary deprivation of liberty”, in the present case the Hungarian authorities were apparently convinced that the applicants could realistically leave in the direction of Serbia [emphasis added].’ This quotation also begs the comment as to why what the national authorities were or were not convinced about actually mattered. In addition, the reference in Ilias and Ahmed v Hungary as to how the national authorities had qualified the situation is also bizarre given that ‘deprivation of liberty’ is an autonomous concept under the Convention. On this point, the two dissenting judges, Judge Bianku and Judge Vućinić criticized the majority by highlighting that ‘the Court has reiterated on many occasions that it does not consider itself bound by the domestic courts’ legal conclusions as to the existence of a deprivation of liberty.’

      Narrowing down the importance of Amuur v France

      The third move performed by the Court is playing down the importance of and narrowing the relevance of Amuur v France. In Ilias and Ahmed v Hungary the Grand Chamber reiterated (para 239) the most significant pronouncement from Amuur: the possibility to leave the zone ‘becomes theoretical if no other country offering protection comparable to the protection they expect to find in the country where they are seeking asylum is included to take them in.’ It then noted that this reasoning ‘must be read in close relation to the factual and legal context in that case.’ This meant that in contrast to the situation in Ilias and Ahmed v Hungary, in Amuur the applicants could not leave ‘without authorization to board an airplane and without diplomatic assurance concerning their only possible destination, Syria, a country “not bound by the Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees.’ (para 240) On this point Ilias and Ahmed v Hungary can be also distinguished from Z.A. and Others v Russia, where the Grand Chamber observed that ‘[…] unlike in land border transit zones, in this particular case leaving the Sheremetyevo airport transit zone would have required planning, contacting aviation companies, purchasing tickets and possibly applying for a visa depending on the destination.’ (para 154) For the applicants in Ilias and Ahmed ‘it was practically possible […] to walk to the border and cross into Serbia, a country bound by the Geneva Convention.’ (para 241). The Grand Chamber acknowledged that the applicants feared of the deficiencies in the Serbian asylum procedure and the related risk of removal to the Republic of North Macedonia or Greece. (para 242) However, what seems to be crucial is that their fears were not related to ‘direct threat to their life or health’ (para 242). It follows that the possibility to leave for a place will not preclude the qualification of the situation as one of detention, only if this place poses a direct threat to life or health.

      As noted by the two dissenting judges, it did not seem to matter for the majority that the applicants could not enter Serbia lawfully. In this way, the majority’s reasoning under Article 5 appears to endorse a situation where people are just pushed out of the border without some formal procedures with elementary guarantees.

      Read as a whole the Grand Chamber judgment in Ilias and Ahmed v Hungary is inconsistent: it contains two findings that are difficult to square together. The Court concluded that since the applicants would not be exposed to a direct risk in Serbia, they were not detained in Hungary. At the same time, Hungary violated Article 3 of the Convention since it did not conduct a proper assessment of the risks that the applicants could face if they were to return to Serbia.

      Overall weakening of the protection of Article 5 ECHR

      One final comment is due. In Ilias and Ahmed v Hungary, the Grand Chamber summarized the following factors for determining whether ‘confinement of foreigners in airport transit zones and reception centers’ can be defined as deprivation of liberty: ‘i) the applicants’ individual situation and their choices, ii) the applicable legal regime of the respective country and its purpose, iii) the relevant duration, especially in the light of the purpose and the procedural protection enjoyed by applicants pending the events, and iv) the nature and degree of the actual restrictions imposed on or experienced by the applicants.’ (para 217) (see also Z.A. and Others v Russia, para 145) Among these criteria particular attention needs to be directed to the applicable legal regime and the availability of procedural protection. In principle, Article 5, if found applicable, offers certain guarantees (e.g. statutory basis for the deprivation of liberty, access to proceedings for challenging the lawfulness of the detention). The Court seems to have inserted such considerations at the definitional stage of its analysis. For example, in Z.A. and Others v Russia, the Grand Chamber when it examined whether the confinement of the applicants in the airport transit zone amounted to deprivation of liberty, noted that they were left ‘in a legal limbo without any possibility of challenging the measure restricting their liberty’ (para 146). This played a role for the Grand Chamber to conclude that the applicants in Z.A. and Others v Russia were indeed deprived of liberty and Article 5 was thus found applicable. In contrast, the Grand Chamber in Ilias and Ahmed v Hungary observed that certain procedural guarantees applied to the applicants’ case (para 226), which also played a role for the final conclusion that Article 5 was not applicable. In sum, instead of scrutinizing the national legal regime and the access to procedural guarantees as part of the substantive analysis under Article 5, where a single deficiency leads to a finding of a violation (i.e. it is sufficient to find a violation of Article 5 if there is no strictly defined statutory basis for the applicants’ detention), the Court has muddled these criteria together with other factors and made them pertinent for the definitional analysis. This ultimately weakens the roles of these criteria and creates uncertainty.

      [1] See V Stoyanova, ‘How Exception must “Very Exceptional” Be? Non-refoulement, Socio-Economic Deprivation and Paposhvili v Belgium’ (2017) International Journal of Refugee Law 29(4) 580.

      [2] See B Nagy, ‘From Reluctance to Total Denial: Asylum Policy in Hungary 2015-2018’ in V Stoyanova and E Karageorgiou (eds) The New Asylum and Transit Countries in Europe during and in the Aftermath of the 2015/2016 Crisis (Brill 2019) 17.

      [3] Boldizsar Nagy has argued that this representation made by the Hungarian government is a lie. See B Nagy, Restricting access to asylum and contempt of courts: illiberals at work in Hungary, https://eumigrationlawblog.eu/restricting-access-to-asylum-and-contempt-of-courts-illiberals-at

      https://strasbourgobservers.com/2019/12/23/the-grand-chamber-judgment-in-ilias-and-ahmed-v-hungary-immigra
      #justice #CEDH #Hongrie #CourEDH

    • Entre la #Pologne et la #Biélorussie :

      Si cette famille a pu être aidée, c’est aussi parce qu’elle a réussi à dépasser la zone de l’état d’urgence : une bande de 3 km tracée par la Pologne tout du long de sa frontière avec la Biélorussie, formellement interdite d’accès aux organisations comme aux journalistes.
      Le long de la frontière, les migrants se retrouvent donc seuls entre les gardes-frontières polonais et biélorusses. Côté polonais, ils sont ramenés manu militari en Biélorussie… En Biélorussie, ils sont également refoulés : depuis octobre, le pays refuse de laisser entrer les migrants déjà passés côté européen. « La seule chance de sortir de la Pologne, c’est d’entrer en Biélorussie. La seule chance de sortir de la Biélorussie, c’est d’entrer en Pologne. C’est comme un ping-pong », confie Nelson (pseudonyme), un migrant originaire de la République démocratique du Congo qui a contacté notre rédaction.

      https://seenthis.net/messages/948199
      et plus précisément ici :
      https://seenthis.net/messages/948199#message948201

      –-

      Et l’article de Médiapart :
      Entre la Pologne et le Belarus, les migrants abandonnés dans une #zone_de_non-droit
      https://seenthis.net/messages/948199#message948202

    • « À titre de mesures compensatoires à l’entrée en vigueur de la convention de Schengen – qui, du reste, n’était pas encore applicable –, la loi du 10 août 1993 instaure les contrôles dits frontaliers : la police, la gendarmerie et la douane peuvent vérifier l’identité de toute personne, pour s’assurer qu’elle respecte les obligations liées à la détention d’un titre de circulation ou de séjour, dans la zone frontalière et dans les zones publiques des ports, aéroports et gares ouvertes au trafic international. La zone frontalière est une bande de terre, large de 20 km, longeant la frontière terrestre ; les ports, gares ou autres aérogares visés figurent sur une longue liste fixée par un arrêté ministériel. »

      (Ferré 2018 : 16)

      –-

      « Il suffit de passer quelques heures à la gare de Menton pour le constater. Pour les personnes présumées étrangères, la liberté d’aller et de venir dans les espaces placés sous surveillance est restreinte. Elle a encore été réduite avec la loi du 30 octobre 2017 renforçant la sécurité intérieure et la lutte contre le terrorisme qui modifie, une fois de plus, le texte de loi sur les contrôles d’identité en étendant les zones frontalières autour de certains ports et aéroports qui constituent des points de passage frontaliers au sens du code frontières Schengen, soit « tout point de passage autorisé par les autorités compétentes pour le franchissement des frontières extérieures ». Dans ces nouvelles zones, la police pourra procéder à des opérations de contrôle sans avoir besoin de motiver son intervention. La loi de 2017 a également prévu que les contrôles frontaliers puissent s’effectuer « aux abords des gares » et non plus seulement dans les zones publiques de ces lieux. La formulation souffre, c’est peu de le dire, d’un manque de précision qui donne plus de latitude encore aux forces de l’ordre. »

      (Ferré 2018 : 19)

      source : Nathalie Ferré, « La France s’enferme à double tour », Plein Droit, 2018, n°116.

      #20_km #20_kilomètres

    • #Pyrénées, frontière #Espagne-#France, témoignage d’une personne ayant acheté un terrain en zone frontalière :

      « En ce moment, on croise plein de voitures de forces de l’ordre, ce qui est étonnant en plein hiver car il n’y a personne. Il y a aussi des barrages de police réguliers car ils savent que des gens se font prendre sur la route », raconte Camille Rosa, cofondatrice d’une cantine solidaire à Perpignan. « On a acheté avec des copains un petit terrain vers Cerbère. Un jour, des gendarmes sont venus fouiller notre camion alors que mes enfants faisaient la sieste à l’intérieur. J’ai tenté de m’interposer, mais ils m’ont dit que sur la #zone_frontalière, ils avaient une #commission_rogatoire_permanente », poursuit-elle.

      https://seenthis.net/messages/950934

    • #France :

      Le contrôle d’identité « Schengen » permet de vérifier le respect des obligations liées aux titres et documents d’identité et de voyage. Il peut avoir lieu dans une zone située à moins de #20_kilomètres de la frontière terrestre séparant la France d’un pays limitrophe (Allemagne, Belgique, Espagne, Italie, Luxembourg et Suisse). Si le contrôle a lieu sur l’autoroute ou dans un train, la zone s’étend jusqu’au 1er péage ou l’arrêt après les 20 kilomètres. Le contrôle peut être effectué dans un port, un aéroport ou une gare et ses abords accessible au public et ouverte au trafic international. Le contrôle ne peut pas être pratiqué plus de 12 heures consécutives dans un même lieu et ne peut pas être systématique.

      Depuis la loi n° 2017-1510 du 30 octobre 2017 renforçant la sécurité intérieure, des contrôles d’identité peuvent également être effectués dans un rayon de #10_kilomètres autour de certains #ports et #aéroports sur le territoire.

      C’est ce dernier contrôle qui concerne majoritairement les personnes se présentant à la frontière francoitalienne, mais certaines situations suivies par les militants locaux laissent penser que d’autres types de contrôles ont pu servir pour justifier les arrestations de personnes au-delà de la bande des 20 kilomètres ou des zones transfrontalières.

      Rapport de l’Anafé, Persona non grata, 2019 : http://www.anafe.org/spip.php?article520

      –—

      Rapport CNCDH 2018, p.7 :

      « la préfète des Hautes-Alpes a expliqué que la zone permettant de procéder à des refus d’entrée avait été définie par son prédécesseur mais qu’elle ne correspondait pas nécessairement à la bande des 20 kms14. Selon la PAF, les refus d’entrée peuvent être prononcés dès lors que l’étranger est contrôlé sur le territoire des communes de Montgenèvre et Nevache, et donc jusqu’à l’entrée de Briançon. »
      Il convient de rappeler que des contrôles aléatoires, hors du cadre dérogatoire prévu en cas de rétablissement des frontières, peuvent être opérés, conformément à l’article 78-2 du code de procédure pénale, dans une zone comprise entre la frontière terrestre de la France avec les Etats de l’espace et une ligne tracée à 20 kilomètres en deçà, ainsi que dans les zones accessibles au public des ports, aéroports et gares ferroviaires ou routières ouverts au trafic international et désignés par arrêté et aux abords de ces gares. Ces contrôles sont toutefois strictement encadrés, notamment par la jurisprudence de la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne. Les personnes interpellées sur ce fondement peuvent faire l’objet d’une procédure de réadmission. En revanche, lorsque les contrôles aux frontières intérieures sont rétablis, les autorités françaises peuvent refuser l’entrée aux étrangers ne remplissant pas les conditions d’entrée sur le territoire aux frontières terrestres et leur notifier une décision de non-admission. Ces étrangers sont considérés comme n’étant pas entrés sur le territoire

      https://www.cncdh.fr/fr/publications/avis-sur-la-situation-des-migrants-la-frontiere-franco-italienne

      #10_km #20_km

    • Sur le #Bibby_Stockholm barge at #Portland Port :

      “Since the vessel is positioned below the mean low water mark, it did not require planning permission”

      https://seenthis.net/messages/1000870#message1011761

      voir aussi :

      “The circumstances at Portland Port are very different because where the barge is to be positioned is below the mean low water mark. This means that the barge is outside of our planning control and there is no requirement for planning permission from the council.”

      https://news.dorsetcouncil.gov.uk/2023/07/18/leaders-comments-on-the-home-office-barge

      #UK #Angleterre

    • The ‘Border’ under EU Law

      The first argument made by the Catania Tribunal regards the correct initiation of a border procedure. According to the judge, the procedure was not applied „at the border“, as understood by EU law (Art. 43 Directive 2013/32). Indeed, the applicants arrived and made their asylum application in Lampedusa (province of Agrigento) but the detention was ordered several days later in Pozzallo (Ragusa province) when the applicants were no longer „at the border.“ Because the border procedure (involving detention) was utilized at a later stage and in a different place, it was not appropriately initiated.

      In support of the Catania Tribunal’s conclusion, we should recall that Article 43 the Procedures Directive requires a spatial and temporal link between the border crossing and the activation of the border procedure (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32013L0032). Although the Directive does not define the terms „border“ or „transit zone“, it clearly distinguishes these areas from other „locations in the proximity of the border or transit zone“ (Article 43(3)), where applicants can be exceptionally accommodated but never detained. The distinction between the border and other places in its vicinity suggests that the procedure provided for in Art. 43 can only be applied in narrow and well-defined areas or in pre-identified transit zones (such as the Hungarian transit zones examined by the Court in FMS and Commission v Hungary).

      Other EU law instruments support this narrow interpretation of the “border” concept. Regulation 1931/2006 defines a „border area“ as a delimited space within 30 km from the Member State’s border. In the Affum case, the Court also called for a narrow interpretation of the spatial concept of „border.“ There, the Court clarified that the Return Directive allows Member States to apply a simplified return procedure at their external borders in order to „ensure that third-country nationals do not enter [their] territory“ (a purpose which resonates with that of Art. 8(3)(c) Reception Directive). However, such a procedure can only be applied if there is a „direct temporal and spatial link with the crossing of the border“, i.e. „at the time of the irregular crossing of the border or near that border after it has been crossed“ (par. 72).

      By contrast, under the Italian accelerated procedure, the border has blurred contours. The new procedure, relying on the “#fiction_of_non-entry” (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/654201/EPRS_STU(2020)654201_EN.pdf), can be carried out not only „at“ the border and in transit zones or in areas territorially „close“ to the border, but in entire provinces in southern and northern Italy. This far exceeds the narrow definition of border or border area derived from EU law.

      https://seenthis.net/messages/1018938#message1023987
      #fiction_de_non-entrée

      –—

      Ce terme est empruntée d’une vieille loi des Etats-Unis, The Immigration Act 1891 :

      “The Immigration Act 1891 was the first to expressly mention detention, as it made provision for officers to ’inspect all such aliens’ or ’to orcier a temporary removal of such aliens for examination at a de ignated time and place, and then and there detain them until a thorough inspection is made’. The Act alsa created the very important provision that came to be known as the ’entry fiction’. According to this, a removal to shore for examination ’shall not be considered a landing during the pendency of such examination’. This was a criticallegal (and constitutional) innovation because it meant that th ose incarcerated must be treated as if they were not there. This was both an attempt to treat the place of detention as if it were sim ply an extension ofbeing held on board ship, but also something more serious. The concept of being physically detained within the territorial land-mass of the United States but not being considered legally present was radical. It suggested a kind of limbo - with the detention centre constituting perhaps an extra-legal space- putting immigrants beyond the reach of constitutional norms, pending a final executive decision to land or deport them.”

      source : Daniel Wilsher, Immigration detention : law, history, politics, 2012, p. 13

  • Contre les théories du « grand remplacement » : rompre avec la rationalité eurocentrique | João Gabriell
    https://joaogabriell.com/2019/03/24/contre-les-theories-du-grand-remplacement-%EF%BB%BF-rompre-avec-la-rat

    Contre les théories du « grand remplacement », plutôt qu’un amoncellement de preuves factuelles contradictoires, il faut rompre avec la rationalité eurocentrique qui les fondent, à la fois en imposant un autre type de débats que ceux qui ont cours, et en renforçant nos luttes politiques contre l’impérialisme occidental. Source : Le blog de João

    • Le « grand remplacement », généalogie d’un complotisme caméléon

      Trouvant ses racines dans la chrétienté médiévale, qui considère juifs et musulmans comme une menace, la théorie d’une « submersion » de la France par un prétendu « envahisseur étranger » convoque et adapte toutes les idéologies présentes et passées – racialistes, antisémites et nationalistes – aptes à servir son propos.

      La pensée du « grand remplacement », propagée principalement par l’écrivain #Renaud_Camus, figure des milieux identitaires, et le candidat d’extrême droite à l’élection présidentielle #Eric_Zemmour, ne repose pas simplement sur un délire démographique. Elle s’appuie sur tout un système de représentations, où s’entremêlent des sources clairement identifiables et un imaginaire plus diffus, constitué au fil des siècles et constamment revisité.

      Le « grand remplacement » ne laisse pas toujours deviner son âge, tant il adopte des formules modernes ou des exemples contemporains. C’est par exemple le cas chez Renaud Camus. Ainsi écrit-il dans Le Grand Remplacement (La Nouvelle Librairie, 2021) : « L’expression de “grand remplacement” désigne, certes, essentiellement, le remplacement d’un peuple, le peuple français indigène, par un ou plusieurs autres ; celui de sa culture par la déculturation multiculturaliste ; celui de sa civilisation si brillante et admirée par la décivilisation pluriethnique (le village global), elle-même en rivalité âpre avec l’intégrisme musulman, la conquête et la conversion islamique. »

      [...] Aujourd’hui, les musulmans sont vus comme les acteurs d’une conspiration mondiale menée « par les princes et par les masses, par les multimilliardaires du pétrole et par les “jeunes” sans emploi », croit savoir Camus. (...)

      Après la seconde guerre mondiale, l’extrême droite est contrainte à un renouvellement idéologique. La fin des colonies et la rapide croissance économique se traduisent par la montée d’une immigration venue du Sud vers l’Europe. Et alors, la peur de la submersion démographique qui était jusque-là davantage du domaine de la fiction, commence à se diffuser.
      L’idée de remplacement de la population est exprimée par René Binet, un ancien SS français, qui écrit dans son livre Théorie du racisme (1950) que« la “Révolution” n’a, jusqu’ici, été que l’accession de races inférieures au pouvoir, en remplacement de races supérieures dégénérées ». Camus ne s’inspire pas de ce livre, mais il s’inscrit néanmoins dans ce courant de pensée. Il rend en effet un hommage appuyé à celui qui travailla le plus à développer ses idées, l’essayiste Dominique Venner. Après son suicide en 2013, Camus le décrit comme un « grand intellectuel ». Pour Stéphane François, professeur de science politique à l’université de Mons, en Belgique, et historien des idées, « Venner joue un rôle central, car il se situe à l’avant-garde intellectuelle, il tente de sortir d’un nationalisme étroit par l’adoption d’un pan-nationalisme européen. Il est notamment l’auteur d’Histoire et tradition des Européens. 30 000 ans d’identité [#éditions_du_Rocher, 2002], dans lequel il affirme qu’existe une continuité culturelle en Europe, de la préhistoire à aujourd’hui… On trouve en outre chez lui l’idée que l’immigration est une invasion, que les nouveaux arrivants venus du Sud ne peuvent pas s’intégrer, à cause de leur violence ».

      (...) L’immigration est une « contre-colonisation ». Un large usage est donc fait d’un auteur anticolonialiste tel le psychiatre martiniquais Frantz Fanon. On le transforme en ce qu’il n’est pas : une espèce d’apôtre du « chacun chez soi » identitaire.

      https://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2022/01/28/le-grand-remplacement-genealogie-d-un-complotisme-cameleon_6111330_3232.html

      https://justpaste.it/28s9i

      source démocratique et CAC 40, #Alain_Finkielkraut pas cité #extrême_droite #histoire #chrétienté_médiévale #1492 #Joseph_de_Maistre #Ernest_Renan #Maurice_Barrès #Édouard_Drumont #Dominique_Venner #antisémitisme #islamophobie #racisme #complotisme #immigration #différentialisme #Enoch_Powell #Alain_de_Benoist #Nouvelle_droite

  • Jagal - The Act of Killing
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tILiqotj7Y


    v.o. sans sous-titres

    avec sous-titres
    https://amara.org/en/videos/lCHCQE8uqUJb/en/749348
    à 00:16:00 un gangster parle de sa passion pour le cinémà et comment c’était pratique d’avoir les locaux pour tuer et torturer en face de la salle de projection.

    C’est le film le moins apprécié par l’office de tourisme indonésien car il montre que le pays est gouverné aujourd’hui par les assassins de 1965/66 qui se font un plaisir de se vanter de leurs crimes devant la caméra.

    BACKGROUND | The Act of Killing
    http://theactofkilling.com/background

    CONTEXT, BACKGROUND AND METHOD
    First Encounter with the 1965-66 Massacres – The Globalization Tapes
    In 2001-2002, Christine Cynn and I went to Indonesia for the first time to produce The Globalization Tapes (2003), a participatory documentary project made in collaboration with the Independent Plantation Workers Union of Sumatra. Using their own forbidden history as a case study, these Indonesian filmmakers worked with us to trace the development of contemporary globalization from its roots in colonialism to the present.

    The Globalization Tapes exposes the devastating role of militarism and repression in building the global economy, and explores the relationships between trade, third-world debt, and international institutions like the IMF and the World Trade Organization. Made by some of the poorest workers in the world, the film is a lyrical and incisive account of how our global financial institutions shape and enforce the corporate world order. The film uses chilling first-hand accounts, hilarious improvised interventions, collective debate and archival collage.

    Several scenes in The Globalization Tapes reveal the earliest traces of the methods we refined in the shooting of The Act of Killing: plantation workers stage a satirical commercial for the pesticide that poisons them; worker-filmmakers pose as World Bank agents who offer microfinance to ‘develop’ local businesses – offers that are both brutal and absurd, yet tempting nonetheless.

    While shooting and editing The Globalization Tapes, we discovered that the 1965-66 Indonesian massacres were the dark secret haunting Indonesia’s much-celebrated entrance into the global economy. One of the military’s main objectives in the killings was to destroy the anti-colonial labour movement that had existed until 1965, and to lure foreign investors with the promise of cheap, docile workers and abundant natural resources. The military succeeded (The Globalization Tapes is a testament to the extraordinary courage of the plantation worker-filmmakers as they challenge this decades-long legacy of terror and try to build a new union).

    The killings would come up in discussions, planning sessions, and film shoots nearly every day, but always in whispers. Indeed, many of the plantation workers were themselves survivors of the killings. They would discretely point out the houses of neighbors who had killed their parents, grandparents, aunts, or uncles. The perpetrators were still living in the same village and made up, along with their children and protégés, the local power structure. As outsiders, we could interview these perpetrators – something the plantation workers could not do without fear of violence.

    In conducting these first interviews, we encountered the pride with which perpetrators would boast about the most grisly details of the killings. The Act of Killing was born out of our curiosity about the nature of this pride – its clichéd grammar, its threatening performativity, its frightening banality.

    The Globalization Tapes was a film made collectively by the plantation workers themselves, with us as facilitators and collaborating directors. The Act of Killing was also made by working very closely with its subjects, while in solidarity and collaboration with the survivors’ families. However, unlike The Globalization Tapes, The Act of Killing is an authored work, an expression of my own vision and concerns regarding these issues.

    THE BEGINNING OF THE ACT OF KILLING

    By the time I first met the characters in The Act of Killing (in 2005), I had been making films in Indonesia for three years, and I spoke Indonesian with some degree of fluency. Since making The Globalization Tapes (2003), Christine Cynn, fellow film-maker and longtime collaborator Andrea Zimmerman and I had continued filming with perpetrators and survivors of the massacres in the plantation areas around the city of Medan. In 2003 and 2004, we filmed more interviews and simple re-enactments with Sharman Sinaga, the death squad leader who had appeared in The Globalization Tapes. We also filmed as he introduced us to other killers in the area. And we secretly interviewed survivors of the massacres they committed.

    Moving from perpetrator to perpetrator, and, unbeknownst to them, from one community of survivors to another, we began to map the relationships between different death squads throughout the region, and began to understand the process by which the massacres were perpetrated. In 2004, we began filming Amir Hasan, the death squad leader who had commanded the massacres at the plantation where we made The Globalization Tapes.

    In late 2004, Amir Hasan began to introduce me to killers up the chain of command in Medan. Independently in 2004, we began contacting ‘veterans’ organizations of death squad members and anti-leftist activists in Medan. These two approaches allowed us to piece together a chain of command, and to locate the surviving commanders of the North Sumatran death squads. In early interviews with the veterans of the killings (2004), I learned that the most notorious death squad in North Sumatra was Anwar Congo and Adi Zulkadry’s Frog Squad (Pasukan Kodok).

    During these first meetings with Medan perpetrators (2004 and 2005), I encountered the same disturbing boastfulness about the killings that we had been documenting on the plantations. The difference was that these men were the celebrated and powerful leaders not of a small rural village, but of the third largest city in Indonesia (Greater Medan has a population of over four million people).

    Our starting point for The Act of Killing was thus the question: how had this society developed to the point that its leaders could – and would – speak of their own crimes against humanity with a cheer that was at once celebratory but also intended as a threat?

    OVERVIEW AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE METHODS USED IN THE ACT OF KILLING

    Building on The Globalization Tapes and our film work outside Indonesia, we had developed a method in which we open a space for people to play with their image of themselves, re-creating and re-imagining it on camera, while we document this transformation as it unfolds. In particular, we had refined this method to explore the intersection between imagination and extreme violence.

    In the early days of research (2005), I discovered that the army recruited its killers in Medan from the ranks of movie theatre gangsters (or preman bioskop) who already hated the leftists for their boycott of American movies – the most profitable in the cinema. I was intrigued by this relationship between cinema and killings, although I had no idea it would be so deep. Not only did Anwar and his friends know and love the cinema, but they dreamed of being on the screen themselves, and styled themselves after their favorite characters. They even borrowed their methods of murder from the screen.

    Of course, I began by trying to understand in as much detail as possible Anwar and his friends’ roles in the killings and, afterwards, in the regime they helped to build. Among the first things I did was to bring them to the former newspaper office directly across the road from Anwar’s old cinema, the place where Anwar and his friends killed most of their victims. There, they demonstrated in detail what they had done. Although they were filming documentary re-enactment and interviews, during breaks I noticed that they would muse about how they looked like various movie stars – for instance, Anwar compared his protégé and sidekick, Herman to Fernando Sancho.

    To understand how they felt about the killings, and their unrepentant way of representing them on film, I screened back the unedited footage of these early re-enactments, and filmed their responses. At first, I thought that they would feel the re-enactments made them look bad, and that they might possibly come to a more complex place morally and emotionally.

    I was startled by what actually happened. On the surface at least, Anwar was mostly anxious that he should look young and fashionable. Instead of any explicit moral reflection, the screening led him and Herman spontaneously to suggest a better, and more elaborate, dramatization.

    To explore their love of movies, I screened for them scenes from their favorite films at the time of the killings – Cecil B. DeMille’s Samson and Delilah and, ironically, The Ten Commandments topped the list – recording their commentary and the memories these films elicited. Through this process, I came to realize why Anwar was continually bringing up these old Hollywood films whenever I filmed re-enactments with them: he and his fellow movie theatre thugs were inspired by them at the time of the killings, and had even borrowed their methods of murder from the movies. This was such an outlandish and disturbing idea that I in fact had to hear it several times before I realized quite what Anwar and his friends were saying.

    He described how he got the idea of strangling people with wire from watching gangster movies. In a late-night interview in front of his former cinema, Anwar explained how different film genres would lead him to approach killing in different ways. The most disturbing example was how, after watching a “happy film like an Elvis Presley musical”, Anwar would “kill in a happy way”.

    In 2005, I also discovered that the other paramilitary leaders (not just the former movie theater gangsters) had other personal and deep-seated relationship to movies. Ibrahim Sinik, the newspaper boss who was secretary general of all the anti-communist organizations that participated in the killings, and who directly gave the orders to Anwar’s death squad, turned out to be a feature film producer, screenwriter, and former head of the Indonesian Film Festival.

    In addition to all this, Anwar and his friends’ impulse towards being in a film about the killings was essentially to act in dramatizations of their pasts – both as they remember them, and as they would like to be remembered (the most powerful insights in The Act of Killing probably come in those places where these two agendas radically diverge). As described, the idea of dramatizations came up quite spontaneously, in response to viewing the rushes from Anwar’s first re-enactments of the killings.

    But it would be disingenuous to claim that we facilitated the dramatizations only because that’s what Anwar and his friends wanted to do. Ever since we produced The Globalization Tapes, the thing that most fascinated us about the killings was the way the perpetrators we filmed would recount their stories of those atrocities. One had the feeling that we weren’t simply hearing memories, but something else besides – something intended for a spectator. More precisely, we felt we were receiving performances. And we instinctively understood, I think, that the purpose of these performances was somehow to assert a kind of impunity, to maintain a threatening image, to perpetuate the autocratic regime that had begun with the massacres themselves.

    We sensed that the methods we had developed for incorporating performance into documentary might, in this context, yield powerful insights into the mystery of the killers’ boastfulness, the nature of the regime of which they are a part, and, most importantly, the nature of human ‘evil’ itself.

    So, having learned that even their methods of murder were directly influenced by cinema, we challenged Anwar and his friends to make the sort of scenes they had in mind. We created a space in which they could devise and star in dramatisations based on the killings, using their favorite genres from the medium.

    We hoped to catalyze a process of collective remembrance and imagination. Fiction provided one or two degrees of separation from reality, a canvas on which they could paint their own portrait and stand back and look at it.

    We started to suspect that performance played a similar role during the killings themselves, making it possible for Anwar and his friends to absent themselves from the scene of their crimes, while they were committing them. Thus, performing dramatizations of the killings for our cameras was also a re-living of a mode of performance they had experienced in 1965, when they were killing. This obviously gave the experience of performing for our cameras a deeper resonance for Anwar and his friends than we had anticipated.

    And so, in The Act of Killing, we worked with Anwar and his friends to create such scenes for the insights they would offer, but also for the tensions and debates that arose during the process – including Anwar’s own devastating emotional unravelling.

    This created a safe space, in which all sorts of things could happen that would probably elude a more conventional documentary method. The protagonists could safely explore their deepest memories and feelings (as well as their blackest humor). I could safely challenge them about what they did, without fear of being arrested or beaten up. And they could challenge each other in ways that were otherwise unthinkable, given Sumatra’s political landscape.

    Anwar and his friends could direct their fellow gangsters to play victims, and even play the victims themselves, because the wounds are only make-up, the blood only red paint, applied only for a movie. Feelings far deeper than those that would come up in an interview would surface unexpectedly. One reason the emotional impact was so profound came from the fact that this production method required a lot of time – the filmmaking process came to define a significant period in the participants’ lives. This meant that they went on a deeper journey into their memories and feelings than they would in a film consisting largely of testimony and simple demonstration.

    Different scenes used different methods, but in all of them it was crucial that Anwar and his friends felt a sense of fundamental ownership over the fiction material. The crux of the method is to give performers the maximum amount of freedom to determine as many variables as possible in the production (storyline, casting, costumes, mise-en-scene, improvisation on set). Whenever possible, I let them direct each other, and used my cameras to document their process of creation. My role was primarily that of provocateur, challenging them to remember the events they were performing more deeply, encouraging them to intervene and direct each other when they felt a performance was superficial, and asking questions between takes – both about what actually happened, but also about how they felt at the time, and how they felt as they re-enacted it.

    We shot in long takes, so that situations could evolve organically, and with minimal intervention from ourselves. I felt the most significant event unfolding in front of the cameras was the act of transformation itself, particularly because this transformation was usually plagued by conflict, misgivings, and other imperfections that seemed to reveal more about the nature of power, violence, and fantasy than more conventional documentary or investigative methods. For this same reason, we also filmed the pre-production of fiction scenes, including castings, script meetings, and costume fittings. Make-up sessions too were important spaces of reflection and transformation, moments where the characters slip down the rabbit hole of self-invention.

    In addition, because we never knew when the characters would refuse to take the process further, or when we might get in trouble with the military, we filmed each scene as though it might be the last, and also everything leading up to them (not only for the reasons above), because often we didn’t know if the dramatization itself would actually happen. We also felt that the stories we were hearing – stories of crimes against humanity never before recorded – were of world historical importance. More than anything else, these are two reasons why this method generated so many hours of footage (indeed, we have created a vast audio-visual archive about the Indonesian massacres. This archive has been the basis of a four-year United Kingdom Arts and Humanities Research Council project called Genocide and Genre).

    After almost every dramatization, we would screen the rushes back to them, and record their responses. We wanted to make sure they knew how they appeared on film, and to use the screening to trigger further reflection. Sometimes, screenings provoked feelings of remorse (as when Anwar watches himself play the victim during a film noir scene) but, at other times, as when we screened the re-enactment of the Kampung Kolam massacre to the entire cast, the images were met with terrifying peals of laughter.

    Most interestingly, Anwar and his friends discussed, often insightfully, how other people will view the film, both in Indonesia and internationally. For example, Anwar sometimes commented on how survivors might curse him, but that “luckily” the victims haven’t the power to do anything in today’s Indonesia.

    The gangster scenes were wholly improvised. The scenarios came from the stories Anwar and his friends had told each other during earlier interviews, and during visits to the office where they killed people. The set was modeled on this interior. For maximum flexibility, our cinematographer lit the space so that Anwar and his friends could move about freely, and we filmed them with two cameras so that they could fluidly move from directing each other to improvised re-enactments to quiet, often riveting reflection after the improvisation was finished.

    For instance, Anwar re-enacted how he killed people by placing them on a table and then pulling tight a wire, from underneath the table, to garrote them. The scene exhausted him, physically and emotionally, leaving him full of doubt about the morality of what he did. Immediately after this re-enactment, he launched into a cynical and resigned rant against the growing consensus around human rights violations. Here, reality and its refraction through fiction, Anwar’s memories and his anticipation of their impact internationally, are all overlaid.

    The noir scenes were shot over a week, and culminated in an extraordinary improvisation where Anwar played the victim. Anwar’s performance was effective and, transported by the performance, the viewer empathizes with the victim, only to do a double take as they remember that Anwar is not a victim, but the killer.

    The large-scale re-enactment of the Kampung Kolam massacre was made using a similar improvisational process, with Anwar and his friends undertaking the direction. What we didn’t expect was a scene of such violence and realism; so much so that it proved genuinely frightening to the participants, all of whom were Anwar’s friends from Pancasila Youth, or their wives and children. After the scene, we filmed participants talking amongst themselves about how the location of our re-enactment was just a few hundred meters from one of North Sumatra’s countless mass graves. The woman we see fainting after the scene felt she had been possessed by a victim’s ghost. The paramilitary members (including Anwar) thought so, too. The violence of the re-enactment conjured the spectres of a deeper violence, the terrifying history of which everybody in Indonesia is somehow aware, and upon which the perpetrators have built their rarefied bubble of air conditioned shopping malls, gated communities, and “very, very limited” crystal figurines.

    The process by which we made the musical scenes (the waterfall, the giant concrete goldfish) was slightly different again. But here too Anwar was very much in the driver’s seat: he chose the songs and, along with his friends, devised both scenes. Anwar and his cast were also free to make changes as we went.

    In the end, we worked very carefully with the giant goldfish, presenting motifs from a half-forgotten dream. Anwar’s beautiful nightmare? An allegory for his storytelling confection? For his blindness? For the willful blindness by which almost all history is written, and by which, consequently, we inevitably come to know (and fail to know) ourselves? The fish changes throughout the film, but it is always a world of “eye candy”, emptiness and ghosts. If it could be explained adequately in words, we would not need it in the film.

    For the scenes written by the newspaper boss Ibrahim Sinik and his staff, Sinik enlisted the help of his friends at state television, TVRI. He borrows the TVRI regional drama studios, and recruits a soap opera crew. In these scenes, our role was largely to document Anwar and his friends as they work with the TV crew, and to catalyze and document debates between fiction set-ups. In our edited scenes, we cut from the documentary cameras to TVRI’s fiction cameras, highlighting the gap between fiction and reality – often to comic effect. But above all, we focused our cameras on moments between takes where they debated the meaning of the scene.

    The Televisi Republik Indonesia “Special Dialogue” came into being when the show’s producers realised that feared and respected paramilitary leaders making a film about the genocide was a big story (they came to know about our work because we were using the TVRI studios.) After their grotesque chat show was broadcast, there was no critical response in North Sumatra whatsoever. This is not to say that the show will not be shocking to Indonesians. For reasons discussed in my director’s statement, North Sumatrans are more accustomed than Jakartans, for example, to the boasting of perpetrators (who in Sumatra were recruited from the ranks of gangsters – and the basis of gangsters’ power, after all, lies in being feared).

    Moreover, virtually nobody in Medan dares to criticise Pancasila Youth and men like Anwar Congo and Ibrahim Sinik. Ironically, the only significant reaction to the talk show’s broadcast came from the Indonesian Actors’ Union. According to Anwar, a representative of the union visiting family in Medan came to Anwar’s house to ask him if he would consider being president of the North Sumatra branch of the union. According to Anwar, the union was angry that such a large-scale production had occurred in North Sumatra without their knowing about it. Luckily, Anwar had the humility to tell them that he is not an actor, that he was playing himself in scenes made for a documentary, and therefore would decline the offer.

    Anwar and his friends knew that their fiction scenes were only being made for our documentary, and this will be clear to the audience, too. But at the same time, if these scenes were to offer genuine insights, it was vital that the filmmaking project was one in which they were deeply invested, and one over which they felt ownership.

    The Act of Killing : don’t give an Oscar to this snuff movie | Nick Fraser | Film | The Guardian
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/23/act-of-killing-dont-give-oscar-snuff-movie-indonesia

    It has won over critics but this tasteless film teaches us nothing and merely indulges the unrepentant butchers of Indonesia

    The Act of Killing won the documentary prize at the Baftas last week and is the favourite to win the much-coveted Oscar. I watch many documentaries on behalf of the BBC each year and I go to festivals. I’m a doc obsessive. By my own, not quite reliable reckoning, I’ve been asked by fans to show The Act of Killing on the BBC at least five times. I’ve never encountered a film greeted by such extreme responses – both those who say it is among the best films and those who tell me how much they hate it. Much about the film puzzles me. I am still surprised by the fact that so many critics listed it among their favourite films of last year.

    For those who haven’t seen the film, it investigates the circumstances in which half-a-million Indonesian leftists were murdered in the 1960s, at the instigation of a government that is still in power. You might think this is a recondite subject, worthy of a late-night screening for insomniacs or atrocity buffs on BBC4, but, no, the film-maker Joshua Oppenheimer has made the subject viewable by enlisting the participation of some of the murderers. He spent some years hanging out with them, to his credit luring them into confessions. But he also, more dubiously, enlisted their help in restaging their killings. Although one of them, the grandfatherly Anwar, shows mild symptoms of distress towards the end of the film, they live in a state of impunity and it is thus, coddled and celebrated in their old age, that we revisit them.

    So let me be as upfront as I can. I dislike the aesthetic or moral premise of The Act of Killing. I find myself deeply opposed to the film. Getting killers to script and restage their murders for the benefit of a cinema or television audience seems a bad idea for a number of reasons. I find the scenes where the killers are encouraged to retell their exploits, often with lip-smacking expressions of satisfaction, upsetting not because they reveal so much, as many allege, but because they tell us so little of importance. Of course murderers, flattered in their impunity, will behave vilely. Of course they will reliably supply enlightened folk with a degraded vision of humanity. But, sorry, I don’t feel we want to be doing this. It feels wrong and it certainly looks wrong to me. Something has gone missing here. How badly do we want to hear from these people, after all? Wouldn’t it be better if we were told something about the individuals whose lives they took?

    I’d feel the same if film-makers had gone to rural Argentina in the 1950s, rounding up a bunch of ageing Nazis and getting them to make a film entitled “We Love Killing Jews”. Think of other half-covered-up atrocities – in Bosnia, Rwanda, South Africa, Israel, any place you like with secrets – and imagine similar films had been made. Consider your response – and now consider whether such goings-on in Indonesia are not acceptable merely because the place is so far away, and so little known or talked about that the cruelty of such an act can pass uncriticised.

    The film does not in any recognisable sense enhance our knowledge of the 1960s Indonesian killings, and its real merits – the curiosity when it comes to uncovering the Indonesian cult of anticommunism capable of masking atrocity, and the good and shocking scenes with characters from the Indonesian elite, still whitewashing the past – are obscured by tasteless devices. At the risk of being labelled a contemporary prude or dismissed as a stuffy upholder of middle-class taste, I feel that no one should be asked to sit through repeated demonstrations of the art of garrotting. Instead of an investigation, or indeed a genuine recreation, we’ve ended somewhere else – in a high-minded snuff movie.

    What I like most about documentary film is that anything can be made to work, given a chance. You can mix up fact and fiction, past and present. You can add to cold objectivity a degree of empathy. You will, of course, lie to reluctant or recalcitrant participants, in particular when they wish not to divulge important pieces of information. And trickery has its place, too. But documentary films have emerged from the not inconsiderable belief that it’s good to be literal as well as truthful. In a makeshift, fallible way, they tell us what the world is really like. Documentaries are the art of the journeyman. They can be undone by too much ambition. Too much ingenious construction and they cease to represent the world, becoming reflected images of their own excessively stated pretensions.

    In his bizarrely eulogistic piece defending The Act of Killing (of which he is an executive producer), Errol Morris, the documentary maker, compares the film to Hamlet’s inspired use of theatre to reveal dirty deeds at the court of Denmark. But Hamlet doesn’t really believe that theatrical gestures can stand in for reality. Nor, we must assume, did his creator. A more apt analogy than Morris’s might come from Shakespeare’s darkest play, Macbeth. What would we think if Macbeth and his scheming wife were written out of the action, replaced by those low-level thugs paid to do bad business on their behalf? We might conclude that putting them centre stage, in the style of The Act of Killing, was indeed perverse and we’d be right.

    There are still half-forgotten, heavily whitewashed atrocities from the last century, such as the Bengali famine allowed to occur during the second world war through the culpably racist inattention of British officials; the never wholly cleared-up question of Franco’s mass killings; or the death of so many millions in the 1950s as a consequence of Mao’s catastrophic utopianism. Those wondering how to record such events will no doubt watch The Act of Killing, but I hope they will also look at less hyped, more modestly conceived depictions of mass murder. In Enemies of the People (2010), the Cambodian journalist Thet Sambath goes after the murderers of the Khmer Rouge. He finds Pol Pot’s sidekick, but it is the earnest, touching quest of Sambath himself that lingers in the mind, rather than the empty encounters with evil-doers. Atrocity is both banal and ultimately impossible to comprehend.

    Writing in 1944, Arthur Koestler was among the first to gain knowledge of the slaughter of eastern European Jews and he estimated that the effect of such revelations was strictly limited, lasting only minutes or days and swiftly overcome by indifference. Koestler suggested that there was only one way we could respond to the double atrocity of mass murder and contemporary indifference and that was by screaming.

    I’m grateful to The Act of Killing not because it’s a good film, or because it deserves to win its Oscar (I don’t think it does), but because it reminds me of the truth of Koestler’s observation. What’s not to scream about?

    Nick Fraser is editor of the BBC’s Storyville documentary series

    #film #documentaire #Indonésie #hécatombe

  • Liste de liens autour d’#accords_de_réadmission entre pays européens...

    Mini liste sur la question des accords de réadmission signés entre différents pays européens afin de pouvoir expulser les migrants...

    #accord_de_réadmission #accord_bilatéral #frontières #expulsions #renvois #refoulement #migrations #asile #réfugiés #réadmission #frontière_sud-alpine #push-backs #refoulements #accords_bilatéraux #réadmission #Alpes #montagne
    ping @isskein

    • Entre la #France et l’#Italie :
      https://seenthis.net/messages/730361

      Il s’agit de l’#accord_de_Chambéry. Décret n° 2000-923 du 18 septembre 2000 portant publication de l’accord entre le Gouvernement de la République française et le Gouvernement de la République italienne relatif à la #coopération_transfrontalière en matière policière et douanière, signé à Chambéry le 3 octobre #1997
      https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000766303

      voir aussi le rapport ASGI :
      https://medea.asgi.it/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/all-4-scheda-DM-5-agosto_def.pdf
      signalé ici :
      https://seenthis.net/messages/892443

    • Entre l’#Espagne et la #France:
      –-> #accord_de_Malaga signé le 26 novembre 2002 entre la France et l’Espagne.

      https://seenthis.net/messages/901308

      –---

      Un accord signé entre la France et l’Espagne prévoit de renvoyer tout migrant se trouvant sur le territoire français depuis moins de quatre heures.

      http://www.infomigrants.net/fr/post/13368/france-19-migrants-interpelles-dans-un-bus-en-provenance-de-bayonne-et

      –---

      Concernant l’accord entre l’Espagne et la France, voici un complément, reçu via la mailing-list Migreurop:

      C’est un accord de réadmission bilatéral signé entre la France et l’Espagne (comme tas d’autres) qui prévoit la réadmission des nationaux ou de ressortissants de pays tiers ayant transité par le territoire de l’un de ces pays.

      L’article 7 de cet accord prévoit :
      Les autorités responsables des contrôles aux frontières des deux Parties contractantes réadmettent immédiatement sur leur territoire les étrangers, ressortissants d’Etats tiers, qui sont présentés par les autorités des frontières de l’autre Partie, dans les quatre heures suivant le passage illégal de la frontière commune.

      Il a été signé le 26 novembre 2002, et concernant la France, publié par le décret n° 2004-226 du 9 mars 2004.

      Vous trouverez sur le site de Migreurop, d’autres accords signés par la France (et aussi par d’autres pays de l’UE),

      http://www.migreurop.org/article1931.html

      –---

      Francia devolvió a España casi 16.000 migrantes en solo cinco meses (2021)

      Para expulsar a los inmigrantes que entran irregularmente a su territorio, Francia y España se valen de un acuerdo bilateral de 2002 (https://elpais.com/politica/2018/11/02/actualidad/1541179682_837419.html) que les permite la devolución en las cuatro horas siguientes al paso de la frontera. El acuerdo contempla una serie de garantías, como que los inmigrantes sean entregados a la policía española o que se formalice por escrito su devolución. Los datos de la policía francesa no especifican cuántos inmigrantes han sido devueltos sobre la base de este acuerdo bilateral, pero fuentes policiales y los propios inmigrantes han señalado que la mayor parte se realiza sin que medie un solo trámite.

      https://seenthis.net/messages/912645

    • Press Release: Court find Slovenian state guilty of chain pushback to Bosnia-Herzegovina

      Civil initiative Info Kolpa, a key member of the Border Violence Monitoring Network, are sharing here the landmark judgement issued on 16th July 2020 by the Slovenian Administrative Court. The findings prove that the national police force carried out an illegal collective expulsion of a member of a persecuted English-speaking minority from Cameroon who wanted to apply for asylum in Slovenia.

      The court heard the experience of the applicant, J.D., who was held in a Slovenian police station for two days and denied access to asylum, despite making three verbal requests. After this procedural gatekeeping, the applicant was readmitted to Croatia – under an agreement described by the Slovenian Ombudswoman as “against the European legal order”. From Croatia, J.D. was chain refouled to Bosnia-Herzegovina, a pattern analysed in a feature length report by InfoKolpa published in May 2019.

      The Administrative Court found that the Republic of Slovenia violated the applicant’s right to asylum (Article 18 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights), the prohibition of collective expulsions (Article 19 § 1) and the principle of non-refoulement (Article 19 § 2):

      “that no one shall be removed, expelled or extradited to a State in which he or she is in serious danger of being subjected to the death penalty, torture or other inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”.

      The court ruled that the police had not informed J.D. of his asylum rights, as mandated to do so, in clear breach of domestic and EU law. The pushback also breached the prohibition of collective expulsion because the applicant was not issued a removal order, nor given translation and legal aid prior to his readmission to Croatia. In regards to the chain refoulement, the judgement found “sufficiently reliable reports on possible risks from the point of view of Article 3 of the ECHR” in both Croatia where the applicant was initially removed, and also in Bosnia-Herzegovina where he was subsequently pushed back. This is inline with evidence provided by BVMN in 2019 showing that 80% of recorded pushback cases from Croatia breached law on torture or inhumane and degrading treatment.

      In a groundbreaking step, once the judgment becomes final, it will oblige the Republic of Slovenia to allow the applicant to enter the country and file an application for international protection without delay, as well as provide €5,000 in compensation. Commenting on the outcome, the applicant stated:

      “I know and believe that the judgement will help those that come after me. It may not have a direct solution for me, but I know that we are creating awareness and you give more trust to the law of the country.” — J. D., Bosnia, 17th July 2020

      While the Ministry of Internal Affairs have stated they will appeal the judgement, the lawyer representing J.D. stated the case is a landmark because it not only proves the human rights violations suffered by the applicant, but establishes that chain pushbacks to Bosnia-Herzegovina are “systematic and routine”.

      https://www.borderviolence.eu/press-release-court-find-slovenian-state-guilty-of-chain-pushback-to-

      #Slovénie #Bosnie

    • Court confirms systematic human rights violations by Austrian police

      Regional Administrative Court of Styria confirmed the practice of chain puchbacks and found the Austrian police guilty of violating the right to human dignity and the right of documentation

      On 28th of September 2020 eight people were pushed back after being chased and humiliated by Austrian police. Their repeated verbal demand for asylum had been ignored, and no interpreter was involved, as our friends from the initiative „Push Back Alarm Austria“ documented, as we reported earlier on, and later pressed charges in the one case of Ayoub N.

      Now, the court confirmed the methodical practice of chain pushbacks and for the first time the existence of a chain pushback route from Austria or Italy crossing Slovenia and Croatia to Bosnia, including the collaboration of the police in different countries.

      The actions of the police officers who intervened were purposefully aimed at the rejection of the complainant and there is no room for any other interpretation

      In synopsis of the entire official act, the court concludes that there was an obvious bias of the officers against the complainant, since the physical search was disproportionate, no food was provided, and the involvement of an interpreter was omitted despite obvious language difficulties and the use of the word “asylum”, the verdict states (asyl.at/de/info/presseaussendungen/push-back-routevonoesterreichbisbosnien/?s=pushbacks).

      The joint press release of Push-Alarm Austria & Asylkoordination notes that, despite a court finding that his rights were disregarded, due to a legal loophole, the complainant Ayoub N. will not be allowed to enter the country. “I was confident that we would win the case. After returning to Bosnia, I felt like shattered glass. At the moment, I am trying to sort out my life and move forward,” he said.

      “We are talking about systematic human rights violations, inhumane treatment and ignoring the principles of the rule of law by police in Austria. It is completely unimaginable that this is happening without the knowledge and against the expressed will of the Minister of the Interior and his officials. If someone questions the Geneva Refugee Convention, one of the greatest lessons of the Shoah, and at the same time does not take consistent action against systematic human rights violations by the police, the only thing left to do is to resign!”

      Lawyer Clemens Lahner sees the finding as a clear warning to the Ministry of the Interior to put an end to the systematic disregard for the rule of law as soon as possible: “Not everyone who applies for asylum in Austria automatically will receive a substantive asylum procedure or be granted protection. But these questions are to be examined and decided by the competent authorities or courts,” the lawyer clarifies. “If the police presume to decide who will get an asylum procedure at all, this is clearly illegal. The Ministry of the Interior has now been put on written notice, in the name of the Republic.”

      Klaudia Wieser of Push-Back Alarm Austria said. “This case shows the necessity of our initiative to prevent systematic breaches of the law at Austrian borders. Austrian push-backs frequently constitute the first step of chain push-backs beyond the EU’s external borders. Sebastian Kurz is the spiritus rector of systematic human rights violations along the push-back route to Bosnia.”

      The finding from Graz also puts the Slovenian government which has just taken over the EU Presidency under considerable pressure. For the first time, it is possible to prove in a court case what human rights organisations such as ours and particularly everyone within the Border Violence Monitoring Network have been documenting since 2016: a continuous pushback route via Austria or Italy via Slovenia and Croatia to Bosnia.

      “If someone questions the Geneva Refugee Convention, one of the greatest lessons of the Shoah, and at the same time does not take consistent action against systematic human rights violations by the police, the only thing left to do is to resign!” — University Professor Dr. Benedek of the Institute of International Law and International Relations from the University of Graz said.

      However, as in other such cases in countries along the so called Balkan Route, no higher responsibility has so far been established by a court or other instance deemed valid by the states, so we expect to see more tacit acceptance of the anti-people and anti-human rights commands by those on the top.

      https://medium.com/are-you-syrious/ays-daily-digest-5-7-21-court-confirmed-the-systemic-chain-pushbacks-b8e0749

      #Autriche

    • BASTARD OPERATOR FROM HELL #1 - 8416 views (5.6.2023)
      https://groups.google.com/g/alt.tasteless/c/W9u1mvR78LA
      le premier #BOFH

      Simon Travaglia
      unread,
      Jun 9, 1992, 11:14:40 PM
      to

      BASTARD OPERATOR FROM HELL #1
      It’s backup day today so I’m pissed off. Being the BOFH, however, does have
      it’s advantages. I assign the tape device to null - it’s so much more
      economical on my time as I don’t have to keep getting up to change tapes every
      5 minutes. And it speeds up backups too, so it can’t be all bad.

      A user rings

      “Do you know why the system is slow?” they ask

      “It’s probably something to do with...” I look up today’s excuse “.. clock
      speed”

      “Oh” (Not knowing what I’m talking about, they’re satisfied) “Do you know
      when it will be fixed?”

      “Fixed? There’s 275 users on your machine, and one of them is you. Don’t be
      so selfish - logout now and give someone else a chance!”

      “But my research results are due in tommorrow and all I need is one page of
      Laser Print..”

      “SURE YOU DO. Well; You just keep telling yourself that buddy!” I hang up.

      Sheesh, you’d really think people would learn not to call!

      The phone rings. It’ll be him again, I know. That annoys me. I put on a
      gruff voice

      “HELLO, SALARIES!”

      “Oh, I’m sorry, I’ve got the wrong number”

      “YEAH? Well what’s your name buddy? Do you know WASTED phone calls cost
      money? DO YOU? I’ve got a good mind to subtract your wasted time, my wasted
      time, and the cost of this call from your weekly wages! IN FACT I WILL! By
      the time I’ve finished with you, YOU’LL OWE US money! WHAT’S YOUR NAME - AND
      DON’T LIE, WE’VE GOT CALLER ID!”

      I hear the phone drop and the sound of running feet - he’s obviously going to
      try and get an alibi by being at the Dean’s office. I look up his username
      and find his department. I ring the Dean’s secretary.

      “Hello?” she answers

      “Hi, SIMON, B.O.F.H HERE, LISTEN, WHEN THAT GUY COMES RUNNING INTO YOUR OFFICE
      IN ABOUT 10 SECONDS, CAN YOU GIVE HIM A MESSAGE?”

      “I think so...” she says

      “TELL HIM `HE CAN RUN, BUT HE CAN’T HIDE’”

      “Um. Ok”

      “AND DON’T FORGET NOW, I WOULDN’T WANT TO HAVE TO TELL ANYONE ABOUT THAT FILE
      IN YOUR ACCOUNT WITH YOUR ANSWERS TO THE PUURITY TEST IN IT...”

      I hear her scrabbling at the terminal...

      “DON’T BOTHER - I HAVE A COPY. BE A GOOD GIRL AND PASS THE MESSAGE ON”

      She sobs her assent and I hang up. And the worst thing is, I was just guessing
      about the purity test thing. I grab a quick copy anyway, it might make for
      some good late-night reading.

      Meantime backups have finished in record time, 2.03 seconds. Modern technology
      is wonderful, isn’t it?

      Another user rings.

      “I need more space” he says

      “Well, why don’t you move to Texas?” I ask

      “No, on my account, stupid.”

      Stupid?!?.... Uh-Oh..

      “I’m terribly sorry” I say, in a polite manner equal to that of Jimmy Stewart
      in a Family Matinee “I didn’t quite catch that. What was it that you said?”

      I smell the fear coming down the line at me, but it’s too late, he’s a goner
      and he knows it.

      “Um, I said what I wanted was more space on my account, please

      “Sure, hang on”

      I hear him gasp his relief even though he covered the mouthpeice.

      “There, you’ve got plenty of space now”

      “How much have I got”

      Now this REALLY PISSES ME OFF! Not only do they want me to give them
      extra disk, they want to check it, to correct me if I don’t give them enough.
      They should be happy with what I give them and that’s it!!!

      Back into Jimmy Stewart mode.

      “Well, let’s see, you have 4 Meg available”

      “Wow! Eight Meg in total, thanks!” he says pleased with his bargaining power

      “No” I interrupt, savouring this like a fine red, at room temperature “4 Meg in
      total...”

      “Huh?... I’d used 4 Meg already, How could I have 4 Meg Available?”

      I say nothing. It’ll come to him.

      “aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagggggghhhhhH!”

      I kill me; I really do!
      –-

      +-----------+ Terminal Sticker: “My other terminal is a chunk of shit too”
      |+----+ | +----------------------------------------------------------+
      || | | | Simon Travaglia, Computer Services, University of Waikato|
      |+----+VT100| | Priv. Bag, Hamilton, New Zealand. s...@grace.waikato.ac.nz|
      +-----------+ +----------------------------------------------------------+

      The telephone pole was approaching fast, I was attempting to swerve out of
      it’s path when it struck my front end.

      #internet #informatique #admin #wtf #histoire #usenet

  • Ava DuVernay’s Netflix film ’13th’ reveals how mass incarceration is an extension of slavery - The Washington Post
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2016/10/06/ava-duvernays-netflix-film-13th-reveals-how-mass-incarceration-is-an-extension-of-slavery/?tid=sm_tw

    Slavery technically ended over 150 years ago. But Ava DuVernay wants you to take another look at the amendment that abolished it.

    Her documentary “13th” is a powerful look at how the modern-day prison labor system links to slavery. The film, which premieres on Netflix and in select theaters Friday, offers a timely and emotional message framed by the upcoming election and the Black Lives Matter movement.

    [Review: Ava DuVernay’s ‘13th’ explores the intersection of racism and criminal justice]

    “13th” received a standing ovation last week at the New York Film Festival, where it became the first documentary to open the prestigious festival. The title refers to the 13th amendment, which formally abolished slavery. But DuVernay zeroes in on the amendment’s exception clause, which states that slavery and involuntary servitude are illegal “except as a punishment for crime.”

    In an interview with The Washington Post, DuVernay said she initially sought to make a documentary that explored “the idea that there are companies making millions of dollars off the punishment of human beings.” But the documentary inevitably turns to current conversations about the criminal justice system and the fatal police shootings of African Americans.

    #incarcération #esclavage #racisme #états-unis #documentaire

  • Jeux Olympiques, une institution capitaliste et une mystification idéologique | Sortir du capitalisme
    http://sortirducapitalisme.fr/158-les-jo-une-institution-capitaliste-et-une-mystification-ideo

    Une émission d’analyse critique des Jeux Olympiques comme institution capitaliste et comme mystification idéologique (1re partie) et d’histoire critique des Jeux Olympiques modernes (notamment des Jeux Olympiques de Berlin de 1936) depuis Pierre de Coubertin (2e partie), avec Jean-Marie Brohm, professeur émérite de sociologie de l’Université de Montpellier III, auteur notamment de « Le mythe olympique, de Pierre de Coubertin, le seigneur des anneaux : aux fondements de l’olympisme et de 1936. Les Jeux Olympiques à Berlin ». Durée : 1h29. Source : Radio Libertaire

    http://sortirducapitalisme.fr/media/com_podcastmanager/brohmjo.mp3

  • Le siège de Gaza ---> 70 % de la population sous le seuil de pauvreté

    via Amina Bitar, responsable du groupe défense Palestine à Arendal (Norvège)

    1,1 million sur 1,6 sont enregistrés comme réfugiés auprès de l’UNRWA, l’agence onusienne qui s’occupe des réfugiés palestiniens

    44 % d’entre eux ont moins de 14 ans

    L’âge moyen est 18 ans

    La croissance de la population est de 3,2 en moyenne, une des plus forte du monde

    72 % de la population vit en zone urbaine

    Taux d’alphabétisation :
    –- 97 % pour les hommes
    –- 88 % pour les femmes

    Taux de chômage estimé à environ 40 %

    70% de la population vit sous le seuil de pauvreté...

    Tous ces chiffres sont du PNUD ou de l’UNWRA

    https://dl.dropbox.com/s/811q7i4x17owtz4/gazaimaging.jpg

    #gaza #palestine #israël #occupation