#centres

La discussion sur le vocabulaire pour décrire #migrants et #réfugiés est là :
►http://seenthis.net/messages/414225

Libye : que se passe-t-il dans le « #centre_d’investigations » de #Tripoli ?

La semaine dernière, environ 300 migrants interceptés en mer par les garde-côtes libyens ont été transférés dans le centre de #Sharah_Zawiya, au sud de la capitale libyenne. Ouvert depuis au moins un an – avec une fermeture de quelques mois fin 2019 – le lieu est depuis peu contrôlé par le #DCIM et accessible à l’Organisation internationale des migrations (#OIM).

#Centre_de_détention « caché », #centre_de_transit ou centre « d’investigations » ? Le centre de Sharah Zawiya, dans le sud de Tripoli, est l’objet d’interrogations pour nombre d’observateurs des questions migratoires en Libye.

Selon l’Organisation internationale des migrations (OIM), contactée par InfoMigrants, le lieu est supposé être un centre de transit : les migrants interceptés en mer sont envoyés dans cette structure afin d’y subir un interrogatoire avant leur transfert vers un centre de détention officiel.

« Théoriquement, ils [les migrants] ne restent pas plus de 48 heures à Sharah Zawiya », précise l’OIM.

« Je suis resté au moins trois mois dans ce centre »

Or plusieurs migrants, avec qui InfoMigrants est en contact et qui sont passés par ce centre, affirment avoir été enfermés plus que deux jours et disent n’avoir jamais été interrogés. « Je suis resté au moins trois mois là-bas l’été dernier, avant de réussir à m’en échapper », indique Ali, un Guinéen de 18 ans qui vit toujours en Libye. « Durant toute cette période, on ne m’a posé aucune question ».

Ce dernier explique qu’à leur arrivée, les gardiens dépouillent les migrants. « Ils prennent tout ce qu’on a, le plus souvent nos téléphones et de l’argent ». Ibrahim, un Guinéen de 17 ans qui a – lui aussi - réussi à s’échapper du centre ce week-end après avoir été intercepté en mer, raconte la même histoire. « Ils m’ont forcé à leur donner mon téléphone et les 100 euros que j’avais sur moi », soupire-t-il.

Ali assure également que les Libyens demandent une #rançon pour sortir du centre, avoisinant les 3 000 dinars libyens (environ 1 950 euros). « Un monsieur, un Africain, nous amenait des téléphones pour qu’on contacte nos familles et qu’on leur demande de l’argent. Un autre, un Arabe, récupérait la somme due ». Il détaille également les #coups portés sur les migrants « sans aucune raison » et le #rationnement_de_la_nourriture – « un morceau de pain pour trois personnes le matin, et un plat de pâtes pour six le soir ».

D’après des informations recueillies et vérifiées par InfoMigrants, le centre est ouvert depuis au moins un an et a fermé quelques mois fin 2019 avant de rouvrir la semaine dernière avec l’arrivée d’environ 300 migrants. Un changement de chefferie à la tête du centre serait à l’origine de cette fermeture temporaire.

Changement d’organisation ?

Ce changement de responsable a-t-il été accompagné d’un changement de fonctionnement ? Ali explique qu’il s’est enfui vers le mois d’octobre, après trois mois de détention, avec l’aide de l’ancienne équipe. « Les Libyens qui contrôlaient le centre nous ont dit de partir car un nouveau chef devait arriver. L’ancien et le nouveau responsable n’étaient d’ailleurs pas d’accord entre eux, à tel point que leurs équipes ont tirés les uns sur les autres pendant que nous prenions la fuite ».
L’OIM signale de son côté n’avoir reçu l’autorisation d’entrer dans le centre que depuis la semaine dernière. « Avant, le lieu était géré par le ministère de l’Intérieur, mais depuis quelques jours c’est le DCIM [le département de lutte contre la migration illégale, NDLR] qui a repris le contrôle », explique l’agence onusienne à InfoMigrants.

Ibrahim assure, lui, qu’aucune somme d’argent n’a été demandée par les gardiens pour quitter le centre. Les personnes interceptées en mer, mardi 18 février, ont en revanche été transférées samedi vers le centre de détention de #Zaouia, où une rançon de 2 000 dinars (environ 1 300 euros) leur a été réclamée pour pouvoir en sortir.
Ce genre de centre n’est pas une exception en Libye, prévient une source qui souhaite garder l’anonymat. « Il existe d’autres centres de ce type en Libye où on ne sait pas vraiment ce qu’il s’y passe. Et de toute façon, #centre_d’investigation, de transit ou de détention c’est pareil. Les migrants y sont toujours détenus de manière arbitraire pour une période indéfinie ».

▻https://www.infomigrants.net/fr/post/22991/libye-que-se-passe-t-il-dans-le-centre-d-investigations-de-tripoli
#Zawiya #IOM #détention

Action contre le centre fédéral de renvoi du Grand-Saconnex
▻https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVaGGh34nMg&feature=youtu.be

Voir, par exemple, l’analyse de Aldo Brina sur le #centre_fédéral de #Chevrilles :

Le 18 juillet 2018, Aldo Brina, chargé d’information sur l’asile du Centre Social Protestant (CSP), s’est rendu au centre fédéral de Chevrilles, aussi appelé Giffers ou Gouglera. Cette structure est la première du genre en Suisse romande (si on ose dire, puisque le centre est situé dans la Singine fribourgeoise…). Elle a pour fonction d’héberger des requérant-e-s d’asile qui attendent le plus souvent une décision de renvoi ou l’exécution de ce renvoi. Selon le Secrétariat d’État aux migrations (SEM) [1], deux tiers des requérant-e-s d’asile affecté-e-s à ce centre ont disparu, c’est-à-dire qu’ils ont préféré passer dans la clandestinité. Un centre de ce même type devrait être construit dans le canton de Genève, sur la commune du Grand-Saconnex, pour 2022. Visite commentée.

https://asile.ch/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/CHEVRILLES.png

« #China_Cables » : révélations sur le fonctionnement des camps d’internement des #Ouïgours

Des directives internes à l’Etat-Parti chinois obtenues par l’ICIJ et 17 médias, dont « Le Monde », jettent une lumière inédite sur la politique de #répression systématique et de #détention_de_masse menée par Pékin au Xinjiang.

https://img.lemde.fr/2019/11/22/0/0/4143/2763/630/0/60/0/8618e3a_TchKmQ7vUAlcSChloH919wYK.jpg

Secret documents reveal how China mass detention camps work

https://storage.googleapis.com/afs-prod/media/3eba5fffd51344e69f2679a9301584aa/800.jpeg

The watch towers, double-locked doors and video surveillance in the Chinese camps are there “to prevent escapes.” Uighurs and other minorities held inside are scored on how well they speak the dominant Mandarin language and follow strict rules on everything down to bathing and using the toilet, scores that determine if they can leave.

“Manner education” is mandatory, but “vocational skills improvement” is offered only after a year in the camps.

Voluntary job training is the reason the Chinese government has given for detaining more than a million ethnic minorities, most of them Muslims. But a classified blueprint leaked to a consortium of news organizations shows the camps are instead precisely what former detainees have described: Forced ideological and behavioral re-education centers run in secret.

The classified documents lay out the Chinese government’s deliberate strategy to lock up ethnic minorities even before they commit a crime, to rewire their thoughts and the language they speak.

The papers also show how Beijing is pioneering a new form of social control using data and artificial intelligence. Drawing on data collected by mass surveillance technology, computers issued the names of tens of thousands of people for interrogation or detention in just one week.

https://storage.googleapis.com/afs-prod/media/36f742be04ca42218abfef65ab1f501a/1000.jpeg

#Perreux #centres_fédéraux #centre_fédéral #Suisse #asile #migrations #réfugiés #alimentation #sommeil #santé_mentale

Sécurité des femmes dans le domaine de l’asile : le Conseil fédéral adopte des mesures décevantes

Les femmes et les jeune-filles qui déposent une demande d’asile en Suisse ont souvent été victimes de violence ou d’exploitation sexuelle dans leur pays d’origine ou durant leurs parcours migratoires. Elles sont aussi souvent des cibles idéales dans les centres fédéraux ou les centres cantonaux et subissent régulièrement des actes de violence.

Sur les cinq dernières années la proportion des requérantes d’asile nouvellement arrivées en Suisse représente en moyenne 30% du nombre total des demandes d’asile. Parmi elles se trouvent une majorité de femmes érythréennes, syriennes, afghanes, somaliennes, turques, irakiennes ou encore iraniennes. Souvent elles n’osent pas parler de leurs traumatismes ou encore reçoivent les mauvais soins. Certaines n’osent pas aller se doucher de peur de croiser certains hommes au passage, d’autres ne ferment pas l’oeil car elles ne peuvent verrouiller leur porte. Et si elles osent communiquer un problème grave elles n’ont personne pour traduire.

Les témoignages de femmes, accessibles sur le site de l’organisation TERRE DES FEMMES Suisse et les informations révélées dans l’excellent rapport du Centre suisse de compétence pour les droits humains (CSDH) sur la situation dans les cantons, font froid dans le dos.

Enquête sur la sécurité des femmes et des filles dans le domaine de l’asile

Il y a quelques jours, le Conseil fédéral adoptait un rapport important en réponse au postulat Feri (16.3407) soumis en juin 2016 et qui avait pour objectif de déterminer quelles améliorations devaient être apportées à l’hébergement et à l’encadrement des femmes et des filles requérantes d’asile en Suisse.

Il se base sur le rapport plus détaillé du Secrétariat d’État aux migrations (SEM), publié en septembre 2019 et élaboré avec la collaboration de représentants du SEM, de l’Office fédéral de la santé publique (OFSP), de la Conférence des directrices et directeurs cantonaux des affaires sociales (CDAS) et de plusieurs organisations qui ont fait partie du “groupe de suivi”.

Le Centre suisse de compétence pour les droits humains (CSDH) a eu pour mission titanesque d’analyser la situation dans les cantons à la demande des cantons (CDAS). Son rapport séparé sur la situation des femmes hébergées dans plusieurs cantons est une mine d’information sur la pratique des autorités cantonales. Les autres organisations, le Centre d’assistance aux migrantes et aux victimes de la traite des femmes (FIZ), l’Organisation suisse d’aide aux réfugiés (OSAR), TERRE DES FEMMES Suisse et le Haut Commissariat des Nations-unies pour les réfugiés (HCR) se sont penchés sur tous les aspects de protection et d’assistance aux femmes et aux filles dans le domaine de l’asile y compris celles victimes de violence. Constituant le “groupe de suivi” qui a accompagné l’élaboration du rapport du SEM ces organisations se sont concentrées sur la situation des femmes dans les centres fédéraux (CFA).

Après deux ans d’enquêtes dans les centre fédéraux et dans les foyers de plusieurs cantons, le SEM propose 18 mesures en précisant que les cantons devront s’aligner autant que possible sur ces dernières.
Les mesures adoptées par le Conseil fédéral…

Parmi les changements envisagés, celles qui concernent la sécurité des femmes dans les hébergements fédéraux et cantonaux sont prioritaires. Le SEM est d’avis que les structures d’hébergement doivent mieux tenir compte des différences entre les sexes. Les femmes doivent avoir la possibilité de verrouiller leurs dortoirs, accéder librement et sûrement aux sanitaires dont beaucoup devront être dotés d’éléments pare-vues pour garantir l’intimité. L’accès aux soins médicaux doit mieux prendre en compte les besoins spécifique des femmes et des victimes de violence. Le SEM reconnaît aussi le besoin de mettre en place des formations adaptées pour le personnel en charge de l’administration, de la sécurité et de l’encadrement dans les centres d’hébergement. Un programme de formation est aussi prévu pour les prestataires fournissant des soins médicaux. Comme il n’existe aucune donnée sur le nombre de femmes et de filles victimes de violence, le SEM prévoit de saisir les données sur les incidents de violence ou d’exploitation sexuelles.
…Sont décevantes !

Le HCR comme les autres organisations ont salué l’adoption de ces premières mesures tout en recommandant de les étoffer et de les compléter car elles sont jugées trop minimalistes et incomplètes. Ces organisations reprochent aussi le manque de professionnalisme du SEM qui aurait dû mener son enquête autrement. Ce n’était pas au SEM d’évaluer lui-même la situation dans les centres fédéraux. Il aurait fallu confier ce travail à une organisation externe. Pourquoi les requérantes d’asile n’ont pas été interrogées ? Pourquoi ce rapport ne contient aucun chiffre sur les violences subies par les femmes et les filles réfugiées ? Pour l’enquête, les organisations estiment que des mesures destinées à générer des données aurait dû être prises.

Parmi les mesures recommandées par ces organisations mais passées à la trappe citons l’installation d’espaces non mixtes intérieurs et extérieurs dans les centres, des lieux d’hébergement externes aux centres fédéraux pour les personnes particulièrement vulnérables, la présence continue d’un personnel féminin formé à intervenir en cas de problèmes dans les hébergements, la prise en charge médicale par des doctoresses, un accès permanent à un service d’interprétariat professionnel et enfin l’instauration d’un système de dépistage systématique à l’arrivée dans les centres fédéraux.
Les femmes à l’aide d’urgence et en détention provisoire doivent aussi bénéficier des mesures d’aide

Avec les mesures du Conseil fédéral, on est encore bien loin des exigences d’assistance sans discrimination prévue par la Convention d’Istanbul qui est entrée en vigueur pour la Suisse en 2018. Selon ce texte toutes les femmes victimes de violence doivent avoir accès à des services de soutien facilitant leur rétablissement. Pourtant notre Loi fédérale sur l’aide aux victimes d’infractions (LAVI) conditionne les mesures d’assistances au lieu de l’infraction ou de résidence de la victime au moment des faits, à savoir la Suisse. Ainsi les violences subies par les femmes et les filles pendant leur fuite ou dans leur pays d’origine ne donnent pas droit à une prise en charge.

Pour l’instant, le Conseil fédéral n’envisage pas de modification de la loi mais propose des “solutions pragmatiques” pour les femmes qui ne sont pas couvertes par la loi. Quelles solutions pragmatiques ? Comment les mettre en place dans les centres fédéraux et dans chaque canton ?

Dans un Appel adressé aujourd’hui au Conseil fédéral et aux cantons, TERRE DES FEMMES Suisse et 108 services spécialisés, organisations, institutions religieuses et partis politiques demandent à la Confédération et aux cantons que des solutions pragmatiques soient mises en place rapidement.

“Nous demandons qu’il n’y ait plus de discriminations selon le statut. Notre demande est très actuelle puisque le Conseil fédéral a annoncé dans son récent communiqué de presse du 16 octobre que ces solutions pragmatiques devront être trouvées. Nous exigeons l’accès à l’aide pour toutes les victimes de violence, indépendamment du lieu du crime ou de leur statut de résidence.” explique Georgiana Ursprung.

L’organisation revendique beaucoup d’autres mesures et estime que les femmes réfugiées ne sont pas du tout en sécurité dans le système d’asile. Elle insiste pour que des mesures de protection et d’assistance soient mises en place dans les cantons suisses pour les femmes et les filles à l’aide d’urgence ou celles placées en détention administrative. La pratique de l’expulsion des femmes enceintes jusqu’à la 36e semaine de grossesse est particulièrement grave et doit cesser.
Le groupe de suivi n’est plus et c’est dommage

Fallait-il attendre 2019 pour concevoir des accès sécurisés aux toilettes, des verrouillages aux portes, des activités et des pièces réservées aux femmes, des formations spécifiques au personnel encadrant et au personnel de sécurité encore trop rarement féminin ?

En adoptant ces mesures le Conseil fédéral reconnaît pour la première fois la nécessité d’aider les victimes de violence ou d’exploitation dans leur pays d’origine ou durant leur fuite. Féliciter le Conseil fédéral pour une telle reconnaissance c’est un peu désolant après toutes les informations à disposition des autorités sur les violences subies par les femmes déplacées de force dans le monde.

Difficile de savoir si la restructuration de l’asile a permis des améliorations pour les femmes dans le domaine de l’asile. Le SEM prétend que oui parce qu’il a pu intégrer certains standards dans son Plan d’hébergement (PLEX) qui est sensé évoluer prochainement. Ce plan n’est pas accessibles au public.

Pour Eliane Engeler, porte-parole de l’OSAR, « le fait de concentrer tous les intervenants dans les centres fédéraux est une opportunité pour améliorer l’encadrement et la protection des femmes et filles. Mais cela nécessite une bonne collaboration entre tous les acteurs dans les centres, ainsi qu’une étroite collaboration avec des professionnels externes. » Elle estime que c’est encore trop tôt pour le dire.

Pour conclure, il faut préciser que rien n’oblige le SEM à mettre en oeuvre les mesures adoptées par le Conseil fédéral (sur ses propres recommandations) et le groupe de suivi pour l’élaboration du rapport n’est pas habilité à surveiller la suite des travaux. Il serait donc judicieux que les ONG s’organisent pour suivre les actions du SEM et des autorités cantonales. Enfin, aucun calendrier d’exécution n’est prévu pour l’instant. Seul un “rapport sur l’avancement de la mise en oeuvre des mesures prises au niveau fédéral” devra être soumis au Conseil fédéral dans deux ans. Les termes sont choisis pour ne pas aller trop vite en besogne.

Heureusement, l’OSAR a bien l’intention de veiller à leur mise en place comme l’explique Eliane Engeler. “ Nous allons suivre les mesures qui seront prises. Le groupe de suivi a été constitué pour l’élaboration du rapport dans le cadre du postulat Feri. Le postulat ne prévoit pas de suivi. Néanmoins nous avons appelé à ce que les lacunes soient comblées au plus vite . Indépendamment du postulat Feri, nous avons élaboré des standards minimaux destinés aux hébergements.”

▻https://blogs.letemps.ch/jasmine-caye/2019/10/31/securite-des-femmes-dans-le-domaine-de-lasile-le-conseil-federal-adopt

UNHCR in Libya Part 2 : Migrants in detention centres : ’Why does UNHCR want to keep us in prison ?’

In this, the second part of our four-part investigation into the UNHCR’s operation in Libya, we talk to those migrants actually involved in the registration and detainment process. They tell Euronews their stories.

Despite increased EU funding to the Libyan coastguard, and an Italian memorandum of understanding with the DCIM (the body responsible for running migrant detention centres) no effective provision has been made by the EU to implement migrants’ human rights and living conditions in Libya.

The migrant experience in the embattled North African nation is deteriorating. Many people in that position who spoke to Euronews have reported abuses after being thrown into detention centres with the hope of being registered by UNHCR. Testimonies include instances of torture, rape and extortion at the hands of local militias and when this leads to an attempt to cross the Mediterranean sea, reports also detail how they have been intercepted by the Libyan coastguards and automatically re-incarcerated into the detention centres.

“It has become an infinite, terrible circle from which there is no way out”, Julien Raickman, head of the MSF-France’s Libyan operation, told The Times.

UNHCR’s main mission in Libya is to register migrants and find a solution to get them out of the country. However, as Raickman adds, “the resettlement procedure is totally blocked”.

https://static.euronews.com/articles/stories/04/14/26/32/808x539_cmsv2_49a12214-ff95-5149-9485-66736d726c89-4142632.jpg https://static.euronews.com/articles/stories/04/14/26/22/808x392_cmsv2_4ee59aed-455c-5010-ac4e-24451f2bdec8-4142622.jpg

Sur les centres de détention en Libye voir aussi :
https://seenthis.net/messages/678573

UNHCR in Libya Part 3: Former staffer blows whistle on favouritism and ’culture of impunity’

https://static.euronews.com/articles/stories/04/14/26/26/773x435_cmsv2_594a03d4-47a1-5b38-a561-72ea8b82dc26-4142626.jpg

Libya’s United Nations Refugee Agency has been branded “the worst in the region” by a former staff member who has alleged corruption, mismanagement and incompetence in its dealings with tens of thousands of vulnerable refugees and asylum seekers.

The former staff member, who spoke to Euronews on condition of anonymity, painted an image of an agency overstretched and out of its depth, with asylum seekers left homeless, deprived of medical care and in legal limbo in an increasingly violent and unstable Libya.

Migrants and refugees on the ground told Euronews that they had even bribed their way into Libya’s notorious detention centres in an effort to speed up their asylum claims. There they face exploitation at the hands of militia groups, which run the centres in all but name.

The former staff member described a chaotic infrastructure at UNHCR, where he worked for several years, with asylum seekers registered under incorrect nationalities and others forced to wait for months to hear the status of their applications.

Meanwhile, questions about UNHCR in Libya have stretched to procurement. An internal audit found that the agency had purchased laptop computers at inflated prices (eight laptops for just under $50,000) and used two travel agents to purchase almost $200,000 worth of flight tickets. The audit also notes that “no competitive bidding was conducted for the travel services” (sect. D of OIOS report 2019/007).
Medical care

Euronews has spoken to dozens of asylum seekers on the ground in Libya, including a man suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis. Asyas, 30, was discharged from the hospital by a UN medical partner, the International Medical Corps (IMC), and was now living in a private home in Tripoli.

“I’m just waiting to die,” he told us.

https://static.euronews.com/articles/stories/04/14/26/32/808x539_cmsv2_b121fb78-a182-5c73-ad6e-1f36d9db0d88-4142632.jpg

A medical source in Tripoli said that the hospitalisation of migrants and refugees - especially those cases with tuberculosis - is expensive, and some public hospitals lack the equipment to correctly diagnose the cases.

As a result, NGOs have to find a balance between paying very high bills to private hospitals or discharging patients too early, the source concludes.

The IMC told Euronews it cannot comment on the case.

The feeling on the streets is one of abandonment by international institutions. Asylum seekers in urban areas believe that the UN agency will be there to help them find accommodation for example but the UNHCR are not obligated to do so.

In one case, a group of Sudanese refugees – including expectant mothers and newborn babies - have been living for several months in an abandoned warehouse in an area of Tripoli known as al-Riyadiya.

The group were since evicted from the warehouse and are now sleeping in front the UNHCR community day centre, waiting to be moved to safer housing.

https://static.euronews.com/articles/stories/04/14/26/26/808x539_cmsv2_c6b9afba-0cfc-5496-a9a0-bfd7073130ed-4142626.jpg

Commenting on the experiences Euronews uncovered, a spokesperson for the UNHCR, Charlie Yaxley, said: “Life for many refugees is extremely difficult and what we can do is at times very limited.”
Libya in the eye of the storm

Libya has been at the forefront of the migrant crisis and is the embarkation point for many boats that attempt to cross the Mediterranean to Italy.

Libya’s lawlessness since the 2011 war that followed the overthrow of Colonel Gaddafi has seen the rise of numerous militia groups, all competing for a piece of the lucrative migrant trade.

A large part of that trade is the operation of detention centres, officially run by the government but effectively controlled by militia groups. Asylum seekers detained in Libya are held at the centres, where they are often subject to abuse and violence.

The conditions at detention centres has got so bad that the UNHCR prioritise the processing of refugees and migrants that are held in them - as they are considered among the most vulnerable. This has led to asylum seekers actually bribing their way into centres, sources say.

In December, migrants and refugees detained in Khoms Suq al-Khamis started a hunger strike to persuade UNHCR to visit the centre and register them in the hope that this might stop them from being sold and disappeared.

https://static.euronews.com/articles/stories/04/14/26/26/808x539_cmsv2_d82451d9-0d9e-55ac-8342-0a642d2bcb77-4142626.jpg

Amina, a Somali refugee now in Triq al-Sikka facility in Tripoli confirmed to Euronews that she paid money to be “accepted into detention and have a better chance to be registered and evacuated".

The former UN staff member detailed one case where he claims a pregnant rape victim had opted to return to a detention centre in order to be considered for evacuation.

At the Abu Salim detention centre, Eritrean refugees have been begging the detention centre manager to admit them, with the sole hope of being evacuated.

Others are paying to get themselves in to the UNHCR’s Gathering and Departure Facility (GDF) - managed by the Libyan Ministry of Interior, UNHCR and UNHCR’s partner LibAid - in Tripoli, where refugees are normally hosted until their transfer to another state is confirmed.

https://static.euronews.com/articles/stories/04/14/26/26/808x496_cmsv2_c13e1285-8f56-558a-a7cc-7f12b0e85572-4142626.jpg

There, one refugee awaiting evacuation told Euronews: “The guards who are working at the gate, brought inside Somalian and Eritrean women; they paid 2000 dinars (around 430€) each. We told this to UNHCR, and they asked us not to tell anyone”.

Commenting on the allegations, Yaxley said: “UNHCR takes any claims of misconduct very seriously. Any claim that is found to be valid following an investigation is followed by a zero tolerance approach. We strongly encourage any victims to directly contact our Inspector General’s Office.”.
Lack of information

Aside from bribery, the former employee said that the fate of individual asylum seekers and their families in Libya largely relies on luck.

“It’s up to the office,” the source said.

“At the beginning of 2019, the UNHCR registered a woman from Ivory Coast (which is not among the 9 nationalities that are prioritised according to Cochetel), only because there was a recommendation letter from a higher rank.

“Sometimes you may wait months to register a case because no one will give you approval; there are cases of favouritism and a lazy attitude. All registration processes are unclear.”

Many refugees and asylum seekers in Tripoli complained to Euronews about the lack of information available to them about their personal case. The former employee said that this is part of a strategy at the agency in order to avoid having to deal with the huge amount of admin involved.

“It’s a general attitude not to answer refugees and keep them blind to avoid more requests. In Tripoli, refugees or asylum seekers are left without a clue. They don’t know if they are accepted or rejected.

“They receive very little information about their file and most of the time, no proper update about the process, or in case they have to appeal if their request has been rejected.”

The source said that since September 2017 there is no system in place to appeal against rejection on their refugee status, and asylum seekers don’t know they have the right to appeal the decision within 30 days.

One family from Nigeria, now detained in Az-Zāwiyah detention centre, described their experience.

“The first time we managed to meet UNHCR was secretly in Tarik Al Matar centre in July 2018. Since that time UNHCR is refusing to register us. When we try to ask about our cases they kept telling us later, next time, next time,” the father said.

“Sometimes they avoid us totally. Once, UNHCR has even advised us to return home. My youngest girl has been born in detention and the eldest have some traumatic effects due to a whole lot of horrible stuff they’ve experienced.”

Meanwhile the situation in Libya is only likely to get worse, with a bottleneck in some states like Niger slowing down the evacuation plan from Libya.

There are currently 1,174 evacuees from Libya staying in Niger, including 192 evacuated unaccompanied children, according to UNHCR. With the Emergency Transit Mechanism (ETM) at full capacity, many cases are still pending a decision.

“The Government of Niger has generously offered additional space for up to 1,500 refugees in the Emergency Transit Mechanism run by UNHCR in Niamey with financial support from the European Union,” writes Cochetel in May 2018.

https://static.euronews.com/articles/stories/04/14/26/26/606x808_cmsv2_2beee997-0854-54c2-8d2a-6806f0a7ed22-4142626.jpg

Mistakes

To make the situation worse, according to the former employee, many mistakes have been made including nationalities wrongly assigned to individuals.

“UNHCR was registering Chadians as Sudanese, or Ethiopians as Eritreans. The UNHCR staff in Libya was not qualified to properly understand the situation,” the source said.

Commenting on that claim, Yaxley said: “UNHCR staff are selected through the same processes as in all other operations worldwide, following human resources rules. There are over 100 national staff working in Libya. UNHCR does not work with external contractors.”

The aforementioned concentration on nine specified nationalities was put in place in order to keep numbers down, the former staff member said.

Libya’s Undersecretary of the Ministry of Interior for Migration, Mohammed Al-Shibani, said that on the contrary the Libyan government is not refusing to register other nationalities. “The nationalities are determined by the UN not by us,” he said.

https://static.euronews.com/articles/stories/04/14/26/32/808x539_cmsv2_c7afc9a8-dcc0-5209-a44d-2c86c01d8fe4-4142632.jpg

Procurement

On issues with procurement, the former staff member points Euronews at the internal UN audit of the operations in Libya, which found that UNHCR designated procurements to 12 partners worth $4.7 million and $4.0 million in 2017 and 2018 respectively.

But the mission “did not conduct any cost-benefit analysis”, opting instead for direct procurement “despite the significant differences between official and market exchange rates.

In 2017 and 2018, “the mission designated procurement exceeding $100,000 to three partners without them being pre-qualified by the Procurement Service at headquarters”. A lack of procurement plans resulted in ’’unnecessary and higher” costs.

For example, the audit found a transaction for eight laptops with total expenditure of $47,067 (equivalent to a unit cost per laptop of $5,883). Moreover, flight tickets amounting to $128,000 and $66,000 during 2017 and 2018 were bought from two different travel agencies without any clear process for selection, as mentioned in the audit and confirmed by a former UN source.

“The mission was unable to demonstrate it used its resources effectively and efficiently in providing for the essential needs of persons of concern. The lack of reporting also increased UNHCR’s reputational risk”, reads the audit.

https://www.euronews.com/2019/10/03/unhcr-in-libya-part-3-former-staffer-blows-whistle-on-favouritism-and-cult
#impunité

UNHCR in Libya Part 4: The detention centres - the map and the stories

https://i.imgur.com/XjR9E0D.png

When NGO workers arrived at the Janzoor detention centre in Libya in October 2018 to collect 11 unaccompanied minors due to be returned to their country of origin, they were shocked to find that the young people had completely disappeared.

The failed asylum seekers were registered and ready to go, a staff member at the International Organisation of Migration, who wished to remain anonymous, told Euronews. It took six months to find out what had happened to the group.

“They were sold and their families were asked for ransom”, the former staff member said.

In February 2019, the Libyan government revealed that there were 23 detention centres operating in Libya, holding over 5,000 asylum seekers. While they are officially run by the government, in reality it is Libya’s complex patchwork of militias that are in control.

Even those ostensibly run by Libya’s Directorate for Combatting Illegal Migration (DCIM) are effectively under the control of whichever armed group controls the neighbourhood where a centre is located.
Rule of militias

Militias, also known as “katibas”, are de-facto in control of the gates of the centres and the management. In many cases, migrants and refugees are under arrest in locations which are not considered official detention facilities, but “holding places” for investigation.

By correct protocol, they should be sent to proper detention facilities, but in reality procedures are seldom respected and asylum seekers are detained with no legal review or rights.

For many migrants and refugees, the ordeal begins at sea.

According to the Libyan coast guard, from January to August 2019, nearly 6,000 people were intercepted and brought back to Libya.

On September 19, a man from Sudan died after being shot in the stomach hours after being returned to shore.

The IOM, whose staff witnessed the attack, said it occurred at Abusitta disembarkation point in Tripoli, when 103 people that had been returned to shore were resisting being sent back to detention centres.

IOM staff who were on the scene, reported that armed men began shooting in the air when several migrants tried to run away from their guards.

“The death is a stark reminder of the grim conditions faced by migrants picked up by the Coast Guard after paying smugglers to take them to Europe, only to find themselves put into detention centres” said IOM Spokesperson Leonard Doyle.

With conflict escalating in Tripoli and many detention centres located on the frontline, the majority of the people intercepted by Libyan coast guards are brought to al-Khoms, a coastal city 120km east of the Libyan capital.

https://static.euronews.com/articles/stories/04/14/26/32/808x608_cmsv2_4aec5d62-d95a-5f2b-91bb-8ae7aa395ba3-4142632.jpg

Tortured, sold, and released

According to UN sources, guards at the city’s two detention facilities - al-Khoms and Souq al-Khamis - have either facilitated access to the militias or were afraid to deny them access.

“Let me be honest with you, I don’t trust anyone in al-Khoms centre,” a former DCIM official told Euronews.

“The detention centre has been officially closed by the DCIM but the militia there do whatever they want and they don’t respect the orders given by the Ministry of Interior.

“People have been tortured, sold and released after paying money. The management and the militia in al-Khoms, they act independently from the government”.

Last June, during the protection sector coordination meeting in Tripoli, UN agencies and international organisations raised the question of people disappearing on a daily basis.

“In one week at least 100 detainees disappeared and despite the closure of the centre, the Libyan coast guard continued to bring refugees to al-Khoms detention centre” according to a note of the meeting seen by Euronews.

The head of an international organisation present at the meeting, who asked to remain anonymous, said: “Many organisations have been turning their back on the situation, as they were not visiting the centre anymore.

“19 people from Eritrea were at risk, including young ladies between 14 and 19 years old”.

During a press briefing last June, the spokesman for UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Rupert Colville, reported that women held in detention have been sold into sexual exploitation.

David, a migrant who had been detained in Misrata detention centre was able to get out after transiting from a safe house in al-Khoms. He said that centre staff “had been extorting money from detainees for months.

“I didn’t have a choice as the UN refused to register me because I come from Central African Republic and my nationality is not among the one recognised by UNHCR.”

https://static.euronews.com/articles/stories/04/14/26/32/1052x701_cmsv2_8e68ca15-5504-5762-a0fb-2ecf046581fe-4142632.jpg

Detention centres are still open

In August 2019, Libyan authorities in Tripoli confirmed the shutdown of three detention centres in Misrata, Khoms and Tajoura, but DCIM officers and migrants held in detention confirmed to Euronews that the centres are still open.

While it is impossible to independently verify the current status of the facilities - as as the Ministry of Interior in Tripoli does not authorise access to them - Euronews was able to speak on the phone with detainees.

“Just bring a letter with the authorisation from the Ministry of Interior and I will let you enter,” said one commander from Tajoura on the phone, confirming that the centre was still running.

Another source at the DCIM in Tripoli mentioned that Tajoura was still running and the militia was mainly arresting people from street to fill the hangars again.

The decision to close the Az-Zāwiyah detention centre - mentioned in PART 1 and 2 - was taken in April 2018 by former head of DCIM Colonel Mohamed Besher. But the centre has instead been transformed into an arrest and investigation centre.

Located at the Az-Zāwiyah Refinery, which is secured by Al-Nasser brigade since 2011, it is close to the base of the Az-Zāwiyah coastguard

Both the commander of the Libyan Coast Guard’s Unit and the head of Al-Nasr brigade are sanctioned by UN and the United States for alleged involvement in human trafficking and migrant smuggling.

Mohammed Kushlaf is working in cooperation with “Osama” (➡️ SEE PART 2), who is in charge of the detention facility. His name appears 67 times in the recent investigation conducted by Italian prosecutor Luigi Patronaggio.

https://static.euronews.com/articles/stories/04/14/26/32/808x539_cmsv2_0e22fb36-86ce-5576-9f09-40d580ffa9c7-4142632.jpg

‘Inhumane conditions’

The investigation had “confirmed the inhumane conditions” endured by many migrants and “the need to act, at an international level, to protect their most basic human rights.”

The Government of National Accord has supported the UN sanctions and issued public statements of condemnation against the trafficking and smuggling of migrants.

The Libyan prosecutor has also issued an order to suspend the commander of the Libyan Coast Guard and bring him into custody for investigations, although this was never implemented, confirmed a Libyan lawyer working at the Ministry of Justice.

Sources at the DCIM mentioned that between September 2018 and April 2019 - when the Libyan National Army (LNA) troops guided by the general Khalifa Haftar seized Tripoli’s southern suburbs – many detention centres were located near the clashes.

Salaheddin, Ain Zara, Qasr Bin Ghashir and Tariq Al Matar detention centres have been closed because of the conflict.

As a result, large groups of refugees and migrants have been displaced or transferred to other locations. A DCIM officer in Tripoli mentioned that “The Tariq Al Matar centre was in the middle of the clashes and many refugees left to find safety in other areas after a few people were injured. A group was transferred to Ain Zara and another to Janzour detention centre, some 20 kilometres southwest of Tripoli’s centre.”

https://static.euronews.com/articles/stories/04/14/26/32/808x539_cmsv2_d603a86d-7d9c-54fd-aa12-d6afbc4be5f5-4142632.jpg

Migrants being recruited to help militia in Libya’s civil war

In September and several times in December and January, refugees say they were forced to move and pack weapons as fighting between rival armed groups in the capital of Tripoli flared up.

They also engaged directly with local militia, from the Tripoli suburb of Tarhouna, that was controlling Qasr Bin Ghashir detention centre at the time.

“No one was fighting on the front but they would ask us to open and close the gate and move and pack weapons”, said Musa, a Sudanese refugee who left Qasr Bin Ghashir in April following the attack.

On October 2, Abdalmajed Adam, a refugee from South Sudan was also injured by a random bullet on his shoulder and was taken to a military hospital,” adds Musa.

https://static.euronews.com/articles/stories/04/14/26/32/1052x791_cmsv2_679cc1f5-1da9-5590-bb29-5f5d39707102-4142632.jpg

The militia who is controlling the area where Abu Salim detention centre is located is known as Ghaniwa and is aligned to the GNA.

The group has been asking refugees, especially Sudanese – as they speak Arabic - to follow them to the frontline.

“Last August they bought us to Wadi Al-Rabea in southern Tripoli, and asked us to load weapons. I was one of them. They took five of us from the centre,” said Amir, a Sudanese asylum seeker who is detained in Abu Salim.

A former DCIM officer confirmed that in June 2018, the head of Abu Salim DCIM, Mohamed al-Mashay (aka Abu Azza), was killed by an armed group following internal disputes over power.

The Qasr Bin Ghashir detention centre, in which 700 people were locked up, was attacked on April 23. Video and photographic evidence shows refugees and migrants trapped in detention having incurred gunshot wounds.

Multiple reports suggested several deaths and at least 12 people injured. A former DCIM officer mentioned that behind the attack there was a dispute over the control of the territory: it is a very strategic point being the main road to enter to Tripoli.

https://static.euronews.com/articles/stories/04/14/26/32/1052x701_cmsv2_12730d39-c1fa-5ac6-bd19-0bd588385e4d-4142632.jpg

#torture #traite_d'êtres_humains #cartographie #visualisation #localisation

Inchiesta. #Ossama_il_libico, ecco chi è «il più spietato di tutti con i migranti»

Per la prima volta fotografato il boss dei trafficanti. I carcerieri prendono ordini da lui. Una scia di omicidi e prevaricazioni di ogni tipo ai danni dei profughi. Arrestati in Sicilia tre complici

https://www.avvenire.it/c/2019/PublishingImages/80d86f677fcc4837a2a9acc3e68963a7/Ossama03.jpg?width=1024#.jpg

Dicono di lui: «Il più spietato». È Ossama, il libico. O almeno così dice di chiamarsi. Nessuno era mai riuscito a fotografare il capo torturatore del vasto campo di prigionia di #Zawyah, tranne un giovane subsahariano che ha tenuto con sé l’immagine del suo aguzzino.

La foto è stata consegnata a un avvocato di Londra e potrebbe dare una spinta all’inchiesta sulle violenze subite nei lager libici. Il nome di Ossama ricorre per settanta volte nelle 37 pagine dell’ordinanza con cui i magistrati siciliani hanno fatto arrestare pochi giorni fa tre complici fuggiti in Italia.

I racconti dei sopravvissuti sono voci scampate agli spettri che ogni notte si davano il cambio addosso alle ragazze. Libici, egiziani, migranti promossi kapò, come nei campi di concentramento quando a un deportato veniva affidata il comando sugli altri prigionieri.

«Tutti hanno riferito di una struttura associativa organizzata, indicando il suo capo, Ossama, e spesso fornendo l’organigramma dell’associazione – si legge nell’ordinanza della procura di Palermo –, ovviamente nei limiti in cui gli stessi prigionieri potevano rendersi conto del numero di sodali addetti alla struttura di prigionia e dei loro rispettivi ruoli». Materiale buono anche per gli investigatori del Tribunale internazionale dell’Aia, che tra poco più di un mese diffonderanno un rapporto aggiornato sull’inferno libico.

«Dalle nostre fonti in loco – spiega Giulia Tranchina, legale per Diritti Umani dello studio Wilson di Londra – sappiamo che le torture continuano ancora in questi giorni e che nessuna svolta c’è stata per questi profughi che continuano a subire abusi, tanto più che le organizzazioni internazionali non sono messe in grado neanche di registrare tempestivamente, dunque è più facile per «Ossama» rivenderle ad altri gruppi di trafficanti senza lasciare alcuna traccia».

Uno dei testimoni ha parlato così di Ossama: «Picchiava, torturava chiunque, utilizzando anche una frusta. A causa delle torture praticate Ossama si è reso responsabile di due omicidi di due migranti del Camerun, i quali sono morti a causa delle ferite non curate. Anche io, inauditamente e senza alcun pretesto, sono stato più volte picchiato e torturato da Ossama con dei tubi di gomma. Tanti altri migranti subivano torture e sevizie di ogni tipo». C’è chi lo ricorda come «una persona adulta, muscolosa, con ampia stempiatura». Ai suoi diretti ordini «vi erano tanti carcerieri».

La polizia di Agrigento ha interrogato separatamente i migranti transitati da Zawyah e salvati nello scorso luglio dalla barca a vela Alex, della piattaforma italiana “Mediterranea”. Tutte le testimonianze concordano sul ruolo e le responsabilità di Ossama e dei suoi scagnozzi.

Quando i magistrati di Agrigento, che poi hanno trasmesso per competenza gli atti ai colleghi di Palermo, raccoglievano fonti di prova e testimonianze non sapevano che anche il segretario generale delle Nazioni Unite, Antonio Guterres, aveva ricevuto e raccolto informazioni analoghe. A cominciare dalla vendita dei migranti da parte della polizia libica. «Un giorno, nel mese di luglio 2018, io e mia moglie – ha raccontato un uomo catturato e seviziato con la moglie – ci trovavamo a Zuara (non lontano da Zawyah, ndr). In quell’occasione venivamo avvistati e avvicinati da due libici, in uniforme, i quali ci hanno poi venduto al trafficante Ossama». Ad accordo fatto, «i due libici ci hanno condotto direttamente nella prigione gestita proprio da Ossama, a Zawyiah, in un’ex base militare».

L’avvocato Tranchina, che nello studio di legali londinesi specializzati nella difesa dei Diritti umani ha vinto numerose battaglie nei tribunali del Regno, continua a ricevere filmati e immagini che tagliano il respiro.

Alcuni sono recentissimi e documentano il fallimento di ogni accordo tra le autorità libiche e gli organismi internazionali. Diversi migranti raccontano di essere stati feriti durante le sessioni di tortura, non di rado a colpi di arma da fuoco, e poi nascosti lontano dalle prigioni durante le ispezioni concesse alla mmissione Onu in Libia.

▻https://www.avvenire.it/attualita/pagine/libia-ossama-lo-spietato-coi-migranti

Allemagne : un site web pour signaler les incidents dans les structures d’accueil

Un nouveau site internet doit permettre d’évaluer et d’améliorer les conditions de vie dans les "centres d’ancrage" en permettant à leurs résidents de témoigner de leur quotidien.

En Allemagne, trois Länder (Etats fédérés), dont la Bavière, ont transformé l’an dernier près d’une dizaine de centres d’accueil en "centres d’ancrage" Les demandeurs d’asile peuvent rester jusqu’à 24 mois dans ces centres à guichet unique en attendant que leur dossier soit traité.

Alors que ce dispositif est très critiqué, les Conseils pour les réfugiés de Bavière et de Munich ont mis en place avec d’autres partenaires le site internet “ANKER-Watch”, pour rendre compte de la vie dans ces centres et recueillir les témoignages et réclamations de leurs résidents.

Sur ce site internet, les demandeurs d’asile qui vivent ou ont vécu dans un centre d’ancrage peuvent :

Remplir un questionnaire anonyme sur les conditions de vie pour "analyser les problèmes concrets". Ce questionnaire est en anglais, allemand et dari.
Rapporter un incident ou des mauvais comportements
Contacter l’équipe d’ANKER-Watch par mail, par téléphone, sms, WhatsApp ou encore sur Facebook, Twitter et Instagram

Selon le site internet, il s’agit aussi de permettre au personnel travaillant dans les centres de signaler des incidents ou de faire connaître leurs opinions. Les faits signalés peuvent aller de conditions d’insalubrité à des cas d’agressions.

Lutter contre la culture du silence

"Ce qui manquait était un moyen de documenter et de rendre public les petites choses du quotidien qui ne vont pas se retrouver dans la presse", assure Katharina Grote du Conseil pour les réfugiés de Bavière. Selon elle, à côté d’une poignée de bénévoles, au moins cinq personnes travaillent actuellement à temps plein pour le site. Jusqu’à présent, seuls quelques résidents ont utilisé l’outil de signalement d’incidents, mais les appels pour des questions concernant les centres d’ancrage se sont multipliés.

Katharina Grote explique qu’il s’agit d’amener les résidents à ne pas avoir peur d’être sanctionnés s’ils rapportent un incident. Certains craignent en effet que cela puisse nuire à leur dossier et avoir des conséquences sur leur demande d’asile.

Un dispositif critiqué

Le but affiché des centres d’ancrage est de raccourcir la durée de traitement des demandes d’asile, en proposant tous les services nécessaires à l’étude du dossier dans un seul et même lieu. En juillet dernier, soit un an après leur lancement, le ministre allemand de l’Intérieur s’est vanté du succès de ce concept.

Mais les ONG de défense des réfugiés estiment que ces lieux sont des centres de détention de masse dont les résidents sont privés d’un accès à la justice et coupés de la société. De plus, des expulsions vers les pays d’origine ont lieu quotidiennement depuis ces centres, ce qui rend le séjour psychologiquement très difficile pour les résidents.

▻https://www.infomigrants.net/fr/post/19447/allemagne-un-site-web-pour-signaler-les-incidents-dans-les-structures-

–--------

#Anker-watch :

https://i.imgur.com/oXIbxIz.png

Who we are and our Goals

In order to get more insight into the living conditions of the people, despite the isolated situation of the ANKER centres, to give them a voice and to make this known to the public, the bavarian and munich refugee councils together with a broad network of supporting organisations and individuals founded “ANKER-Watch”. On the one hand a survey will be conducted to find out what the conditions in the institutions are like and on the other hand a platform will be offered for reports from experts and victims on the subject. The aim is to break through the isolation barrier and make these problems more transparent to the public.

The introduction of ANKER centres has brought about a major change for all those who are either active full-time in the refugee field or on a voluntary basis. Access to and the exchange with refugees has become much more difficult than before due to the often remote camps and the inaccessibility of those. At the same time, the need for support seems to be increasing due to the difficult circumstances in the ANKER facilities. The Bavarian and Munich Refugee Councils in particular have been repeatedly informed of serious grievances, fatal living conditions and experiences of violence by fugitives from the ANKER centres. In most ANKER centres there are only a few active volunteers. Access is complicated and the burden and frustration for volunteers is high.

Out of the collected reports, we are creating a documentation in the form of a watch list.

We stand up for the rights of refugees. We are against the exclusion and isolation of refugees by placing them in camps and we demand equal rights and a life in safety for all.

▻https://www.anker-watch.de/en/about-us

Doctors to quit German ’Anchor Center’ for asylum seekers

The international human rights organization Doctors of the World says it won’t continue to run medical clinics at an asylum seeker center in Bavaria. The group says the living conditions in the Anchor Center make it impossible to provide proper treatment.

The German branch of Doctors of the World has announced that it is pulling out of the so-called Anchor Center (known as “Anker”-Center in German) in Manching-Ingolstadt in Bavaria as of the end of October.

The organization was joined by a number of other groups in criticizing the one-stop processing facilities for asylum seekers during a hearing of the state’s parliamentary committee on legal affairs in late September.

Despite calls from the Greens party for the Anchor Centers to be shut down, the chief of the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees, Hans Echkard-Sommer, defended the system and said the centers had made asylum procedures faster and more effective, according to reports in the Die Welt daily newspaper.

’Sickening living conditions’

Doctors of the World has been offering an onsite clinic twice a month since January, providing psychological and psychiatric care to asylum seekers in the center. The Ingolstadt facility was the first “Anker” Center (Arrival, Distribution, Decision and Return facility) to open in Germany. Located in a former military barracks, the center was intended to accommodate asylum seekers from “safe countries of origin,” such as Bosnia, Serbia and Macedonia.

“The sickening living conditions in the Anchor Center at Manching/Ingolstadt prohibit successful treatment,” said Professor Heinz-Jochen Zenker, a psychiatrist and committee chair of Doctors of the World. “Under these circumstances, Doctors of the World cannot take responsibility for the condition of patients with severe mental illness and for their medication.”

https://scd.infomigrants.net/media/resize/my_image_big/fd3f46ed26e42c7681572a56968637a89e6d301b.jpeg

The group said factors like inadequate protection from assault, lack of privacy, and disturbances at night, as well as uncertainty about the future and insufficient control over their own lives meant that patients could not even be made stable, let alone cured. The group said medical teams were under too much pressure as a result.

No system to identify vulnerable migrants

Some people who attend bi-monthly clinics offered by Doctors of the World at the Manching facility have been severely traumatized through experiencing war, rape and other forms of violence, according to the organization. Yet they often find their way to the clinic “by chance”.

The group also says there is no systematic procedure in place at the Anchor Center to identify highly vulnerable residents. And even when special needs are recognized, there is no procedure nor sufficient personnel to provide the necessary support.

Doctors of the World says despite the fact that it has raised these concerns in the past, only minor changes have been made as a result, and the “sickening structure of the facility remains in place.”
The organization says it had “no choice” but to withdraw from the facility, though it will continue to provide support to staff who remain in the center. The psychological counselling and psychiatric walk-in clinic in Munich will continue to operate.

Three German states, including Bavaria, last year turned nine reception facilities into Anchor Centers. Asylum seekers are supposed to stay at the anchor centers for up to 24 months while their applications are being processed — and they either receive asylum or get deported.

Since their launch, the concept of the holding facilities has been repeatedly criticized by NGOs while the government has called them a success. This summer, the Bavarian and Munich refugee councils together with a network of partner and support organizations launched the “ANKER-Watch” website to document and “critically monitor” the situation inside the seven Bavarian anchor centers.

▻https://www.infomigrants.net/en/post/20011/doctors-to-quit-german-anchor-center-for-asylum-seekers

#santé #accès_aux_soins

#santé #soins #procédures_accélérées #accélération_des_procédures #suisse #asile #migrations #réfugiés #procédure_d'asile #TAF #SEM #état_de_santé #centres_fédéraux

‘Some Suburb of Hell’: America’s New Concentration Camp System

https://cdn.nybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/GettyImages-73862274.jpg

On Monday, New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez referred to US border detention facilities as “concentration camps,” spurring a backlash in which critics accused her of demeaning the memory of those who died in the Holocaust. Debates raged over a label for what is happening along the southern border and grew louder as the week rolled on. But even this back-and-forth over naming the camps has been a recurrent feature in the mass detention of civilians ever since its inception, a history that long predates the Holocaust.

At the heart of such policy is a question: What does a country owe desperate people whom it does not consider to be its citizens? The twentieth century posed this question to the world just as the shadow of global conflict threatened for the second time in less than three decades. The dominant response was silence, and the doctrine of absolute national sovereignty meant that what a state did to people under its control, within its borders, was nobody else’s business. After the harrowing toll of the Holocaust with the murder of millions, the world revisited its answer, deciding that perhaps something was owed to those in mortal danger. From the Fourth Geneva Convention protecting civilians in 1949 to the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child, the international community established humanitarian obligations toward the most vulnerable that apply, at least in theory, to all nations.

The twenty-first century is unraveling that response. Countries are rejecting existing obligations and meeting asylum seekers with walls and fences, from detainees fleeing persecution who were sent by Australia to third-party detention in the brutal offshore camps of Manus and Nauru to razor-wire barriers blocking Syrian refugees from entering Hungary. While some nations, such as Germany, wrestle with how to integrate refugees into their labor force—more and more have become resistant to letting them in at all. The latest location of this unwinding is along the southern border of the United States.

So far, American citizens have gotten only glimpses of the conditions in the border camps that have been opened in their name. In the month of May, Customs and Border Protection reported a total of 132,887 migrants who were apprehended or turned themselves in between ports of entry along the southwest border, an increase of 34 percent from April alone. Upon apprehension, these migrants are temporarily detained by Border Patrol, and once their claims are processed, they are either released or handed over to ICE for longer-term detention. Yet Border Patrol itself is currently holding about 15,000 people, nearly four times what government officials consider to be this enforcement arm’s detention capacity.

On June 12, the Department of Health and Human Services announced that Fort Sill, an Army post that hosted a World War II internment camp for detainees of Japanese descent, will now be repurposed to detain migrant children. In total, HHS reports that it is currently holding some 12,000 minors. Current law limits detention of minors to twenty days, though Senator Lindsey Graham has proposed expanding the court-ordered limit to 100 days. Since the post is on federal land, it will be exempt from state child welfare inspections.

In addition to the total of detainees held by Border Patrol, an even higher number is detained at centers around the country by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency: on a typical day at the beginning of this month, ICE was detaining more than 52,500 migrants. The family separation policy outraged the public in the 2018, but despite legal challenges, it never fully ended. Less publicized have been the deaths of twenty-four adults in ICE custody since the beginning of the Trump administration; in addition, six children between the ages of two and sixteen have died in federal custody over the last several months. It’s not clear whether there have been other deaths that have gone unreported.

https://cdn.nybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/GettyImages-1136085170.jpg

Conditions for detainees have not been improving. At the end of May, a Department of Homeland Security inspector general found nearly 900 migrants at a Texas shelter built for a capacity of 125 people. On June 11, a university professor spotted at least 100 men behind chain-link fences near the Paso del Norte Bridge in El Paso, Texas. Those detainees reported sitting outside for weeks in temperatures that soared above 100 degrees. Taylor Levy, an El Paso immigration lawyer, described going into one facility and finding “a suicidal four-year-old whose face was covered in bloody, self-inflicted scratches… Another young child had to be restrained by his mother because he kept running full-speed into metal lockers. He was covered in bruises.”

If deciding what to do about the growing numbers of adults and children seeking refuge in the US relies on complex humanitarian policies and international laws, in which most Americans don’t take a deep interest, a simpler question also presents itself: What exactly are these camps that the Trump administration has opened, and where is this program of mass detention headed?

Even with incomplete information about what’s happening along the border today and what the government plans for these camps, history points to some conclusions about their future. Mass detention without trial earned a new name and a specific identity at the end of the nineteenth century. The labels then adopted for the practice were “reconcentración” and “concentration camps”—places of forced relocation of civilians into detention on the basis of group identity.

Other kinds of group detention had appeared much earlier in North American history. The US government drove Native Americans from their homelands into prescribed exile, with death and detention in transit camps along the way. Some Spanish mission systems in the Americas had accomplished similar ends by seizing land and pressing indigenous people into forced labor. During the 245 years when slavery was legal in the US, detention was one of its essential features.

Concentration camps, however, don’t typically result from the theft of land, as happened with Native Americans, or owning human beings in a system of forced labor, as in the slave trade. Exile, theft, and forced labor can come later, but in the beginning, detention itself is usually the point of concentration camps. By the end of the nineteenth century, the mass production of barbed wire and machines guns made this kind of detention possible and practical in ways it never had been before.

Under Spanish rule in 1896, the governor-general of Cuba instituted camps in order to clear rebel-held regions during an uprising, despite his predecessor’s written refusal “as the representative of a civilized nation, to be the first to give the example of cruelty and intransigence” that such detention would represent. After women and children began dying in vast numbers behind barbed wire because there had been little planning for shelter and even less for food, US President William McKinley made his call to war before Congress. He spoke against the policy of reconcentración, calling it warfare by uncivilized means. “It was extermination,” McKinley said. “The only peace it could beget was that of the wilderness and the grave.” Without full records, the Cuban death toll can only be estimated, but a consensus puts it in the neighborhood of 150,000, more than 10 percent of the island’s prewar population.

Today, we remember the sinking of the USS Maine as the spark that ignited the Spanish-American War. But war correspondent George Kennan (cousin of the more famous diplomat) believed that “it was the suffering of the reconcentrados, more, perhaps, than any other one thing that brought about the intervention of the United States.” On April 25, 1898, Congress declared war. Two weeks later, US Marines landed at Fisherman’s Point on the windward side of the entrance to Guantánamo Bay in Cuba. After a grim, week-long fight, the Marines took the hill. It became a naval base, and the United States has never left that patch of land.

As part of the larger victory, the US inherited the Philippines. The world’s newest imperial power also inherited a rebellion. Following a massacre of American troops at Balangiga in September 1901, during the third year of the conflict, the US established its own concentration camp system. Detainees, mostly women and children, were forced into squalid conditions that one American soldier described in a letter to a US senator as “some suburb of hell.” In the space of only four months, more than 11,000 Filipinos are believed to have died in these noxious camps.

Meanwhile, in southern Africa in 1900, the British had opened their own camps during their battle with descendants of Dutch settlers in the second Boer War. British soldiers filled tent cities with Boer women and children, and the military authorities called them refugee camps. Future Prime Minister David Lloyd George took offense at that name, noting in Parliament: “There is no greater delusion in the mind of any man than to apply the term ‘refugee’ to these camps. They are not refugee camps. They are camps of concentration.” Contemporary observers compared them to the Cuban camps, and criticized their deliberate cruelty. The Bishop of Hereford wrote to The Times of London in 1901, asking: “Are we reduced to such a depth of impotence that our Government can do nothing to stop such a holocaust of child-life?”

https://cdn.nybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/GettyImages-545966581.jpg

Maggoty meat rations and polluted water supplies joined outbreaks of contagious diseases amid crowded and unhealthy conditions in the Boer camps. More than 27,000 detainees are thought to have died there, nearly 80 percent of them children. The British had opened camps for black Africans as well, in which at least 14,000 detainees died—the real number is probably much higher. Aside from protests made by some missionaries, the deaths of indigenous black Africans did not inspire much public outrage. Much of the history of the suffering in these camps has been lost.

These early experiments with concentration camps took place on the periphery of imperial power, but accounts of them nevertheless made their way into newspapers and reports in many nations. As a result, the very idea of them came to be seen as barbaric. By the end of the first decade of the twentieth century, the first camp systems had all been closed, and concentration camps had nearly vanished as an institution. Within months of the outbreak of World War I, though, they would be resurrected—this time rising not at the margins but in the centers of power. Between 1914 and 1918, camps were constructed on an unprecedented scale across six continents. In their time, these camps were commonly called concentration camps, though today they are often referred to by the more anodyne term “internment.”

Those World War I detainees were, for the most part, foreigners—or, in legalese, aliens—and recent anti-immigration legislation in several countries had deliberately limited their rights. The Daily Mail denounced aliens left at liberty once they had registered with their local police department, demanding, “Does signing his name take the malice out of a man?” The Scottish Field was more direct, asking, “Do Germans have souls?” That these civilian detainees were no threat to Britain did not keep them from being demonized, shouted at, and spat upon as they were paraded past hostile crowds in cities like London.

Though a small number of people were shot in riots in these camps, and hunger became a serious issue as the conflict dragged on, World War I internment would present a new, non-lethal face for the camps, normalizing detention. Even after the war, new camps sprang up from Spain to Hungary and Cuba, providing an improvised “solution” for everything from vagrancy to anxieties over the presence of Jewish foreigners.

Some of these camps were clearly not safe for those interned. Local camps appeared in Tulsa, Oklahoma, in 1921, after a white mob burned down a black neighborhood and detained African-American survivors. In Bolshevik Russia, the first concentration camps preceded the formation of the Soviet Union in 1922 and planted seeds for the brutal Gulag system that became official near the end of the USSR’s first decade. While some kinds of camps were understood to be harsher, after World War I their proliferation did not initially disturb public opinion. They had yet to take on their worst incarnations.

In 1933, barely more than a month after Hitler was appointed chancellor, the Nazis’ first, impromptu camp opened in the town of Nohra in central Germany to hold political opponents. Detainees at Nohra were allowed to vote at a local precinct in the elections of March 5, 1933, resulting in a surge of Communist ballots in the tiny town. Locking up groups of civilians without trial had become accepted. Only the later realization of the horrors of the Nazi death camps would break the default assumption by governments and the public that concentration camps could and should be a simple way to manage populations seen as a threat.

However, the staggering death toll of the Nazi extermination camp system—which was created mid-war and stood almost entirely separate from the concentration camps in existence since 1933—led to another result: a strange kind of erasure. In the decades that followed World War II, the term “concentration camp” came to stand only for Auschwitz and other extermination camps. It was no longer applied to the kind of extrajudicial detention it had denoted for generations. The many earlier camps that had made the rise of Auschwitz possible largely vanished from public memory.

https://cdn.nybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/GettyImages-51707546.jpg

It is not necessary, however, to step back a full century in American history to find camps with links to what is happening on the US border today. Detention at Guantánamo began in the 1990s, when Haitian and Cuban immigrants whom the government wanted to keep out of the United States were housed there in waves over a four-year period—years before the “war on terror” and the US policy of rendition of suspected “enemy combatants” made Camps Delta, X-Ray, and Echo notorious. Tens of thousands of Haitians fleeing instability at home were picked up at sea and diverted to the Cuban base, to limit their legal right to apply for asylum. The court cases and battles over the suffering of those detainees ended up setting the stage for what Guantánamo would become after September 11, 2001.

In one case, a federal court ruled that it did have jurisdiction over the base, but the government agreed to release the Haitians who were part of the lawsuit in exchange for keeping that ruling off the books. A ruling in a second case would assert that the courts did not have jurisdiction. Absent the prior case, the latter stood on its own as precedent. Leaving Guantánamo in this gray area made it an ideal site for extrajudicial detention and torture after the twin towers fell.

This process of normalization, when a bad camp becomes much more dangerous, is not unusual. Today’s border camps are a crueler reflection of long-term policies—some challenged in court—that earlier presidents had enacted. Prior administrations own a share of the responsibility for today’s harsh practices, but the policies in place today are also accompanied by a shameless willingness to publicly target a vulnerable population in increasingly dangerous ways.

I visited Guantánamo twice in 2015, sitting in the courtroom for pretrial hearings and touring the medical facility, the library, and all the old abandoned detention sites, as well as newly built ones, open to the media—from the kennel-style cages of Camp X-Ray rotting to ruin in the damp heat to the modern jailhouse facilities of Camp 6. Seeing all this in person made clear to me how vast the architecture of detention had become, how entrenched it was, and how hard it would be to close.

Without a significant government effort to reverse direction, conditions in every camp system tend to deteriorate over time. Governments rarely make that kind of effort on behalf of people they are willing to lock up without trial in the first place. And history shows that legislatures do not close camps against the will of an executive.

Just a few years ago there might have been more potential for change spurred by the judicial branch of our democracy, but this Supreme Court is inclined toward deference to executive power, even, it appears, if that power is abused. It seems unlikely this Court will intervene to end the new border camp system; indeed, the justices are far more likely to institutionalize it by half-measures, as happened with Guantánamo. The Korematsu case, in which the Supreme Court upheld Japanese-American internment (a ruling only rescinded last year), relied on the suppression of evidence by the solicitor general. Americans today can have little confidence that this administration would behave any more scrupulously when defending its detention policy.

What kind of conditions can we expect to develop in these border camps? The longer a camp system stays open, the more likely it is that vital things will go wrong: detainees will contract contagious diseases and suffer from malnutrition and mental illness. We have already seen that current detention practices have resulted in children and adults succumbing to influenza, staph infections, and sepsis. The US is now poised to inflict harm on tens of thousands more, perhaps hundreds of thousands more.

Along with such inevitable consequences, every significant camp system has introduced new horrors of its own, crises that were unforeseen when that system was opened. We have yet to discover what those will be for these American border camps. But they will happen. Every country thinks it can do detention better when it starts these projects. But no good way to conduct mass indefinite detention has yet been devised; the system always degrades.

When, in 1940, Margarete Buber-Neumann was transferred from the Soviet Gulag at Karaganda to the camp for women at Ravensbrück (in an exchange enabled by the Nazi–Soviet Pact), she came from near-starvation conditions in the USSR and was amazed at the cleanliness and order of the Nazi camp. New arrivals were issued clothing, bedding, and silverware, and given fresh porridge, fruit, sausage, and jam to eat. Although the Nazi camps were already punitive, order-obsessed monstrosities, the wartime overcrowding that would soon overtake them had not yet made daily life a thing of constant suffering and squalor. The death camps were still two years away.

The United States now has a vast and growing camp system. It is starting out with gruesome overcrowding and inadequate healthcare, and because of budget restrictions, has already taken steps to cut services to juvenile detainees. The US Office of Refugee Resettlement says that the mounting number of children arriving unaccompanied is forcing it to use military bases and other sites that it prefers to avoid, and that establishing these camps is a temporary measure. But without oversight from state child welfare inspectors, the possibilities for neglect and abuse are alarming. And without any knowledge of how many asylum-seekers are coming in the future, federal administrators are likely to find themselves boxed in to managing detention on military sites permanently.

President Trump and senior White House adviser Stephen Miller appear to have purged the Department of Homeland Security of most internal opposition to their anti-immigrant policies. In doing so, that have removed even those sympathetic to the general approach taken by the White House, such as former Chief of Staff John Kelly and former Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, in order to escalate the militarization of the border and expand irregular detention in more systematic and punitive ways. This kind of power struggle or purge in the early years of a camp system is typical.

The disbanding of the Cheka, the Soviet secret police, in February 1922 and the transfer of its commander, Felix Dzerzhinsky, to head up an agency with control over only two prisons offered a hint of an alternate future in which extrajudicial detention would not play a central role in the fledgling Soviet republic. But Dzerzhinsky managed to keep control over the “special camps” in his new position, paving the way for the emergence of a camp-centered police state. In pre-war Germany in the mid-1930s, Himmler’s struggle to consolidate power from rivals eventually led him to make camps central to Nazi strategy. When the hardliners win, as they appear to have in the US, conditions tend to worsen significantly.

Is it possible this growth in the camp system will be temporary and the improvised border camps will soon close? In theory, yes. But the longer they remain open, the less likely they are to vanish. When I visited the camps for Rohingya Muslims a year before the large-scale campaign of ethnic cleansing began, many observers appeared to be confusing the possible and the probable. It was possible that the party of Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi would sweep into office in free elections and begin making changes. It was possible that full democracy would come to all the residents of Myanmar, even though the government had stripped the Rohingya of the last vestiges of their citizenship. These hopes proved to be misplaced. Once there are concentration camps, it is always probable that things will get worse.

The Philippines, Japanese-American internment, Guantánamo… we can consider the fine points of how the current border camps evoke past US systems, and we can see how the arc of camp history reveals the likelihood that the suffering we’re currently inflicting will be multiplied exponentially. But we can also simply look at what we’re doing right now, shoving bodies into “dog pound”-style detention pens, “iceboxes,” and standing room-only spaces. We can look at young children in custody who have become suicidal. How much more historical awareness do we really need?

https://cdn.nybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/GettyImages-980378244.jpg

▻https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2019/06/21/some-suburb-of-hell-americas-new-concentration-camp-system

#Alexandria_Ocasio-Cortez engage le bras de fer avec la politique migratoire de Donald Trump

L’élue de New York a qualifié les camps de rétention pour migrants érigés à la frontière sud des Etats-Unis de « camps de concentration ».

https://img.lemde.fr/2019/05/30/0/0/3380/2254/688/0/60/0/8eb63f4_25295452f75f465a8b11ca278494454c-25295452f75f465a8b11ca278494454c-0.jpg

▻https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2019/06/19/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-engage-le-bras-de-fer-avec-la-politique-migratoire-

Libye, loin des yeux, loin du cœur : reportage dans les centres de détention

https://www.msf.fr/sites/default/files/styles/contenu_article/public/image_base_media/2019/07/MSF278414.jpg

5 000 à 6 000 réfugiés et migrants sont détenus de façon arbitraire dans les centres de détention libyens qui dépendent du ministère de l’Intérieur basé à Tripoli.

Ces derniers mois, leur situation s’est encore aggravée à cause du conflit qui a éclaté début avril entre le gouvernement libyen reconnu par les Nations unies et basé à Tripoli (GNA) et les forces de l’Armée Nationale Libyenne (ANL). Toutefois, malgré des appels répétés à la protection et à l’évacuation des réfugiés et des migrants détenus, ceux-ci ont peu de chances de parvenir en lieu sûr dans un avenir proche. Par ailleurs, nombre d’entre eux sont renvoyés de force dans ce même cycle de violences et de détention en Libye par les garde-côtes libyens soutenus par l’Union européenne.

Loin de la zone de combat, des centaines de personnes restent enfermées pour une durée indéterminée, dans des conditions néfastes, dans des centres de détention où elles sont exposées aux maltraitances et à la mort, et poussées au désespoir.

https://www.msf.fr/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/image_base_media/2019/07/MSF278410.jpg

Dans le djebel Nafousa, une région montagneuse au sud de Tripoli, des personnes nécessitant une protection internationale et enregistrées auprès du Haut Commissariat des Nations unies pour les réfugiés (HCR) en tant que réfugiés ou demandeurs d’asile, ont été abandonnées dans des centres de détention depuis des mois, voire des années, sans aucune assistance.

De septembre 2018 à mai 2019, au moins 22 personnes sont décédées dans les centres de détention de Zintan et de Gharyan, principalement de la tuberculose. Parmi les morts se trouvaient des jeunes hommes, des femmes et un enfant de huit ans.

Dans le centre de détention de Zintan, quelque 700 personnes étaient enfermées dans un entrepôt agricole surpeuplé, tandis que 200 autres étaient confinées dans un ensemble de petits bâtiments.

▻https://www.msf.fr/actualites/libye-loin-des-yeux-loin-du-coeur-reportage-dans-les-centres-de-detention

Libye : incendie dans un centre de détention de migrants à Zintan

https://scd.infomigrants.net/media/resize/my_image_big/df34867421a030534953446b0a1ec8a9901f65c7.png

Un feu s’est déclaré dimanche dans le centre de détention de Zintan, en Libye. Provoqué par des infrastructures électriques vétustes, l’incendie a provoqué des dégâts matériels et alerte une fois de plus sur les conditions de détention des migrants en Libye.

Un nuage de fumée noire sort d’un bâtiment délabré. À l’extérieur, plusieurs jeunes hommes tentent d’évacuer les affaires qu’ils peuvent atteindre. Certains portent un tissu sur la bouche, maigre protection face à une fumée toxique.

Dimanche 1er décembre, le centre de détention de Zintan, en Libye, a connu un incendie dont l’origine serait électrique. L’incident n’a pas fait de blessés même si certains migrants ont respiré des fumées. Une vingtaine d’entre eux ont perdu leurs affaires personnelles et le bâtiment où s’est déclaré l’incendie est désormais inutilisable.

Selon Besay*, un jeune Érythréen détenu dans le centre et contacté par InfoMigrants, les gardiens ont mis plus d’une heure et demie à appeler les pompiers. Cet incendie rappelle que les conditions de vie des migrants en Libye sont extrêmement difficiles. Les ONG dénoncent régulièrement la situation des migrants dans les centres de détention gérés par le département libyen de lutte contre la migration illégale (DCIM, selon l’acronyme anglais).

Près de 500 hommes – majoritairement érythréens et somaliens – sont détenus à Zintan. Parmi eux, plus d’une centaine sont atteints de tuberculose. Les équipes de Médecins sans frontières (MSF) n’ont accès aux détenus que depuis le mois de mai.

Aujourd’hui, les malades de la tuberculose sont séparés des autres détenus pendant deux semaines. Mais cela n’a pas toujours été le cas. « Après ils reviennent avec nous », explique Besay. Le jeune Érythréen est lui-même malade. « Depuis quatre mois, je prends un traitement donné par MSF. »

À Zintan, les migrants souffrent également du manque de nourriture. En mars 2019, plusieurs migrants étaient morts de faim dans le centre. InfoMigrants avait reçu des photos de jeunes hommes d’une maigreur extrême.

Plus de 40 000 migrants ont été enregistrés en Libye par le Haut-Commissariat des Nations unies pour les réfugiés (HCR). Mais plusieurs centaines vivraient en tout dans le pays dans des centres de détentions officiels et clandestins ainsi que dans des squats et des logements individuels.

▻https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7GmSTYgAK4&feature=emb_logo

▻https://www.infomigrants.net/fr/post/21270/libye-incendie-dans-un-centre-de-detention-de-migrants-a-zintan?ref=tw

#feu #incendie

La machine à broyer. Réfugiés et migrants piégés en Libye

Fin 2017, des images effroyables de migrants vendus comme des marchandises en Libye faisaient le tour du monde et suscitaient une réaction en chaîne de nombreux dirigeants, en Libye, en Europe, en Afrique, promettant de prendre des mesures destinées à protéger les réfugiés et migrants d’un système d’exploitation organisée.

Deux ans après, rien n’a pourtant changé. Présentes depuis 2017 auprès des migrants et réfugiés détenus en Libye, les équipes MSF témoignent de l’#horreur de la situation pour des milliers de personnes condamnées à croupir dans des centres de détention ou prises au piège d’un cycle sans fin de #violence et d’#abus.

►https://msf2016.atavist.com/libye-la-machine-a-broyer

#MSF #rapport
–----------
v. des documents archivés sur seenthis en 2017 :
▻https://seenthis.net/messages/605873

Migrant in Libya relives brutal detention through sketches

https://i.imgur.com/z3cLsP6.jpg https://i.imgur.com/Y1UaoA4.jpg?1 https://i.imgur.com/WXX12gb.jpg https://i.imgur.com/CUgXFRs.jpg

A guard withholds water from a barefoot migrant kneeling in front of him. An emaciated man lies on the ground while a thermostat reads a broiling 43 degrees Celsius. Refugees cower to the ground as bullets whiz by.

These rough pencil sketches by an Eritrean refugee offer a glimpse of the brutal reality of Libya’s migrant detention centers, where thousands have been locked away for months or even years. Most are there after failing to make the perilous crossing to Europe through the Mediterranean Sea.

The artist asked to only be identified by his nickname, Aser, because he fears reprisals from militias for speaking out about what he says are “nightmare conditions” inside the centers. In a country with no functioning government, it is often competing militias who run the detention centers and make money off migrants.

The drawings are based on what Aser, 28, witnessed inside several migrant facilities in Tripoli between September 2017 and October this year. At night, he recalls, he awoke to the sounds of militiamen dragging migrants from their sleep and beating them to get ransoms from their families, mostly in sub-Saharan Africa. Guards withheld food, water and medicine for the same reason.

Libya’s migrant detention centers are rife with abuse, and many have gotten caught in the crossfire of the country’s civil war. One drawing depicts refugees in the crossfire between forces of military commander Khalifa Hifter and militias allied with the United Nations-supported government in Tripoli.

Libya became a major crossing point for migrants to Europe after the death of longtime dictator Moammar Gadhafi in 2011, but Europe now sends money for Libya to prevent migrants from reaching its shores. With increased reports of torture and abuse inside detention centers, Europe’s policy of supporting the Libyan coast guard as it intercepts fleeing migrants has come under growing criticism.

Aser says that often, the only drinking water available inside the hangars where he was kept was a few buckets of water for hundreds of people. He and others went weeks without seeing sunlight, and the crowded centers became breeding grounds for disease. At the last facility where he was held, Abu Salim, he and another migrant, who also spoke on condition of anonymity, said two Eritreans died from what they believed to be tuberculosis.

Aser’s journey began more than four years ago, when he escaped forced military conscription in Eritrea, considered among the world’s most repressive governments. He made his way through Ethiopia and Sudan, and paid $6,000 to traffickers in Libya to secure a place on a boat to Europe. But the vessel was intercepted by the Libyan coast guard.

He ended up in Tripoli in September 2017 and was placed in the first of three centers. Visiting workers from Doctors Without Borders, or MSF, provided him with pencils and paper, and he worked out of the sight of guards. He sometimes hid the drawings with other migrants, and took photos of some sketches before destroying them.

In late October, Aser fled to an already overcrowded United Nations-run facility with hundreds of other detainees. Now his hope is that he can be one of the few to qualify for asylum, who are put on flights via Niger and Rwanda to Europe.

In the meantime, he says, his only escape is art.

“I dream that one day I can move out of Libya to develop my skill by gaining additional education,” he said.

source : ▻https://apnews.com/b55a574819e26a45c819fe843c946379

#eau #guerre_civile #jeu_de_l'oie (une sorte de jeu de l’oie bien dramatique, car la dernière étape est le #cimetière dans ce dessin) #centre_de_détention #centres_de_détention #décès #mort

Et pour le dessin du « tour des centres de détention » :
▻https://twitter.com/mokhbersahafi/status/1211981910219657218?s=03

Demain, grande réunion de la famille (actionnariale) à Marcq-en-Baroeul.
Motus et bouche cousue, c’est confidentiel

Chez nous, on veut supprimer le train qui approvisionne Rungis et donc jeter 25000 camions de plus sur les routes.

Non, je ne me suis pas trompée de 0.

Sur Rungis : ▻https://seenthis.net/messages/778695

François Ruffin sur l’oiseau bleu

On apprend que les 82 wagons qui emmenaient les fruits et légumes de Perpignan à Rungis vont être supprimés. Remplacés par des camions. 20 000 à l’année. Voilà le choix du marché. Votre loi Mobilité, sans vision, sans horizon, n’est qu’un pansement sur une hémorragie de CO2...

▻https://twitter.com/Francois_Ruffin/status/1126139458691248129

Petite synthèse du reportage.
1. Le #budget d’entretien des autoroutes et routes nationales allemandes est de 3,9 milliards. Ce coût s’explique en particulier par l’impact des poids lourds : 1 camion de 40 tonnes a un impact équivalent à celui de 60 000 véhicules légers.

2. Le fonctionnement en #flux_tendu de l’ensemble du système #logistique transforme de facto le #réseau_routier en espace de #stockage grâce à un coût particulièrement intéressant ne prenant pas en compte les #externalités_négatives et reposant largement sur l’#exploitation des travailleurs de l’est de l’#union_européenne, que ce soit les chauffeurs ou les employés des #centres_logistiques. Le reportage cite notamment l’exemple d’Amazon — mais cela doit être valable pour l’ensemble des acteurs du #e-commerce —
qui installe ses centres en Pologne pour ses livraisons en Allemagne. Ce coût extrêmement faible se reflète également dans le fait que 36 % des camions roulant en Allemagne roulent à vide !

3. Pour en revenir à l’exploitation, les patrons des sociétés de transport mettent une pression terrible sur leurs chauffeurs au détriment de la #sécurité_routière tout en profitant d’un nombre de contrôle très insuffisant et des sanctions trop légères (en #Allemagne) en cas d’irrespect de la législation européenne sur les temps de repos. Ainsi, il est estimé qu’un chauffeur routier pourra faire 100 000 kilomètres sans être contrôlé alors que 50 % de ces contrôles amènent à constater une infraction (cas allemand toujours) ! La faiblesse des sanctions amène d’ailleurs les transporteurs à prévoir leur coût lorsqu’ils ne fraudent pas directement en manipulant les instruments de contrôle.

4. Bien entendu, le reportage aborde également la question du diesel (subventionné) et des émissions de #particules_fines avec leur impact sur la #santé : maladies cardio-vasculaires, décès prématurés.

5. L’#électromobilité ne concernera le fret longue distance qu’à long terme, les constructeurs allemands ne s’y investissant pas pour la plupart. Il y a un début de développement de solutions pour le #fret_urbain. Pour le transport de passagers, le reportage cite l’exemple d’un #bus_électrique développé par l’entreprise Build your dreams, d’origine chinoise comme l’indique son nom, et exploité par #Flixbus pour sa liaison Paris – Amiens.

6. En matière de lobbying, #Volkswagen entretient en particulier un groupe de pression de 40 personnes auprès des instances de l’Union.

7. Alors qu’un train de marchandise de 740 mètres de long permet de remplacer 52 poids lourds, les #infrastructures_ferroviaires souffrent d’un manque d’investissement, de voies d’évitement trop réduites, d’une #électrification des lignes insuffisante, de gros problèmes de jonctions entre les différents réseaux nationaux.

8. Le reportage se termine en citant le cas #suisse qui a développé une politique ambitieuse de #ferroutage. Le ferroviaire représente 37 % du fret, dont 70 % pour le transit, soit 2 fois plus qu’en Allemagne et 4 fois plus que la France. Cela s’explique notamment par la question des redevances versées pour l’usage des voies ferrées et routières qui permet de redonner sa chance au ferroviaire alors qu’il est estimé que le fret routier va augmenter en Allemagne de 40 % d’ici 2030 par rapport à 2010.

J’en profite pour renvoyer vers ce message, de 2016, citant un article de Jean Gadrey signalant le documentaire de Gilles Balbastre, Transport de marchandises : changeons d’ère ! réalisé à l’initiative du comité d’entreprise de SCNF-fret : ▻https://seenthis.net/messages/548855

merci @af_sobocinski pour ce résumé. J’ai arrêté à la publicité pour flixbus avec les interviews convenues des voyageurs émerveillé·es par les bus « non polluants », mais rien sur la pollution nucléaire, ce n’est pas sérieux.
Déçue qu’il n’y est apparemment rien non plus sur les militants écologistes #anti-fret-routier, comme ceux certes des années 1990 de la Vallée du Somport.

Il y a un passage sur les conducteurs de Pologne ou de Roumanie sous payés mais qui naviguent dans l’espace européen (surtout l’Allemagne) avec des camions qui font des trajets Allemagne=>Pologne=>Allemagne pour justifier ces aberrations socios-économiques-polluantes, Amazon en bonne position des pires entreprises implante ses plateformes dans les pays européens les plus pauvres.

Et je renote ici le chiffre donné impressionnant : un poids-lourd représente le passage de 60.000 voitures . Donc, il faut inclure dans le coût global du #fret_routier la construction et l’entretien des routes, autoroutes et aires de stationnement tous saturé·es par les poids-lourds. En plus des cadeaux fiscaux, diesel moins cher, #subventions aux entreprises etc. #croissance #folie_humaine #inside_the_wall

@aude_v j’appellerai pas ça du survivalisme mais du #déni_opportuniste
#fin_du_monde #macronerie

Je n’ai pas encore pété de télé @touti mais il n’est pas trop tard pour que je m’y mette. Ce n’est pas les boîtes à conneries et les raisons qui manque. J’ai beaucoup cassé et dès l’adolescence, tout seul où en groupe. Puis on s’est calmé quand on a eu affaire aux flics. Plus tard avec un pote, on pointe à pôle-emploi (anpe à l’époque) depuis une antique cabine téléphonique. Tapez 1, tapez 2… tatati tatata, patins,couffins… au tour de mon compère, avant de finaliser par je ne sais quelle touche, il arrache le combiné et s’en sert telle une masse d’arme pour détruire la cabine. J’ai rien fait pour le retenir, je crois bien même que j’ai dû l’aider. J’ai encore, dans la tête, l’image de cette cabine toute destroy alors qu’on étaient partis faire du stop un peu plus loin.

Bon, je n’ai pas imaginé que ça allait déclencher de telles réactions. Je me retire de cette discussion et j’emmène avec moi la façon dont je pense que la télévision fonctionne avec une conclusion qui semble avoir activé moralisme et souvenirs de vandalisme à mon grand désarroi.