• #Hautes-Alpes : des migrants ont-ils été rackettés par deux policiers de la #PAF à la frontière franco-italienne ?

    Les deux policiers sont jugés en correctionnel à Gap pour des faits présumés de #violence et de #détournement_de_fonds.

    Soupçonné de violence contre un jeune migrant en août 2018, un gardien de la paix de la #police_aux_frontières (PAF) de #Montgenèvre (#Hautes-Alpes) et un adjoint de sécurité (ADS) du même service, jugé pour détournement de fonds, en janvier 2019, comparaissent cet après-midi devant le tribunal correctionnel de Gap.

    Comme depuis le déconfinement du 11 mai et la reprise des audiences correctionnelles, le procès se déroule sans public en raison des mesures sanitaires liées au coronavirus.

    Le gardien de la paix, un fonctionnaire âgé de 51 ans, et l’ADS âgé de 30 ans, dont le contrat n’a pas été renouvelé par l’administration sont respectivement poursuivis pour « #violences_volontaires_sans_ITT » commises par #personne_dépositaire_de_l’autorité_publique (#PDAP) dans l’exercice ou à l’occasion de ses fonctions, et pour « #faux_administratif » et « #soustraction_frauduleuse_de_fonds_publics » par PDAP.

    Une révélation en interne

    L’enquête menée par l’antenne marseillaise de l’inspection générale de la police nationale (#IGPN) a débuté en janvier 2019 après un rapport remis au parquet de Gap par la direction départementale de la police aux frontières (DDPAF) des Hautes-Alpes, « signalant plusieurs dysfonctionnements administratifs et en interne mais également des faits de violence contre un migrant et de détournement de fonds », a indiqué une source judiciaire. « Une révélation en interne qui fait suite à des soupçons de rackets réguliers à l’encontre de migrants qui traversaient la frontière franco-italienne à Montgenèvre », souligne cette même source.

    Concernant ces vols présumés, « l’enquête n’a pas permis d’établir, ni la réalité des dénonciations, ni l’identification des éventuels auteurs, au contraire des faits qui justifient la comparution des deux prévenus aujourd’hui », a souligné avant le début du procès, le procureur de la République de Gap, Florent Crouhy.

    « Dès la fin de l’année 2018, le parquet a reçu de nombreux courriers de migrants ou d’associations dénonçant des faits de vols sur des migrants. Les vérifications n’ont jamais permis d’étayer ces dénonciations, les migrants étant le plus souvent impossible à retrouver », a indiqué le magistrat qui représentera le ministère public à l’audience.

    Un enregistrement audio à charge contre le policier

    Selon le rapport de l’IGPN, le gardien de la paix - actuellement en arrêt maladie - est soupçonné d’avoir donné un #coup_de_poing à un migrant Malien, aujourd’hui âgé de 17 ans. L’#altercation a été discrètement enregistrée par la victime présumée qui accuse des policiers de lui avoir volé son argent quelques jours plus tôt lors d’un contrôle sur la voie publique à Montgenèvre.

    L’adjoint de sécurité est soupçonné d’avoir gardé pour lui 90 euros en espèce, c’est-à-dire le montant d’une amende dressée lors d’un contrôle à l’encontre d’un conducteur italien qui n’avait pas sa ceinture de sécurité. L’auteur présumé qui conteste les faits a jusqu’ici soutenu qu’il s’agissait d’une erreur de remplissage du procès-verbal.

    « La commission nationale consultative des droits de l’homme (CNCDH) a rendu en 2018 un rapport sur lequel la frontière italienne ne doit pas être une zone de non-droit. Notre affaire s’inscrit pleinement dans cette problématique de comportements qui ne sont pas acceptables », a expliqué avant le début de l’audience Me Vincent Brengarth, du barreau de Paris, avocat de la victime présumé ainsi que de l’association « Tous Migrants » qui doit se constituer partie civile au procès. Créée en 2016 à partir d’un mouvement citoyen de 2015, l’association « sensibilise la population aux enjeux migratoires et plaide pour le respect des droits des étrangers et notamment des personnes exilées auprès des pouvoirs publics », rappelle son coprésident Michel Rousseau.
    Les prévenus encourent 3 et 10 ans d’emprisonnement

    « Nous disposons d’un enregistrement audio ce qui permet la tenue de ce procès. Nous attendons que les responsabilités des policiers qui sont mis en cause pour des faits de vols et de violence soient déterminées par le tribunal, avance Me Brengarth. C’est un procès rare pour des pratiques dont on sait qu’elles sont régulières. Le dossier révèle qu’il ne s’agit pas de faits isolés. Il est indispensable que la justice puisse rétablir le droit de ceux que nous devons protéger ». Alors que l’ancien Adjoint de sécurité (ADS) encourt jusqu’à 10 ans d’emprisonnement, le gardien de la paix risque jusqu’à 3 ans de prison. Le jugement devrait être mis en délibéré.

    https://www.laprovence.com/article/faits-divers-justice/6035565/hautes-alpes-des-migrants-ont-ils-ete-rackettes-par-deux-policiers-de-la
    #police #racket #frontières #asile #migrations #réfugiés #France #Italie #frontière_sud-alpine #justice

    ping @davduf

  • More deaths of refugees on the Balkan route

    “The bodies of two younger men were found in the #Mrežnica River on Thursday (https://www.jutarnji.hr/vijesti/crna-kronika/iz-rijeke-mreznice-izvucena-tijela-dvojice-muskaraca-po-svemu-sudeci-radi-s). In the last three years, not counting these cases, 25 refugees have died in this area, and drowning in rivers is prevalent. Approximately one body per month appeared in one of the rivers, and only in Mrežnica six of them were found this June.”

    Reçu via la mailing-list Inicijativa Dobrodosli, mail du 01.07.2020

    #décès #morts #mourir_dans_la_forteresse_europe #Croatie #asile #migrations #réfugiés #route_des_balkans #frontière_sud-alpine #Mrežnica_River #Mreznica #frontières

    –—

    Ajouté à la métaliste sur les morts à la frontière alpine :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/758646#message806448

    • Iz rijeke Mrežnice izvučena tijela dvojice muškaraca, po svemu sudeći radi se o migrantima

      Policijski službenici su iz rijeke Mrežnice na području Donjih Dubrava, koje se nalaze u sastavu grada Ogulina, izvukli dva tijela nepoznatih muških osoba, javili su iz PU karlovačke.

      Slijedi istraga i postupak utvrđivanja njihova identiteta, no po svemu sudeći i u ovom slučaju radi se o tijelima migranata. Samo u lipnju s migrantske rute iz Mrežnice izvučeno je šest leševa utopljenika.

      Dva mrtva tijela izvučena su također u subotu, 13. lipnja, iz rijeke Mrežnice u mjestu Svojić na području općine Barilović. Karlovačka policija tad je javila da su oko podneva njihovi kolege koji rade na poslovima zaštite državne granice zatekli strane državljane koji su im rekli da su se na slapovima Mrežnice utopile dvije osobe. HGSS-ovci su ih izvukli u večernjim satima.

      Istoga tjedna, u ponedjeljak, također su iz Mrežnice na području općine Barilović izvučena dva utopljenika. Radilo se o migrantima koji su u vodi proveli duže vrijeme prije nego ih je netko pronašao.

      U posljednje tri godine, ne računajući ove slučajeve, na migrantskoj ruti smrtno je stradalo 25 migranata, a isto toliko ih je teško ozlijeđeno. Po načinu stradavanja prevladava utapljanje u rijekama. Otprilike jedno tijelo isplivalo je u nekoj od rijeka mjesečno, a samo Mrežnica ih je u lipnju izbacila šest.

      https://www.jutarnji.hr/vijesti/crna-kronika/iz-rijeke-mreznice-izvucena-tijela-dvojice-muskaraca-po-svemu-sudeci-radi-s

  • Equatorial Guinea Halts Construction of Cameroon Border Wall

    Equatorial Guinea has agreed to pause the construction of a controversial border wall with Cameroon after talks between the two countries’ defense ministers in Yaoundé. The two sides also agreed once again to withdraw troops from their disputed border after deadly clashes left at least seven people dead. An agreement earlier this month to withdraw forces failed to hold and some border traders are skeptical of this latest pact.

    After a second day of closed-door meetings in Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea’s Defense Minister Leandro Bekale Nkogo said the two sides agreed to set aside their differences.

    Nkogo on Tuesday announced Equatorial Guinea would pause construction of its controversial border wall, which Cameroon’s government says violates its territory.

    He says troops from the two countries that have been deployed to the border will return to their barracks and only come out to protect their civilians in times of crisis. Nkogo says Cameroon and Equatorial Guinea will henceforth jointly combat their common enemies, who are poachers, pirates resurfacing in the Gulf of Guinea, and armed groups attacking and looting civilians in both countries.

    Nkogo said as neighbors, Cameroon and Equatorial Guinea need each other for their security and development.

    Equatorial Guinea’s President Teodoro Obiang Nguema ordered the border wall be built in 2019 to stop Cameroonians and West Africans from illegally entering the country.

    Cameroon deployed its army to stop what it called an intrusion of border markers, leading to armed conflicts and casualties.

    An agreement earlier this month to pull back troops, and jointly demarcate the border, apparently failed.

    Cameroon says at least seven of its civilians were killed in border clashes that followed in the southwestern town of Kye-Ossi.

    But Cameroon’s Defense Minister Joseph Beti Assomo on Tuesday said both sides were firm in seeking an end the border tensions.

    He says the wish of Cameroon’s President Paul Biya is to see Cameroon and Equatorial Guinea become the true brotherly and friendly nations that they were at the dawn of independence. He says both countries have sociological, cultural and geographic relations that should encourage the people of the two states to live in peace and harmony.

    Despite the agreements Monday, not all traders along the border were convinced that the skirmishes will end.

    40-year-old Cameroonian merchant Angelica Amende, who buys wine from Equatorial Guinea to sell back home, doubts the border dispute can soon be resolved.

    She says she does not think there is a political will to solve the crisis on Cameroon’s border with Equatorial Guinea. She says it is not the first-time high-profile delegations have met on the instructions of the two heads of state and the border crisis is yet to end.

    Equatorial Guinea has often accused Cameroon of not doing enough to stop its citizens and other West Africans from crossing the border illegally.

    In 2017, Equatorial Guinea sealed its border with Cameroon for six months after authorities on both sides arrested heavily armed foreigners and accused them plotting to overthrow Obiang.

    The two countries’ leaders are Africa’s longest-serving presidents. Obiang has ruled Equatorial Guinea since 1979, while Biya has ruled Cameroon since 1982.

    Cameroon and Equatorial Guinea in 2017 joined four other states in the Central African Economic and Monetary Community (CEMAC) in agreeing to lift visa requirements.

    Cameroon, the Central African Republic, Chad, Gabon, and the Republic of Congo have since accused Equatorial Guinea of dragging its feet on allowing the free movement of people and goods.

    https://www.voanews.com/africa/equatorial-guinea-halts-construction-cameroon-border-wall
    #guinée_équatoriale #murs #barrières_frontalières #frontières #Cameroun

  • EU: Damning draft report on the implementation of the Return Directive

    Tineke Strik, the Green MEP responsible for overseeing the passage through the European Parliament of the ’recast Return Directive’, which governs certain common procedures regarding the detention and expulsion of non-EU nationals, has prepared a report on the implementation of the original 2008 Return Directive. It criticises the Commission’s emphasis, since 2017, on punitive enforcement measures, at the expense of alternatives that have not been fully explored or implemented by the Commission or the member states, despite the 2008 legislation providing for them.

    See: DRAFT REPORT on the implementation of the Return Directive (2019/2208(INI)): https://www.statewatch.org/media/documents/news/2020/jun/ep-libe-returns-directive-implementation-draft-rep-9-6-20.pdf

    From the explanatory statement:

    “This Report, highlighting several gaps in the implementation of the Return Directive, is not intended to substitute the still overdue fully-fledged implementation assessment of the Commission. It calls on Member States to ensure compliance with the Return Directive and on the Commission to ensure timely and proper monitoring and support for its implementation, and to enforce compliance if necessary.

    (...)

    With a view to the dual objective of the Return Directive, notably promoting effective returns and ensuring that returns comply with fundamental rights and procedural safeguards, this Report shows that the Directive allows for and supports effective returns, but that most factors impeding effective return are absent in the current discourse, as the effectiveness is mainly stressed and understood as return rate.”

    Parliamentary procedure page: Implementation report on the Return Directive (European Parliament, link: https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/ficheprocedure.do?reference=2019/2208(INI)&l=en)

    https://www.statewatch.org/news/2020/june/eu-damning-draft-report-on-the-implementation-of-the-return-directive
    #Directive_Retour #EU #Europe #Union_européenne #asile #migrations #réfugiés #renvois #expulsions #rétention #détention_administrative #évaluation #identification #efficacité #2008_Return_Directive #régimes_parallèles #retour_volontaire #déboutés #sans-papiers #permis_de_résidence #régularisation #proportionnalité #principe_de_proportionnalité #AVR_programmes #AVR #interdiction_d'entrée_sur_le_territoire #externalisation #Gambie #Bangladesh #Turquie #Ethiopie #Afghanistan #Guinée #Côte_d'Ivoire #droits_humains #Tineke_Strik #risque_de_fuite #fuite #accord #réadmission

    –—

    Quelques passages intéressants tirés du rapport:

    The study shows that Member States make use of the possibility offered in Article 2(2)(a) not to apply the Directive in “border cases”, by creating parallel regimes, where procedures falling outside the scope of the Directive offer less safeguards compared to the regular return procedure, for instance no voluntary return term, no suspensive effect of an appeal and less restrictions on the length of detention. This lower level of protection gives serious reasons for concern, as the fact that border situations may remain outside the scope of the Directive also enhances the risks of push backs and refoulement. (...) Your Rapporteur considers that it is key to ensure a proper assessment of the risk of refoulement prior to the issuance of a return decision. This already takes place in Sweden and France. Although unaccompanied minors are rarely returned, most Member States do not officially ban their return. Their being subject to a return procedure adds vulnerability to their situation, due to the lack of safeguards and legal certainty.

    (p.4)
    #frontières #zones_frontalières #push-backs #refoulement

    Sur les #statistiques et #chiffres de #Eurostat:

    According to Eurostat, Member States issued over 490.000 return decisions in 2019, of which 85% were issued by the ten Member States under the current study. These figures are less reliable then they seem, due to the divergent practices. In some Member States, migrants are issued with a return decision more than once, children are not issued a decision separately, and refusals at the border are excluded.

    Statistics on the percentage of departure being voluntary show significant varieties between the Member States: from 96% in Poland to 7% in Spain and Italy. Germany and the Netherlands have reported not being able to collect data of non-assisted voluntary returns, which is remarkable in the light of the information provided by other Member States. According to Frontex, almost half of the departures are voluntary.

    (p.5)

    As Article 7(4) is often applied in an automatic way, and as the voluntary departure period is often insufficient to organise the departure, many returnees are automatically subject to an entry ban. Due to the different interpretations of a risk of absconding, the scope of the mandatory imposition of an entry ban may vary considerably between the countries. The legislation and practice in Belgium, Bulgaria, France, the Netherlands and Sweden provides for an automatic entry ban if the term for voluntary departure was not granted or respected by the returnee and in other cases, the imposition is optional. In Germany, Spain, Italy, Poland and Bulgaria however, legislation or practice provides for an automatic imposition of entry bans in all cases, including cases in which the returnee has left during the voluntary departure period. Also in the Netherlands, migrants with a voluntary departure term can be issued with an entry ban before the term is expired. This raises questions on the purpose and effectiveness of imposing an entry ban, as it can have a discouraging effect if imposed at an early stage. Why leave the territory in time on a voluntary basis if that is not rewarded with the possibility to re-enter? This approach is also at odds with the administrative and non-punitive approach taken in the Directive.

    (p.6)

    National legislation transposing the definition of “risk of absconding” significantly differs, and while several Member States have long lists of criteria which justify finding a risk of absconding (Belgium has 11, France 8, Germany 7, The Netherlands 19), other Member States (Bulgaria, Greece, Poland) do not enumerate the criteria in an exhaustive manner. A broad legal basis for detention allows detention to be imposed in a systematic manner, while individual circumstances are marginally assessed. National practices highlighted in this context also confirm previous studies that most returns take place in the first few weeks and that longer detention hardly has an added value.

    (p.6)

    In its 2016 Communication on establishing a new Partnership Framework with third countries under the European Agenda on Migration, the Commission recognised that cooperation with third countries is essential in ensuring effective and sustainable returns. Since the adoption of this Communication, several informal arrangements have been concluded with third countries, including Gambia, Bangladesh, Turkey, Ethiopia, Afghanistan, Guinea and Ivory Coast. The Rapporteur regrets that such informal deals are concluded in the complete absence of duly parliamentary scrutiny and democratic and judicial oversight that according to the Treaties the conclusion of formal readmission agreements would warrant.

    (p.7)

    With the informalisation of cooperation with third countries in the field of migration, including with transit countries, also came an increased emphasis on conditionality in terms of return and readmission. The Rapporteur is concerned that funding earmarked for development cooperation is increasingly being redirected away from development and poverty eradication goals.

    (p.7)
    #développement #aide_au_développement #conditionnalité_de_l'aide

    ping @_kg_ @isskein @i_s_ @karine4 @rhoumour

  • War & Pacification

    TNI’s War & Pacification work concerns the nexus between militarisation, security and globalisation. It confronts the structures and interests that underpin a new era of permanent war, makes visible the technologies of control and repression, highlights the impacts on people considered threatening or worthless by the powerful, and advocates alternatives based on peacebuilding, conflict transformation and respect for fundamental human rights.

    TNI uses the term ‘pacification’ to describe what is frequently presented as ‘security’. Our research has long shown that the effect of many policies adopted in the name of security is increased social control, allowing the maintenance of social orders that are deeply unequal and unjust. Pacification thus encompasses elite attempts to police the contours of globalisation’s discontents – the unworthy and expendable, the restive and resistant – and close down the progressive spaces occupied by civil society.

    –-> avec une série d’articles et analyses sur le sujet à trouver sur le site web du TNI :

    https://www.tni.org/en/war-pacification

    #militarisation #globalisation #répression #contrôle #technologie #guerre #exclusion #dépossession #coercition #conflits #peace-building #frontières #contrôles_frontaliers #militarisation_des_frontières #privatisation #violence #mouvements_sociaux

    –-

    @karine4 :

    TNI uses the term ‘pacification’ to describe what is frequently presented as ‘security’.

    #terminologie #pacification #sécurité #mots #vocabulaire

    ping @isskein

  • Asylum Outsourced : McKinsey’s Secret Role in Europe’s Refugee Crisis

    In 2016 and 2017, US management consultancy giant #McKinsey was at the heart of efforts in Europe to accelerate the processing of asylum applications on over-crowded Greek islands and salvage a controversial deal with Turkey, raising concerns over the outsourcing of public policy on refugees.

    The language was more corporate boardroom than humanitarian crisis – promises of ‘targeted strategies’, ‘maximising productivity’ and a ‘streamlined end-to-end asylum process.’

    But in 2016 this was precisely what the men and women of McKinsey&Company, the elite US management consultancy, were offering the European Union bureaucrats struggling to set in motion a pact with Turkey to stem the flow of asylum seekers to the continent’s shores.

    In March of that year, the EU had agreed to pay Turkey six billion euros if it would take back asylum seekers who had reached Greece – many of them fleeing fighting in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan – and prevent others from trying to cross its borders.

    The pact – which human rights groups said put at risk the very right to seek refuge – was deeply controversial, but so too is the previously unknown extent of McKinsey’s influence over its implementation, and the lengths some EU bodies went to conceal that role.

    According to the findings of this investigation, months of ‘pro bono’ fieldwork by McKinsey fed, sometimes verbatim, into the highest levels of EU policy-making regarding how to make the pact work on the ground, and earned the consultancy a contract – awarded directly, without competition – worth almost one million euros to help enact that very same policy.

    The bloc’s own internal procurement watchdog later deemed the contract “irregular”.

    Questions have already been asked about McKinsey’s input in 2015 into German efforts to speed up its own turnover of asylum applications, with concerns expressed about rights being denied to those applying.

    This investigation, based on documents sought since November 2017, sheds new light on the extent to which private management consultants shaped Europe’s handling of the crisis on the ground, and how bureaucrats tried to keep that role under wraps.

    “If some companies develop programs which then turn into political decisions, this is a political issue of concern that should be examined carefully,” said German MEP Daniel Freund, a member of the European Parliament’s budget committee and a former Head of Advocacy for EU Integrity at Transparency International.

    “Especially if the same companies have afterwards been awarded with follow-up contracts not following due procedures.”

    Deal too important to fail

    The March 2016 deal was the culmination of an epic geopolitical thriller played out in Brussels, Ankara and a host of European capitals after more than 850,000 people – mainly Syrians, Iraqis and Afghans – took to the Aegean by boat and dinghy from Turkey to Greece the previous year.

    Turkey, which hosts some 3.5 million refugees from the nine-year-old war in neighbouring Syria, committed to take back all irregular asylum seekers who travelled across its territory in return for billions of euros in aid, EU visa liberalisation for Turkish citizens and revived negotiations on Turkish accession to the bloc. It also provided for the resettlement in Europe of one Syrian refugee from Turkey for each Syrian returned to Turkey from Greece.

    The EU hailed it as a blueprint, but rights groups said it set a dangerous precedent, resting on the premise that Turkey is a ‘safe third country’ to which asylum seekers can be returned, despite a host of rights that it denies foreigners seeking protection.

    The deal helped cut crossings over the Aegean, but it soon became clear that other parts were not delivering; the centrepiece was an accelerated border procedure for handling asylum applications within 15 days, including appeal. This wasn’t working, while new movement restrictions meant asylum seekers were stuck on Greek islands.

    But for the EU, the deal was too important to be derailed.

    “The directions from the European Commission, and those behind it, was that Greece had to implement the EU-Turkey deal full-stop, no matter the legal arguments or procedural issue you might raise,” said Marianna Tzeferakou, a lawyer who was part of a legal challenge to the notion that Turkey is a safe place to seek refuge.

    “Someone gave an order that this deal will start being implemented. Ambiguity and regulatory arbitrage led to a collapse of procedural guarantees. It was a political decision and could not be allowed to fail.”

    Enter McKinsey.

    Action plans emerge simultaneously

    Fresh from advising Germany on how to speed up the processing of asylum applications, the firm’s consultants were already on the ground doing research in Greece in the summer of 2016, according to two sources working with the Greek asylum service, GAS, at the time but who did not wish to be named.

    Documents seen by BIRN show that the consultancy was already in “initial discussions” with an EU body called the ‘Structural Reform Support Service’, SRSS, which aids member states in designing and implementing structural reforms and was at the time headed by Dutchman Maarten Verwey. Verwey was simultaneously EU coordinator for the EU-Turkey deal and is now the EU’s director general of economic and financial affairs, though he also remains acting head of SRSS.

    Asked for details of these ‘discussions’, Verwey responded that the European Commission – the EU’s executive arm – “does not hold any other documents” concerning the matter.

    Nevertheless, by September 2016, McKinsey had a pro bono proposal on the table for how it could help out, entitled ‘Supporting the European Commission through integrated refugee management.’ Verwey signed off on it in October.

    Minutes of management board meetings of the European Asylum Support Office, EASO – the EU’s asylum agency – show McKinsey was tasked by the Commission to “analyse the situation on the Greek islands and come up with an action plan that would result in an elimination of the backlog” of asylum cases by April 2017.

    A spokesperson for the Commission told BIRN: “McKinsey volunteered to work free of charge to improve the functioning of the Greek asylum and reception system.”

    Over the next 12 weeks, according to other redacted documents, McKinsey worked with all the major actors involved – the SRSS, EASO, the EU border agency Frontex as well as Greek authorities.

    At bi-weekly stakeholder meetings, McKinsey identified “bottlenecks” in the asylum process and began to outline a series of measures to reduce the backlog, some of which were already being tested in a “mini-pilot” on the Greek island of Chios.

    At a first meeting in mid-October, McKinsey consultants told those present that “processing rates” of asylum cases by the EASO and the Greek asylum service, as well as appeals bodies, would need to significantly increase.

    By December, McKinsey’s “action plan” was ready, involving “targeted strategies and recommendations” for each actor involved.

    The same month, on December 8, Verwey released the EU’s own Joint Action Plan for implementing the EU-Turkey deal, which was endorsed by the EU’s heads of government on December 15.

    There was no mention of any McKinsey involvement and when asked about the company’s role the Commission told BIRN the plan was “a document elaborated together between the Commission and the Greek authorities.”

    However, buried in the EASO’s 2017 Annual Report is a reference to European Council endorsement of “the consultancy action plan” to clear the asylum backlog.

    Indeed, the similarities between McKinsey’s plan and the EU’s Joint Action Plan are uncanny, particularly in terms of increasing detention capacity on the islands, “segmentation” of cases, ramping up numbers of EASO and GAS caseworkers and interpreters and Frontex escort officers, limiting the number of appeal steps in the asylum process and changing the way appeals are processed and opinions drafted.

    In several instances, they are almost identical: where McKinsey recommends introducing “overarching segmentation by case types to increase speed and quality”, for example, the EU’s Joint Action Plan calls for “segmentation by case categories to increase speed and quality”.

    Much of what McKinsey did for the SRSS remains redacted.

    In June 2019, the Commission justified the non-disclosure on the basis that the information would pose a “risk” to “public security” as it could allegedly “be exploited by third parties (for example smuggling networks)”.

    Full disclosure, it argued, would risk “seriously undermining the commercial interests” of McKinsey.

    “While I understand that there could indeed be a private and public interest in the subject matter covered by the documents requested, I consider that such a public interest in transparency would not, in this case, outweigh the need to protect the commercial interests of the company concerned,” Martin Selmayr, then secretary-general of the European Commission, wrote.

    SRSS rejected the suggestion that the fact that Verwey refused to fully disclose the McKinsey proposal he had signed off on in October 2016 represented a possible conflict of interest, according to internal documents obtained during this investigation.

    Once Europe’s leaders had endorsed the Joint Action Plan, EASO was asked to “conclude a direct contract with McKinsey” to assist in its implementation, according to EASO management board minutes.

    ‘Political pressure’

    The contract, worth 992,000 euros, came with an attached ‘exception note’ signed on January 20, 2017, by EASO’s Executive Director at the time, Jose Carreira, and Joanna Darmanin, the agency’s then head of operations. The note stated that “due to the time constraints and the political pressure it was deemed necessary to proceed with the contract to be signed without following the necessary procurement procedure”.

    The following year, an audit of EASO yearly accounts by the European Court of Auditors, ECA, which audits EU finances, found that “a single pre-selected economic operator” had been awarded work without the application of “any of the procurement procedures” laid down under EU regulations, designed to encourage transparency and competition.

    “Therefore, the public procurement procedure and all related payments (992,000 euros) were irregular,” it said.

    The auditor’s report does not name McKinsey. But it does specify that the “irregular” contract concerned the EASO’s hiring of a consultancy for implementation of the action plan in Greece; the amount cited by the auditor exactly matches the one in the McKinsey contract, while a spokesman for the EASO indirectly confirmed the contracts concerned were one and the same.

    When asked about the McKinsey contract, the spokesman, Anis Cassar, said: “EASO does not comment on specifics relating to individual contracts, particularly where the ECA is concerned. However, as you note, ECA found that the particular procurement procedure was irregular (not illegal).”

    “The procurement was carried under [sic] exceptional procurement rules in the context of the pressing requests by the relevant EU Institutions and Member States,” said EASO spokesman Anis Cassar.

    McKinsey’s deputy head of Global Media Relations, Graham Ackerman, said the company was unable to provide any further details.

    “In line with our firm’s values and confidentiality policy, we do not publicly discuss our clients or details of our client service,” Ackerman told BIRN.

    ‘Evaluation, feedback, goal-setting’

    It was not the first time questions had been asked of the EASO’s procurement record.

    In October 2017, the EU’s fraud watchdog, OLAF, launched a probe into the agency (https://www.politico.eu/article/jose-carreira-olaf-anti-fraud-office-investigates-eu-asylum-agency-director), chiefly concerning irregularities identified in 2016. It contributed to the resignation in June 2018 of Carreira (https://www.politico.eu/article/jose-carreira-easo-under-investigation-director-of-eu-asylum-agency-steps-d), who co-signed the ‘exception note’ on the McKinsey contract. The investigation eventually uncovered wrongdoings ranging from breaches of procurement rules to staff harassment (https://www.politico.eu/article/watchdog-finds-misconduct-at-european-asylum-support-office-harassment), Politico reported in November 2018.

    According to the EASO, the McKinsey contract was not part of OLAF’s investigation. OLAF said it could not comment.

    McKinsey’s work went ahead, running from January until April 2017, the point by which the EU wanted the backlog of asylum cases “eliminated” and the burden on overcrowded Greek islands lifted.

    Overseeing the project was a steering committee comprised of Verwey, Carreira, McKinsey staff and senior Greek and European Commission officials.

    The details of McKinsey’s operation are contained in a report it submitted in May 2017.

    The EASO initially refused to release the report, citing its “sensitive and restrictive nature”. Its disclosure, the agency said, would “undermine the protection of public security and international relations, as well as the commercial interests and intellectual property of McKinsey & Company.”

    The response was signed by Carreira.

    Only after a reporter on this story complained to the EU Ombudsman, did the EASO agree to disclose several sections of the report.

    Running to over 1,500 pages, the disclosed material provides a unique insight into the role of a major private consultancy in what has traditionally been the realm of public policy – the right to asylum.

    In the jargon of management consultancy, the driving logic of McKinsey’s intervention was “maximising productivity” – getting as many asylum cases processed as quickly as possible, whether they result in transfers to the Greek mainland, in the case of approved applications, or the deportation of “returnable migrants” to Turkey.

    “Performance management systems” were introduced to encourage speed, while mechanisms were created to “monitor” the weekly “output” of committees hearing the appeals of rejected asylum seekers.

    Time spent training caseworkers and interviewers before they were deployed was to be reduced, IT support for the Greek bureaucracy was stepped up and police were instructed to “detain migrants immediately after they are notified of returnable status,” i.e. as soon as their asylum applications were rejected.

    Four employees of the Greek asylum agency at the time told BIRN that McKinsey had access to agency staff, but said the consultancy’s approach jarred with the reality of the situation on the ground.

    Taking part in a “leadership training” course held by McKinsey, one former employee, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told BIRN: “It felt so incompatible with the mentality of a public service operating in a camp for asylum seekers.”

    The official said much of what McKinsey was proposing had already been considered and either implemented or rejected by GAS.

    “The main ideas of how to organise our work had already been initiated by the HQ of GAS,” the official said. “The only thing McKinsey added were corporate methods of evaluation, feedback, setting goals, and initiatives that didn’t add anything meaningful.”

    Indeed, the backlog was proving hard to budge.

    Throughout successive “progress updates”, McKinsey repeatedly warned the steering committee that productivity “levels are insufficient to reach target”. By its own admission, deportations never surpassed 50 a week during the period of its contract. The target was 340.

    In its final May 2017 report, McKinsey touted its success in “reducing total process duration” of the asylum procedure to a mere 11 days, down from an average of 170 days in February 2017.

    Yet thousands of asylum seekers remained trapped in overcrowded island camps for months on end.

    While McKinsey claimed that the population of asylum seekers on the island was cut to 6,000 by April 2017, pending “data verification” by Greek authorities, Greek government figures put the number at 12,822, just around 1,500 fewer than in January when McKinsey got its contract.

    The winter was harsh; organisations working with asylum seekers documented a series of accidents in which a number of people were harmed or killed, with insufficient or no investigation undertaken by Greek authorities (https://www.proasyl.de/en/news/greek-hotspots-deaths-not-to-be-forgotten).

    McKinsey’s final report tallied 40 field visits and more than 200 meetings and workshops on the islands. It also, interestingly, counted 21 weekly steering committee meetings “since October 2016” – connecting McKinsey’s 2016 pro bono work and the 2017 period it worked under contract with the EASO. Indeed, in its “project summary”, McKinsey states it was “invited” to work on both the “development” and “implementation” of the action plan in Greece.

    The Commission, however, in its response to this investigation, insisted it did not “pre-select” McKinsey for the 2017 work or ask EASO to sign a contract with the firm.

    Smarting from military losses in Syria and political setbacks at home, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan tore up the deal with the EU in late February this year, accusing Brussels of failing to fulfil its side of the bargain. But even before the deal’s collapse, 7,000 refugees and migrants reached Greek shores in the first two months of 2020, according to the United Nations refugee agency.

    German link

    This was not the first time that the famed consultancy firm had left its mark on Europe’s handling of the crisis.

    In what became a political scandal (https://www.focus.de/politik/deutschland/bamf-skandal-im-news-ticker-jetzt-muessen-sich-seehofer-und-cordt-den-fragen-d), the German Federal Office for Migration and Refugees, according to reports, paid McKinsey more than €45 million (https://www.augsburger-allgemeine.de/politik/Millionenzahlungen-Was-hat-McKinsey-beim-Bamf-gemacht-id512950) to help clear a backlog of more than 270,000 asylum applications and to shorten the asylum process.

    German media reports said the sum included 3.9 million euros for “Integrated Refugee Management”, the same phrase McKinsey pitched to the EU in September 2016.

    The parallels don’t end there.

    Much like the contract McKinsey clinched with the EASO in January 2017, German media reports have revealed that more than half of the sum paid to the consultancy for its work in Germany was awarded outside of normal public procurement procedures on the grounds of “urgency”. Der Spiegel (https://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/fluechtlinge-in-deutschland-mckinsey-erhielt-mehr-als-20-millionen-euro-a-11) reported that the firm also did hundreds of hours of pro bono work prior to clinching the contract. McKinsey denied that it worked for free in order to win future federal contracts.

    Again, the details were classified as confidential.

    Arne Semsrott, director of the German transparency NGO FragdenStaat, which investigated McKinsey’s work in Germany, said the lack of transparency in such cases was costing European taxpayers money and control.

    Asked about German and EU efforts to keep the details of such outsourcing secret, Semsrott told BIRN: “The lack of transparency means the public spending more money on McKinsey and other consulting firms. And this lack of transparency also means that we have a lack of public control over what is actually happening.”

    Sources familiar with the decision-making in Athens identified Solveigh Hieronimus, a McKinsey partner based in Munich, as the coordinator of the company’s team on the EASO contract in Greece. Hieronimus was central in pitching the company’s services to the German government, according to German media reports (https://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-147594782.html).

    Hieronimus did not respond to BIRN questions submitted by email.

    Freund, the German MEP formerly of Transparency International, said McKinsey’s role in Greece was a cause for concern.

    “It is not ideal if positions adopted by the [European] Council are in any way affected by outside businesses,” he told BIRN. “These decisions should be made by politicians based on legal analysis and competent independent advice.”

    A reporter on this story again complained to the EU Ombudsman in July 2019 regarding the Commission’s refusal to disclose further details of its dealings with McKinsey.

    In November, the Ombudsman told the Commission that “the substance of the funded project, especially the work packages and deliverable of the project[…] should be fully disclosed”, citing the principle that “the public has a right to be informed about the content of projects that are financed by public money.” The Ombudsman rejected the Commission’s argument that partial disclosure would undermine the commercial interests of McKinsey.

    Commission President Ursula von Der Leyen responded that the Commission “respectfully disagrees” with the Ombudsman. The material concerned, she wrote, “contains sensitive information on the business strategies and the commercial relations of the company concerned.”

    The president of the Commission has had dealings with McKinsey before; in February, von der Leyen testified before a special Bundestag committee concerning contracts worth tens of millions of euros that were awarded to external consultants, including McKinsey, during her time as German defence minister in 2013-2019.

    In 2018, Germany’s Federal Audit Office said procedures for the award of some contracts had not been strictly lawful or cost-effective. Von der Leyen acknowledged irregularities had occurred but said that much had been done to fix the shortcomings (https://www.ft.com/content/4634a3ea-4e71-11ea-95a0-43d18ec715f5).

    She was also questioned about her 2014 appointment of Katrin Suder, a McKinsey executive, as state secretary tasked with reforming the Bundeswehr’s system of procurement. Asked if Suder, who left the ministry in 2018, had influenced the process of awarding contracts, von der Leyen said she assumed not. Decisions like that were taken “way below my pay level,” she said.

    In its report, Germany’s governing parties absolved von der Leyen of blame, Politico reported on June 9 (https://www.politico.eu/article/ursula-von-der-leyen-german-governing-parties-contracting-scandal).

    The EU Ombudsman is yet to respond to the Commission’s refusal to grant further access to the McKinsey documents.

    https://balkaninsight.com/2020/06/22/asylum-outsourced-mckinseys-secret-role-in-europes-refugee-crisis
    #accord_UE-Turquie #asile #migrations #réfugiés #externalisation #privatisation #sous-traitance #Turquie #EU #UE #Union_européenne #Grèce #frontières #Allemagne #EASO #Structural_Reform_Support_Service (#SRSS) #Maarten_Verwey #Frontex #Chios #consultancy #Joint_Action_Plan #Martin_Selmayr #chronologie #Jose_Carreira #Joanna_Darmanin #privatisation #management #productivité #leadership_training #îles #Mer_Egée #Integrated_Refugee_Management #pro_bono #transparence #Solveigh_Hieronimus #Katrin_Suder

    ping @_kg_ @karine4 @isskein @rhoumour @reka

  • Pushbacks in Melilla : ND and NT v. Spain

    On 13 February 2020, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) rendered a judgment in the case of ND and NT v. Spain, the first trial to address ‘pushbacks’—the cross-border expulsion of refugees and migrants—at Europe’s land borders.

    The case concerns the pushback of two men from Mali and Ivory Coast at the Spanish-Moroccan border in Melilla in August 2014. ND and NT had crossed into the Spanish enclave of Melilla by climbing a series of fences at its border, along with a group of other migrants.

    The group, including ND and NT, were handcuffed and returned to Morocco by Spain’s paramilitary Guardia Civil, without the opportunity to explain their circumstances or speak to a lawyer

    In its judgment, the Court found that those pushbacks did not violate the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). In doing so, the Court introduced a new legal exception to human rights at Europe’s borders, creating a dangerous precedent: the Court stated that climbing the border fences was ‘culpable conduct’ on the part of ND and NT, who should have used legal entry procedures instead. The Court accepted that Spain had provided ‘several possible means of seeking admission’, in particular:

    – by applying for international protection at the Beni Enzar border crossing point,

    – or in Spain’s diplomatic and consular representations.

    FA and ECCHR investigated whether the legal entry procedures presented to the Court by Spain were in fact available to Sub-Saharan nationals, using spatial analysis, official data from the Spanish government, human rights reports, and testimony.

    Our investigation demonstrates that both Spain’s claims and the Court’s conclusions are false, and that Black people from Sub-Saharan Africa are systematically discriminated against at the Melilla border.

    In fact, Black people trying to reach the Spanish border in Melilla have to evade a special Moroccan border police force and bypass three Moroccan border checkpoints, at which they are consistently denied passage.

    Spain made the claim that legal routes to apply for asylum are available to Sub-Saharan nationals however, gave no evidence to support this claim. In fact, there were only two applications made by Sub-Saharan nationals at the Melilla and Ceuta border posts between September 2014 and May 2017, both of them were women ‘camouflaged with typical Moroccan clothes’ to obscure their skin. According to witness testimony, the consulate in Nador is not accessible to Black Sub-Saharan nationals and there were no applications by Sub-Saharan nationals at any Spanish embassies in Morocco between 2015 and 2018. Nevertheless, the Court accepted Spain’s claims.

    The case of ND and NT reveals the mechanisms of structural racism embedded in Europe’s border policies. During the trial, Spain made misleading claims which were contradicted not only by multiple reports and testimonies, but also by their own data. Nevertheless, the Court accepted these arguments, and dismissed those of the claimants. The resulting judgment is a gross distortion of the facts, and fails to acknowledge the realities at Europe’s borders.

    This video investigation was submitted to the ECtHR as part of a further case relating to pushbacks at the EU’s borders, ‘Danny’ v Spain.

    https://forensic-architecture.org/investigation/pushbacks-in-melilla-nd-and-nt-vs-spain
    #push-backs #refoulements #Melilla #Espagne #Maroc #frontières #migrations #asile #réfugiés #CourEDH #CEDH #justice #architecture_forensique #forensic_architecture

    ping @isskein @reka

  • Quelques notes sur l’opération répressive du 10 juin 2020

    passamontagna

    https://lavoiedujaguar.net/Quelques-notes-sur-l-operation-repression-du-10-juin-2020

    Oui, nous avons occupé. Nous avons occupé le sous-sol de l’église de Claviere. Et quand ils nous ont expulsés, nous sommes entrés dans l’ancienne Casa Cantoniera di Oulx.

    Nous avons pris l’espace nécessaire pour nous rencontrer, nous parler, nous organiser. Contre les frontières. Contre les systèmes d’exploitation et de sélection qui les soutiennent. Pour porter une solidarité active à toutes ces personnes qui se trouvent discriminées, différenciées, constamment rackettées pour l’obtention d’un bout de papier, d’un État qui les massacre et du capital qui les exploite.

    Nous avons occupé. Nous l’avons fait et nous le revendiquons.

    Et nous sommes toujours là. La Casa Cantoniera existe toujours et la lutte à la frontière est bien plus large que les 24 personnes impliquées dans l’enquête pour occupation et les 17 personnes qu’ils tentent de chasser.

    Des centaines et des centaines de personnes de tous les continents ont traversé ces espaces. Certaines, indépendamment du fait qu’ils aient des documents ou non, déterminées à choisir où et comment vivre, d’autres pour combattre ce système d’exploitation, d’exclusion et de différenciation. (...)

    #frontières #Italie #réfugiés #répression #solidarité #occupation

  • Reconnaissance faciale : face au renoncement d’IBM, Amazon et Microsoft, qu’envisage l’Europe ?
    https://information.tv5monde.com/info/reconnaissance-faciale-face-au-renoncement-d-ibm-amazon-et-mic

    IBM, Amazon et Microsoft abandonnent la vente de systèmes de reconnaissance faciale aux forces de police, admettant qu’elles posent des problèmes de discrimination et de libertés publiques. En Europe, malgré des réglementations de l’Union qui devraient mettre à mal l’utilisation de cette technologie, de nombreuses expérimentations sont à l’œuvre. Explications. C’est un paradoxe qui vient de se révéler… et pas des moindres : alors que trois des plus grandes firmes américaines technologiques déclarent (...)

    #Microsoft #RATP #IBM #Amazon #algorithme #Alicem #CCTV #smartphone #biométrie #[fr]Règlement_Général_sur_la_Protection_des_Données_(RGPD)[en]General_Data_Protection_Regulation_(GDPR)[nl]General_Data_Protection_Regulation_(GDPR) #facial #reconnaissance #vidéo-surveillance (...)

    ##[fr]Règlement_Général_sur_la_Protection_des_Données__RGPD_[en]General_Data_Protection_Regulation__GDPR_[nl]General_Data_Protection_Regulation__GDPR_ ##BigData ##frontières ##surveillance ##CNIL ##EuropeanDigitalRights-EDRi ##LaQuadratureduNet

  • THE DARK SIDE OF EUROPEANISATION. Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and the European Border Regime

    While the external borders of the European Union have remained largely closed for people on the move since 2016, the two neighbouring states, Serbia, and Bosnia & Herzegovina, have become the main transit countries in Southeast Europe, with migrations taking place in a clandestine manner, often back and forth and exposed to brutal border pushbacks. Examining migration movements, policies, public discourses and struggles in the Balkans between the summer of migration in 2015 and the pandemic crisis in 2020, this study provides an analysis of the impact of the EUropean border and migration regime in the region, which has become a #buffer_zone for people on the move. Tracing the complex interplay of EU, state and local institutions, it offers insight into how policies of the securitisation and militarisation of the EU’s external borders are intertwined with the region’s EU accession process.

    https://www.rosalux.rs/en/dark-side-europeanisation
    #rapport #border_regime #Bosnie #Balkans #Serbie #migrations #asile #réfugiés #frontières #frontières_extérieures #transit #Europe #EU #UE #militarisation #sécurisation #militarisation_des_frontières

    ping @luciebacon @isskein

  • IDemia
    https://technopolice.fr/idemia

    Historique Idemia est une entreprise française qui se présente comme le « leader de l’identité augmentée ». Elle est née en 2017 de la fusion de Morpho (Safran), considéré comme chef de file mondial d’identification biométrique et d’Oberthur Technologies, spécialisé dans la fabrication de carte à puce et de documents d’identité. Idemia se veut leader d’identification biométrique ainsi que des paiements sécurités. Aujourd’hui, la société possède des références dans l’identification criminelle (avec le FBI, (...)

    #Idemia #Interpol #Morpho #NYPD #Safran #carte #PARAFE #biométrie #facial #reconnaissance #vidéo-surveillance #Aadhaar #empreintes #frontières #sport #surveillance (...)

    ##CNIL

  • EU ’covered up’ Croatia’s failure to protect migrants from border brutality

    Exclusive: Brussels officials feared disclosing Zagreb’s lack of commitment to monitoring would cause ‘scandal’

    EU officials have been accused of an “outrageous cover-up” after withholding evidence of a failure by Croatia’s government to supervise #police repeatedly accused of robbing, abusing and humiliating migrants at its borders.

    Internal European commission emails seen by the Guardian reveal officials in Brussels had been fearful of a backlash when deciding against full disclosure of Croatia’s lack of commitment to a monitoring mechanism that ministers had previously agreed to fund with EU money.

    Ahead of responding to inquiries from a senior MEP in January, a commission official had warned a colleague that the Croatian government’s failure to use money earmarked two years ago for border police “will for sure be seen as a ‘scandal’”.

    Supervision of the behaviour of border officers had been the condition set on a larger grant of EU funds to Croatia. There have been multiple allegations of violent pushbacks of migrants and refugees by Croatian police on the border with Bosnia, including an incident in which a migrant was shot.

    In response to allegations of a cover-up, an EC spokesman told the Guardian that what was known had been withheld from MEPs as the information was believed to have been “incomplete”.
    Crosses on our heads to ’cure’ Covid-19: refugees report abuse by Croatian police
    Read more

    It throws a spotlight on both the Croatian government’s human rights record and the apparent willingness of the EU’s executive branch to cover for Zagreb’s failure.

    Croatia is seeking to enter the EU’s passport-free Schengen zone – a move that requires compliance with European human rights standards at borders.

    Despite heated denials by the Croatian authorities, the latest border incident has been described by aid workers as the most violent in the Balkan migration crisis. On 26 May, 11 Pakistani and five Afghan men were stopped by a group wearing black uniforms and balaclavas in the Plitvice Lakes, 16km (10 miles) into Croatia from the Bosnian border.

    “The men in uniforms tied each of the Pakistanis and Afghanis around a tree, so their wrists were bound and they had to turn their faces toward the trees,” according to a report from the Danish Refugee Council (DRC), which provides healthcare for migrants in Bosnia. “Once these people were unable to move, the men in uniforms fired several shots in the air with guns placed close to the ears of the Pakistanis and Afghanis. There were also shots fired close to their legs.’’

    “They kept shooting. They were shooting so closely that the stones under our feet were flying and being blown to pieces,” one of the men told the Guardian. “They kept saying: ‘I want to beat and kill you.’ They tortured us for three to four hours.”

    The council’s report says electro-shockers were placed on people’s necks and heads. “One of the men in uniform was cutting several victims with knives and the same person inflicted cuts on both of the palms of one person.”

    One asylum seeker said that one of the men put his knee on his neck, then cut at him with a blade. ‘‘He sliced the index finger of my left hand, and blood started spurting out like a small shower,’’ he said. “Then he smiled and cut my middle finger followed by my palm with a larger cut. The whole hand is swollen beyond recognition.”

    After a while, the men in balaclavas called other uniformed officers.

    According to the victims and a report by the DRC, “before the police arrival, one of the men in uniform made a film with his mobile phone, while others in his company were laughing, yelling and provoking”.

    Upon the arrival of police officers, the migrants were put into vans and taken to the border at Šiljkovača, a village close to Velika Kladuša. Police officers did not beat them, but ordered them into Bosnian territory.

    “All of them had bleeding wounds on their heads and numerous bruises on various parts of the body,” Nicola Bay, the DRC country director for Bosnia, told the Guardian. “Four of them had broken arms and one had a broken leg and both arms.”

    Contacted by the Guardian, the Croatian police denied the allegations and suggested that asylum seekers could have fabricated the account and that the wounds could be the result of “a confrontation among migrants” that took place ‘‘on 28 May in the vicinity of the Croatian border, near Cazin’’.

    Volunteers and charities who have treated migrants involved in the fight in Cazin, said the two incidents are unrelated and happened two days apart. Those involved in the fight in Cazin have not claimed they were attacked by the police.

    The establishment of supervisory mechanisms to ensure the humane treatment of migrants at the border had been a condition of a €6.8m (£6.1m) cash injection announced in December 2018 to strengthen Croatia’s borders with non-EU countries.

    The mechanism was publicised by the European commission as a way to “ensure that all measures applied at the EU external borders are proportionate and are in full compliance with fundamental rights and EU asylum laws”.

    Croatian ministers claimed last year that the funds had been handed over to the UN High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) and the Croatian Law Centre to establish the supervisory mechanism.

    Both organisations deny receiving the money.

    In January this year, the commission was asked by Clare Daly, an Irish MEP in the Independents 4 Change party, to account for the discrepancy.

    A commission official responded that the UNCHR and Croatian Law Centre had established the monitoring mechanism but from “their own funds” to ensure independence from the government.

    He added: “Hopefully [this] clarifies this matter once and for all”.

    But both organisations have again denied being involved in any monitoring project, clarifying that they had only been engaged in an earlier initiative involving the examination of police files.

    Beyond the apparent inaccuracy of the response to Daly, internal emails suggest the full facts of the “underspending” – as its known to the commission – were also withheld.

    The EC failed to inform Daly that the Croatian government had decided to ring-fence only €102,000 of the €300,000 provided for the monitoring mechanism and that ultimately only €84,672 was actually spent – €17,469.87 was given to the interior ministry and €59,637.91 went to NGOs. A roundtable conference accounted for €1,703.16.

    “While we know that there has been underspending on the €300,000 … we thought that around € 240,000 were nevertheless spent in the context of the monitoring mechanism,” an EU official had written while discussing how to deal with the MEP’s questions. “Having spent only EUR 102,000, will for sure be seen as a ‘scandal’.”

    The commission did not pass on information on the spending to Daly but privately officials agreed to seek answers urgently. They also discussed in a phone and email exchange the possibility of intervening in the member state’s planned report due to the poor handling of the matter by the Croatian government.

    “Seeing how unfortunate [Croatia] is presenting this issue, [Croatia] definitively needs (your?) help in putting some ‘final touches’ to the report,” an official in the commission’s migration department wrote to a colleague. “Will [Croatia] provide you with an advance copy of the final report?”

    Daly told the Guardian: “It is outrageous – the commission appears to be colluding with the Croatian authorities in a cover-up.”

    An EC spokesperson said the EU’s executive branch was committed to the establishment of a fully independent border monitoring mechanism.

    The spokesperson said: “We would caution against drawing misleading conclusions from reading the internal email exchanges in isolation.”

    He added: “The Croatian authorities are explaining in their final implementation report how the monitoring mechanism was established, how it works in practice and outline the results.

    “Given that the report submitted by the Croatian authorities was incomplete, the commission asked the Croatian authorities for clarifications first in writing and orally regarding outstanding issues (eg factual data confirming the achievements of the project indicators relating to internal controls and trainings).”

    https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2020/jun/15/eu-covered-up-croatias-failure-to-protect-migrants-from-border-brutalit
    #complicité #EU #UE #Croatie #violence #réfugiés #asile #migrations #violence #violences #hauts_fonctionnaires #fonds #argent #gardes_frontière #route_des_Balkans #frontières #Plitvice_Lakes #commission_européenne #Union_européenne #couverture

    • Report from Centre for Peace Studies on the pushback of children

      On 29th May 2020, the Centre for Peace Studies – a key member of the Border Violence Monitoring Network (BVMN) – presented a new report alongside the Welcome! Initiative. Addressing the Croatian Government, the “Report on violent and illegal expulsions of children and unaccompanied children” is based on testimonies collected by activists through the BVMN shared database. The publication shares the story of children who sought protection from Croatia, and how Croatia answered in violence.

      “We came to the door of Prime Minister Plenković and Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Interior Božinović, who have been turning their backs on testimonies and accusations for years and silently pursuing a policy of flattering the European Union. Even the most vulnerable are not excluded from violence – children “, said Tea Vidović on behalf of the Welcome! Initiative.

      The report submitted to the Government by the organizations provides testimonies of children and their families and unaccompanied children on violent and illegal methods that they had to experience at the hands of police authorities. This illegal and inhuman behavior violates national laws, international law and human rights, prevents access to international protection and, most importantly, marks children’s lives. Although the Government of the Republic of Croatia and the Ministry of the Interior should take into account the special vulnerability of children, respect their rights and best interests, children experience police brutality and limitation of their freedom for hours without access to water and food.

      “While the government uses every opportunity to emphasize the importance of border protection, we wonder in which way is police protecting Croatian borders? By beating children, confiscating their personal belongings, locking children in police vans for several hours in which they are exposed to extremely high or extremely low temperatures, shooting and using electric shocks, is this how the police protect Croatian borders? ”, points out Ana Ćuća.

      The exact number of children who are victims of police brutality remains unknown. BVMN has reported 209 cases of violent and illegal expulsions of children from Croatia since 2017, while Save the Children recorded 2969 expulsions of children at the borders in the Western Balkans during the first 9 months of last year.

      Two cases are currently pending at the European Court of Human Rights against Croatia, both involving violence and pushback. The first is the case of the family of the tragically late six-year-old girl Madina Hussiny, who was killed at the Croatian-Serbian border. The second includes pushbacks, illegal detention and inhumane treatment of a 17-year-old Syrian boy by Croatian police, who was pushed back to Bosnia and Herzegovina despite seeking asylum in Croatia.

      The latest report presented is the sixth report on violent and illegal expulsions published in the last four years, and it is the collective work of the Centre for Peace Studies, the Society for Psychological Assistance, the Welcome! Initiative and the Border Violence Monitoring Network. It also brings a short graphic novel based on the story of little #Madina, a young girl killed in transit, for whose death no one has yet been held accountable.

      Therefore, the organisations ask the Government and the Ministry of the Interior to finally take responsibility and for those who sanction and carry out systematic violence. Responsible institutions are obliged to investigate those who commit violence and push back children in need of protection. All children deserve justice and protection.

      https://www.borderviolence.eu/report-from-centre-for-peace-studies-on-the-pushback-of-children
      #enfants #enfance #mineurs

      Pour télécharger le #rapport:
      https://www.cms.hr/system/article_document/doc/647/Pushback_report_on_children_and_unaccompanied_children_in_Croatia.pdf

    • Policiers croates accusés de violences contre des migrants : l’UE réclame une "enquête approfondie’’

      Après avoir été interpellée par Amnesty International sur la « violence » des policiers croates à l’égard des migrants, la Commission européenne a réclamé à Zagreb une « enquête approfondie ». L’institution prévoit d’envoyer une mission sur place, quand la situation sanitaire le permettra.

      L’Union européenne est sortie de son ’’silence’’ au sujet des accusations de violences contre des migrants perpétrées par la police croate. Vendredi 12 juin, la Commission européenne a réclamé à Zagreb une "#enquête_approfondie'' à la suite de la publication d’un rapport à charge de l’ONG Amnesty International dénonçant des #passages_à_tabac, des #tortures et des tentatives d’#humiliation de la part de policiers croates (https://www.infomigrants.net/fr/post/25339/on-les-suppliait-d-arreter-de-nous-frapper-ils-chantaient-et-riaient-l).

      « Nous sommes très préoccupés par ces allégations », a déclaré un porte-parole de l’exécutif européen, Adalbert Jahnz. « La #violence, l’humiliation et les #traitements_dégradants des demandeurs d’asile et migrants n’ont pas leur place dans l’Union européenne et doivent être condamnés », a-t-il assuré.

      L’Union européenne avait été directement interpellée par Amnesty International dans son rapport. Ce document affirme que 16 migrants, qui tentaient d’entrer illégalement en Croatie, ont été « ligotés, brutalement battus et torturés » pendant plusieurs heures par des forces de l’ordre, dans la nuit du 26 au 27 mai. « L’Union européenne ne peut plus rester silencieuse et ignorer délibérément les violences et les abus commis par la police croate à la frontière », avait déclaré Massimo Moratti, directeur adjoint de l’antenne européenne de l’ONG.

      https://twitter.com/Jelena_Sesar/status/1271044353629335553?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E12

      Une mission sur place quand la situation sanitaire le permettra

      L’exécutif européen a également indiqué être « en contact étroit » avec les autorités croates qui « se sont engagées à enquêter » sur ces accusations de mauvais traitements à leur frontière avec la Bosnie (https://www.infomigrants.net/fr/post/18721/plusieurs-migrants-retrouves-blesses-a-la-frontiere-entre-la-bosnie-et). « Nous attendons que ces accusations fassent l’objet d’une enquête approfondie et que toutes les actions nécessaires soient prises », a poursuivi le porte-parole.

      La Commission prévoit aussi d’envoyer, quand la situation sanitaire le permettra, une mission sur place, dans le cadre d’un mécanisme de surveillance du respect des droits fondamentaux par les autorités aux frontières lié à l’allocation de fonds européens.

      Le ministère croate de l’Intérieur a, de son côté, immédiatement démenti ces accusations, en ajoutant cependant qu’une enquête serait ouverte.

      Des milliers de migrants empruntent chaque année la « route des Balkans » pour essayer de rejoindre l’Europe occidentale. La plupart passent par la Croatie, pays membre de l’UE, le plus souvent en provenance de la Bosnie.


      https://www.infomigrants.net/fr/post/25354/policiers-croates-accuses-de-violences-contre-des-migrants-l-ue-reclam

    • Croatia: Fresh evidence of police abuse and torture of migrants and asylum-seekers

      In a horrifying escalation of police human rights violations at the Croatian border with Bosnia, a group of migrants and asylum seekers was recently bound, brutally beaten and tortured by officers who mocked their injuries and smeared food on their bleeding heads to humiliate them, Amnesty International has revealed today.

      Amnesty International spoke to six men among a group of 16 Pakistani and Afghan asylum-seekers who were apprehended by the Croatian police on the night between 26 and 27 May near Lake Plitvice, as they tried to cross the country to reach Western Europe.

      Between eight and ten people wearing black uniforms and balaclavas identical to those used by Croatia’s Special Police, fired their weapons in the air, kicked and repeatedly hit the restrained men with metal sticks, batons and pistol grips. They then rubbed ketchup, mayonnaise and sugar that they found in one of the backpacks on migrants’ bleeding heads and hair and their trousers. Amnesty International also spoke to doctors who treated the men and NGOs who witnessed their injuries.

      “The European Union can no longer remain silent and wilfully ignore the violence and abuses by Croatian police on its external borders. Their silence is allowing, and even encouraging, the perpetrators of this abuse to continue without consequences. The European Commission must investigate the latest reports of horrifying police violence against migrants and asylum-seekers.” said Massimo Moratti, Deputy Director of the Europe Office, following the latest incident on the Croatian border.

      Physical and psychological abuse

      Amir from Pakistan told Amnesty: “We were pleading with them to stop and show mercy. We were already tied, unable to move and humiliated; there was no reason to keep hitting us and torturing us.” He said the armed men showed no sympathy. “They were taking photos of us with their phones, and were singing and laughing.” Amir had a broken arm and nose, stiches on the back of his head, and visible bruising all over his face and arms.

      Ten men suffered serious injuries that night. Thirty-year-old Tariq now has both of his arms and a leg in a cast, visible cuts and bruises on his head and face and is suffering from severe chest pain.

      “They did not give us a chance to say anything at all when they caught us. They just started hitting us. While I was lying on the ground, they hit my head with the back of a gun and I started bleeding. I tried to protect my head from the blows, but they started kicking me and hitting my arms with metal sticks. I was passing in and out of consciousness the rest of the night.” Tariq is now forced to use a wheelchair to move around and it will take months before he is able to move on his own again.

      The men told Amnesty International how they felt humiliated as militia rubbed mayonnaise and ketchup on to their bloody heads and faces. One masked man squirted mayonnaise on an asylum-seeker’s trousers between his legs, while others laughed and sang “Happy Birthday” around them.

      After almost five hours of continuous abuse, the migrants were handed over to the Croatian Border Police who transported them close to the border with Bosnia and Herzegovina in two vans before ordering them to walk. “They were taken aback by our condition. We were drenched in blood and very shook up. We could barely stand, much less walk for hours to Bosnia. But they told us to go. They told us to carry the guys who couldn’t walk and just go.” Faisal told Amnesty.

      Some of the men eventually reached Miral, a reception centre run by the International Organization for Migration in Velika Kladusa in Bosnia and Herzegovina, but five, who were too weak to walk, stayed behind and were eventually picked up by an NGO operating in the camp.

      An emergency doctor at the medical clinic in Velika Kladusa who treated the men told Amnesty International that they all had injuries on the back of their heads which were consistent with a blow by a blunt object and required stiches. Most had multiple fractures, joint injuries, collapsed lungs, cuts and bruises and several were traumatized. Their recovery could take months.

      Routine violent pushbacks and torture by the Croatian police remain unpunished

      While only the latest in the series, the incident points to a new level of brutality and abuse by the Croatian police. In early May, the Guardian reported about a group of men who were forced across the Croatian border after being beaten and having orange crosses spray-painted on their heads. The Croatian Ministry of Interior dismissed the allegations, but the testimonies of violence and intimidation fit the trend of unlawful pushbacks taking place not only on the Croatian, but also on other external borders of the European Union.

      Numerous reports over the past three years have revealed how the Croatian border police routinely assault men, women and teenagers trying to enter the country, destroy their belongings and smash their phones before pushing them back to Bosnia. People are sometimes stripped of their clothes and shoes, and forced to walk for hours through snow and freezing cold rivers.

      A physician in the Velika Kladusa clinic told Amnesty International that approximately 60 per cent of migrants and asylum-seekers who required medical treatment reported that their injuries were inflicted by the Croatian police, while they were trying to cross the border. “Many injuries involve fractures of long bones and joints. These bones take longer to heal and their fractures render the patient incapacitated for extended periods of time. This appears to be a deliberate strategy – to cause injuries and trauma that take time to heal and would make people more reluctant to try to cross the border again or any time soon,” the physician told Amnesty International.

      The Croatian Ministry of Interior has so far dismissed these allegations, refusing to carry out independent and effective investigations into reported abuses or hold its officers to account. In a climate of pervasive impunity, unlawful returns and violence at the border have only escalated. Amnesty International has shared the details of this incident with the Ministry of Interior, but has not received an official response.

      The EU’s failure to hold Croatia to account

      The European Commission has remained silent in the face of multiple, credible reports of gross human rights abuses at the Croatian border and repeated calls by the European Parliament to investigate the allegations. Furthermore, Croatia remains a beneficiary of nearly EURO 7 million of EU assistance for border security, the vast majority of which is spent on infrastructure, equipping border police and even paying police salaries. Even the small proportion (EURO 300,000) that the Commission had earmarked for a mechanism to monitor that the border measures comply with fundamental rights and EU asylum laws, has been no more than a fig leaf. Last year, the Commission recommended Croatia’s full accession to the Schengen Area despite human rights abuses already being commonplace there.

      “The European Commission cannot continue to turn a blind eye to blatant breaches of EU law as people are being branded with crosses on their heads or brutally tortured and humiliated by Croatian police. We expect nothing less than the condemnation of these acts and an independent investigation into reported abuses, as well as the establishment of an effective mechanism to ensure that EU funds are not used to commit torture and unlawful returns. Failing urgent action, Croatia’s inhumane migration practices will turn the EU into an accomplice in major human rights violations taking place at its doorstep,” said Massimo Moratti.

      Violent pushbacks from Croatian border have been a regular occurrence since late 2017. The Danish Refugee Council recorded close to 7,000 cases of forcible deportations and unlawful returns to Bosnia and Herzegovina in 2019, most of which were accompanied by reported violence and intimidation by Croatian police. Despite the brief respite during the lockdown due to COVID-19 pandemic, pushbacks continue with 1600 cases reported only in April. The figures are increasing daily, as the restrictions across the region are being lifted and the weather is turning milder.

      Amnesty International has interviewed over 160 people who have been pushed back or returned to Bosnia and Herzegovina since July 2018. Nearly one third reported being beaten, having their documents and telephones stolen, and verbally abused in what appears to be a deliberate policy designed to deter future attempts to enter the country.

      https://www.amnesty.eu/news/croatia-fresh-evidence-of-police-abuse-and-torture-of-migrants-and-asylum-se
      #rapport #Amnesty_international

    • Croatia, police abuse is systemic

      While the world is outraged and protests after George Floyd’s death to denounce institutionalised violence, migrants have been beaten and tortured on the Balkan route for years. A brutal practice often covered up, even by the EU itself.

      George Floyd’s death on May 25th sparked protests around the world against police violence and institutional racism. In the Balkans as elsewhere, sit-ins have been held in support of #BlackLivesMatter , followed by calls to report abuses committed locally by the police. And in the region there is no lack of such abuses. In fact, police violence is routine on the “Balkan route”, the flow of migrants and refugees that has crossed the peninsula since 2015 in the hope of reaching the European Union. The events of the past few weeks have unfortunately confirmed once again the link between police brutality and immigration, bringing us back to the Croatian-Bosnian border. It is a story of systemic abuse, both proven and covered up, which involves a member state of the EU, candidate for accession to the Schengen area and, according to the latest revelations of The Guardian, the European Commission itself.
      Torture in Croatia

      When it comes to police abuse on the Croatian-Bosnian border, one does not really know where to start. The accidents recorded in recent years are so many that we can no longer even speak of “accidents”, or unexpected events. On the contrary, violence is rather a common practice, the only news being the increase in brutality by the agents, who have gone from illegal pushbacks to outright torture.

      “We rarely use the word ’torture’ in Europe, but in this case we had to”, explains Massimo Moratti, deputy director of the Europe office of Amnesty International (AI). Last week, AI published yet another report of the mistreatment of migrants by the Croatian police along the border with Bosnia and Herzegovina. Mistreatment is an understatement. The testimonies collected no longer speak of broken mobile phones, or – as has happened more recently – destroyed with a screwdriver to prevent recharging, but instead contain “actual sadism”, as Moratti puts it.

      The case in question is that of 16 Pakistani and Afghan asylum seekers arrested by the Croatian police near the Plitvice lakes between May 26th and 27th. Their testimony is chilling. “We asked them to stop and show mercy. We were already tied up, there was no reason to continue hitting and torturing us", Amir told Amnesty International. Singing and filming on mobile phones, the agents continued to beat the 16 unfortunate men hard, finally smearing their wounds with ketchup and mayonnaise found in the backpack of one of the migrants. Eventually, the group was brought back to the border and forced to walk to Bosnia. Those who were unable to walk, because they are now in a wheelchair, had to be transported by others.

      “It is a pattern, a trend. These are the same practices that we have already seen in Hungary in 2015, 2016, and 2017. Dogs, sticks, broken bones... The goal is to intimidate and frighten so that no one tries to cross the border anymore", resumes Massimo Moratti, who adds: “the fractures we saw in the latter case will take months to heal”. The Amnesty International report and the attached photos tell the rest.
      Four years of violence

      How did we get to this? It is useful to make a brief summary of recent years to understand the evolution of violence. First, the “Balkan route” became a media phenomenon in the summer of 2015, when hundreds of thousands of Syrians, Iraqis, and Afghans began to travel up the Balkan peninsula to reach the European Union. At the beginning, the destination of the route was Hungary, then, with the closure of the Hungarian wall, it became Croatia, which leads to Slovenia and then to the Schengen area. In 2015, Croatian policemen showed themselves to be tolerant and benevolent, as reminded by this cover of Jutarnji List .

      In the spring of 2016, the agreement between the EU and Turkey led to the closure of the Balkan route and a change of pace. “The first case of pushback is registered in 2016 on the Serbo-Croatian border. In 2017, we have the first cases of violence", says Antonia Pindulić, legal advisor to the Centre for Peace Studies (CMS) in Zagreb. At the end of 2017, Madina Hussiny, 6, died hit by a train while returning from Croatia to Serbia following the tracks. Together with her family, she had been illegally pushed back by the Croatian policemen.

      In the summer of 2018, the Croatian police fired on a van that carried 29 migrants and refused to stop. Nine people were injured and two minors ended up in hospital in serious conditions. Since then, it has been a crescendo of accidents, especially on the Croatian-Bosnian border, where what remains of the Balkan route passes. Here, the testimonies collected by NGOs speak of beatings, theft, destruction of mobile phones and, as always, illegal pushbacks. Then, the situation has deteriorated up to the torture of the last few weeks. All in the silence of the authorities.
      The silence of the institutions

      How could the Zagreb government not complete an investigation in four years, address the police abuse, punish the guilty? It just didn’t. In fact, Andrej Plenković’s government has just “denied everything” for four years, while “no investigation has produced results”, as Antonia Pindulić of CMS summarises. And this despite the fact that there have been complaints from NGOs and also the actions of the institutions themselves in Croatia.

      “In 2019, a group of policement wrote an anonymous letter to the Croatian Ombudswoman asking to be protected from having to carry out illegal orders”, recalls Pindulić. The agents then revealed the pushback technique: GPS off, communications only on Whatsapp or Viber, no official report. Also in 2019, then President Kolinda Grabar Kitarović had let slip , during an interview on Swiss television, that “of course, a little strength is needed when making pushbacks”. Later, she said she had been misunderstood.

      After dozens of complaints have fallen on deaf ears and after in 2018 the Ombudswoman, in her investigations, had been denied access to video surveillance videos with the excuse that they were lost, the CMS decided a couple of weeks ago to file a complaint “against unknown police officers” guilty of “degrading treatment and torture against 33 people” and “violent and illegal expulsion [of these people, ed.] from the territory of the Republic of Croatia to Bosnia and Herzegovina”. “We hope that the prosecutor will open an investigation and that people who have violated the law are identified. But since the institutions themselves have violated the law for four years, I don’t know what we can expect”, says Antonia Pindulić.

      The complaint filed brings together four cases, all of which occurred at the beginning of May 2020. “We suspect that the cases are linked to each other, as all the migrants and refugees involved have reported beatings, theft of their belongings, being stripped and, above all, having a cross drawn on their head with orange spray”, says Antonia Pindulić. This very detail had brought the story on the Guardian and sparked controversy in Croatia.
      Towards a turning point?

      In their brutality, the cases seem to repeat themselves without any change in sight. But the Croatian government may soon be forced to answer for what appears to be institutionalised violence. Not only the legal action taken by the CMS “could likely end in Strasbourg”, as Massimo Moratti of Amnesty International speculates, but a lawsuit filed by three Syrian refugees against Croatia reached the European Court of Human Rights at the end of the May . And last week, after the publication of the AI ​​report, the European Commission announced that an observation mission will be sent to Croatia.

      And there is more. This week, the Guardian also revealed that communications between officials of the European Commission show how the European body “covered up Croatia’s failure to protect migrants from brutality on the border”. In question are the European funding received from Zagreb for border security: 7 million Euros, of which 300,000 for the implementation of an independent control mechanism that should have supervised the work of the police. Not only has the mechanism never been implemented, but there have been contradictory communications in this regard, with the Commission declaring that UNHCR was part of the mechanism and the latter publicly denying at the end of 2019 .

      In short, although Brussels allocated a (small) budget for the control of the brutality of Croatian agents, the mechanism that was to be activated with those funds was never created. And the Commission is aware of this. How long, then, will the Plenković government manage to hide its system of violence on the Bosnian border?

      https://www.balcanicaucaso.org/eng/Areas/Croatia/Croatia-police-abuse-is-systemic-202952

      #violence_systémique

  • 19 juin 20h Amnesty International sur internet, diffusion suivie d’un débat, du #documentaire :

    Demain est si loin
    Muriel Cravatte (2019, France, 88 min, Couleur)
    https://www.amnesty.fr/cine-debat-demain-est-si-loin
    https://www.facebook.com/events/1165149137184372

    2018, frontière franco-italienne. Chaque jour, des exilés tentent de rejoindre la France à pied, en empruntant des itinéraires de montagne dangereux, pour échapper aux traques policières.

    Le film sera suivi par un temps d’échange en direct depuis Paris et Briançon avec Muriel Cravatte elle-même et des personnes engagées dans l’accueil des réfugiés et migrants à Briançon.

    Dans les Alpes, la fraternité prise pour cible
    Amnesty International, le 3 mars 2020
    https://www.amnesty.fr/refugies-et-migrants/actualites/dans-les-alpes-la-fraternite-prise-pour-cible

    Et une pétition à signer :

    Protégeons les défenseurs des droits des migrants
    https://www.amnesty.fr/refugies-et-migrants/petitions/protegeons-les-defenseurs-des-droits-des-migrants

    #France #Italie #migrants #Frontière_sud-alpine #frontières #Briançon #Hautes-Alpes #asile #migrations #réfugiés #parcours_migratoires #montagne #Blessing #police #violence_policière #vidéo #Muriel_Cravatte

    Voir la compilation ici :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/756096

  • #Webinars. #COVID-19 Capitalism #Webinar Series

    Since 1 April, #TNI with allies has brought together experts and activists weekly to discuss how this pandemic health crisis exposes the injustices of the global economic order and how it must be a turning point towards creating the systems, structures and policies that can always protect those who are marginalised and allow everyone to live with dignity. Every Wednesday at 4pm CET.

    TNI works closely with allied organisations and partners around the world in organising these webinars. AIDC and Focus on the Global South are co-sponsors for the full series.

    –—

    Les conférences déjà en ligne sont ci-dessous en commentaire.

    –----

    Les prochains webinars:

    On 10 June, TNI will hold a webinar on Taking on the Tech Titans: Reclaiming our Data Commons.

    Upcoming webinars - Wednesdays at 4pm CET

    17 June: Borders and migration
    #frontières #migrations

    24 June: Broken Trade System
    #commerce

    https://www.tni.org/en/webinars
    #capitalisme #vidéo #conférence #coronavirus

    ping @isskein @reka

    • Building an internationalist response to Coronavirus
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5qN35qeB1w&feature=emb_logo


      Panellists:

      Sonia Shah, award-winning investigative science journalist and author of Pandemic: Tracking contagions from Cholera to Ebola and Beyond (2017).
      Luis Ortiz Hernandez, public health professor in UAM-Xochimilco, Mexico. Expert on social and economic health inequities.
      Benny Kuruvilla, Head of India Office, Focus on the Global South, working closely with Forum For Trade Justice.
      Mazibuko Jara, Deputy Director, Tshisimani Centre for Activist Education, helping to coordinate a national platform of civic organisations in South Africa to confront COVID-19.
      Umyra Ahmad, Advancing Universal Rights and Justice Associate, Association for Women’s Rights in Development (AWID), Malaysia

      #internationalisme

    • The coming global recession: building an internationalist response

      Recording of a TNI-hosted webinar on Wednesday, 8 April with Professor Jayati Ghosh, Quinn Slobodian, Walden Bello and Lebohang Pheko on the likely global impacts of the economic fallout from the Coronavirus and how we might be better prepared than the 2008 economic crisis to put forward progressive solutions.

      The webinar explored what we can expect in terms of a global recession that many predict could have bigger social impacts than the virus itself. How should we prepare? What can social movements learn from our failures to advance alternative progressive policies in the wake of the 2008 economic crisis?

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiP5qJhHsjw&feature=emb_logo

      Panellists:

      Professor Jayati Ghosh, award-winning economist Jawaharlal Nehru University, India. Author of India and the International Economy (2015) and co-editor of Handbook of Alternative Theories of Economic Development, 2018.
      Quinn Slobodian, associate professor of history, Wellesley College. Author of Globalists: The End of Empire and the Birth of Neoliberalism (2018)
      Walden Bello, author of Paper Dragons: China and the Next Crash (2019) and Capitalism’s Last Stand?: Deglobalization in the Age of Austerity (2013)

      Lebohang Liepollo Pheko, Senior Research Fellow of Trade Collective, a thinktank in South Africa that works on international trade, globalisation, regional integration and feminist economics

      #récession #crise_économique

    • A Recipe for Disaster: Globalised food systems, structural inequality and COVID-19

      A dialogue between Rob Wallace, author of Big Farms Make Big Flu and agrarian justice activists from Myanmar, Palestine, Indonesia and Europe.

      The webinar explored how globalised industrial food systems set the scene for the emergence of COVID-19, the structural connections between the capitalist industrial agriculture, pathogens and the precarious conditions of workers in food systems and society at large. It also touched on the kind of just and resilient food systems we need to transform food and agriculture today?

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9A6WkeqPss&feature=emb_logo

      Panellists:

      Rob Wallace author of Big Farms Make Big Flu and co-author of Neoliberal Ebola: Modeling Disease Emergence from Finance to Forest and Farm.
      Moayyad Bsharat of Union of Agricultural Work Committees (UAWC), member organization of La Via Campesina in Palestine.
      Arie Kurniawaty of Indonesian feminist organization Solidaritas Perempuan (SP) which works with women in grassroots communities across the urban-rural spectrum.
      Sai Sam Kham of Metta Foundation in Myanmar.
      Paula Gioia, peasant farmer in Germany and member of the Coordination Committee of the European Coordination Via Campesina.

      #inégalités #agriculture #alimentation

      –—

      #livre:
      Big Farms Make Big Flu

      In this collection of dispatches, by turns harrowing and thought-provoking, #Rob_Wallace tracks the ways #influenza and other pathogens emerge from an agriculture controlled by multinational corporations. With a precise and radical wit, Wallace juxtaposes ghastly phenomena such as attempts at producing featherless chickens with microbial time travel and neoliberal Ebola. While many books cover facets of food or outbreaks, Wallace’s collection is the first to explore infectious disease, agriculture, economics, and the nature of science together.


      https://monthlyreview.org/press/new-big-farms-make-big-flu-by-rob-wallace
      #multinationales

    • Taking Health back from Corporations: pandemics, big pharma and privatized health

      This webinar brought together experts in healthcare and activists at the forefront of struggles for equitable universal public healthcare from across the globe. It examined the obstacles to access to medicines, the role of Big Pharma, the struggles against health privatisation, and the required changes in global governance of health to prevent future pandemics and bring about public healthcare for all.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KSIRFYF3W8&feature=emb_logo

      Panellists:

      Susan George, Author and President of the Transnational Institute
      Baba Aye, Health Officer, Public Services International
      Mark Heywood, Treatment Action Campaign, Section27 and editor at the Daily Maverick
      Kajal Bhardwaj, Independent lawyer and expert on health, trade and human rights
      David Legge, Peoples Health Movement Moderator: Monica Vargas, Corporate Power Project, Transnational Institute

      #santé #big-pharma #industrie_pharmaceutique #privatisation #système_de_santé

    • States of Control – the dark side of pandemic politics

      In response to an unprecedented global health emergency, many states are rolling out measures from deploying armies and drones to control public space, to expanding digital control through facial recognition technology and tracker apps.

      This webinar explored the political dimension of state responses, particularly the securitisation of COVID-19 through the expansion of powers for military, police, and security forces. It examined the impact of such repression on certain groups who are unable to socially distance, as well as how digital surveillance is being rolled out with little, if any democratic oversight.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KI515hJud8&feature=emb_logo

      Panellists:

      Fionnuala Ni Aolain, UN Special Rapporteur on the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights while Countering Terrorism, University of Minnesota
      Arun Kundnani, New York University, author of The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia, extremism, and the domestic War on Terror and The End of Tolerance: racism in 21st century Britain
      Anuradha Chenoy, School of International Studies in Jawaharlal Nehru University (retired), and author of Militarisation and Women in South Asia
      María Paz Canales, Derechos Digitales (Digital Rights campaign), Chile

      #contrôle #surveillance #drones #reconnaissance_faciale #démocratie

      ping @etraces

    • A Global Green New Deal

      This sixth webinar in our COVID Capitalism series asked what a truly global #Green_New_Deal would look like. It featured Richard Kozul-Wright (UNCTAD), and leading activists from across the globe leading the struggle for a just transition in the wake of the Coronavirus pandemic.

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

      Panellists:

      Richard Kozul-Wright, Director of the Division on Globalization and Development Strategies at the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, author of Transforming Economies: Making Industrial Policy Work for Growth, Jobs and Development
      Karin Nansen, chair of Friends of the Earth International, founding member of REDES – Friends of the Earth Uruguay
      Sandra van Niekerk, Researcher for the One Million Climate Jobs campaign, South Africa

      #transition

    • Proposals for a democratic just economy

      Outgoing UN rapporteur, #Philip_Alston in conversation with trade unionists and activists in Italy, Nigeria and India share analysis on the impacts of privatisation in a time of COVID-19 and the strategies for resistance and also constructing participatory public alternatives.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-IvJq9QJnI&feature=emb_logo

      Panellists:

      Philip Alston, outgoing UN Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
      Rosa Pavanelli, General Secretary of the global union federation Public Services International (PSI)
      Aderonke Ige, Our Water, Our Rights Campaign in Lagos / Environmental Rights Action /Friends of The Earth Nigeria
      Sulakshana Nandi, Co-chair, People’s Health Movement Global (PHM Global)

      #privatisation #participation #participation_publique #résistance

    • Feminist Realities – Transforming democracy in times of crisis

      An inspiring global panel of feminist thinkers and activists reflect and discuss how we can collectively reorganise, shift power and pivot towards building transformative feminist realities that can get us out of the worsening health, climate and capitalist crises.

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

      Panellists:

      Tithi Bhattacharya, Associate Professor of History and the Director of Global Studies at Purdue University and co-author of the manifesto Feminism for the 99%.
      Laura Roth, Lecturer of legal and political philosophy at Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Barcelona, member of Minim Municipalist Observatory and co-author of the practice-oriented report Feminise Politics Now!
      Awino Okech, Lecturer at the Centre for Gender Studies at School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London who brings over twelve years of social justice transformation work in Eastern Africa, the Great Lakes region, and South Africa to her teaching, research and movement support work.
      Khara Jabola-Carolus, Executive Director of the Hawaii State Commission on the Status of Women, co-founder of AF3IRM Hawaii (the Association of Feminists Fighting Fascism, Imperialism, Re-feudalization, and Marginalization) and author of Hawaii’s Feminist Economic Recovery Plan for COVID-19.
      Felogene Anumo, Building Feminist Economies, AWID presenting the #feministbailout campaign

      #féminisme

    • COVID-19 and the global fight against mass incarceration

      November 3rd, 2015, Bernard Harcourt (Columbia Law School) and Naomi Murakawa (Princeton) present rival narratives about mass incarceration in America. In The Illusion of Free Markets: Punishment and the Myth of Natural Order , Harcourt shows the interdependence of contract enforcements in global markets and punitive authority. InThe First Civil Right: How Liberals Built Prison America, by contrast, Murakawa traces prison growth to liberal campaigns and progressive legislation. Together, Murakawa and Harcourt offer fresh ideas about into the political, economic and ethical dimensions of mass incarceration.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLeXbi4aIno&feature=emb_rel_pause

      Olivia Rope, Director of Policy and International Advocacy, Penal Reform International
      Isabel Pereira, Principal investigator at the Center for the Study of Law, Justice & Society (Dejusticia), Colombia
      Sabrina Mahtani, Advocaid Sierra Leone
      Maidina Rahmawati, Institute of Criminal Justice Reform (ICJR), Indonesia
      Andrea James, Founder and Exec Director, and Justine Moore, Director of Training, National Council For Incarcerated and Formerly Incarcerated Women and Girls, USA

      #prisons #emprisonnement_de_masse #USA #Etats-Unis

  • La lutte payante de l’Uruguay contre l’épidémie due au coronavirus
    https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2020/06/08/la-lutte-payante-de-l-uruguay-contre-l-epidemie-due-au-coronavirus_6042143_3

    « Si l’Uruguay était une île, nous pourrions dire que nous avons vaincu l’épidémie, estime Carlos Batthyany, malheureusement nous partageons une frontière terrestre avec le Brésil, le deuxième pays ayant le plus de cas positifs au monde. » La ville frontalière de Rivera (nord), qui est celle qui enregistre le plus grand nombre de cas, inquiète particulièrement les autorités, qui ont renforcé les contrôles devant une augmentation récente du nombre de cas.

    #Covid-19#migrant#migration#frontières#Uruguay#Bresil#santé#tests#système-santé

  • Le coronavirus pousse les Vénézuéliens sur le chemin du retour
    https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2020/06/08/le-covid-19-pousse-les-venezueliens-sur-le-chemin-du-retour_6042145_3210.htm

    Accaparés par la gestion de la crise sanitaire et la récession économique qui s’installe, ministères et mairies se renvoient dos à dos la prise en charge des Vénézuéliens précarisés. La xénophobie y trouve son compte. « Je préfère avoir faim dans mon pays que me faire humilier ici », soupire Miguel. Le délabrement du système sanitaire vénézuélien ne dissuade pas les migrants de rentrer. « Ici en Colombie, nous n’avons pas non plus accès à un lit d’hôpital », rappelle Mayra. Un de ses voisins renchérit, rageur : « S’il faut crever, je veux crever entouré des miens. Pas dans la rue, comme un chien. » La frontière a été officiellement fermée le 14 mars. Mais deux couloirs humanitaires ont été maintenus, l’un entre la ville de Cucuta et celle de San Cristobal au Venezuela, l’autre dans le département de l’Arauca. Ils permettent aux Vénézuéliens de rentrer chez eux. Covid-19 oblige, Bogota et Caracas ont autorisé les administrations locales à dialoguer. Une première depuis la rupture, il y a seize mois, des relations diplomatiques entre les deux pays. « Le Covid-19 n’a pas de passeport, rappelle Victor Bautista, directeur départemental des affaires frontalières à Cucuta. L’Etat vénézuélien du Tachira et le département colombien du Norte de Santander fonctionnent en miroir : si la situation se dégrade de l’autre côté du fleuve, nous en paierons ici le prix et vice versa. » Des deux côtés de la frontière, les autorités locales – administratives et sanitaires – le savent et coopèrent « en bonne entente ». Bogota et Caracas semblent l’ignorer.

    #covid-19#migrant#migration#Colombie#Venezuela#migrant-retour#santé#frontières#couloir-humanitaire#accès-santé

  • Asylum seekers illegally returned from Italy to Slovenia, NGOs claim

    Two migrant-aid organizations are accusing authorities in northeastern Italy of illegally returning asylum seekers to Slovenia. They also claim that readmission procedures between Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia prevent people from asking for asylum in the EU.
    The Italian Consortium of Solidarity (ICS) and Catholic charity Caritas in Trieste published a statement on May 28, saying that they were strongly concerned about “the implementation of informal readmissions of migrants” from Italy to Slovenia.

    The two organizations provide housing to immigrants in the province of Trieste in northeastern Italy, near the border with Slovenia.

    ICS and Caritas said that it is illegal for authorities to return those who intend to apply for asylum. They said asylum requests must be registered before authorities check whether the applicant might have applied in another EU country. Under the Dublin Regulation, asylum seekers can be transferred back to the first EU country where they were registered.

    Migrants ’illegitimately sent away from EU’?

    ICS and Caritas also claimed that readmission procedures between Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia enabled authorities to “illegitimately turn away... those who have entered to apply for protection” from European Union territory. These people, “are subjected to grave violence throughout the so-called Balkan route,” they said in their statement.

    Pierpaolo Roberti, the security councilor of the Friuli Venezia Giulia region, where Trieste is located, responded to the statement, saying that authorities will “move ahead with informal readmissions.” He said that the police and the prefect had his “full support.” Roberti belongs to the far-right League party, which is known for its harsh anti-migrant policies.

    He said he hopes that “as many people as possible continue to be readmitted to Slovenia and, in addition, that we strive to totally stop that migration flow.”


    https://www.infomigrants.net/en/post/25114/asylum-seekers-illegally-returned-from-italy-to-slovenia-ngos-claim
    #Slovénie #Italie #push-back #push-backs #renvois #frontière_sud-alpine #refoulements #refoulement #Alpes #frontières #asile #migrations #réfugiés

    ping @isskein

    • AYS Special: Italian Court StopsDeportation to Slovenia, Meanwhile Pushbacks Continue

      Italy has become the latest link in chain push backs where literally thousands of people — often violently — end up in the overcrowded camps of Bosnia and Serbia.

      Contradictory approaches in Italy

      An Italian court stopped deportation to Slovenia on the grounds that there is a risk for an asylum seeker to be subjected to inhumane and degrading treatment due to the high possibility of him (or her) being further expelled to Croatia and then to Bosnia or Serbia. However, although the court stopped the deportation of a single individual, collective push-backs from Italy are becoming increasingly common in the months since the judgement made by the court in Genova (April 7th). Thus Italian courts are acknowledging the cruel and inhumane treatment that a returnee is subjected to but, on the other hand, the Italian government is massively increasing the scope of push-backs to Slovenia, as is evident in the recent decision to deploy the army with police jurisdiction.

      16.000 people were returned to Croatia from Slovenia in the last two years.

      These are people who were caught and were processed in police stations with charges of illegal border crossing. When a person asks for asylum in slovenia, he is often faced with threats or the asylum claim is simply ignored and in the official records he is reported as an “economic migrant” — a category invented by the Ministry of Interior and the Police and not encompassed by any law. If one is classified as an “economic migrant” who has no interest to seek asylum, he can be returned to Croatia under a bilateral readmission agreement from 2006.

      The Court in Italy is concerned over systemic deficiencies in the Slovene asylum system and finds real risk for an asylum seeker to be subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment if deported to Slovenia. Meanwhile, reports of daily informal deportations from theItalian — Slovene border are becoming more and more common.

      COURT RULING: “…the risk of the applicant being subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment in Slovenia seems justified …

      In early April a court in Genoa, Italy found that:

      “Based on the submitted documentation and additional information obtained by this court proprio motu, the applicant’s complaint — given the conditions of receiving refugees in Slovenia and systemic shortcomings in the asylum procedure — seems justified. (…)

      In this case, the risk of the applicant being subjected to inhumane and degrading treatment in Slovenia seems justified (…) The data collected raise serious concerns about the reception and asylum system currently in force in Slovenia and in general about the atmosphere of cultural intolerance and discrimination prevailing in civil society, among government leaders and between police forces towards foreigners who have entered the country illegally, who have lodged or intend to lodge an application for international protection.”

      The complaint was lodged by a Pakistani asylum seeker, represented by Alessandra Ballerini, who had first filed the application for international protection in Slovenia and was consequently expected to be deported from Italy to Slovenia according to the Dublin regulation.

      The complaint stipulated that such a deportation would violate, inter alia, paragraph 2 of Article 3 of the Dublin Regulation due to systemic deficiencies in the asylum system in Slovenia. The court agreed and refused to deport the asylum seeker to Slovenia, “because of the danger that he would be treated there contrary to fundamental humanitarian principles and contrary to the provisions of Article 4 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights”.

      As reported by Primorski dnevnik, the judges came to this conclusion taking into account reports of non-governmental organizations on the deteriorating treatment of migrants in Slovenia in the past two years and a 2018 report by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), which confirms allegations by non-governmental organizations of collective expulsions and violence against migrants in the Balkan region, including Croatia and Slovenia.

      Reports of several Slovenian and International NGOs and civil society actors (Amnesty International, Are You Syrious?, InfoKolpa, Border Violence Monitoring Network) highlight the issue of the Slovenian police authority’s illegal restrictions of access to asylum and practice of forced returns of asylum seekers without a proper assessment of whether their human rights would be violated in other countries via an informal procedure and without the possibility to appeal the deportation (push-backs).

      This was shown by several fact-finding missions: a survey from 2018 by Amnesty International obtained testimonies of 51 people in Velika Kladuša and Bihać in BiH, who were returned to the hands of the Croatian authorities by the Slovenian police, despite the fact that they wanted to apply for asylum in Slovenia.

      Report on illegal practices of collective expulsion at the Slovene-Croatian border by InfoKolpa documents numerous cases of groups of migrants rejected by Slovenian police and returned to Croatia and further to Bosnia despite explicitly showing intention to file for asylum in Slovenia between 11th September and 7th November 2018 via an Alarmphone report; reports by No Name Kitchen and Balkan Violence Monitoring show collective expulsion and violent return of asylum seekers to the Bosnian border surrounding Velika Kladuša as a routine occurrence initiated by Croatian and Slovenian police forces.

      In one year there were 4,653 out of a total of 9,149 intercepted migrants that were collectively deported to Croatia. The above-mentioned reports also cite further official statistics from the Slovenian police, which show a change in practice between May and June 2018, when returns to Croatia increased sharply, while at the same time the number of people applying for asylum dropped severely. Police statistic from police station of a border town Črnomelj state that in May 2018, 371 of the 379 migrants considered (97.88% of all) applied for asylum; after receiving different instructions from the Chief of police, in June only 13 of the 412 migrants, ie 3.15%, lodged an asylum application.

      NGOs accuse the Slovenian government and police of preventing refugees from filing asylum applications and of carrying out collective forced returns without a proper and individual assessment of whether their human rights will be violated in other countries and without the possibility of appeal.

      Returns to Croatia are carried out on the basis of a controversial bilateral agreement between the two countries from 2006 (when Croatia was not yet a member of European Union), which enables informal returns under an abbreviated procedure. According to the court in Genoa, such an abbreviated procedure violates Slovenia’s human rights obligations.

      These findings are further corroborated by an official 2018 report of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), which confirms allegations by non-governmental organizations of collective rejection and violence against migrants in the Balkan region, including Croatia and Slovenia.

      Primorski dnevnik cites the court decision featuring portions of NGO reports, saying:

      “Threats, violence, abuse of power and denial of fundamental rights have become common practice at border police stations, and collective deportations to Croatia are repeated daily with the support and awareness of senior police and government officials, despite the high risk of further police violence and theft in Croatia.”

      Slovenian daily newspaper Dnevnik asked Slovenian police for comments on the judgement, and they replied that their procedures were legal and professional, that the guidelines for the work of police officers had already been made public and that UNHCR had not discovered any irregularities when visiting police stations. The Ministry of the Interior replied that they were fully implementing EU legislation in the field of international protection, and that they were not aware of the ruling and could not comment on it.

      Though there was a decrease of irregular entries into Slovenia during the past few months there was an increase of record irregular entries recorded by Italian authorities. This has resulted in minor diplomatic tension between the countries where Slovenia has been dismissed as not being diligent enough in their Schengen gatekeeping duties.
      We suspect that there are two reasons that Italian authorities are recording an increase of border crossings:

      First, as InfoMigrants reported, as part of covid-19 measure the Italian authorities announced temporary legalisation of undocumented residents. We suspect that this might be a reason for a greater number of people reporting themselves and, thus, creating a spike in official records. Connected with this reason might be the Covid-19 measures as traveling became more difficult a greater number of people might be pressed to weather the virus in border municipalities (such as Trieste).

      Migrants (as well as border tensions with Slovenia) are traditionally a convenient distraction for the Italian government(s) in time(s) of crisis. To show its commitment to regulating the frontier the Italian government deployed the armed forces to aid police in intercepting migrants via the last stretch of the Balkan route. As Uroš Škerl reported for the daily newspaper Dnevnik in the last month Italy returned more people than in the previous four months combined (29 compared to 27 from January to April). In a statement for Dnevnik Gianfranco Schiavone of the NGO Consorzio Italiano di Solidarietà — Ufficio Rifugiati Onlus stated:

      “What is new in the last week is that the Italian police started to return people for whom we are convinced that they have the same circumstances as their colleagues that applied for asylum and stayed in Italy.”

      These returns are now conducted with the aid of the armed forces whose deployment the interior ministry justified as “an answer on illegal migrations”. Schiavone is skeptical of the military as they are not trained to conduct border patrols and handle asylum seekers adding: “this is all just political theater”.

      This latest act of EU migration policy melodrama has actors that are less fortunate than others. According to Dnevnik there have been three groups of people (14,17,8) returned to Slovenia and we suspect that at least one of these groups (if not all) has ended up in Velika Kladuša (BIH). A video emerged with a statement of a member of one of these groups containing claims of violent treatment during the Italy-BIH pushback was published recently by a migrant/activist: “This boy who left his fingerprints in Trieste and applied for asylum ، was deported to Slovenia and gradually back to hell”.

      So, on the one hand, Italian courts have found that push backs are cruel and inhumane, yet at the same time the same government has doubled down on its commitment to condemning people to this fate that its own courts find inhumane and cruel.

      Although the condemnation of deportation is a necessary first step, unless this idea is used to hold the security forces to account for their oppression and torture of people, it will remain a hollow ruling. Europeans like to look down on the USA due to their police violence on minorities, state hypocrisy towards its own values and their border walls. Maybe we should stop looking across the ocean and look closer to home.

      Written by: Iza Thaler and Miha Turk from InfoKolpa

      Find daily updates and special reports on our Medium page.

      If you wish to contribute, either by writing a report or a story, or by joining the info gathering team, please let us know.

      We strive to echo correct news from the ground through collaboration and fairness. Every effort has been made to credit organisations and individuals with regard to the supply of information, video, and photo material (in cases where the source wanted to be accredited). Please notify us regarding corrections.

      If there’s anything you want to share or comment, contact us through Facebook, Twitter or write to: areyousyrious@gmail.com

      https://medium.com/are-you-syrious/ays-special-italian-court-stops-deportation-to-slovenia-meanwhile-pushbacks-
      #refoulements_en_chaîne

    • Even from Trieste, Italy.

      “Working every day in the street with people-on-the-move has allowed medical volunteers in Trieste to witness the worsening situation at the Italian border with Slovenia. Here is a sum-up of the radical changes in the last two months, highlighting growing repression towards transit groups and a spike in pushbacks from Italian territory. The events are relayed in three distinct stages: from the start of the pandemic, the development of tighter police controls, and finally the expansion of pushbacks through the dubious “informal readmission” process”

      https://www.borderviolence.eu/news-from-trieste-covid-19-and-pushbacks

      Reçu via la mailing-list de Migreurop, le 15.06.2020

  • enfant du placard
    Les enfants de saisonniers cachés en Suisse après l’initiative Schwarzenbach
    https://www.rts.ch/info/suisse/11381497-les-enfants-de-saisonniers-caches-en-suisse-apres-l-initiative-schwarze

    Il y a 50 ans, la Suisse votait sur l’initiative Schwarzenbach. Le texte « contre l’emprise étrangère » fut refusé de justesse, mais il a durablement marqué notre politique migratoire. Depuis les années 1960, des milliers d’enfants d’immigrés vécurent cachés, le regroupement familial étant interdit.

    Un regard lourd de souvenirs... C’est derrière la fenêtre d’une chambre en mansarde, à Zurich, que Catia Porri est restée cachée six mois par an, trois années de suite : « Je n’avais pas le droit de bouger, parce que le sol était en bois. Chaque fois qu’on faisait un pas, ça grinçait. Donc je marchais le moins possible, je passais mon temps à dessiner et à lire ».


    La jeune Catia a douze ans en 1962 lorsque ses parents – tous deux saisonniers italiens – la font entrer pour la première fois illégalement en Suisse. La fillette passe la frontière cachée dans le coffre de la voiture. Elle est ce qu’on appellera plus tard une « enfant du placard » : « Mes parents avaient tellement peur, que cette peur a fini par me contaminer. Pour moi, le message était clair : tu n’existes pas. Point ».

    La xénophobie atteint un paroxysme
    Face à l’arrivée massive de travailleurs étrangers au cours des années 1960, la xénophobie atteint un paroxysme. C’est l’époque de l’initiative Schwarzenbach https://www.rts.ch/archives/tv/information/politique/10953941-initiative-schwarzenbach.html . La Suisse est confrontée pour la première fois à la question du regroupement familial.

    Le Conseil fédéral y réagit de façon stricte, constate cette historienne qui a lancé un premier projet de recherche sur les enfants cachés : « C’est au moment où on veut réduire à tout prix la présence des étrangers », explique Kristina Schulz, professeure d’Histoire à l’Université de Neuchâtel : « Et la manière de le faire, c’est de réfléchir sur le regroupement familial et d’éviter que ces étrangers viennent avec toute leur famille »

    La psychologue bernoise Marina Frigerio a longtemps suivi des familles de saisonniers.

    Elle a raconté leurs parcours de vie dans plusieurs livres : « Dans les années 1980, beaucoup d’enfants de migrants italiens sont tombés dans la drogue. Je sais qu’un grand nombre d’entre eux étaient des enfants de saisonniers qui avaient rejoint tardivement leurs parents ou qui avaient été cachés ».

    Catia Porri a fini par réussir à s’intégrer en Suisse même si, une fois à l’école, elle a continué à subir des discriminations : « Un jour, après une dictée, le professeur a pris ma copie – comme ça – pour montrer aux autres élèves que je ne savais même pas écrire ».

    Comme la dizaine de milliers d’enfants de saisonniers cachés en Suisse, Catia Porri est longtemps restée seule avec ses blessures. Elle attend toujours que la Suisse fasse la lumière sur cette page de son Histoire.

    Les intiatives Schwarzenbach : https://www.rts.ch/archives/7445297-la-marque-schwarzenbach.html

    #enfants #regroupement_familial #Suisse #Conseil_fédéral #xénophobie #étrangers #saisonniers #Intégration #frontières country:suisse #discrimination #racisme

  • Ben Gourion International, cet aéroport devenu tribunal de la pensée
    Par Laurent Perpigna Iban – TEL AVIV, Israël - Samedi 6 juin 2020 | Middle East Eye édition française
    https://www.middleeasteye.net/fr/reportages/israel-palestine-aeroport-tel-aviv-securite-interrogatoire-refoulemen

    (...) Le quotidien économique Globes, citant des statistiques de l’Administration des postes frontaliers, de la population et de l’immigration – placée sous les ordres du ministère israélien de l’Intérieur –, rapportait ainsi qu’en 2018, près de 19 000 personnes avaient été refoulées à leur arrivée contre 16 534 en 2016 et… 1 870 en 2011.

    Résultat, nombre de voyageurs désirant se rendre en Cisjordanie de manière indépendante préfèrent taire leurs projets, sous peine d’être lourdement interrogés, voire renvoyés.
    Interminables interrogatoires

    Kamel et Louis* le savaient. Ces deux jeunes Français s’étaient documentés sur la question avant de décoller pour Tel Aviv, au mois de novembre 2019. Si Louis passe les contrôles facilement, ce n’est pas le cas de son compère.

    « J’ai tendu mon passeport français. J’ai répondu que j’allais visiter Tel Aviv et Jérusalem. La jeune femme m’a alors demandé quelles étaient mes origines. Algériennes. Le début des embrouilles pour moi », raconte Kamel à Middle East Eye.

    Le jeune homme va alors être placé dans la salle d’attente réservée aux « candidats suspects ». Kamel subit un premier interrogatoire d’une demi-heure. Deux heures s’écoulent avant qu’il ne soit présenté à un deuxième interlocuteur.

    « Cette personne m’a annoncé être chef de la sécurité. Il m’a posé les mêmes questions, auxquelles j’ai donné les mêmes réponses. J’ai été présenté à une troisième personne. Ça a été une véritable montée en puissance. »

    À partir du troisième interrogatoire, Kamel rapporte la présence d’un traducteur français.

    « L’agent de la sécurité israélienne a élevé la voix à plusieurs reprises. Il m’a demandé si j’étais musulman, si je priais… Ainsi que des questions intimes qui ne les regardaient pas et qu’ils se permettaient quand même de poser. Ils donnaient l’impression de vouloir tout contrôler, et d’avoir un pouvoir absolu. Ils m’ont demandé pourquoi mes parents étaient venus vivre en France. Ils ont aussi fouillé mon portable », rapporte-t-il.

    Au total, le jeune homme va subir cinq interrogatoires, avec une rétention de six heures au total.

    « Ils ont essayé de m’atteindre psychologiquement. J’étais en position de coupable », rapporte-t-il à MEE. Alors qu’il se prépare à un renvoi en bonne et due forme, il finit, « presque miraculeusement », par obtenir le visa. (...)

    #contrôles #frontières

  • Coronavirus dans le monde : le Brésil menace de quitter l’OMS, levée des restrictions en Europe
    https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2020/06/06/jair-bolsonaro-menace-de-retirer-le-bresil-de-l-oms-en-raison-de-son-parti-p

    Tout au long de la crise sanitaire, M. Bolsonaro a imité Donald Trump en minimisant la gravité de la maladie, en exhortant à maintenir une activité économique normale, et en vantant l’efficacité d’un traitement qui divise les scientifiques, l’hydroxychloroquine. Le Brésil est depuis jeudi le troisième pays comptant le plus de morts : 35 026 décès répertoriés (dont 1 005 entre jeudi et vendredi) et plus de 645 000 cas. Un nombre que bien des spécialistes considèrent comme largement sous-évalué, faute de tests en nombre suffisant.Face à cette « vague » de contaminations, le Paraguay a affirmé vendredi qu’il refusait de rouvrir sa frontière avec le Brésil. Des commerçants paraguayens privés de leurs clients frontaliers avaient plaidé pour cette réouverture, mais, d’après le directeur de la veille sanitaire, Guillermo Sequera, elle serait prématurée. « La situation au Brésil est assez chaotique… Nous allons attendre que passe la vague au Brésil », a-t-il déclaré à la presse.

    #Covid-19#migrant#migration#Brésil#Paraguay#circulations-transfrontalières#santé#contamination#frontières#veille-sanitaire#décès#test

  • A Single Company Will Now Operate Facial Recognition for Nearly 800 Million People
    https://onezero.medium.com/idemia-will-operate-facial-recognition-for-nearly-800-million-people

    Idemia just scored a major new contract with the EU Idemia, a French company specializing in facial, fingerprint, and iris recognition, just scored a new contract with the European Union that will include processing images attached to more than 400 million people’s identities. The company’s algorithms will verify the identity of EU residents who were born elsewhere and work for non-EU companies as they enter from external borders. Idemia doesn’t have direct access to this data as an (...)

    #Idemia #NYPD #Thalès #algorithme #passeport #CCTV #payement #biométrie #migration #facial #reconnaissance #iris #empreintes #frontières (...)

    ##BigData

  • COVID-19 E (IN)MOVILIDAD EN LAS AMÉRICAS

    Este es un proyecto (in)acabado, por lo tanto en construcción, que reflexiona colectivamente en torno a la (in)movilidad y el control en las Américas durante la pandemia. Hemos querido mapear las respuestas estatales; las situaciones de alerta que enfrenta la población migrante, particularmente desplazados internos, deportadxs, detenidxs, solicitantes de asilo, refugiados, migrantes irregularizados sean éstos adultos o niñxs o adolescentes; y, las respuestas sociales en cada uno de los espacios nacionales. Al mapear, no hemos pretendido en lo absoluto producir una cartografía fija del continente, ni menos aún información geo-referenciada. En el contexto de este proyecto, mapear ha tenido otras significaciones. Por un lado, ha supuesto levantar información de prensa, sistematizarla y crear un archivo digital donde quede registrada la tensión entre (in)movilidad y control desatada en la gran mayoría de los países del continente durante el momento inicial de la pandemia. Por otro, inspirados en la cartografía crítica, mapear ha implicado “deconstruir el mapa” (Harley, 1989), o la imagen nítida que da la cartografía tradicional del continente, para sacar a la luz los espacios ocultos, los conflictos no vistos ni captados por la prensa, pero latentes; esos conflictos que deliberadamente quedan por fuera de un mapa tradicional y a la vez de la discusión pública.

    https://www.inmovilidadamericas.org
    #migrations #immobilité #im/mobilité #mobilité #Amériques #covid-19 #coronavirus #asile #migrations #Amérique_latine #frontières #peur #violence #droits #droit_d'asile #confinement

    –------

    COVID-19 AND (IM)MOBILITY IN THE AMERICAS

    This is an (un)finished project – therefore under construction– that collectively reflects on (in)mobility and control in the Americas during the pandemic. We wanted to map three main themes: 1- state measures; 2- warning situations the migrant population currently face, particularly internally displaced persons, deportees, detainees, asylum seekers, refugees, irregularized migrants, whether they are adults or children or adolescents; and, 3- the social responses in each of the national spaces. By mapping, we have not at all intended to produce a fixed mapping of the continent, neither geo-referenced information. In the context of this project, mapping has different meanings. On the one hand, it has involved gathering press information, systematizing it, and creating a public digital archive about the tension between (in)mobility and control in the vast majority of countries on the continent during the initial moment of the pandemic. On the other hand, inspired by critical cartography, mapping has implied “deconstructing the map” (Harley, 1989) of the Americas, or “to read between the lines of the map –in the margins of the text – and through its trope to discover the silences and contradictions that challenge the apparent honesty of image” (1989:3). Mapping has signify therefore bringing to the light hidden spaces or conflicts built upon (in)mobility and control during the pandemic that deliberately remain outside of a traditional map and thus often of the public discussion.

    https://www.inmovilidadamericas.org/?lang=en

    ping @isskein @thomas_lacroix @reka

  • Devenu épicentre de l’épidémie de Covid-19, le Brésil préoccupe ses voisins
    https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2020/06/03/devenu-epicentre-de-l-epidemie-de-covid-19-le-bresil-preoccupe-ses-voisins_6

    Pour l’heure, plusieurs pays sud-américains ont renforcé les contrôles aux frontières. En Uruguay − 3,5 millions d’habitants −, l’épidémie a été rapidement maîtrisée, avec 825 cas confirmés et 23 décès au 1er juin. L’activité économique reprend peu à peu, mais la vigilance reste forte à la frontière avec le Brésil. Dans la ville de Rivera (nord), le nombre de nouveaux cas est en augmentation depuis quelques jours. Idem au Paraguay, qui ne recensait que 11 décès liés au Covid-19, mais a enregistré une recrudescence de contaminations dans les régions frontalières avec le Brésil. Le pays maintiendra sa frontière de plus de 1 360 kilomètres avec son voisin fermée « tant que la propagation du virus ne sera pas contrôlée », a déclaré, le 21 mai, le président Mario Abdo Benitez. La France a aussi des raisons de s’inquiéter. La frontière entre la Guyane et l’Etat d’Amapa, dans le nord du Brésil, a été fermée le 19 mars. Depuis fin avril, l’épidémie a progressé très vite en Amapa, pour atteindre, au 2 juin, environ 1 000 cas confirmés dont un tiers à Oiapoque, ville frontalière avec la Guyane. Près de la moitié des 517 cas enregistrés en Guyane l’ont été sur la rive guyanaise de l’Oyapock. « En tant que territoire frontalier du Brésil, nous sommes très préoccupés, indique Clara de Bort, directrice générale de l’agence régionale de santé (ARS) de Guyane. Nous avons mis en place depuis plusieurs semaines des mesures très restrictives pour limiter les flux entre la Guyane et l’Amapa, et tester toutes les personnes qui passent par le pont binational, mais il est très difficile de rendre étanche une frontière, a fortiori lorsque c’est un fleuve qui partage un bassin de vie transfrontalier, avec d’intenses échanges entre les deux rives. » Depuis trois semaines, à Saint-Georges et à Camopi, à cinq heures de pirogue – les deux seules communes à être restées confinées en Guyane –, des équipes médicales de l’ARS et des centres de santé de l’hôpital de Cayenne généralisent le dépistage sur le terrain, renforcées par la réserve sanitaire. Il faut attendre dix à trente jours pour avoir le résultat des prélèvements envoyés dans la capitale. Le préfet de Guyane, Marc Del Grande, prône la solidarité dans le cadre de « relations de bon voisinage ».

    #Covid-19#migrant#migration#Uruguay#Paraguay#Brésil#France#Guyane#frontieres#reserve-sanitaire#contamination#ARS#mesures-restrictive#zone-transfrontaliere#sante

  • Frontex bientôt sur les frontières du #Monténégro et de la #Serbie

    1er juin - 8h : L’Union européenne a approuvé, mardi 26 mai, un #accord passé avec le Monténégro et la Serbie, prévoyant le déploiement de la #mission_Frontex sur les frontières de ces deux pays. Il s’agit d’aider le Monténégro et la Serbie, candidats à l’intégrer, à « mieux gérer les flux migratoires ». Le déploiement de #Frontex sera effectif dès juillet au Monténégro, tandis qu’une date doit encore être fixée pour la Serbie.

    https://www.courrierdesbalkans.fr/Les-dernieres-infos-Refugies-Balkans-Bosnie-Herzegovine-un-nouvea

    #Balkans #route_des_balkans #militarisation_des_frontières #frontières #asile #migrations #réfugiés

    –---

    Voir aussi :

    2018 :
    « Come il Montenegro si prepara a un’emergenza che non c’è »
    https://seenthis.net/messages/712376

    2019 :
    European Border and Coast Guard : Agreement reached on operational cooperation with Montenegro
    https://seenthis.net/messages/758359

    À partir de 22 mai 2019, Frontex déploiera des équipes conjointes à la frontière grecque avec des agents albanais. La Commission européenne a passé des accords semblables avec la Macédoine du Nord, la Serbie, le Monténégro et la Bosnie-Herzégovine, qui devraient également entrer en vigueur.
    https://seenthis.net/messages/782260

    ping @isskein @reka @karine4