Approaches to Unaccompanied Minors Following Status Determination in the EU plus Norway
Rapport sorti en 2018, que je mets ici pour archivage
ping @karine4
The Protection of Family Unity in Dublin Procedures
Prof. Maiani discusses the protection of family unity in proceedings arising under the Dublin III Regulation against the backdrop of the Swiss authorities’ practice in this area. His comprehensive analysis is, however, relevant to any national administration applying the regulation and provides important guidance for European legal practitioners in this area.
The study demonstrates that while there is considerable tension in practice between the operation of the Dublin system and the protection of family unity, if properly interpreted, the Dublin III Regulation could afford effective protection to the families of those to whom it applies. Indeed, “in a system where the protection of family life is a ‘primary consideration,’ preserving or promoting family unity should be the norm rather than the exception and this conclusion is valid a fortiori in situations characterized by particular vulnerabilities” (Maiani § 4.3.3). As demonstrated by the study, where the regulation itself falls short, relevant human rights norms can and must fill in the gaps. These conclusions rest on extensive research including of the jurisprudence of the CJEU and other relevant European and international bodies.
Finally, the study offers an insightful and unique critique of the underdeveloped jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights in this area. Importantly, it discusses the emerging contribution – and largely untapped potential – of the UN Treaty Bodies in closing the protection gaps for families and vulnerable persons caught up in the rigours of Dublin proceedings.
British orphans found trapped in Syria IS camp
The war in Syria has been reignited on new fronts by Turkey’s incursion into the north east of the country.
In camps across the regions are thousands of terrified children whose parents supported the Islamic State group, but most of their countries don’t want them home.
In one camp, the BBC has discovered three children, believed to be from London, whose parents joined IS five years ago, and were subsequently killed in the fighting.
The children - Amira, Heba and Hamza - are stranded, in danger and they want to come home.
▻https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-middle-east-50030567/british-orphans-found-trapped-in-syria-is-camp
#enfants #enfance #ISIS #EI #Etat_islamique #camps #orphelins #Syrie #conflit #guerre #combattants_étrangers
Gli svizzeri della Jihad
Chi sono gli jihadisti elvetici, di che reti facevano parte e cosa li ha spinti a partire? Da Winterthur a Ginevra, dai palazzi popolari ai quartieri borghesi, siamo andati a cercare i giovani che si sono uniti all’ISIS.
Sono svizzeri e sono partiti per fare la jihad. Molti di loro hanno combattuto per lo stato islamico, altri sono entrati in contatto con gli attentatori che hanno colpito l’Europa. Sono stati catturati in Siria e adesso si trovano nelle prigioni nel nord del paese.Con loro ci sono donne e bambini. Per ora nessun tribunale sta giudicando i loro crimini, tutti quanti sono in attesa che i rispettivi paesi d’origine decidano come procedere nei loro confronti. Uno stallo che sembra però sbloccarsi: secondo alcune indiscrezioni Berna starebbe considerando l’ipotesi di far rientrare le donne e i bambini.Una squadra di Falò è stata nei campi di prigionia che ospitano donne e bambini dell’ISIS; tendopoli al collasso in cui l’ideologia radicale sta risorgendo. Ma ci sono anche svizzeri che hanno fatto parte dello Stato Islamico e sono già rientrati in Svizzera.Chi sono questi jihadisti elvetici, di che reti facevano parte e cosa li ha spinti a partire? Da Winterthur a Ginevra, dai palazzi popolari ai quartieri borghesi, siamo andati a cercare i giovani che si sono uniti all’ISIS. Alcuni si dicono pentiti, altri sembrano aver mantenuto dei legami con gli ambienti radicalizzati. A che punto stanno i processi nei loro confronti? Chi si occupa di sorvegliare le loro attività? Quanto pericolosi li dobbiamo considerare?
▻https://www.rsi.ch/play/tv/falo/video/gli-svizzeri-della-jihad----------?id=12256843
#documentaire #film #suisse #femmes #al-Hol #camps_de_réfugiés #détention #prison
UK special forces may help British orphans escape Syria
Home Office reverses stance and says it will consider repatriating children in camps.
▻https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/d0a1d88ba6202391e12730afd5aac7dc8694af18/0_235_5616_3370/master/5616.jpg?width=620&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=204f73a9482a4debc42258
Britain will consider repatriating orphans and unaccompanied children in north-east Syria if they are alerted to their presence by local military or aid agencies.
Home Office officials said the UK would assist British orphans trapped in Syria after the Turkish invasion, reversing a previous policy that children had to be taken out of the country before they might get any help.
Officials would not say exactly how children might be extracted from the country, implying that SAS or other special forces, still understood to be based in the region, could be involved in the repatriations.
They said children thought to be British would be assessed on a case-by-case basis once removed from Syria and only orphans and unaccompanied children would be eligible to be brought back to the UK.
The shift in policy comes after a BBC reporting team found three English-speaking orphans aged 10 or under in a Syria camp over the weekend. The children are believed to have been taken by their parents to live under Islamic State five years ago.
The eldest, Amira, 10, told the film crew that their parents and other immediate adult family members were killed in an air assault on Baghouz, the last Isis stronghold, which fell in March, and she wanted to return to the UK.
Save the Children, one of the few charities operating in north-east Syria, said the Home Office developments were a step in the right direction but more detail was required.
“For this to translate into a real change of policy, we need to know that the government is working on how to bring all British children to the UK while we still can, not just those featured in the media,” the charity said.
It is not clear how many British unaccompanied children remain in the crowded refugee camps in the Kurdish region of Syria. Some unofficial estimates put the figure at around 30.
Any child born to a Briton – whether inside or outside the UK – is a British citizen. Before the Turkish invasion the government had said it was too risky to try to attempt any rescue children with a legitimate claim.
When Shamima Begum was deprived of her UK citizenship in February, the British government said her infant son was still British. After the child died at a Syrian refugee camp at the age of three weeks, Jeremy Hunt, then foreign secretary, said it had been too dangerous for British officials to attempt to a rescue.
Opposition MPs questioned whether the change in stance would lead to more orphaned children getting help. Stephen Gethins, the SNP’s foreign affairs spokesman, said: “We know the UK government’s record on resettling refugees and vulnerable people leaves a lot to be desired. Beyond the rhetoric there is very little substance from the UK government.”
On Tuesday the foreign secretary, Dominic Raab, had hinted at a change of policy when, during an urgent debate on the Syrian crisis, he said: “We are looking at whether orphans and unaccompanied minors who bear UK nationality can be given safe passage to return to the UK.”
Further details were spelled out on Wednesday by the Home Office, which has been leading on repatriations from Syria.
The government does not want former Isis fighters and adult supporters to return to the UK, although around 450 are thought to have previously done so, and it is suggesting they could be put on trial in the region.
▻https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/16/uk-shifts-stance-on-helping-british-orphans-escape-syria?CMP=Share_iOSA
#orphelins #rapatriement
5 Years Alarmphone
For our anniversary, we are publishing a booklet, reflecting on our activities and experiences supporting thousands of travellers in the Mediterranean. It is available in three languages (English, German, French) and can be downloaded for free:
▻https://alarmphone.org/en/publications/anniversary-booklets
#alarm_phone #rapport #booklet #migration #méditerranée #sauvetage
’Inhumane’ Frontex forced returns going unreported
On a late evening August flight last year from Munich to Afghanistan, an Afghan man seated in the back of the plane struggled to breath as a German escort officer repeatedly squeezed his testicles.
The man, along with another Afghan who had tried to kill himself, was being forcibly removed from Germany and sent back to a country engulfed in war.
The EU’s border agency Frontex coordinated and helped pay for the forced return operation, as part of a broader bid to remove from Europe unwanted migrants and others whose applications for international protection had been rejected.
By then, almost 20 years of war and civil conflict had already ravaged Afghanistan - with 2018 registering its worst-ever civilian death rate since counting had started.
Also seated on the plane for the 14 August flight were independent observers of the anti-torture committee (CPT) of the human rights watchdog, the Strasbourg-based Council of Europe.
In a report, they describe in detail how six escort officers had surrounded the terrified man in an effort to calm him.
The ’calming’ techniques involved an officer pulling the man’s neck from behind while yanking his nose upwards.
His hands and legs had been cuffed and a helmet placed on him. Another knelt on the man’s knees and upper legs, using his full weight to keep him seated.
After 15 minutes, the kneeling officer “then gripped the returnee’s genitals with his left hand and repeatedly squeezed them for prolonged periods.”
Another 503 have been sent to Afghanistan in flights coordinated by Frontex since the start of this year.
Vicki Aken, the International Rescue Committee’s Afghanistan country director, says those returned are invariably put in harm’s way.
“You cannot say that Kabul is ’conflict-free’. Kabul is actually one of the most dangerous places in Afghanistan,” she said, noting Afghanistan has the highest number of child casualties in the world.
The day after the Munich flight landed on 14 August 2018, a blast ripped through a high school in the capital city, Kabul, killing 48 people, including over 30 students.
Accountability
The flight journey from Munich highlights a stunning omission from Frontex responsibilities - adding to concerns the EU agency is failing to maintain standards when it comes to coordinating forced-returns in a humane manner.
For one, all return operations must be monitored in accordance with EU law, and a forced-return monitor is required to deliver a report to Frontex and to all the member states involved.
Such reports, handed over to Frontex’s executive director, are supposed to act as an internal check and balance to stem alleged abuse by escort guards in a system that has been in place since the start of 2017.
These monitors come from a “pool of forced-return monitors”, as required under the 2016 European Border and Coast Guard Regulation and the 2008 Return Directive, and are broadly sourced from the member states themselves.
The CPT in their report noted that the flight on 14 August 2018 had also been monitored by Frontex staff itself, and concluded that its “current arrangements cannot be considered as an independent external monitoring mechanism”.
When the agency compiled its own internal report spanning the latter half of 2018, which included the 14 August flight, no mention was made of the Afghan man who had been manhandled by six officers.
Asked to explain, the Warsaw-based agency whose annual budget for 2020 is set to increase to €420.6m, has yet to respond to Euobserver.
Instead, the report, which had been written up by Frontex’s fundamental rights officer, highlighted other issues.
It demanded escorts not place restraints on children. It said minors who are alone cannot be sent back on a forced-return flight, which is exactly what had happened on two other operations.
No one on the 14 August flight had issued a “serious incident report” label, used by Frontex whenever a particularly bad incident has been deemed to have transpired.
During 2018 Frontex coordinated and helped fund 345 such return operations, by charter flights during which only one “serious incident report” was filed - posing questions on the reliability and independence of the monitors and return escorts, as well as the sincerity of internal Frontex efforts to stem any abuse.
The accountability gap was highlighted by the outgoing head of the Council of Europe, Thorbjorn Jagland, who in his farewell speech earlier this month, deliberately singled out Frontex.
“Frontex is bound by EU laws that prohibit torture and any form of inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment,” he said, in reference to reports of alleged human rights violations that occurred during Frontex support operations observed since mid-2018.
Monitoring the monitors
For Markus Jaeger, a Council of Europe official who advises the Frontex management board, the agency’s monitoring system for forced return is meaningless.
“The internal system of Frontex produces close to nil reports on serious incidents, in other words, the internal system of Frontex, says there is never a human rights incident,” he told EUobserver, earlier this month.
He said Frontex’s pool of 71 monitors is overstretched and that in some cases, only one is available for a flight that might have 150 people being returned.
“One monitor doesn’t suffice,” he said, noting Frontex has been able to delegate any blame onto member states, by positioning itself merely as a coordinator.
But as Frontex expands - with the ability to lease planes, pilots and staff - its direct involvement with the returns also increases and so does its accountability, says Jaeger.
“The [return] figures are supposedly going up, the capacity is supposedly going up, the procedures are being shortened, and deportations are going to happen by deployed guest officers and or by Frontex officers and so the independence of the monitors is crucial,” he pointed out.
For its part, the European Commission says Frontex’s pool of monitors is set to expand.
Nafplion Group
Jaeger, along with other national authorities from a handful of member states, which already contribute to Frontex’s pool of monitors, are now putting together a new group to keep the forced-returns organised by Frontex better in check.
Known as the Nafplion Group, and set up as a pilot project last October by the Greek ombudsman, it describes itself as a “remedy to the absence of an external, independent governance of the pool of forced-return monitors” in Frontex forced-return flights.
The plan is to get it up and running before the end of the year, despite having no guarantee they will ever be selected by Frontex to help monitor a forced-return flight.
“This is how de facto the Nafplion Group can be avoided,” said Jaeger, noting that they plan to go public should they not be picked.
Asked to comment, the European Commission says it is not in discussions with any institutions on the establishment of a new, parallel monitoring system.
▻https://euobserver.com/migration/146090
#renvois #expulsions #Frontex #Allemagne #réfugiés #réfugiés_afghans #asile #migrations #violence #responsabilité #retours_forcés #renvois #expulsions #déboutés #Kaboul #directive_retour #Nafplion_Group #monitoring #monitorage
Germany: Visit 2018 (return flight)
CPT/Inf (2019) 14 | Section: 12/18 | Date: 03/12/2018
A. The removal operation: preparation, execution and handover / 5. Use of force and means of restraint
50.The use of force and means of restraint in the context of pick-up and transport of irregular migrants by the different Länder police authorities is regulated in the respective Länder police legislation.[1] In the context of the transfer to the airport, most of the returnees were not subjected to any means of restraint. However, a number of returnees were restrained (handcuffed, hand- and foot-cuffed, or even body-cuffed) during their transfer and upon arrival at Terminal F. The use of means of restraint was based on an individual risk assessment.
51.During the different stages in the preparation of the removal operation by air from a German airport as well as on board a stationary aircraft on German territory, the use of force and means of restraint falls under the jurisdiction of the Federal Police. In-flight, the aircraft commander[2] is – with the assistance of the Federal Police[3] – entitled to apply the necessary preventive and coercive measures to ensure flight security. In particular, means of restraint can be applied if there is a risk that the returnee might attack law enforcement officers or a third party, or if he/she resists.[4]
The internal instruction of the Federal Police contains detailed provisions on the use of force and means of restraint. In particular, coercive measures are only applied based both on an individual risk assessment and on the returnee’s conduct. Further, the principle of proportionality must be observed. During removal operations, the following means of restraint may be applied: steel, plastic or Velcro hand- and foot-cuffs as well as body-cuffs and head- (i.e. a helmet) and bite-protective devices; the last three means of restraint may only be applied by specially trained police officers and precise instructions have to be followed. Every application of use of force or means of restraint is documented. Further, according to another internal instruction and the operational instructions for this return operation, other weapons (i.e. firearms, tear gas, batons) are prohibited.
This approach is in line with the means of restraint agreed upon with the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex), as specified in the implementation plan and its Annex I (operational overview). The implementation plan also underlines that the “use of force is always a last resort and must be the minimum level required to achieve the legitimate objective”.
Moreover, the internal instruction explicitly mentions by way of clear guidelines the risks related to the use of force and/or means of restraint capable of causing positional asphyxia, including a detailed list of possible related symptoms, and prohibits the use of means likely to obstruct the airways as well as “techniques directed against the person’s neck or mouth”. Further, the forced administration of medication (i.e. sedatives or tranquilisers) as a means of chemical restraint to facilitate removal is strictly forbidden. Such an approach fully reflects the Committee’s position on this issue.
52.According to information provided by letter of 18 October 2018, the German authorities, in the context of return operations, applied means of restraint 1,098 times for a total of 21,904 foreign nationals returned in 2017, and 673 times for a total of 14,465 persons returned in the period between January and August 2018.
53.In the course of the return flight on 14 August 2018, coercive measures were applied by the Federal Police to two returnees who attempted to forcefully resist their return.
One returnee, who had previously attempted to commit suicide and to resist his transfer by the Länder police authorities (see paragraph 28), became agitated during the full-body search in the airport terminal, when Federal Police officers attempted to remove his body-cuff in order to replace it with a more appropriate model (i.e. with Velcro straps rather than metal handcuffs). Further, the wounds on his left forearm had re-opened, requiring the medical doctor to dress them. The returnee was temporarily segregated from other returnees and embarked separately, during which resort to physical force was required to take him inside the aircraft.
Once seated in the rear of the aircraft (surrounded by five escort officers seated on either side of him, in front and behind), he continued resisting, including by banging his head against the seat, and two of the escorts had to stand up to contain him manually during take-off. Apart from two further minor episodes of agitation, he calmed down as the flight progressed. However, at the moment of handover, he resisted being removed from the aircraft. Consequently, he was immobilised and carried out of the aircraft by a team of up to seven escort officers. Once on the tarmac, he was placed in a separate police vehicle, his body-cuff was removed, and he was handed over to three Afghan police officers, one of whom filmed his handover.
54.The second returnee complied with the embarkation procedure until the moment when he was seated in the aircraft, at which point he became agitated, started shouting and hitting out in all directions, and attempted to stand up. The two escorts seated on either side of him attempted to keep him seated by holding his arms; they were supported by a back-up team of four escorts, three of whom took up positions behind his seat. One of these escort officers put his arm around the returnee’s neck from behind and used his other hand to pull the returnee’s nose upwards thus enabling his colleague to insert a bite protection into the returnee’s mouth.
The reaction of the returnee was to increase his resistance, and a second escort officer from the back-up team intervened pulling the returnee’s head down onto an adjacent seat and placing his knee on the returnee’s head in order to exert pressure and gain compliance while the returnee’s hands were tied behind his back with a Velcro strap. Another escort officer applied pressure with his thumb to the returnee’s temple. A second Velcro strap was applied below the returnee’s knees to tie his legs. A helmet was placed on the returnee’s head, additional Velcro straps were applied to his arms and legs, and force was used in order to contain him manually. At this stage, three escorts were holding the returnee from behind his seat and an escort officer was seated either side of him. A sixth escort officer knelt on the returnee’s knees and upper legs, using his weight to keep the returnee seated. After some 15 minutes, this sixth escort officer gripped the returnee’s genitals with his left hand and repeatedly squeezed them for prolonged periods to gain the returnee’s compliance to calm down. When the aircraft took off some ten minutes later, two escorts were still standing upright behind the returnee’s seat to ensure that he remained seated. Shortly thereafter, the returnee calmed down when told that, if he remained compliant, most means of restraint would be removed. He remained cuffed, with his hands tied behind his back, for about one hour. As he remained calm, he was untied.
55.In the course of this intervention, the delegation observed that, when the first escort officer from the back-up team put his arm around the returnee’s neck, the returnee started struggling to breath and became even more agitated, given that the pressure applied around his throat obstructed his respiratory tract momentarily. The CPT considers that any use of force must avoid inducing a sensation of asphyxia on the person concerned. As is reflected in the relevant internal instructions of the Federal Police, no control technique which impedes a person’s capacity to breath is authorised for use by escort officers.
Moreover, the delegation observed that, each time the sixth escort officer applied pressure to squeeze the returnee’s genitals, he physically reacted by becoming more agitated. The CPT acknowledges that it will often be a difficult task to enforce a removal order in respect of a foreign national who is determined to stay on a State’s territory. Escorts may on occasion have to use force and apply means of restraint in order to effectively carry out the removal; however, the force used should be no more than is absolutely necessary. To ill-treat a person by squeezing the genitals, a technique which is clearly aimed at inflicting severe pain to gain compliance, is both excessive and inappropriate; this is all the more so given that the person was being restrained by six escorts.
The CPT recommends that the German authorities take immediate action to end the application of these two techniques by Federal Police escort officers.
56.The wearing of identification tags by staff involved in removal operations is also an important safeguard against possible abuse. The delegation noted that escort police officers from the Bavarian State Police and from the Federal Police did not wear any identification tag. The CPT recommends that all police escorts from the Federal Police as well as from all Länder police authorities wear a visible identification tag to make them easily identifiable (either by their name or an identification number).
▻https://hudoc.cpt.coe.int/eng#{%22sort%22:[%22CPTDocumentDate%20Descending,CPTDocumentID%20Ascending,CPTSectionNumber%20Ascending%22],%22tabview%22:[%22document%22],%22CPTSectionID%22:[%22p-deu-20180813-en-12%22]}
#rapport
Je découvre ces deux articles qui se focalisent sur les #réfugiés et les #animaux... un regard assez nouveau...
The important role of animals in refugee lives
Refugees are people who have been forcibly displaced across a border. What do animals have to do with them? A lot.
Companion animals, for example, are important to many people’s emotional wellbeing. “For people forced to flee,” the Norwegian Refugee Council recently noted, “a pet can be a vital source of comfort.” At the sterile and hyper-modern Azraq refugee camp in Jordan, Syrian refugees would pay a high price for caged birds (30-40 Jordanian dinars each, roughly €35-50). In Syria, many people keep a bird at home. At Azraq keeping a bird is one way of making a plastic and metal shelter into a home.
In many contexts, refugees also depend on animals for their livelihoods. Humanitarian assistance understandably focuses on supporting people, but if refugees’ working animals and livestock perish then their experience of displacement can worsen drastically: they lose the means to support themselves in exile, or to return home and rebuild their lives.
Ever since the earliest days of modern refugee camps, at the time of the First World War, agencies responsible for refugees have had to think about animals too. When the British army in the Middle East built a camp at Baquba near Baghdad in 1918 to house nearly 50,000 Armenian and Assyrian refugees, there were some animals that they needed to keep out. Fumigation procedures and netting were used against lice and mosquitos, carriers of typhus and malaria respectively. But refugee agencies also needed to let larger animals in. The people in the camp, especially the Assyrians, were accompanied by seven or eight thousand sheep and goats, and about six thousand larger animals like horses and cattle. Many of the people depended on their animals for their livelihood and for any prospect of permanent settlement, so they all needed to be accommodated and cared for.
There are similar examples around the world today, like the longstanding camps for Sahrawi refugees in southwestern Algeria. There, goats and camels are socially and economically significant animals: goat barns, enclosures often made of scrap metal, are a prominent part of the camps’ increasingly urban landscape, while camel butcheries are important shops.
This helps us understand why the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees now has programmes to support refugees’ animals. For example, in 2015, with funding from the IKEA Foundation, the organization assisted 6,000 Malian refugees in Burkina Faso and their 47,000 animals: helping animals helps the people too, in this case to earn a living (and achieve economic integration) through small-scale dairy farming. It also helps us understand how conflicts can arise between refugees and host communities when refugees’ animals compete for grazing or water with local animals, or damage local farmers’ crops.
Starting in 2011, nearly 125,000 people from Blue Nile state in Sudan fled from a government offensive into Maban country, South Sudan, with hundreds of thousands of animals (about half of whom soon died, stressed by the journey). Peacefully managing their interactions with local residents and a community of nomadic herders who also regularly migrated through the county was a complex task for the South Sudanese government and humanitarian agencies. It required careful negotiations to allocate grazing zones as far as 60km from the camps where the refugees lived, schedule access to watering points, and agree a different route for the nomads’ migration.
In Bangladesh, meanwhile, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature has recently been involved in efforts to prevent conflict between refugees and wild animals. Nearly a million Rohingya refugees from state persecution in Myanmar live in semi-formal camps near Cox’s Bazar that have grown up since 2017, but these block the migration routes of critically endangered Asian elephants. The International Union’s conflict mitigation programme includes building lookout towers, training Rohingya observers, and running an arts-based education project.
And this highlights a final issue. The elephants at Cox’s Bazar are endangered because of ecological pressures caused by humans. But increasingly, humans too are endangered—and displaced—by ecological pressures. In the late 2000s, a years-long drought in Syria, worsened by human-caused climate change, pushed over a million rural Syrians off the land. (The country’s total livestock fell by a third.) The political and economic pressure that this generated was a significant factor in the crisis that ignited into war in 2011, in turn displacing millions more people. Hundreds of thousands of them fled to Jordan, one of the most water-stressed countries in the world, where the increased extraction of groundwater has lowered the water table, drying out oases in the Jordanian desert. Wild birds migrating across the desert have to fly further to find water and rest, meaning fewer survive the journey. In the Syrian war, and in many other conflicts around the world, human and animal displacements are intersecting under environmental stress. If we want to understand human displacement and respond to it adequately, we need to be thinking about animals too.
https://blog.oup.com/2019/10/the-important-role-of-animals-in-refugee-lives
#rapport_aux_animaux #animaux_de_compagnie
‘Tusk force’ set up to protect refugees and elephants in #Bangladesh
UNHCR and the International Union for Conservation of Nature are working together to mitigate incidents between elephants and humans in the world’s largest refugee settlement.
Battered and badly bruised, Anwar Begum, a Rohingya refugee, surveys the damage around her bamboo shelter.
Sleeping mats ripped apart; plastic buckets and even metal cooking pots and plates torn and dented. Her shelter was toppled – but neighbours in Kutupalong refugee settlement near Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, have helped her re-erect it.
“I’m very grateful, thanks to the almighty, to be alive,” the 45-year-old said. “But I’m terrified.”
Just a few days earlier, in the middle of the night, a wild elephant entered her small shelter and killed her husband, 50-year-old Yakub Ali. It was one of several elephants that wandered into the camp, damaging shelters and injuring their occupants, following their usual migratory path.
Anwar and her family fled their home in Myanmar six months ago, settling in the vast Kutupalong refugee settlement. “We weren’t aware of any elephant presence here,” she said. “I remember once seeing elephants back home in Myanmar, but in the distance – never close up like this.”
Clearly shaken, Anwar recounted the events that occurred that night. “It was around 1 a.m. I heard a heavy sound and felt the roof falling onto us. It was quick and loud. I started screaming. It all went very fast and my husband was killed”.
Anwar was treated in hospital for three days. By the time she came back to the settlement, neighbours had helped to rebuild her shelter. UNHCR’s partners have now provided her with new household items, and Anwar has received counselling from UN Refugee Agency protection staff.
UNHCR and its partner IUCN – the International Union for Conservation of Nature – have now launched an action plan to try to prevent incidents like this, which have resulted in the deaths of at least 10 refugees, including young children, in Kutupalong settlement.
“This partnership is critical not only to ensure the conservation of elephants, but to protect refugees.”
The highly congested site, which used to be forest land, lies along one of the migratory routes between Myanmar and Bangladesh for critically endangered Asian elephants.
The so-called ‘tusk force’ will work with both the local host community and refugees, in close consultation with the Bangladesh Forest Department and the Refugee Relief and Repatriation Commissioner’s Office.
Mitigation plans include installing watch-towers in key spots around the settlement, as well as setting up Elephant Response Teams who can sound the alarm if elephants enter the site. Elephant routes and corridors will be clearly marked, so that people will know which areas to avoid. Campaigns will also be carried out to create better awareness of the risks.
“This partnership is critical not only to ensure the conservation of elephants, but to protect refugees, a number of whom have tragically already lost their lives,” said Kevin Allen, UNHCR’s head of emergency operations in Cox’s Bazar district.
The project is part of a wider initiative by UNHCR and the IUCN, in support of government activities, to mitigate some of the environmental impacts linked to the establishment of refugee settlements in Cox’s Bazar.
Other plans include carrying out environmental education and awareness among refugees and the host communities about the importance of forest resources as well as taking steps to improve the environment in the refugee settlement areas and nearby surroundings.
The project leaders will also advocate for reforestation programmes to ensure that natural resources and a shared environment are better protected.
https://www.unhcr.org/uk/news/latest/2018/3/5a9801d64/tusk-force-set-protect-refugees-elephants-bangladesh.html
#éléphants #IUCN #sécurité
Bangladesh elephant rampage highlights dangers for refugees
A refugee prays on a hill overlooking Kutupalong camp after another Rohingya burial.
After fleeing flames and gunfire in Myanmar, Rohingya refugee Jane Alam thought danger was behind him in Bangladesh.
But as he slept last night in a fragile shelter in a forested area near Kutupalong refugee camp, rampaging elephants crashed in on top of his family.
The 18-year-old’s father and a seven-month-old baby were killed in the attack, which also injured seven of his relatives.
“We thought we would be safe here.”
Grazed on the cheek, neck and hip, he trekked barefoot up a hillside overlooking the makeshift camp this morning to bury them.
“We thought we would be safe here,” he says, numb with disbelief, standing beside his father’s grave, marked with small bamboo stakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cy_fkc5qRt8
A few paces away, the tiny body of his infant relative lies on the muddy ground, wrapped in a white cloth. A man scoops out her shallow grave with a farm tool as a group of men stand solemnly by.
The deaths highlight one of the unexpected dangers facing refugees and the risks as humanitarian actors respond to the arrival in Bangladesh of at least 429,000 people who have fled the latest outbreak of violence that erupted in Myanmar on August 25.
As two formal refugee camps in Bangladesh are overwhelmed, thousands are seeking shelter where they can - some in an uninhabited forested area outside Kutupalong camp.
“The area is currently completely wild, so the people who are settling-in where there is wildlife,” says Franklin Golay, a staff member for UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, who is working to provide water, sanitation and shelter at the informal camp.
“There are elephants roaming around that pose a threat,” he says.
Asian elephants are considered a critically endangered species in Bangladesh, where conservationists estimate there are presently just 239 living in the wild. Many roam in the Chittagong area in the southeast of the country, where the refugee influx is concentrated.
Local residents say the elephants are drawn to populated areas in the Monsoon season, when fruit including mangos and jackfruit ripen.
Securing the rugged and partially forested area to mitigate the risk could be achieved with lights or electric fencing, Golay says.
But for Alam’s grieving family, who fled persecution across the border in Myanmar, the attack is a stark reminder that their trials are not yet over.
“We ran from danger, and we are still in a dangerous situation now,” says Ali Hussein, the dead man’s uncle. “This cannot be forgotten.”
Multilateral DamageThe impact of EU migration policies on central Saharan routes
▻https://www.clingendael.org/sites/default/files/2018-09/multilateral-damage.pdf
#externalisation_des_frontières #asile #migrations #réfugiés #frontières #Corne_de_l'Afrique #EU #UE #Soudan #Niger #Tchad #RSF #milices #Forces_de_soutien_rapide #mines #mines_d'or #rapport
Rapport de septembre 2018
Ajouté à cette métaliste sur l’externalisation des frontières :
►https://seenthis.net/messages/731749
Dublin : l’urgence de mettre fin à un règlement kafkaïen
Dans un rapport publié le mardi 24 septembre, élaboré en collaboration avec des demandeurs d’asile, le Secours Catholique explique le règlement de Dublin et les conséquences de son application en France. L’association demande au gouvernement de cesser de se dégager de sa #responsabilité et de prendre en compte le choix exprimé par des milliers de personnes exilées de vivre en sécurité sur son territoire.
▻https://www.secours-catholique.org/actualites/dublin-lurgence-de-mettre-fin-a-un-reglement-kafkaien
#rapport #Dublin #France #règlement_dublin #secours_catholique #asile #migrations #réfugiés #échec #dysfonctionnement #migrerrance #ADA
Et autour de la question du #logement #hébergement :
Pour télécharger le rapport en pdf :
▻https://www.secours-catholique.org/sites/scinternet/files/publications/rapport_dublin.pdf
ping @karine4
Villes européennes et réfugiés : un laboratoire du logement abordable et de la #résilience_urbaine
Comment les villes européennes, et plus particulièrement allemandes et suédoises, sont-elles parvenues à loger les demandeurs d’asile arrivés à partir de 2015 ? En 2017, La Fabrique de la Cité menait un projet d’étude international et pluridisciplinaire consacré à la résilience des villes européennes au choc démographique qu’a constitué l’arrivée de ces demandeurs d’asile. Le rapport né de ces travaux, en répertoriant les solutions apportées par #Berlin, #Hambourg, #Stockholm, #Stuttgart, #Munich et #Dresde, constitue un #guide pratique à l’usage des villes confrontées à une crise semblable ou à celles qui le seront dans les années à venir.
Obstacles to Excellence: Academic Freedom & China’s Quest for World Class Universities
Obstacles to Excellence is a new report from Scholars at Risk mapping threats to academic freedom that jeopardize China’s higher education ambitions.
“For decades now, the Chinese government has invested heavily in academic institutions and programs designed to compete with the world’s finest,” says SAR executive director Robert Quinn. “This positive ambition is undermined, however, by state policies and practices that fail to protect academic freedom. This poses grave personal and professional risks for Chinese scholars and students,” as documented in the report, “and serious academic, reputational, and financial risks for foreign academic institutions with partnerships with Chinese counterparts, in China or abroad.”
Drawing on academic literature, legislative and regulatory texts, media, human rights reports, interviews with Chinese and foreign experts, and data from SAR’s Academic Freedom Monitoring Project, Obstacles to Excellence identifies pressures and threats to academic freedom in China and where China has extraterritorial academic connections, including:
Systematic and targeted tactics employed by state and university authorities in mainland China to constrict academic activity and to intimidate, silence, and punish outspoken academics and students;
Heightened pressures on scholars and students in the Tibet, Inner Mongolia, and Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Regions including language policies that limit equitable access to higher education, heightened surveillance, and the imprisonment of a growing number of minority scholars and students at so-called “re-education camps;”
Erosion of university autonomy in Hong Kong and Macau under Beijing’s growing influence over China’s Special Administrative Regions;
Academic freedom and autonomy challenges facing foreign higher education institutions operating joint ventures with Chinese universities on the mainland;
Extra-territorial pressures by the Chinese Party-state and supporters, through Confucius Institutes and other activities, to restrict academic inquiry and expression at universities outside China; and
Vague, unsubstantiated, and overbroad foreign government rhetoric and policies that impede academic inquiry and risk stigmatizing innocent overseas Chinese academics and students.
As noted in the report, a small but growing number of international universities have responded to academic freedom concerns by scaling back or terminating partnerships with institutions in mainland China and with China-supported institutes on their own campuses. Others have stayed out of the public dialogue. Obstacles to Excellence urges nuanced, public discussion of the issues, with the goal of identifying practices which recognize China’s legitimate higher education ambitions while fully protecting academic freedom.
“Pressures on academic freedom in China mirror those we see around the world, as documented in our annual Free to Think reports,” says SAR’s advocacy director Clare Robinson. “But given the size of its higher education sector, and China’s important and growing position on the global academic stage, it is more important than ever to discuss the issues raised publicly and to work together to institutionalize policies and practices that safeguard academic freedom and recognize its central role in world-class universities and scholarship.”
Obstacles to Excellence, available in English and simplified Chinese versions, invites readers to consider these important issues and to discuss them publicly, including at conferences, annual association meetings, and in international partnerships. It includes recommendations for Chinese state authorities, university leadership, and civil society in China aimed at strengthening understanding of and respect for academic freedom. It also urges state authorities, higher education leaders, and civil society outside of China to demonstrate their commitment to academic freedom by supporting at-risk Chinese scholars and students, wherever they may be, and by ensuring that their international partnerships—with Chinese and non-Chinese partners alike—respect academic freedom and other core university values.
▻https://www.scholarsatrisk.org/resources/obstacles-to-excellence-academic-freedom-chinas-quest-for-world-clas
#liberté_académique #Chine #université #rapport #scholars_at_risk #éducation #Tibet #Mongolie #Xinjiang_Uyghur #Macau #Hong_Kong #Confucius_Institutes
Ce mot d’#excellence qui me dérange beaucoup...
Refugee Education #2030: A Strategy for Refugee Inclusion
The strategy arises from lessons learned about parallel education provision for refugees reflected in the 2011 Review of refugee education, and from the experience of shifting to national education service provision across a wide range of distinct contexts as a result of the guidance provided in the 2012-2016 UNHCR Refugee Education Strategy. It is also informed by partner and UNHCR collaboration and innovations, new or amplified partnerships with ministries of education and planning, refugee youth, civil society, development and humanitarian donors and the private sector, greater UNHCR internal capacity and significant international commitments related to the Global Compact on Refugees.
As the lead for refugee protection, UNHCR maintains its commitment to and support for refugees and host governments until solutions for all refugees are identified. UNHCR has nearly 70 years of experience developing legal frameworks, policy, guidance and programming informed by monitoring and evaluation results, annual participatory assessments and research about and with refugee communities. It works daily and directly with refugees, governments and partners at field, country, regional and global levels. It therefore assumes a global leadership role to ensure that decisions and actions related to education for refugees in emergency and protracted situations are considered through the lenses of legal frameworks, historical experience and emerging displacement trends. UNHCR aims to draw attention to education needs in hosting communities, create conditions for partnership and action that result in strengthened education systems that benefit all learners, leverage the comparable strengths of various partners in mixed situations for improved coherence across population groups and make meaningful and collaborative contributions to the goals of the 2030 #Global_Agenda_for_Education (#2030_Agenda).
#rapport #éducation #HCR #réfugiés #asile #migrations #inclusion
Redoubler d’efforts. L’éducation des réfugiés en crise
Ce rapport raconte l’histoire de quelques-uns des 7,1 millions d’enfants réfugiés dans le monde qui sont en âge d’aller à l’école et relèvent de la compétence du HCR. De plus, il examine les espoirs en matière d’éducation que nourrissent de jeunes réfugiés désireux de poursuivre leurs études au-delà de l’enseignement secondaire. Il met également en lumière la nécessité de partenariats robustes pour lever les obstacles à l’éducation de millions d’enfants réfugiés.
Les chiffres sur la scolarisation des réfugiés et la population réfugiée sont tirés de la base de données démographiques du HCR, des outils d’établissement des rapports et des enquêtes sur l’éducation. Ils se rapportent à 2018. On ne dispose pas de données ventilées par âge pour l’ensemble de la population réfugiée. Lorsque ces données ne sont pas disponibles, elles ont été estimées sur la base de données ventilées par âge disponibles. Le rapport fait aussi référence aux données sur la scolarisation dans le monde de l’Institut de statistique de l’UNESCO concernant 2017.
Malawi to evacuate citizens from South Africa
Malawi says it will repatriate its nationals from South Africa, following an upsurge in xenophobic violence.
At least five foreigners, including a 14-year-old boy, have been killed in attacks in South Africa’s coastal city of Durban since last week.
Some foreign-owned shops in the main city Johannesburg have shut amid fears that the violence could spread.
Zimbabwe has also condemned the attacks, blamed on locals who accuse foreigners of taking their jobs.
Tens of thousands of foreigners, mostly from other African states and Asia, have moved to South Africa since white-minority rule ended in 1994.
At least 62 people died in xenophobic attacks that swept South Africa in 2008.
Malawi is the only country which has so far decided to repatriate its citizens.
Information Minister Kondwani Nankhumwa said the first group would return at the weekend.
About 420 Malawians are reportedly living in refugee camps in Durban after fleeing the violence, he said.
The BBC’s Raphael Tenthani reports from Blantyre that he received a call from a Malawian in Durban who said saw he some Malawians being killed - including a close friend who was burned alive.
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/media/images/82334000/jpg/_82334509_82334002.jpg 
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/media/images/82334000/jpg/_82334511_img_2287.jpg Mr Nankhumwa called on the African Union (AU) and the Southern African Development Community (Sadc) to intervene to help protect foreigners.
“This is unfortunate coming at a time we are working on regional integration,” he said at a press conference.
“We urge the government of South Africa to protect foreigners,” he added.
At the scene: Milton Nkosi, BBC News
Standing in the middle of a football field that has been turned into a refugee camp overnight in Durban’s Chatsworth township, one cannot help but feel ashamed of being South African.
There are white and green tents dotted around housing destitute African migrant families who fled the violence meted out to them by their South African hosts.
Two weeks ago locals began attacking and looting properties owned by fellow Africans, calling them “kwerekwere”, a derogatory word for African migrants.
I did not even have to ask Memory Mahlatini, a Zimbabwean who works as a nanny, what happened to her because her story was written all over her face.
Her eyes alone made me look down in shame as she explained how a group of South Africans came to her rented home last Monday evening just as they were preparing to sleep and demanded that they go back to where they came from.
Fear and shame in South Africa
In total, the violence has left about 5,000 foreigners homeless in Durban, the main city in South Africa’s KwaZulu-Natal province, local media reports.
On Wednesday, the violence spread to the province’s second city, Pietermaritzburg, where foreign-owned shops were looted.
Verulam, a town about 30km (18 miles) north of Durban, has been hit by similar violence.
The government has ordered police to step up patrols to prevent the violence from escalating.
The governing African National Congress (ANC) said in a statement that South Africans should “hang our heads in shame in the face of these misguided and misplaced assaults”.
Zulu King Goodwill Zwelithini has been accused of fuelling xenophobia after he was widely quoted as saying at a meeting last month that foreigners should “please go back to their countries”.
He denied being xenophobic and claimed he had been mistranslated.
South Africa’s official unemployment rate stands at 24%, but some analysts believe that it is much higher.
▻https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-32316731
#réfugiés #asile #migrations #Malawi #Afrique_du_Sud #réfugiés_malawiens #renvois #rapatriement #expulsion
Balkan Region - Report July 2019
The Border Violence Monitoring Network has just published it’s August report summarizing the current situation regarding pushbacks and police violence in the Western Balkans, primarily in Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, the Serbian borders with Croatia and Hungary, but also including Italy, Slovenia, North Macedonia and Greece.
This report analyzes, among other things:
– Torture: Recurrence of extreme violence and abuse
– Pushback from Italy
– Beyond police: Actors within the pushback framework
– Further dispersion of pushback sites in NW Bosnia
– Trends in pushback sites to and from Greece
More broadly, monitoring work continues to note the trans-national and bilateral cooperation between EU member states in the north of the Balkan route. Instances of chain pushbacks from Italy to Bosnia and Herzegovina, though relatively rare, offer insight into the web of actors engaged in the refoulement of groups across multiple borders, and liminality of due process in these cases. The intersection of unlawful acts also raises key concerns about aiding and abetting of pushbacks by Brussels. Specifically, analysis from this month elaborates on the involvement of Frontex in facilitating pushbacks.
▻https://www.borderviolence.eu/wp-content/uploads/August-Report.pdf
#rapport #migrations #réfugiés #Balkans #route_des_Balkans #asile #frontières #violence #push-back #push-backs #refoulement #refoulements
–------
v. aussi la liste des push-back avec armes à feu (août 2017-octobre 2019) :
Push-back reports from Croatia with gun violence
►https://seenthis.net/messages/814569
Je mets ici les passages qui m’intéressent particulièrement... et notamment sur la #frontière_sud-alpine
Push-back from Italy
Chain push-backs from Italy are comparatively rare. Yet notably one report (see 1.1: ▻https://www.borderviolence.eu/violence-reports/august-5-2019-0700-fernetti-italy conducted last month provided evidence of this sequential phenomena of expulsion from Italy back to BiH, via Slovenia and Croatia; drawing into question why such uncommon and illegal procedure was conducted by Italian police officers. The transit group was initially apprehended by Italian police officers in a small village on theoutskirts of Trieste from where they described being brought to a government building. Both in Italy and later in Slovenia, the transit group in question was detained, made to give their fingerprints, had their pictures taken and were asked to sign paperswritten in languages that they did not understand.
“We asked the woman, what was on the paper because it was in Italian. She didn’t translate and we didn’t understand what we signed.” “I told the translator that they have to find a solution. They can’t just bring us back to Slovenia, knowing that we were in Italy. And they said, we are just migrants, we are not tourists.”Once they arrived in Croatia, the transit group was detained in a police station and interviewed one at a time before being brought to the border with Bosnia-Herzegovina where the group had their phones individually broken with a hammer by a Croatian police officer. They were then told to walk through a forest into Bosnia-Herzegovina. The chronology of events above alludes also to the complicit nature of preliminary actors within the wider pushbacks. Arguably initiators such as Slovenia and Italy -who often afford groups with translators and legal documents -have an intimate relationship to the violence and terror that accompanies subsequent push-backs from Croatia to BiH. The feigning of due process by these countries, despite prior knowledge of violent chain refoulement, forms a central part of their conceit. Italy and Slovenia mask their actions in a malaise of procedures (regularly untranslated or explained), in order to hide the institutionalisation of illegal chain pushbacks. The nature of chain pushbacks are defined by these bit-part processes, which simultaneously imitate regular procedures, while providing ample space for state authorities to deviate from legal obligations.
(pp.6-7)
#Italie #push-back #Slovénie #refoulement
And on the
Construction of further fencing along Slovenian-Croatian border
This August the Slovenian government authorized the construction (▻https://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-slovenia/slovenia-erects-more-border-fence-to-curb-migrant-inflow-idUSKCN1VC19Q) of a fence 40 kms long on the banks of the river Kolpa, on the border with Croatia. The security device, installed by Serbian firm LEGI SGS, will add up to an already existing fence, making the barrier a total of 219km long. The exact location of the construction was not made public, and a spokeswoman for the interior ministry said itwill be a temporary measure to prevent people crossing the border. She did however directly cite migration as a threat to the security of citizens’ in her statement, arguably reinforcing the ideological bordering that accompanies this further fencing. Theconstruction is part of an escalating approach to border security which includes the deployment of military (▻https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2019/07/slovenia-deploy-soldiers-boost-border-patrols-migrants-190721191235190.ht), stationed on the border since 2016, and bolstered this year alongside regular police forces.
The opposition party NSi demanded tighter control (▻https://balkaninsight.com/2019/07/05/slovenia-opposition-demands-tighter-border-controls-with-croatia) sat the border with Croatia in July, and there seems little, or no will to challenge the mainstream rhetoric on migration. These demands, as BVMN reported last month (▻http://www.nonamekitchen.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Final-Report-July-2019.pdf), coincided with concerns of Italy building a wall on the border with Slovenia, were the ongoing joint border not to stem movement from Slovenia into Italy. Thus it seems somewhat ironic to observe the construction of a barrier on Slovenia’s Southern border, preempting the machinations of Italian interior minister, Matteo Salvini.
Unfortunately, the domino effect being played out between these states only feeds into Croatia’s intensifying security measures. While interior minister David Bozinovic was plethoric, stating that “what Slovenians are doing, is their own decision” (▻https://www.total-croatia-news.com/politics/38042-migrants), his assertion that a joint European solution would be more welcome rings fairly hollow when viewed in tandem with the heightened repression around pushbacks this month and the already complicit role of Frontex. To this end, there seems to be no escape from the vicious circle of reborderization and loss of human rights in Europe, shown most recentlyby Slovenia’s harder borders.
Allegations of smuggling made against asylum centerstaff in Ljubljana
A statement (▻https://push-forward.org/novica/izjava-iniciative-prosilcev-za-azil-la-lutte-de-la-liberte-6-8-2019-az) by the asylum seekers initiative La lutte de la Liberté, and released at the beginning of August highlights what may be a serious case of abuse by security personnel in the asylum seekers camp Vič, Slovenia. According to the group, a resident in the camp called Ibrahim witnessed a number of security guards smuggling migrants out of the camp with cars in exchange for money. After the incident, which took place at the beginning of July, Ibrahim told the director of the camp who flatly denied the allegations, yet simultaneously removed two guards from their posts, causing great suspicion. In retaliation, other guards started to mob Ibrahim resulting in a series of episodes of violence culminating in a fight, for which Ibrahim was taken to a detention centre in #Postojna.
Ibrahim has now been released and three security guards in the camp are under investigation, a source from InfoKolpa shared. Even though the actual occurrence of smuggling remains a supposition, the event highlights an important grey zone in which camp staff are operating, and the potential for systemic abuse of the asylum system. It can be argued that such cases can only emerge in the void left by inaccessible procedures and it is well known that extremely long waiting times are built into the asylum system in Slovenia. The behaviorof the security guards, in a position of absolute power over the migrants, can be explained by the fact that they are virtually invisible to the outside world, unless the migrants can organizethemselves as in this case. There has already been proof of violent behaviorby the guards in Vic, as shown in this video (
) taken some six months ago.People on the move, for their part, are in a position of structural and individual disadvantage, susceptible to many types of violence. As the statement correctly underlines, regardless of some staff being amenable, one person abusing a position of power is enough to ruin the life of someone held captive in a protracted asylum system. Infact, evidence would go further to suggest that in this case it seems like the guards were more of an organizedmob, rather than rogue individuals.
The waiting period for asylum which reaches nine months maximum in theory (with only 18 euros a month granted to applicants by the state), makes the tenure of asylum seekers even more precarious, adding to the poor or nonexistent measures taken to integrate them into society: asylum seekers have no access to welfare, assistance in access to work or social housing and their placement in the detention center in Postojna is decided arbitrarily bythe police. The entire Slovenian asylum system goes thus into inquiry, if viewed through thelensof this case, which both expounds its flaws and the potential corruption within.
(pp.18-20)
#murs #barrières_frontalières #militarisation_des_frontières
La collapsologie : une théorie réactionnaire | Lutte de classe, le mensuel de LO (n°202 - septembre-octobre 2019)
▻https://mensuel.lutte-ouvriere.org/2019/09/14/la-collapsologie-une-theorie-reactionnaire_134355.html
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img921/49/Y2IlXl.png 
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/1521/r42L4J.png 
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img921/4665/b44jFt.png 
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/7563/KVrp1s.png
TLDR : l’article résume quasiment ça au malthusianisme alors que c’est qu’une partie parmi plein d’autres de toutes les informations utilisées par Servigne-Stevens, et du coup la majeure partie de l’article parle uniquement de ça. Ensuite un peu sur le capitalisme pas assez abordé, en rappelant que l’industrie de la guerre s’est développé grace à l’État etc, sauf que… tout ça ce sont des choses dites par Servigne lui-même ou d’autres, et pas qu’une fois, donc toute cette partie ne critique pas grand chose non plus. Du coup tout ça tombe un peu à plat et ne prouve pas grand chose de l’assertion du titre.
Malgré cela, je l’ajoute à la troisième compilation :
►https://seenthis.net/messages/680147
#effondrement #collapsologie #catastrophe #fin_du_monde #it_has_begun #Anthropocène #capitalocène
« La majeure partie de l’article parle uniquement de malthusianisme », c’est quelque peu exagéré : 7 colonnes sur 21. Il est vrai que l’article se consacre à démonter l’inanité de la position malthusianiste, qui est dominante, mais il dit également, voire surtout, beaucoup d’autre chose : que le problème ne tient pas de la nature même des hommes, mais du système de production (qui aujourd’hui détermine tant les échanges que les modes de consommation), le système de production capitaliste. L’article dit aussi, contre le point de vue fataliste des collapsologues – et cela n’est pas fréquent par les temps qui courent –, qu’il existe une solution à défendre : la révolution sociale qui rendra possible la socialisation de ces moyens de production. Rien que pour cela, l’"assertion du titre" se trouve pleinement justifiée.
Paperless people of #post-conflict Iraq
During the conflict with the Islamic State group (IS), six million Iraqi citizens were forced to flee their homes. Since the end of the conflict, more than four million have returned home, while 1.7 million people still live in displacement. These families struggle to access basic services and face often insurmountable roadblocks to either returning home or rebuilding a life elsewhere. Many, whether still in displacement or returned home, are unable to enjoy their rights as Iraqi citizens and fully engage in the recovery and reconstruction of post-conflict Iraq.
A foundational reason for this is they do not have proof of their legal identity. Some people lost their documents as they fled their homes; others had them confiscated by various parties to the conflict; and yet others were issued IS documentation, which is of no value now. These paperless people, as a result of lacking critical state-issued civil documents, such as birth certificates, marriage certificates, nationality cards and civil IDs, find themselves denied human rights, barred from a range of public services and excluded from recovery and reconstruction efforts.
Local and international humanitarian agencies like the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC), the Danish Refugee Council (DRC) and the International Rescue Committee (IRC) have collectively helped tens of thousands of Iraqis over the last few years obtain, renew, or replace civil documents lost as a result of the most recent crisis. However, an estimated 80,000 families across the country still have family i members missing at least one civil document. The number of children missing documents is likely much higher. At least 45,000 displaced children living in camps alone are estimated to be missing birth certificates. Without these essential civil papers, they are at risk of statelessness and find it incredibly difficult to access services such as education and healthcare.
This report, based on research conducted by NRC in partnership with DRC and IRC, through the Cash Consortium for Iraq (CCI) shows how a significant portion of Iraqi families living in urban areas formerly under IS control are being denied basic services because they are paperless.
https://www.nrc.no/image/86947/Screenshot%202019-08-28%20at%2013.43.19.png?width=300&height=400#.jpg
’Updata-ing’ the narrative about African migration
Migration has become a staple of the news in many countries, filled with images of desperate Africans fleeing an impoverished continent, poised to descend on the West. These reports are not necessarily false, and they can be valuable in highlighting the human stories of migration but they are not a good basis for helpful action.
Politicians push myths and half-truths to score points but policymakers interested in addressing the complex issues around migration need data that can help them understand who, where, and why and therefore what an appropriate and targeted response might look like. Surely migration is not the same in Malawi and Morocco?
In addition to official figures, one source of useful data is ordinary Africans – the source, after all, of all African migration. In its Round 7 public-attitude surveys (2016/2018), the research network Afrobarometer asked more than 45,000 Africans in 34 countries how they see and think about migration.
Engaging with the data and scratching beneath the surface of existing narratives are essential if we are to move beyond ’stronger borders’ and other simplistic, one-size-fits-all ’solutions’. While statistical data help to reposition the discussion on migration and to cool down debates about ’mass migration’, perception data contribute to understanding intentions and motivations. Together they form a strong basis for informing areas for policy action.
This co-authored research paper showcases the main findings of Afrobarometer research and the latest facts and figures of the Mo Ibrahim Foundation report “Africa’s youth: jobs or migration?”
https://i.imgur.com/1aLl7JW.png 
https://i.imgur.com/athiwfQ.png 
https://i.imgur.com/hj4RdIN.png 
https://i.imgur.com/w6wAW4v.png ▻http://afrobarometer.org/fr/publications/updata-ing-narrative-about-african-migration
#Rapport en pdf:
▻http://afrobarometer.org/sites/default/files/publications/Publications%20conjointes/partenaires/afrobarometer-moibrahim-updata-ing-the-narrative-about-african-migrat
#émigration #chiffes #statistiques #migrations #réfugiés #Afrique #émigration #cartographie #visualisation
Evaluation of #Emergency_Transit_Centres in Romania and the Slovak Republic
Executive summary
The Emergency Transit Centres were established to provide emergency protection and the possibility to evacuate refugees who could not be protected in their countries of asylum. Temporary relocation of refugees who required resettlement on an urgent or emergency basis to an Evacuation Transit Facility (ETF) was expected to serve five objectives, namely:
Provide timely and effective protection to an individual or group of individuals of concern to UNHCR;
Demonstrate a tangible form of burden‐ and responsibility‐sharing, enabling States not otherwise involved in emergency resettlement to accept cases from an ETF;
Enable officials from UNHCR and resettlement countries to undertake interviews in a stable, safe and secure environment;
Promote the subsequent realization of the durable solution of permanent resettlement; and - Encourage States hosting ETFs to become involved in resettlement.
To date, three ETFs have become operational, namely the Emergency Transit Centres (ETCs) in Romania in 2008 and the Slovak Republic in 2011(although the Tri-Partite Agreement was signed in 2010), and the Emergency Transit Mechanism (ETM) in the Philippines in 2009. The ETCs are managed on the basis of Tri-Partite Agreements signed by their hosting governments, UNHCR and IOM. The ETC in Timisoara, Romania, can accommodate a maximum of 200 refugees, whereas the one in Humenné, Slovak Republic, a total of 150 refugees (from mid-2012 onwards). As of 30 September 2015, 1,717 refugees had departed from the ETC in Timisoara, and 797 refugees from Humenné to resettlement countries. Since 2012, the main resettlement countries using the two centres are the USA, the UK, the Netherlands, Canada and Finland, with the USA the sole resettlement country using Humenné since 2013.
At the request of UNHCRs Resettlement Service in the Division of International Protection UNHCR’s Policy Development and Evaluation Service commissioned an evaluation of the ETCs in Romania and the Slovak Republic. As the ETCs have been in place for seven (Timisoara) and four years (Humenné) respectively, the evaluation presented UNHCR with an opportunity to assess whether the objectives set out at their establishment have been met. A comparative approach was used to assess the functioning of the two ETCs. The evaluation’s main findings should inform the development of strategies to meet emergency resettlement needs. Additionally, the results of the evaluation contribute to reflections on minimum standards and on whether the ETCs should continue with the same or similar objectives, or if there are other objectives that could lead to enhanced protection dividends for refugees.
The evaluation team was composed of one PDES staff member and one external evaluation consultant.
The ETCs in Timisoara, Romania, and in Humenné, Slovak Republic, have been relevant and appropriate for UNHCR, IOM, the ETC-hosting governments, resettlement countries and refugees. The ETCs offer a mechanism to UNHCR to provide a safe environment for refugees pending resettlement processing, including those classified under emergency or urgent priority, and to realize the durable solution of resettlement. While the number of refugees with emergency prioritization is small relative to the total number of refugees transferred to the centres, interlocutors described the ETCs as “life-saving” and “indispensable” for those few high-profile or high-risk refugees. This function for the most compelling protection cases is seen as core to UNHCR’s protection mandate.
The centres also have an advocacy function. This is of pivotal importance to UNHCR and the hosting countries, as the agency must be seen to be able to respond immediately to lifethreatening situations to provide immediate protection. Although the overall contribution to global resettlement figures is small, the positive change brought about by the immediate safety and security (and access to basic services) and the overall realization of resettlement for hundreds of refugees has considerable value. In the evaluation period from the beginning of 2012 until 30 September, 2015 a total of 1,568 refugees were resettled through the two ETCs. The life-saving dimension in compelling protection cases is seen as vital even if there are very few emergency cases.
Moreover, ETCs provided resettlement countries (and the IOM as part of its Resettlement Service Centre function for the US-government) access to refugees to undertake activities necessary to complete the resettlement process, including the selection of municipalities in resettlement countries. Some countries, in particular the US, are unable to process emergency cases due to long and complicated state procedures. The existence of the ETCs allows the US to process resettlement cases of persons who have been evacuated, and thereby increase accessibility of resettlement to some refugees, even if not on an emergency basis. The centre in Humenné has gradually expanded into one which solely caters to US-government processing, while only Timisoara has received emergency cases due to the shorter Romanian government clearance, and the absence of visa requirements. For the ETC-hosting governments, Romania and the Slovak Republic, the centres provided an opportunity to show their solidarity with countries hosting large refugee case-loads, while neither providing a permanent home to larger groups of refugees nor carrying all the operational costs of these centres.
While the coverage of the ETCs is in principle global, only refugees of some nationalities and countries of first asylum have been accommodated in the centres. Ad hoc planning and the obstacles experienced by some resettlement countries in the process of adjudication or completion of resettlement procedures, including selecting municipalities, has generally driven the use of ETCs. Most of the refugees transferred to the ETCs were resettled to the USA or the UK.
Male and female refugees of all age groups have been transferred to the ETCs, although some restrictions have been imposed with respect to refugees with high medical needs, including serious mental health needs due to limitations of the ETCs with respect to providing services to persons with high medical needs. There have also been challenges in providing accommodation to Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex (LGBTI) refugees. Since 2014, Iraqi refugees from Syria for resettlement to the USA are no longer transferred due to the refusal of already pre-vetted cases during the period 2012 - 2014. This has resulted in traumatic experiences for the concerned refugees, as three of them have remained in Timisoara since 2012 without a durable solution. Although alternative resettlement countries have been found for most of the rejected cases, this created an extra burden for UNHCR as well as delays for the concerned refugees.
The efficiency of the ETC operations in Timisoara and Humenné was assessed from different angles, namely UNHCR and IP staffing, budgets, and utilization of capacity including the “pipeline”.
The efficiency of the ETC operations in Timisoara and Humenné was assessed from different angles, namely UNHCR and IP staffing, budgets, and utilization of capacity including the “pipeline”.
The centres are respectively under the supervision of the UNHCR Country Representative in Bucharest, and the UNHCR Deputy Regional Representative of the Regional Representative Office for Central Europe (RRCE) in Budapest. The resulting reporting lines and management of the budgets has led to limited coordination to ensure commonalities in approach in terms of staffing and assistance provided. Thus, in Timisoara, three UNHCR staff (with UNHCR or UNOPS contracts) work in the centre. In the Slovak Republic, the only UNHCR staff member manages the centre on a UNOPS contract. The difference in ETC-level staffing cannot be fully justified on the basis of their capacity. The above has also led to different budgets and variations in IP capacity, responsibilities and assistance, with the division of responsibilities between the different actors in Timisoara resulting in an overstretched IP with reduced capacity for counseling and other refugee-oriented activities.
As the host countries’ contributions are different in each of the ETCs, the contribution of UNHCR also differs, the biggest difference being that UNHCR pays the food costs in Timisoara, which amounted to between 40-49% of total expenditures in the period 2012-2014. The overall expenditures for Timisoara, excluding food costs ranged from USD 621,700 in 2012, USD 654,900 in 2013 to USD 657,000 in 2014. If food costs are included, the annual costs are USD 1,031,000 in 2012, USD 1,278,100 in 2013, USD 1,195,800 in 2014 and USD 1,157,000 in 2015. The ETC requires 51% (2015) to 60% (2012, 2013) of the total budget for the Romania operation. The overall expenditure for Humenné was USD 406,700 in 2012, USD 747,800 in 2013, USD 979,900 in 2014, and USD 666,700 in 2015 (first 11 months).
The underutilization of the ETCs was regularly raised as a concern by interlocutors. Their occupancy rate has historically been relatively low. The average daily occupancy rate for Timisoara is between one third to one half, and for Humenné approximately half of its capacity. Considering the nature of emergency case handling, and the flexibility this requires, the ETCs must always have space available to receive cases with serious protection needs. However, the planning documents for the ETCs do not allocate a specific number of spaces for emergency evacuations. In addition, the turnover of refugees has been slower than envisaged, with some refugees submitted to the US overstaying the maximum period of six months. The overwhelming majority of refugees stay an average of four to five months. Capacity has generally been viewed in terms of the available number of beds instead of in relation to site and shelter space available.
Minimum standards for ETCs have not been developed. The application of minimum humanitarian standards in the areas of shelter confirms that the centres would not fully comply with these criteria if used to capacity. As the ETCs have become a semi-permanent response mechanism in the resettlement process, it is necessary to consider developing minimum standards for ETCs to guarantee the well-being of refugees. These standards should be based for example on the Sphere minimum humanitarian standards for shelter and non-food items.1 The standards should also take into account the objectives of preparing refugees for life in a resettlement country.
The Romanian government has received funds from the EU to upgrade an existing facility to house the ETC. Work is expected to begin in 2016 so that refugees could be accommodated in 2017. It is imperative that UNHCR seize the opportunity to be involved at the planning stage of this process in order to ensure that the physical set-up is conducive to providing adequate assistance and protection, and to preparing refugees for resettlement. Some input into planning would also allow cost-savings if, for example, kitchens were included so that refugees could cook for themselves.
The utilization of the ETCs has also been viewed in connection with the selection of refugees, and the process of obtaining clearances and organizing the transfer to one of the centres. The ETCs are directly linked to UNHCR’s global resettlement operation through the ETC focal point in the Resettlement Service, UNHCR headquarters. UNHCR Field Offices and Regional Resettlement Hubs are vital in identifying refugees for whom transfer to the ETC is an appropriate solution. Yet not all resettlement staff are aware of the existence of these facilities or know how to use these centres. This can be partially attributed to outdated guidance notes and a gap between vision and practice, which has led to different views on the usage of these centres.
The underutilization of the ETCs is also a consequence of the use of emergency priority quota and/or a direct transfer to the resettlement country, which is the preferred option for all parties. Other obstacles include lengthy exit procedures of some countries of asylum, and a bureaucratic and lengthy process to organize the transfer of cases. Additionally, the part-time nature of the ETC focal point at headquarters does not encourage a more pro-active advocacy role.
There are some differences in the provision of protection and assistance in the two ETCs. The major protection deficit noted by the evaluation team was the application of “limited freedom of movement” in Romania. Article 2 (2) of the Tri-Partite Agreement states that refugees “shall be required to reside in the ETC facility designated by the Romanian government.” This provision has been implemented in a manner that restricts freedom of movement of refugees as they are not permitted to leave the centre unless escorted by the implementing partner. This limitation is extremely frustrating for refugees and leads to a degree of institutionalization.
While most of the refugees interviewed during the mission were satisfied with the standards of assistance offered, they felt that their lives in the ETC were on hold and many expressed a desire to have a “normal” life and to move on quickly from the ETC. Especially in Timisoara, concerns were expressed regarding the difficulties arising from living with many other refugees in a relatively small area, including sharing rooms with other families and/or individuals, the limited to no freedom of movement, few opportunities for leisure and language training for adults, and a general sense of boredom. This has produced a living environment in which stress and tensions between individuals can more easily build up. Overall, the services provided in Humenné were more comprehensive than in Timisoara. This was reflected in the level of satisfaction expressed by refugees during the focus group discussions.
Resettlement is by definition a partnership activity. Cooperation with external stakeholders was generally viewed as efficient and effective by all respondents. Cooperation between UNHCR and the Government of Romania was regarded in a positive light, especially with respect to the limited time needed to process clearance requests, and the provision of identification documentation and security in the premises. However, the “limited freedom of movement” for refugees in the town, the lack of maintenance of the premises, and the regular provision of basic household items has led to some concern.
Cooperation between UNHCR and the Government of the Slovak Republic was generally considered efficient and effective by all interlocutors, despite some challenges in obtaining visas from embassies in countries of asylum or neighboring countries. The third partner to the agreements, IOM, has taken effective care of travel logistics, medical assessments and cultural orientation training. Possible challenges were ironed out in the beginning of these local partnerships. Some communication challenges were however noted at the field level in countries of asylum between UNHCR and IOM (and some ICRC delegations) due to staff turnover.
A similar positive note can be recorded with regard to the cooperation between UNHCR and the nine resettlement countries that used the ETCs in the 2012-2015 period. However, concern was expressed about referring an adequate number of refugees for the US “pipeline” on the one hand, and the US speed of processing, both during the pre-vetting stage and the stay of refugees in the ETCs, on the other hand. The first issue was resolved in 2015 with stronger coordination taking place between the three partners: UNHCR, the US and IOM.
The two ETCs have been effective to some degree considering the initial objectives established especially considering that a transfer can only be approved if a resettlement country is already identified. Only the centre in Timisoara was used for emergency priority cases in 2013 and 2014. An overall reduction of this function is visible during the period 2012-2015. However, for refugees classified under normal priority, the transfer to an ETC was still viewed as life-saving if evacuated from an unsafe situation.
The majority of refugees were transferred to the ETCs to support either the processing of resettlement cases by means of interviews, biometrics or to find municipalities in the resettlement country. Providing opportunities for recovery and preparing for the integration process has only been achieved to some degree, depending on the situation in countries of asylum and the protection and assistance provided in the two centres. The centres have however supported the objective “potential for resettlement realized”. The overwhelming majority of refugees arriving in the ETCs actually departed for resettlement. The ETCs have therefore contributed to facilitating the resettlement process of some refugees that otherwise could not have been resettled.
The main impact of the ETCs has been the provision of immediate and effective protection to refugees. Moreover, as a tangible form of responsibility-sharing, the centres have given Romania and the Slovak Republic the opportunity to present their contribution to the international protection regime in international fora. Romania established a resettlement programme with a quota of 40 refugees per year, with the first group of 38 refugees arriving in 2010, and the second group in 2014. The Slovak Republic also pledged, on a voluntary basis, 100 resettlement places in the period 2015-2017 towards the Council of the European Conclusions on Resettlement of 20 July 2015. However, arrivals under this programme are still pending.
Given the current situation in Europe it could be argued that more responsibility-sharing could be expected, and the existence of the ETCs should not absolve these governments of the obligation to provide durable solutions to a greater number of refugees. The host governments might also be persuaded to contribute more resources to the running of the ETCs.
The ETCs have contributed modestly to global resettlement figures and to reducing protracted refugee case-loads in countries of first asylum. But they have provided a safe alternative for cases that could not be transferred directly to resettlement countries, thereby offering the only available durable solution to these refugees. For some refugees, without the ETCs, there would simply be no possibility of resettlement.
In conclusion, the evolution in the operation of the ETCs shows a move away from their original vision. In the words of one interlocutor “there is nothing emergency about this process.” This has resulted in a situation whereby the policies and practices of resettlement countries to a large extent actually determine the use of the ETCs. Internal factors further impact upon the efficiency and effectiveness of the centres. Thus, replacing the first word of the acronym “ETC” with resettlement (“Resettlement Transit Centres”) would actually give a clearer indication of the main purpose of these centres, namely to support the realization of this durable solution. This could then also cover possible shifts or changes in their functions as RTCs continue to respond to the needs of different stakeholders. The sustainability of these centres must also be viewed in relation to UNHCR’s responsibility to manage the “pipeline” in cooperation with resettlement states.
The key recommendations of this evaluation are directed to DIP’s Resettlement Service, the RRCE and CO Romania.
▻https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/575935d17_0.pdf
#Roumanie #République_Tchèque #ETC #asile #migrations #réfugiés #rapport #réinstallation #évacuation #protection_d'urgence #Evacuation_Transit_Facility (#ETF) #hub
–-> document de 2016, mis ici pour archivage
via @pascaline
Guidance Note on Emergency Transit Facilities: #Timisoara, Romania / #Manila, #Philippines / #Humenné, the Slovak Republic
US : How Abusive, Biased Policing Destroys Lives
Abusive policing in Tulsa, Oklahoma that targets black people and poor people, diminishes the quality of life in all communities, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. Human Rights Watch released the report on the eve of the third anniversary of the killing of Terence Crutcher, an unarmed black man. That killing led Human Rights Watch to investigate everyday police interactions in Tulsa as a window into the larger human rights problems with policing throughout the United States.
The 216-page report, “‘Get on the Ground!’: Policing, Poverty, and Racial Inequality in Tulsa, Oklahoma,” details how policing affects Tulsa, particularly in the segregated and largely impoverished North Tulsa area. Human Rights Watch found that black people are subjected to physical force, including tasers, police dog bites, pepper spray, punches, and kicks, at a rate 2.7 times that of white people. Some neighborhoods with larger populations of black people and poor people experienced police stops more than 10 times the rate of predominantly white and wealthier neighborhoods. Arrests and citations lead to staggering accumulations of court fees, fines, and costs, often for very minor offenses, that trap poor people in a cycle of debt and further arrests for failing to pay.
▻https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/09/12/us-how-abusive-biased-policing-destroys-lives
#police #racisme #USA #Etats-Unis #violences_policières #pauvreté #guerre_contre_les_pauvres #Noirs #Tulsa #Oklahoma #rapport #discriminations #HRW
Unaccompanied minors, symbols of a policy of mistreatment
Young foreign nationals continue to arrive unaccompanied in France and for some, recognition of their minority status can be an arduous process. Médecins Sans Frontières has released a report, Unaccompanied minors: symbols of a policy of mistreatment, based on our experience with vulnerable adolescents at our day centre in Paris. While the full report is available for download in French, the executive summary has been translated into English and is available below.
Executive summary
More and more young foreign nationals continue to arrive unaccompanied in France. The majority are from Mali, Guinea, Côte d’Ivoire or Afghanistan. In 2017, the Ministry of Justice’s Unaccompanied Minors Department put their number at 14,908, up from 8,054 the previous year.
For some adolescents, obtaining recognition of their minority status can be a long and gruelling process. As minors with no family in France, they have to turn to France’s départements to be placed in the care of Child Protection services.
Increasingly often, Départements refuse to take responsibility for these young people whose minority they dispute, forcing them to sleep rough with access to neither child nor adult reception centres. “Neither nors”, i.e. neither minors nor adults, has become a fitting label for these youngsters.
Young people can initiate court proceedings to obtain recognition as minors and the protection this status affords them, but the process is lengthy and complex. For the thousands of adolescents finding themselves in this situation, the legal process for securing access to accommodation and health care is a veritable obstacle course.
In the name of the principle of the best interests of the child, the law requires France to protect such young people and provide them accommodation, health care and education until such time as the process is concluded. However, this is far from the case.
In December 2017, prompted by the distress and vulnerability of these young people, Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) opened a programme in north Paris suburb Pantin to offer them a comprehensive range of support services ─ nursing care, mental health support and social and legal assistance. The figures presented in our report are derived from the assistance provided to 787 minors from when the programme first opened on 5 December 2017 to 31 December 2018.
Unaccompanied and extremely vulnerable minors
They may have encountered violence in their countries of origin (war, armed conflict, domestic violence), during their journeys (kidnapping, arbitrary detention, torture, traumatising sea crossings, death of a friend or relative), or in the environment young people in distress face when they get to France (forced to sleep rough in inhumane and degrading conditions, psychological trauma caused by the unremitting scepticism they are subjected to when recounting their journeys, to name but a few).
Eighty-seven per cent of the young people interviewed by the MSF nursing team said they had experienced violence, torture or abuse during their journeys.
Young people attending minority assessments in France are given no access to medical check-ups, vaccinations or screening services.
Only those recognised as minors after assessments and placed in the care of Child Protection Services are given access to medical care provided by universal health protection. Young unaccompanied foreign nationals not recognised as minors can only claim State Medical Assistance, which is reserved solely for undocumented adults. Obtaining entitlement of their rights is an uphill struggle for young people who often sleep rough and therefore cannot produce proof of a fixed address.
Thirty-four per cent of the patients who attended MSF’s mental health unit were suffering from psychotraumatic stress disorders requiring immediate treatment.
The medical care available to young unaccompanied foreigners is arbitrary and varies from one health facility to the next ─ sometimes they’re treated as minors, and others as adults.
Fifty-one per cent of the adolescents assisted by MSF were sleeping rough at the time of their first visit to the centre.
For the most part, legally-recognised organisations, such as socio-medical centres, health centres for people in difficulty and entities that provide addresses, are unable to cope with demand, and their staff do not have the necessary training to be able to assist such a specific, and particularly vulnerable, population. And, when serious illness is diagnosed, obtaining a referral to specialist services can be problematic. The lack of effective coordination of the care pathway can result in a denial of care.
An inadequate system for protecting unaccompanied minors
Minority assessments conducted by départements are not standardised at national level and numbers vary substantially from one to another. The requirement to provide unconditional, immediate temporary accommodation for a minimum of five days during the assessment process is often unmet, which condemns vulnerable young people to sleeping on the streets.
Interviews are often conducted hastily (in the case of 40 per cent of the young people, they lasted less than 30 minutes) and sometimes without the presence of an interpreter. Assessments can be rejected on the grounds that a young person “clearly looks like an adult” (10 per cent of the young people).
Any at-risk minor can go to court to obtain protection, and in the case of unaccompanied minors, this protection means being placed in the care of Child Protection Services. But for unaccompanied youngsters who understand neither the French language nor the intricacies of the legal system, going to court is a complex process necessitating the assistance of an association.
It can take a long time, and some young people, who in the interim have neither accommodation nor protection, give up along the way. Additionally, a lack of identity documents can be a barrier to the legal process, with some judges ruling they have no jurisdiction to hear the cases of minors not in the possession of identity documents (11 per cent of rulings).
Nevertheless, recourse to the courts is essential to protect young people départements refuse ─ wrongly ─ to place in the care of Child Protection Services. In a clear illustration of the shortcomings of the assessment process, 55 per cent of the young people MSF assisted were placed in the care of Child Protection Services, and half of those who applied to the courts benefited from a temporary placement order that enabled them to be provided accommodation while awaiting the court’s decision.
Identity documents are essential to corroborating the age of unaccompanied minors. However, judges and officers conducting assessments often cast doubt on their authenticity and call on the national fraud agency to analyse them. Its conclusions are not always reliable because of insufficient knowledge of the laws and practices of the countries that issued them.
▻https://www.msf.org/unaccompanied-minors-symbols-policy-mistreatment-france-migration
#rapport #MNA #mineurs_non_accompagnés #Paris #France
ping @karine4 @isskein
Témoignages : le #travail_forcé, l’autre facette de l’enfer que vivent les migrants détenus en #Libye
Agriculture, travaux ménagers, construction de bâtiments… En Libye, les migrants enfermés dans les centres de rétention officiels sont forcés de travailler pour des employeurs libyens, sans rémunération et avec la complicité des autorités.
« Régulièrement, des Libyens viennent nous chercher en prison et nous forcent à travailler pour eux », affirme à InfoMigrants John*, un migrant érythréen enfermé dans le centre de détention officiel de #Zintan, au sud de Tripoli.
« Lorsque j’étais au centre de Tarek-el-Matar [à Tripoli, ndlr], des hommes en armes choisissaient parmi nous des personnes pour les forcer à travailler », explique à son tour Landry, un migrant camerounais qui vit aujourd’hui en Tunisie, joint par InfoMigrants.
« On travaille de 8h du matin à la tombée de la nuit »
La rédaction d’InfoMigrants a récolté nombre de témoignages qui racontent la même histoire : des employeurs libyens qui entrent dans les centres officiels, avec la complicité des gardes, pour choisir plusieurs migrants et les obliger à travailler toute la journée. Le soir, ils sont re-déposés au centre, sans avoir perçu la moindre rémunération.
Il existe en Libye 16 centres de détention officiels où s’entassent environ 6 000 migrants, selon les estimations d’Amnesty International données fin 2018. C’est là que les migrants interceptés en mer par les garde-côtes libyens sont envoyés.
https://scd.infomigrants.net/media/resize/my_image_big/854b4364ebbb06a803fcba6ba1f5043d05686f67.jpeg
« On travaille de 8h du matin à la tombée de la nuit. Si la tâche donnée n’est pas terminée, ils peuvent nous forcer à travailler toute la nuit », précise encore Landry.Cette main-d’oeuvre gratuite est ainsi réquisitionnée pour travailler dans la construction de bâtiments, dans les champs d’oliviers ou la récolte de tomates, dans l’agriculture mais aussi effectuer des travaux ménagers. Les femmes, sont, elles, forcées de se prostituer ou d’effectuer des tâches domestiques chez des particuliers.
« Nous en avons entendu parler sur les réseaux sociaux mais nous n’avons pas la confirmation que cela existe », déclare à InfoMigrants Sasfa Msehli de l’Organisation internationale des migrations (OIM) en Libye.
Ce phénomène n’est pourtant pas nouveau. Il est documenté depuis plus de deux ans. Un rapport du Haut-commissariat des Nations unies aux droits de l’Homme (HCDH) et de la mission d’appui des Nations unies en Libye (Manul) publié fin 2016 faisait déjà état de travaux forcés dans les centres de détention gérés par les autorités libyennes.
« Si on refuse de les suivre, ils nous torturent et nous tuent »
Des migrants « ont été forcés de travailler afin d’économiser suffisamment de fonds pour pouvoir sortir de détention. Après avoir travaillé toute la journée, certains sont ramenés dans les centres de détention le soir. D’autres sont détenus sur le lieu de travail pendant des semaines ou des mois », écrivent les auteurs du rapport.
En décembre 2018, un rapport produit par les mêmes institutions réitère les observations de 2016. « Les hommes migrants et réfugiés sont régulièrement retirés de leur captivité pour effectuer des travaux manuels forcés […] », peut-on lire dans le document.
Ces travaux forcés se font, par définition, sous la menace. « Si on refuse de les suivre, ils nous torturent, parfois nous tuent », signale Moussa, un Camerounais qui est passé par le centre de détention de Zouara, à l’ouest de Tripoli.
« Lorsque je travaillais dans les champs, des hommes en armes contrôlaient ce que nous faisions. Si ça ne leur convenait pas ou si on s’arrêtaient quelques minutes, ils nous frappaient », assure de son côté Landry.
https://scd.infomigrants.net/media/resize/my_image_big/9c2f152484e40ad637a1c2664dcdc3808550e84c.jpeg Tous racontent aussi les privations de nourriture lors de leur journée de travail, sous le soleil brûlant de Libye. « Ils nous donnent seulement un morceau de pain et de l’eau », déplore John, toujours enfermé au centre de Zintan. « Le travail est très éprouvant, certains s’évanouissent ».
« Les autorités légitiment cette pratique »
Comment les migrants sont-ils choisis par les exploitants ? Souvent, ce sont les personnes les plus fortes physiquement qui sont désignées. « Si tu es costaud en Libye, tu es mort. Tu es réquisitionné pour toutes les tâches », se souvient Moussa.
Le Camerounais explique aussi que les « anciens » ont plus de risques d’être exploités. « Les gardes ont espoir que les nouveaux arrivants puissent récupérer de l’argent de leur famille pour payer leur libération. Alors ils préfèrent envoyer les plus anciens pour les travaux forcés car ils savent qu’ils n’ont plus aucune chance de se faire de l’argent avec eux ». En d’autres mots, les plus anciens ne représentent plus aucun intérêt financier pour les gérants des centres de détention et sont donc à la merci des trafiquants.
« Les autorités légitiment cette pratique », estime Hassiba Hadj-Sahraoui, conseillère aux affaires humanitaires de Médecins sans frontières (MSF), contactée par InfoMigrants. « Les employeurs passent des arrangements avec les gardes des centres de détention. Souvent, ils reçoivent de l’argent des trafiquants en échange de main d’œuvre gratuite ».
https://scd.infomigrants.net/media/resize/my_image_big/c4a558909162e79a744f210131dbff655b7ecd15.jpeg Selon elle, les centres de détention sont une source de revenus pour de nombreux Libyens. « Tout le monde se fait de l’argent sur le dos des migrants, à tous les niveaux. Cela explique en partie que ces centres existent encore ».
« Le système de détention libyen est en fait un système d’exploitation »
Les travaux forcés ne se limitent pas à l’extérieur des prisons. Au sein même des centres de détention, certains migrants sont exploités par le personnel.
« J’ai dû déboucher des toilettes du centre à mains nues, mais j’ai aussi été forcé de décharger des armes dans un entrepôt situé à quelques mètres de la prison », glisse Landry.
Une pratique confirmée dans le rapport de 2018 du HCDC et de la Manul. Selon les auteurs, les migrants sont forcés de travailler « à l’intérieur des installations, notamment le nettoyage, la cuisine, le déchargement d’objets lourds et le lavage des véhicules des fonctionnaires de la DCIM [le département de lutte contre la migration illégale, chargé des centres de détention, ndlr] ».
« Le système de détention libyen est en fait un système d’exploitation », déplore Hassiba Hadj-Sahraoui.
Depuis 2016, l’Union européenne (UE) a signé un accord avec la Libye, permettant de fournir un appui logistique et matériel aux garde-côtes libyens. Pour les ONG, cet accord rend les États européens complices des exactions commises sur les migrants en Libye. En début de semaine, un collectif d’avocats a déposé plainte à la Cour pénale internationale (CPI) contre l’Union européenne pour « crimes contre l’humanité ».
▻https://www.infomigrants.net/fr/post/17333/temoignages-le-travail-force-l-autre-facette-de-l-enfer-que-vivent-les
#centres_de_détention #asile #migrations #réfugiés #esclavage_moderne
ping @reka
Libye, loin des yeux, loin du cœur : reportage dans les centres de détention
5 000 à 6 000 réfugiés et migrants sont détenus de façon arbitraire dans les centres de détention libyens qui dépendent du ministère de l’Intérieur basé à Tripoli.
Ces derniers mois, leur situation s’est encore aggravée à cause du conflit qui a éclaté début avril entre le gouvernement libyen reconnu par les Nations unies et basé à Tripoli (GNA) et les forces de l’Armée Nationale Libyenne (ANL). Toutefois, malgré des appels répétés à la protection et à l’évacuation des réfugiés et des migrants détenus, ceux-ci ont peu de chances de parvenir en lieu sûr dans un avenir proche. Par ailleurs, nombre d’entre eux sont renvoyés de force dans ce même cycle de violences et de détention en Libye par les garde-côtes libyens soutenus par l’Union européenne.
Loin de la zone de combat, des centaines de personnes restent enfermées pour une durée indéterminée, dans des conditions néfastes, dans des centres de détention où elles sont exposées aux maltraitances et à la mort, et poussées au désespoir.
Dans le djebel Nafousa, une région montagneuse au sud de Tripoli, des personnes nécessitant une protection internationale et enregistrées auprès du Haut Commissariat des Nations unies pour les réfugiés (HCR) en tant que réfugiés ou demandeurs d’asile, ont été abandonnées dans des centres de détention depuis des mois, voire des années, sans aucune assistance.
De septembre 2018 à mai 2019, au moins 22 personnes sont décédées dans les centres de détention de Zintan et de Gharyan, principalement de la tuberculose. Parmi les morts se trouvaient des jeunes hommes, des femmes et un enfant de huit ans.
Dans le centre de détention de Zintan, quelque 700 personnes étaient enfermées dans un entrepôt agricole surpeuplé, tandis que 200 autres étaient confinées dans un ensemble de petits bâtiments.
▻https://www.msf.fr/actualites/libye-loin-des-yeux-loin-du-coeur-reportage-dans-les-centres-de-detention
Libye : incendie dans un centre de détention de migrants à Zintan
Un feu s’est déclaré dimanche dans le centre de détention de Zintan, en Libye. Provoqué par des infrastructures électriques vétustes, l’incendie a provoqué des dégâts matériels et alerte une fois de plus sur les conditions de détention des migrants en Libye.
Un nuage de fumée noire sort d’un bâtiment délabré. À l’extérieur, plusieurs jeunes hommes tentent d’évacuer les affaires qu’ils peuvent atteindre. Certains portent un tissu sur la bouche, maigre protection face à une fumée toxique.
Dimanche 1er décembre, le centre de détention de Zintan, en Libye, a connu un incendie dont l’origine serait électrique. L’incident n’a pas fait de blessés même si certains migrants ont respiré des fumées. Une vingtaine d’entre eux ont perdu leurs affaires personnelles et le bâtiment où s’est déclaré l’incendie est désormais inutilisable.
Selon Besay*, un jeune Érythréen détenu dans le centre et contacté par InfoMigrants, les gardiens ont mis plus d’une heure et demie à appeler les pompiers. Cet incendie rappelle que les conditions de vie des migrants en Libye sont extrêmement difficiles. Les ONG dénoncent régulièrement la situation des migrants dans les centres de détention gérés par le département libyen de lutte contre la migration illégale (DCIM, selon l’acronyme anglais).
Près de 500 hommes – majoritairement érythréens et somaliens – sont détenus à Zintan. Parmi eux, plus d’une centaine sont atteints de tuberculose. Les équipes de Médecins sans frontières (MSF) n’ont accès aux détenus que depuis le mois de mai.
Aujourd’hui, les malades de la tuberculose sont séparés des autres détenus pendant deux semaines. Mais cela n’a pas toujours été le cas. « Après ils reviennent avec nous », explique Besay. Le jeune Érythréen est lui-même malade. « Depuis quatre mois, je prends un traitement donné par MSF. »
À Zintan, les migrants souffrent également du manque de nourriture. En mars 2019, plusieurs migrants étaient morts de faim dans le centre. InfoMigrants avait reçu des photos de jeunes hommes d’une maigreur extrême.
Plus de 40 000 migrants ont été enregistrés en Libye par le Haut-Commissariat des Nations unies pour les réfugiés (HCR). Mais plusieurs centaines vivraient en tout dans le pays dans des centres de détentions officiels et clandestins ainsi que dans des squats et des logements individuels.
▻https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7GmSTYgAK4&feature=emb_logo
▻https://www.infomigrants.net/fr/post/21270/libye-incendie-dans-un-centre-de-detention-de-migrants-a-zintan?ref=tw
La machine à broyer. Réfugiés et migrants piégés en Libye
Fin 2017, des images effroyables de migrants vendus comme des marchandises en Libye faisaient le tour du monde et suscitaient une réaction en chaîne de nombreux dirigeants, en Libye, en Europe, en Afrique, promettant de prendre des mesures destinées à protéger les réfugiés et migrants d’un système d’exploitation organisée.
Deux ans après, rien n’a pourtant changé. Présentes depuis 2017 auprès des migrants et réfugiés détenus en Libye, les équipes MSF témoignent de l’#horreur de la situation pour des milliers de personnes condamnées à croupir dans des centres de détention ou prises au piège d’un cycle sans fin de #violence et d’#abus.
►https://msf2016.atavist.com/libye-la-machine-a-broyer
#MSF #rapport
–----------
v. des documents archivés sur seenthis en 2017 :
▻https://seenthis.net/messages/605873
Migrant in Libya relives brutal detention through sketches
https://i.imgur.com/z3cLsP6.jpg 
https://i.imgur.com/Y1UaoA4.jpg?1 
https://i.imgur.com/WXX12gb.jpg 
https://i.imgur.com/CUgXFRs.jpg A guard withholds water from a barefoot migrant kneeling in front of him. An emaciated man lies on the ground while a thermostat reads a broiling 43 degrees Celsius. Refugees cower to the ground as bullets whiz by.
These rough pencil sketches by an Eritrean refugee offer a glimpse of the brutal reality of Libya’s migrant detention centers, where thousands have been locked away for months or even years. Most are there after failing to make the perilous crossing to Europe through the Mediterranean Sea.
The artist asked to only be identified by his nickname, Aser, because he fears reprisals from militias for speaking out about what he says are “nightmare conditions” inside the centers. In a country with no functioning government, it is often competing militias who run the detention centers and make money off migrants.
The drawings are based on what Aser, 28, witnessed inside several migrant facilities in Tripoli between September 2017 and October this year. At night, he recalls, he awoke to the sounds of militiamen dragging migrants from their sleep and beating them to get ransoms from their families, mostly in sub-Saharan Africa. Guards withheld food, water and medicine for the same reason.
Libya’s migrant detention centers are rife with abuse, and many have gotten caught in the crossfire of the country’s civil war. One drawing depicts refugees in the crossfire between forces of military commander Khalifa Hifter and militias allied with the United Nations-supported government in Tripoli.
Libya became a major crossing point for migrants to Europe after the death of longtime dictator Moammar Gadhafi in 2011, but Europe now sends money for Libya to prevent migrants from reaching its shores. With increased reports of torture and abuse inside detention centers, Europe’s policy of supporting the Libyan coast guard as it intercepts fleeing migrants has come under growing criticism.
Aser says that often, the only drinking water available inside the hangars where he was kept was a few buckets of water for hundreds of people. He and others went weeks without seeing sunlight, and the crowded centers became breeding grounds for disease. At the last facility where he was held, Abu Salim, he and another migrant, who also spoke on condition of anonymity, said two Eritreans died from what they believed to be tuberculosis.
Aser’s journey began more than four years ago, when he escaped forced military conscription in Eritrea, considered among the world’s most repressive governments. He made his way through Ethiopia and Sudan, and paid $6,000 to traffickers in Libya to secure a place on a boat to Europe. But the vessel was intercepted by the Libyan coast guard.
He ended up in Tripoli in September 2017 and was placed in the first of three centers. Visiting workers from Doctors Without Borders, or MSF, provided him with pencils and paper, and he worked out of the sight of guards. He sometimes hid the drawings with other migrants, and took photos of some sketches before destroying them.
In late October, Aser fled to an already overcrowded United Nations-run facility with hundreds of other detainees. Now his hope is that he can be one of the few to qualify for asylum, who are put on flights via Niger and Rwanda to Europe.
In the meantime, he says, his only escape is art.
“I dream that one day I can move out of Libya to develop my skill by gaining additional education,” he said.
source : ▻https://apnews.com/b55a574819e26a45c819fe843c946379
#eau #guerre_civile #jeu_de_l'oie (une sorte de jeu de l’oie bien dramatique, car la dernière étape est le #cimetière dans ce dessin) #centre_de_détention #centres_de_détention #décès #mort
Et pour le dessin du « tour des centres de détention » :
▻https://twitter.com/mokhbersahafi/status/1211981910219657218?s=03
L’#OIM, une organisation au service des #frontières… fermées.
Le 4 avril 2019, l’Organisation internationale pour les migrations (OIM) faisait connaître sa préoccupation au sujet des migrant·e·s détenu·e·s en Libye. Ce communiqué faisait office de « clarification », rendue nécessaire par la prise de position d’António Guterres, secrétaire général de l’ONU. En visite en Libye, celui-ci s’était en effet déclaré « choqué » du sort des personnes migrantes et avait lancé « un appel à la communauté internationale pour le respect du droit international des réfugiés et la nécessité de traiter le problème de la migration d’une manière compatible […] avec les droits de l’Homme ».
Dans sa mise au point, l’OIM prend pourtant soin de n’incriminer aucun État, pas même cette « communauté internationale » qui avait clairement été pointée par António Guterres. Pour l’OIM, la détention des personnes que ses agents accueillent dans des « points de désembarquement » est certes « arbitraire », mais elle se borne à plaider pour des « solutions alternatives » à l’internement pratiqué par le gouvernement libyen. Le soutien donné à ce dernier par des États européens avides de trouver des partenaires prêts à mettre en oeuvre leurs politiques d’externalisation n’est pas même évoqué. L’OIM est en effet un maillon important des dispositifs de #dissuasion et d’entrave de l’émigration prônés par ses principaux financeurs. Y oeuvrer sans états d’âme lui a permis d’occuper une place de plus en plus grande dans un système onusien où d’autres agences et instances sont un peu plus regardantes en matière de droits humains.
Le 5 avril, le secrétaire général de l’OIM se déclarait particulièrement préoccupé par « la sécurité des migrants en détention en cas d’escalade des actions militaires ». La reprise des affrontements militaires dans la région de Tripoli rendait la fiction d’une Libye « pays sûr » de moins en moins tenable. Hors de question cependant de renoncer à « défendre » les frontières des pays du nord de la Méditerranée : c’est au #Niger et au #Nigeria qu’ont été déplacées ou reconduites quelques centaines de personnes placées sous la « protection » de l’OIM.
▻http://www.migreurop.org/article2918.html
#contrôles_frontaliers #asile #migrations #réfugiés #fermeture_des_frontières #IOM #renvois #retours_volontaires #externalisation #ONU
ping @karine4 @reka @_kg_
Sur l’#OIM, en quelques mots, par #Raphaël_Krafft...
▻https://seenthis.net/messages/904103
De Coke La Rock à Run-DMC : Les phases poétiques du hip-hop Old School
Jason Savard, Les Cahiers de la Société québécoise de recherche en musique, 14:79-88 (2013)
▻http://id.erudit.org/iderudit/1023742ar
Le 1 er juillet 1982 paraît la chanson « The Message » de Grand Master Flash and The Furious Five. Le texte, interprété par le MC Melle Mel, se démarque fortement de « Hard Times » que Kurtis Blow avait lancé sur son album éponyme de 1980. Bien que dans les deux cas soit abordé le thème de la difficulté de vivre dans le ghetto américain de l’époque, la perspective est différente, tout comme l’objectif visé. Alors que Blow, dans « Hard Times », ne cherche pas vraiment à définir ce que sont ces moments difficiles (hard times), mais plutôt à les surmonter – « Je vais utiliser ma forte mentalité/ Comme la crème de la crème/Vaincre les temps durs, voilà mon rêve » (Blow, 1980) –, Mel, dans « The Message », les met en scène : « Du verre cassé partout/Des gens pissent sur les escaliers/Tu sais qu’ils s’en foutent » (Grandmaster Flash and The Furious Five 1982).
Version édulcorée :
« Rapper’s Delight » du Sugarhill Gang a changé à jamais la face du hip-hop américain
Brice Miclet, Slate, le 14 octobre 2019
▻http://www.slate.fr/story/182724/rappers-delight-sugarhill-gang-premier-single-rap-mythique
En ce moment, Twitter me balance une vidéo « sponsorisée » d’un festival en Arabie séoudite, dans laquelle l’ambassadeur de France François Gouyette interprète « une mélodie classique » sur un grand piano. Pourquoi pas. (Comme pub Twitter j’ai vu pire :-))
Mais tant qu’à faire, faudrait préciser : la « mélodie classique », c’est Aatani al nay wa ghanny (Donne-moi la flûte et chante), une chanson qu’on connaît bien à la maison, puisqu’on en a tiré le prénom de notre deuxième fille.
Alors Aatani al nay, c’est Fairuz qui chante des paroles de Gibran Khalil Gibran, sur une musique de Najib Hankash, et c’est du miel pour tes oreilles. Ça doit être une des plus belles chansons du monde :
►https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEXkWCtymeY
(Beaucoup de reprises, dont une par Shakira. Tu n’auras pas de mal à trouver celle de Lhasa de Sela, particulièrement émouvante.)
Quelques reprises ici aussi,…
dont Lhasa de Sela
▻https://seenthis.net/messages/107271
et, pointé par un certain @arno en 2011,
►https://seenthis.net/messages/26119
La chanson fait partie de mon répertoire, car il y a bien longtemps un lecteur aux LanguesO, dont je te laisse deviner la nationalité…, nous en avait fait apprendre les paroles par cœur.
Il trotte dans ma mémoire, comme un autre, de Elias Abou Chabaka, qu’un – autre lecteur - de même nationalité nous avait fait apprendre :
أُسجُدي لِلَّهِ يا نَفسي
▻http://www.adab.com/modules.php?name=Sh3er&doWhat=shqas&qid=72222
Même sans rien comprendre à l’arabe, la voix de Fairouz est si sublime. Et pas seulement dans cette merveilleuse chanson. La plus grande diva à mon avis.
@aude_v, ben,… oui ! Arabe littéral à l’époque c’était à Asnières.
Tiens donc @Simplicissimus on se serait donc côtoyé ? (mais moi j’en ai fait une grande partie en cours du soir, un truc qui existait à l’époque).
J’ai eu le DULCO, en 2 ans - j’avais eu l’autorisation de cumuler la 1ère et la 2è année - en 1980, mais je suivais les cours dans la journée.
C’est d’ailleurs à l’occasion de l’examen du cumul, en fin du premier trimestre, que j’avais eu une confirmation objective du fait que les professeurs français étaient au nombre des orientalistes distingués qui pensaient que la langue arabe est une langue sublime que ne méritent pas vraiment leurs locuteurs qui, d’ailleurs ne sont pas en état d’en comprendre toutes les subtilités. Et à part ça, nostalgiques du temps béni des colonies.
J’avais passé l’examen avec un bon copain, Redouane, algéro-breton algérois. Si ses yeux étaient bleus, venant de sa mère bretonne, son patronyme était bien typé algérien. Nous nous étions répartis le travail et, comme il se doit, j’avais fait la version et lui le thème. J’ai été reçu, pas lui…
Dans la liste des 30 chansons les plus tristes du monde
►https://seenthis.net/messages/724826
►https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmygnicYLIA&list=PLkeA_mTMOkTt1UMWHWjnQks3r8oqM7BcD
Premier amphi à Langues Zoo par un très distingué grammairien orientaliste français : « Les Arabes n’ont pas le même sens du temps que nous, c’est pour ça qu’ils ont l’accompli et l’inaccompli ! ». Ca commençait très fort ! (Et tu dois être mon benjamin de 2 ou 3 ans.)
@simplicissimus, @gonzo c’est tout a fait normal les langues orientales ont été créées pour parler aux « colonisés » donc on apprend la langue des « barbares ». C’est pour ça que plein d’étudiants qui veulent apprendre l’arabe s’inscrivent aux universités de Damas, de Beyrouth et du Caire
Lionel D - Pour Toi Mon Frère Le Beur (1990)
►https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JINkyx_2aD4
Autres versions ici :
►https://seenthis.net/messages/26119
Discuté ici :
Une histoire de samples arabes dans le rap (1/3)
Vintage Arab, Soundcloud, le 18 juin 2020
►https://seenthis.net/messages/861921
#Aatini_Al_Nay_Wa_Ghani #Fairouz #Musique #Liban #Lionel_D #France #rap
Migranti, la grande espulsione. Quarantamila fuori dai centri
In vigore il decreto sicurezza. Senza lavoro 15mila operatori. Mattarella difende patto Onu
I migranti sotto protezione umanitaria dovranno lasciare anche i centri di prima accoglienza. Tutti, anche famiglie con bambini. La comunicazione arriva dalle Prefetture. Prime espulsioni in tutta Italia.
Rischiano 40mila persone, 15mila operatori perderanno il lavoro.
Fuori dagli Sprar, come prevede la legge Salvini, ma anche fuori dai Cas e dai Cara, secondo una “conseguenziale” interpretazione data dai prefetti di tutta Italia che, da qualche giorno, hanno cominciato a riunire i gestori dei centri comunicando loro che i titolari di protezione umanitaria dovranno lasciare anche le strutture di prima accoglienza. Tutti, comprese donne e famiglie con bambini. Già ieri 26 persone sono state invitate a lasciare immediatamente il Cara di Isola Capo Rizzuto in Calabria: tra loro una donna incinta e un bambino di cinque mesi, subito presi in carico dalla Croce Rossa.
Tutti migranti regolari, tutti con documenti di identità e permesso di protezione umanitaria, tutti destinati alla strada come altri 40mila, questa la stima fatta dalle associazioni di settore, interessati dai provvedimenti dei prefetti che, chi con data perentoria chi con maggiore elasticità a difesa delle situazioni più vulnerabili, hanno
così allargato a dismisura la portata della legge Salvini, di fatto privando di qualsiasi tipo di accoglienza i titolari di protezione umanitaria.
E proprio nel giorno in cui da Verona il presidente della Repubblica richiamava ad un senso di comune responsabilità nell’affrontare il problema dell’immigrazione «un fenomeno che non è più di carattere emergenziale ma strutturale e quindi costituisce una delle grandi sfide che si presentano all’Unione europea e a tutto il mondo ed è un’esigenza che richiama alla responsabilità comune».
Mattarella, facendo appello all’Unione europea ad «assumere questo fenomeno che non va ignorato ma affrontato» ha implicitamente invitato il governo italiano (che non intende sottoscriverlo) a leggere il Global Compact delle Nazioni Unite «prima di formulare un giudizio perché non si esprimono opinioni e giudizi per sentito dire».
▻https://www.meltingpot.org/Migranti-la-grande-espulsione-Quarantamila-fuori-dai-centri.html
#chômage #Decreto_Salvini #Italie #SDF #sans-abri #asile #migrations #réfugiés
v. aussi la métaliste sur le Décret Salvini :
►https://seenthis.net/messages/739545
Dl Sicurezza, 24 migranti cacciati dal Cara di Isola Capo Rizzuto e portati in stazione: “Non hanno un posto dove andare”
La prefettura di Crotone ha deciso di far uscire il gruppo per applicare il provvedimento appena approvato dal Parlamento. Gli stranieri sono in possesso del permesso di soggiorno umanitario e pur avendo diritto di stare in Italia, non possono beneficiare del diritto d’accoglienza nel sistema Sprar o restare nel sistema di prima accoglienza
Ventiquattro migranti hanno dovuto lasciare il Cara di Isola Capo Rizzuto, a seguito di un provvedimento emesso dalla prefettura di Crotone in ottemperanza al decreto Sicurezza approvato nei giorni scorsi in Parlamento. Gli stranieri sono in possesso del permesso di soggiorno umanitario e pur avendo diritto di stare in Italia, non possono beneficiare del diritto d’accoglienza nel sistema Sprar o restare nel sistema di prima accoglienza. Il gruppo, nonostante la protesta organizzata nel pomeriggio per chiedere di non lasciare il centro, è stato fatto salire su un pullman e accompagnato alla stazione ferroviaria di Crotone.
Lì c’erano ad attenderli i volontari delle associazioni che si occupano di assistenza e che si stanno adoperando per trovare per loro una sistemazione temporanea per la prossima notte. I rifugiati allontanati dal Cara, infatti, non hanno un luogo dove andare e per evitare che passino la notte all’addiaccio, è intervenuta la rete delle associazioni solidali di Crotone. L’accoglienza, però, secondo quanto hanno spiegato queste ultime, potrà essere garantita solo per pochi giorni, dopodiché dovranno tornare in strada. Nella stazione ferroviaria di Crotone, ci sono i volontari di Legacoop Calabria, che stanno fornendo loro assistenza. Secondo Pino De Lucia, responsabile immigrazione di Legacoop Calabria, “i costi per eventuali casi speciali che riguardano migranti minori, malati e disabili, sono a carico dei Comuni ospitanti, con notevole aggravio per le casse degli enti locali”. Tra le persone destinatarie del provvedimento c’è anche una giovanissima coppia, lei nigeriana, lui ghanese, con una bambina di cinque mesi, che sarà ospitata, assieme ad un’altra donna, a Crotone a cura della Croce Rossa e della Caritas, con vitto e alloggio assicurato per una ventina di giorni.
Il Cara di #Isola_di_Capo_Rizzuto era finito al centro delle polemiche a maggio 2017, dopo l’arresto per ‘ndrangheta di 68 persone. Secondo quanto rivelato nelle indagini, dei 100 milioni di euro stanziati negli ultimi 10 anni per i migranti, 32 andavano alla ‘ndrangheta. Secondo i pm la cosca Arena, era riuscita ad aggiudicarsi gli appalti indetti dalla prefettura di Crotone per le forniture dei servizi di ristorazione al centro di accoglienza di Isola Capo Rizzuto e di Lampedusa. Le indagini rivelarono anche che venivano dato cibo per maiali ai migranti.
▻https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2018/11/30/dl-sicurezza-24-migranti-cacciati-da-cara-di-isola-capo-rizzuto-e-portati-in-stazione-non-hanno-un-posto-dove-andare/4804833/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
I primi effetti del decreto (in)sicurezza
I primi effetti del decreto (in)sicurezza confermano, purtroppo, quanto in molti stiamo denunciando da settembre, da quando la bozza del decreto ha iniziato a circolare.
Sono già diverse decine le persone, alcuni bambini piccolissimi, costretti a stare per strada perché impossibilitate ad accedere alle strutture di seconda accoglienza (sono di ieri le prime circolari emanate da diverse Prefetture).
Se il Presidente della Repubblica firmerà la legge licenziata dalla camera, la situazione, nel medio e lungo periodo, peggiorerà sempre più. Migliaia di persone saranno costrette all’esclusione e alla marginalità sociale in nome della demagogia e del populismo.
A pagare il prezzo più alto saranno i più deboli, come al solito d’altronde, costretti a vivere sempre più ai margini, lontano dagli occhi dei più, nelle baraccopoli che affollano le periferie dalle nostre città e delle nostre campagne, come quella nella piana di Gioia Tauro dove ieri sera è morta un’altra persona, in quei «ghetti» utili a chi domanda lavoro da sfruttare per incrementare i propri profitti, quelli attarversati della violenza che, in quei luoghi, colpisce soprattutto le donne, le più invisibili tra gli invisibili.
Chi guadagnerà in tutto ciò? Solo sciacalli e criminali:
– i politicanti che proveranno a tradurre in consenso la frustrazione della gente che vede il proprio nemico in chi è affamato e non in chi affama;
– gli enti gestori e il considerevole indotto economico creato da quei luoghi di detenzione amministrativa chiamati centri per il riconoscimento e il rimpatrio in cui le persone saranno recluse fino a 180 giorni senza aver commesso alcun reato per essere poi rilasciate in condizione di irregolarità sul territorio;
– le aziende senza scrupoli che sfrutteranno il lavoro privato di diritti degli uomini e delle donne colpite dagli effetti del decreto (in)sicurezza;
– le organizzazioni criminali che gestiscono la tratta della prostituzione e il traffico di stupefacenti;
– chi potrà acquistare, o meglio riacquistare, i beni sequestrati alle organizzazioni mafiose.
Ognuno di noi deve decidere da che parte stare, sono sicuro che la maggioranza delle persone per bene, di chi crede nell’eguaglianza, nei diritti umani, non starà con le mani in mano.
Noi continueremo a resistere, disubbidiremo e ci organizzeremo per contrastare la barbarie, come già stiamo facendo, e lo faremo sempre meglio.
Touche pas à mon pote, non toccare il mio amico! Non toccate i nostri fratelli, non toccate le nostre sorelle!
▻https://migr-azioni.blogspot.com/2018/12/i-primi-effetti-del-decreto-insicurezza.html?m=1
Dl sicurezza, in 24 allontanati da Cara
Prima notte fuori dal Centro accoglienza richiedenti asilo di #Isola_Capo_Rizzuto, tra disagi e preoccupazione, per i 24 migranti in possesso di permesso umanitario allontanati in ottemperanza al Decreto Sicurezza. Solo una parte di loro è riuscita a trovare un tetto a Crotone dove sono stati accompagnati: una giovanissima coppia di origine africana con la loro bambina di cinque mesi, ospitati da Croce rossa e Caritas per una ventina di giorni e quattro donne, vittime di tratta, accolte provvisoriamente dalla cooperativa l’Agorà. Gli altri componenti del primo gruppo - altri ne usciranno lunedì per un totale stimato in 200 che dovranno lasciare la struttura entro la prossima settimana - si sono dovuti accontentare di soluzioni di fortuna probabilmente all’interno della baraccopoli sorta in corrispondenza del cavalcavia nord della città di Crotone. In base a quanto stabilisce il Dl Sicurezza, i migranti destinatari dei provvedimenti, pur avendo diritto a stare in Italia, non possono beneficiare del diritto all’accoglienza nel sistema Sprar. Né possono restare nel sistema di prima accoglienza. Da ieri sera, nella città calabrese meta di numerosi sbarchi di migranti, le associazioni che si occupano di accoglienza e assistenza si sono attivate per trovare soluzioni alla problematica.
▻http://www.ansa.it/calabria/notizie/2018/11/30/dl-sicurezza-in-24-allontanati-da-cara_6f548eae-48de-46a0-bc22-d0bfb015180f.htm
Migranti, trattenute a #Malpensa senza assistenza
Due donne, una cubana e una senegalese, sono bloccate all’area arrivi dell’aeroporto, rispettivamente da 96 e da 51 ore. Erano di rientro da un periodo di vacanze nel loro Paese d’origine e al controllo documenti hanno scoperto che i loro permessi di soggiorno sono stati revocati. Negato finora negato il permesso di incontrare un avvocato.
Stavano tornando in Italia dove un periodo di vacanze nel loro Paese. Ma agli arrivi dell’aeroporto di Malpensa hanno scoperto che il loro permesso di soggiorno era stato revocato. E ora sono bloccate in aeroporto, nell’area dei controlli dei documenti, senza poter incontrare qualcuno che possa dare loro assistenza legale. E’ quanto sta avvenendo a due donne straniere, una cubana e una senegalese, accomunate ora dal fatto di vivere in un limbo. La donna cubana è trattenuta a Malpensa da 96 ore, mentre quella senegalese, che è anche in stato di gravidanza, da 51 ore. Da questa mattina in aeroporto è presente Giulia Vicini, avvocata dell’Associazione studi giuridici dell’immigrazione (Asgi): “Il problema è che non mi permettono di incontrare le due donne –spiega-. Non mi fanno accedere nell’area dove sono trattenute, con la motivazione che si tratterebbe di territorio internazionale, non sottoposto alla giurisdizione nazionale”. L’avvocata contesta questa motivazione. “E’ come se dicessero che in aeroporto c’è una zona che non è Italia. Il fatto stesso che siano trattenute lì significa che ci sono funzionari della polizia e quindi stanno esercitando la giurisdizione”. Per cercare di sbloccare al più presto la situazione (il volo di ritorno per la donna senegalese partirà in serata) ha mandato due mail pec al Garante nazionale dei diritti delle persone detenute o private della libertà personale. “Il problema di fondo è che se non incontrano un avvocato queste due donne non possono firmare il mandato per presentare il ricorso. Viene loro negato il diritto di fare ricorso”.
Alla signora senegalese il permesso di soggiorno sarebbe stato revocato per insufficienza del reddito. La donna cubana ha ottenuto la cittadinanza italiana, ma deve ancora fare il giuramento e le è stato revocato il permesso di soggiorno perché non è più convivente con il marito, dal quale si sarebbe separata. “Si tratta di revoche contestabili perché si basano su interpretazioni secondo noi errate delle norme in materia”, sottolinea l’avvocata Giulia Vicini. Ma, comunque, al di là degli aspetti giuridici delle revoche dei permessi di soggiorno, il problema ora è che sono trattenute a Malpensa senza poter ricevere assistenza.
Il caso delle due donne ricorda quello della famiglia marocchina di cui si è occupato Redattore sociale: padre, madre e quattro figli, in Italia da oltre un decennio. Al ritorno da un periodo di vacanza, la donna ha scoperto che il suo permesso di soggiorno era stato revocato. Lei, con tre dei figli, ha dovuto fare ritorno in Marocco, lui è rimasto in Italia con la più piccola. Hanno fatto ricorso e, dopo più di un anno, hanno ottenuto il permesso di rientrare in Italia e vivere di nuovo tutti insieme.
▻http://www.redattoresociale.it/Notiziario/Articolo/609515/Migranti-trattenute-a-Malpensa-senza-assistenza
#aéroport #limbe
–---------
Aggiornamento del collega Dario Paladini: la donna senegalese è stata rimpatriata nella serata di ieri, la donna cubana ancora in aeroporto #Milano #Malpensa
▻https://twitter.com/EleonoraCamilli/status/1069164388765102080
Aggiornamento/2 Anche la signora cubana è stata rimpatriata. Ieri sera sul tardi. E senza aver potuto parlare con un avvocato. (Dario Paladini)
▻https://twitter.com/EleonoraCamilli/status/1069332199625973760
Decreto sicurezza. È caos accoglienza. Scoppia il caso #Mineo
Famiglie e bambini verranno allontanati a giorni. Il vescovo eri: «Abbandonare i cani è reato. Lasciare persone per strada ’è legge’. Se serve apriremo le chiese per dare un tetto»
Ieri sarebbe dovuto toccare a una mamma con la sua bambina colpita da broncopolmonite. Ma la cacciata dei migranti dal Cara di Mineo, il più grande d’Italia, è stata posticipata di qualche giorno. Le istituzioni non si occuperanno di dare un tetto alle famiglie con bambini escluse dal sistema di protezione, ma il vescovo di Caltagirone non ci sta, e ha già trovato 40 posti letto. Se non bastassero, «apriremo anche le chiese per alloggiare queste persone», annuncia monsignor Calogero Peri. Entro l’11 dicembre quasi 90 persone su 1.800 verranno accompagnate fuori dalla struttura. Poi ne seguiranno altri secondo una tabella di marcia non ancora precisata.
A pochi giorni dal Natale, l’Italia mostra il suo volto peggiore. Verranno allontanati anche bambini da 1 a 12 anni, molti dei quali nati proprio in Sicilia durante la permanenza dei genitori nel Centro per richiedenti asilo. L’ultima volta il cappuccino Peri ne ha battezzati 11 e il rito dell’amministrazione dei Sacramenti non di rado si tiene nella cattedrale di Caltagirone, coinvolgendo così tutta la diocesi. Ma adesso questi bambini figli di migranti non solo dovranno trovarsi un tetto, ma saranno costretti ad abbandonare la scuola dell’obbligo, almeno fino a quando non raggiungeranno un’altra città italiana dove riorganizzare un futuro sempre più in salita. Nessuno dei cacciati potrà tornare nei Paesi d’origine e, dovendo vivere in “clandestinità”, non è neanche certo che i bambini continueranno gli studi da qualche altra parte.
E pensare che il Cara «fu fortemente voluto da Forza Italia e dalla Lega Nord, rispettivamente nella persona di Silvio Berlusconi, presidente del consiglio, e di Roberto Maroni, ministro dell’Interno», ricorda Calogero Peri. Una decisione che fu imposta «contro le alternative proposte dai sindaci del territorio». Nei giorni scorsi il ministro Salvini ha provato a rassicurare: «Sembrava a leggere i giornali che io buttassi fuori la notte della vigilia di Natale donne incinte, bambine e anziani: chi è nello Sprar arriva alla fine del percorso Sprar, se uno ha ancora un anno sta lì un anno». Affermazione che elude la situazione di tutte le altre strutture di permanenza, come i Centri per richiedenti asilo. Proprio come a Mineo. Quello del presule siciliano è però un richiamo alle coscienze: «In Italia, specialmente prima delle vacanze estive, passa una bella pubblicità: non è civiltà abbandonare i cani per strada e chi lo fa è punito dalla legge. Invece, abbandonare per strada i migranti o, se sembra troppo forte, “accompagnarli” e lasciarli per strada, è “sicurezza”, è legge». I timori sono diffusi in tutta la Penisola. In Lombardia la cooperativa Aeris, con oltre 300 migranti ospitati in circa 150 appartamenti tra Milano, Monza e Lecco, prevede che già solo in questo mese di dicembre rimarranno senza tetto una trentina di migranti con la protezione umanitaria, visto che il decreto Salvini ha loro sbarrato l’accesso ai progetti di accoglienza dello Sprar, il Sistema di protezione per richiedenti asilo e rifugiati. E nei prossimi mesi saranno almeno dai 20 ai 30 gli operatori (soprattutto mediatori culturali) che perderanno il lavoro.
Il “Progetto Arca”, che attualmente accoglie 500 migranti a Milano, stima che nei prossimi mesi almeno un terzo sarà costretto ad arrangiarsi. Contemporaneamente i mediatori ai quali non verrà rinnovato il contratto a progetto sono una settantina. E la Caritas Ambrosiana prevede che almeno mezzo migliaio di stranieri finiranno a ingrossare le fila dei senzatetto. «Non ci interessa fare i bed & breakfast dei migranti – spiega Alberto Sinigallia, presidente di Progetto Arca – . Oggi prendiamo dai 27 ai 29 euro al giorno per persona ospitata. Con i nuovi bandi delle prefetture non ci sarà più obbligo di garantire neanche corsi di lingua, l’assistenza medica e i percorsi di integrazione. Il prezzo più basso servirà solo per offrire vitto e alloggio. Ma non è la nostra mission». Il decreto sicurezza finirà per rendere più difficile anche i controlli sui malintenzionati. Trasformare i centri d’accoglienza in dormitori senza alcun progetto farà la fortuna di stranieri come i tre richiedenti asilo nigeriani arrestati ieri a Lucca per spaccio di droga e che fino a qualche tempo fa stavano in una struttura per migranti controllata a vista dalla Croce rossa. Le “mele marce” certo non mancano. Ieri la Guardia di finanza di Ferrara ha perquisito 16 strutture attive nell’accoglienza dei migranti.
Secondo gli investigatori vi sarebbero stati abusi sulla rendicontazione dei servizi erogati, con conseguente danno alle casse pubbliche. L’unica alternativa sembrano essere proprio quegli Sprar che il governo non ha voluto incentivare. Al contrario la Regione Campania chiede all’esecutivo 10 milioni per sostenere le attività di integrazione dei migranti. «Il nostro obiettivo principale – spiega Franco Roberti, assessore regionale alla Sicurezza – è sostenere le attività degli Sprar in tutte le province della Campania».
▻https://www.avvenire.it/attualita/pagine/caos-accoglienza-scoppia-il-caso-mineo
New Italian law adds to unofficial clampdown on aid to asylum seekers. “Hundreds have already been expelled from reception centres”
Tens of thousands of vulnerable asylum seekers have lost their right to two-year residency permits and integration services in Italy after new legislation championed by the populist government’s right-wing Interior Minister Matteo Salvini was signed into law this week.
But over the past two years thousands have already had government services to which they were entitled cut or curtailed, according to interviews with asylum seekers and legal experts over several months, as well as government responses to dozens of freedom of information requests.
One in every three asylum seekers who arrived in more than half of Italy’s local government prefectures over the past two years has either left or been evicted from their government-run accommodation, according to information IRIN obtained from local governments.
A request for comment on these findings to the Italian interior ministry went unanswered at time of publication.
Aid groups warn that the new law will compound an existing crisis in Italy, which is struggling to cope with providing basic services to some 180,000 refugees and asylum seekers awaiting decisions and an estimated 500,000 undocumented migrants – many of whom have already fallen out of the reception system.
In addition to granting five-year residence permits to refugees and to asylum seekers who meet “subsidiary protection” criteria, Italy has for the past 20 years granted two-year residency permits to a wider group of migrants on comparatively flexible “humanitarian protection” grounds – broadly interpreted as those who aren’t refugees but who can’t be sent home either.
The controversial new Decree-Law on Immigration and Security, signed by President Sergio Matterella on Monday, scraps “humanitarian protection” altogether and introduces new “special permits” for a much narrower group that comprises: victims of domestic violence, trafficking, and severe exploitation; those with serious health issues; those fleeing natural disasters; and those who commit acts of civic valour.
–------------------------
The Decree-Law on Immigration and Security in brief
“Humanitarian protection” residency permits – granted to one in four asylum seekers last year – abolished
Asylum seekers lose access to integration services until their application is granted
Network of reception centres drastically downsized
Withdrawal of refugee status made easier
Maximum detention time in “repatriation centres” doubled to six months
Fast-track expulsions for “socially dangerous” migrants
–-------------------------
In 2017, 20,166 people – around 25 percent of the total who sought asylum – were granted “humanitarian protection”. Those who lose their permits also lose their right to work and their right to stay in the best facilities that have services to help them integrate into Italian society.
Only 25,000 places are available in Italy’s longer-term, government-run reception system, known by its Italian acronym SPRAR, which typically provides high standards of care. This means that more than 150,000 people waiting for decisions on their asylum applications, or 80 percent of the total, are housed in more than 9,000 supposedly temporary accommodation facilities, known by the acronym CAS. These are for the most part managed by commercial entities with no track record in providing housing and services for asylum seekers, and have been associated with corruption and substandard living conditions.
Some asylum seekers formerly granted “humanitarian protection” are already being forced out of the SPRAR facilities, meaning they also lose out on integration measures such as language classes and work skills courses.
"Hundreds have already been expelled from reception centres throughout Italy, and left homeless at a moment’s notice,” Oliviero Forti, head of the migration division for Caritas in Italy, told IRIN. “In some places, like Crotone, our charity shelters have been overwhelmed over the weekend. Some very vulnerable individuals, such as pregnant women or persons with psychiatric conditions, are being put on the street without any support measure and, incredibly, government-managed facilities are calling upon Caritas for help.”
An attempt to reduce arrivals
Italy overtook Greece in 2016 as the main European entry point for migrants and asylum seekers, receiving 320,000 people in the past two years – the vast majority entering on small, overcrowded vessels operated by smugglers across the Mediterranean from North Africa, or after being rescued en route.
Salvini, also deputy prime minister, leads the far-right League Party and campaigned on a strongly anti-immigration platform during the March general election. Shortly after taking office in June as part of a fractious ruling coalition with the populist and anti-EU Five Star Movement, Salvini closed the country’s ports to migrant rescue ships.
Migrants who arrive in Italy by boat typically spend their first two days in initial arrival facilities known as “hotspots”, mostly concentrated in Sicily, where identification procedures take place. Those who are prima facie determined to have a legitimate basis to claim asylum are entitled to a place in the SPRAR system, even if the majority don’t get one.
These are small facilities evenly distributed across the country, organised by the Interior Ministry and managed by humanitarian organisations with experience working with migrant populations. They are known for providing a high standard of basic services as well as vocational training and psychological counselling. The 25,000 available placements have typically been reserved for the most vulnerable cases, such as minors who are victims of trafficking.
Under Salvini’s new law, only people who are granted a visa – a process that can take several years — may be placed in SPRAR facilities, not asylum seekers. Migrants and asylum seekers will be sent to a CAS.
Médecins Sans Frontières warned in a statement that the new law will have a “dramatic impact on the life and health of thousands of people”. MSF said that “over the years it operated inside CAS”, its workers found that prolonged stays in the centres “deteriorates migrants’ mental health” and “hampers their chances of integrating successfully into society”.
The coalition government promised that Salvini’s new law would result in half a million deportations. Past deportation rates suggest it will be difficult to keep that promise, analysts say. What does seem likely, they say, is that larger numbers of asylum seekers will be detained for longer periods. Salvini’s law doubles to six months the time new arrivals can be held in “repatriation” centres while their identities and nationalities are being confirmed.
Added to the 30-day detention period many face in hotspot facilities, this means asylum seekers can now be detained for up to seven months without having committed any crime.
Another measure within the new legislation suspends refugee protections for those considered “socially dangerous” or who are convicted of crimes, even in the first of Italy’s three-stage conviction process.
Already in crisis
Based on IRIN’s analysis of responses to freedom of information requests received from 53 of Italy’s 103 prefectures (the others did not reply), the Italian reception system is unable to retain its guests, partly due to a lack of integration opportunities and medical care. More than 28,000 residents have left the temporary facilities over the last 24 months, either because local governments withdrew their right to assistance for alleged violations of certain rules or because the migrants and asylum seekers decided to leave of their own accord.
Interviews with legal experts, social workers, dozens of migrants, and analysis of the withdrawal orders shows a pattern of widespread violations of migrants’ legal rights in the reception centres, with local authorities sometimes complicit in the abuses.
The CAS centres – for the most part private-sector hotels and apartments identified and approved by local government – are in theory just one link in a complex and poorly regulated chain of migrant accommodations. But because the SPRAR centres are full to capacity, they have taken on a spill-over function.
A migrant can be entitled to remain in Italy as an asylum seeker or refugee, but can still lose, with a “withdrawal order”, all institutional support, such as accommodation, training, medical care etc. Under EU law that is legally binding in Italy, withdrawal orders should only be issued as a last resort, to punish violent conduct or severe abuse of the reception benefits.
Dozens of interviews with former and current CAS residents – as well as withdrawal orders and communications between reception centre managers and government officials seen by IRIN – reveal that this regulation is frequently abused, sometimes to retaliate against residents who protest their treatment within the facilities. Minor infringements such as returning to centres late are routinely penalised, sometimes retroactively, with criteria that vary massively from one prefecture to another – including, sometimes, withdrawal notices.
The abuse of withdrawal orders “infringes both EU and Italian law, depriving migrants of basic human rights,” said Dario Belluccio, a lawyer and the director of ASGI, a leading association of immigration law scholars.
Those who receive a withdrawal notice – the number could spike under Salvini’s new law, with more asylum seekers being deemed “socially dangerous” or found guilty of minor infractions – instantly lose their place in a residence centre, a €75 monthly allowance, and virtually all institutional support.
Those who leave the centres often move to migrant shanty towns, which tend to lack water and electricity and where severe labour exploitation and sex trafficking thrive.
Helped by the unsatisfactory conditions in the reception system, the shanty towns have grown in size over the past few years. In these communities, migrants often find it difficult to obtain basic services such as healthcare as well as the legal assistance needed to follow up on asylum applications.
No permit, no job, no home
Even without a withdrawal order, more asylum seekers and migrants may soon find themselves without access to shelter or services provided by the government. That’s already the case for Becky*, a Nigerian woman in her 20s who was trafficked to Italy for sex work. A social worker familiar with her case, who spoke to IRIN on condition of anonymity for security concerns, said that shortly after arriving in Italy two years ago Becky was forced by her trafficker to leave the reception facility in which she was placed to move to a large shanty town in the province of Foggia.
When local anti-trafficking authorities became aware of Becky’s case after questions were raised during her asylum interview earlier this year, they offered her a place in a protection facility. But such facilities demand that residents give up their mobile phones to ensure that traffickers can’t track them. Residents are limited to one weekly call to a family member while trafficking allegations are being investigated.
“It is not an easy choice to make, and she didn’t take up that opportunity,” said the social worker.
Days before the new immigration law was passed by parliament last month, Becky was issued a humanitarian residence permit by the local asylum commission. But under the new law, authorities are no longer able to distribute the permits, even after they have been granted. “It is not a matter of will, it is literally a matter of police no longer having a button on their computers to print a humanitarian permit,” the social worker noted.
Without documents, Becky can’t look for a job or new accommodation. So she remains in the shanty town, exactly where her trafficker placed her two years ago.
►https://www.irinnews.org/news-feature/2018/12/07/new-italian-law-adds-unofficial-clampdown-aid-asylum-seekers
Vulnerable migrants made homeless after Italy passes ’Salvini decree’
Decree named after leader of far-right party abolishes humanitarian protection for those not eligible for refugee status.
Dozens of migrants, including victims of sex trafficking and a child with mental health problems, have been removed from so-called “welcome centres” in Italy as the populist government’s hardline immigration measures kick in.
The “Salvini decree” – named after Matteo Salvini, interior minister and leader of the far-right League – won a vote in parliament last week and was formally endorsed by the president Sergio Mattarella on Monday.
The main element of the bill, which abolishes humanitarian protection for those not eligible for refugee status but who cannot be sent home, was however retroactively applied by the interior ministry’s representative in Crotone, a province in the southern Calabria region, where last Friday 24 people were forced to leave a centre in the town of Isola Capo Rizzuto.
The evictions are not only affecting those whose request for protection on humanitarian grounds is pending approval, but also those in possession of permits to stay, despite the law stipulating that their status should be maintained.
The majority of migrants who have arrived in Italy in recent years have been granted humanitarian protection, with some 100,000 people estimated to hold the permit, which is valid for two years and enables them to work.
Among those stranded in Isola Capo Rizzuto were a young couple with a five-month-old daughter, two victims of sex trafficking and a boy suffering from mental health problems.
“When the police came to tell us that we couldn’t stay there anymore, I couldn’t believe my ears,” Blessing, a 31-year-old victim of sex trafficking from Nigeria, told the Guardian. “They took all of our belongings and escorted us out. There was a young girl in our group. This is outrageous. I have a legal permit to stay. And soon I may not have a roof over my head. I’m really frightened.”
Blessing found temporary shelter in a Red Cross charity facility in Crotone while the rest have also been accommodated with the help of other charities and the town hall.
“What happened here is crazy,” said Francesco Parisi, president of Crotone’s Red Cross. “You can’t just leave vulnerable people on the street. This is a violation of human rights. We are going to take care of these people now, but I hope things will change.”
Alessia Romana, a social policies councillor in Crotone, said the local authority was trying to manage the situation.
“The council has a moral obligation but also the juridical obligation to take care of these people,” she said. “Up until now, the system in #Crotone worked well. We managed to give reception and there wasn’t any trouble; migrants and locals co-existed.”
A similar measure was applied in Potenza, a city in the southern region of Basilicata, with the interior ministry prefect there announcing last week that “humanitarian protection holders” must be “invited to leave” welcome centres.
Once humanitarian protection permits are received, people are supposed to leave centres on the first rung of the migrant reception system and move to an accommodation in which they can benefit from integration programmes. But slow-moving bureaucracy and limited space means that those with permits end up staying in the first-rung centres for longer.
A dozen or so others have been asked to leave a welcome centre in #Caserta, Campania, according to Italian press reports, while hundreds are expected to be evicted from Cara di Mineo, Europe’s second largest migrant reception centre, in the coming days.
The number is likely to rise as the bill, which Salvini has described as a “gift to Italians”, takes effect. The loss of protection will also mean hundreds of people suddenly becoming “illegal” immigrants, with Italy’s national statistics office estimating that the decree will make 130,000 migrants illegal by 2020.
“What we have been witnessing recently leads us to believe that there will be negative effects not only on vulnerable people, but also on Italian society generally as people enter into a formally illegal status,” said Carlotta Sami, spokeswoman for the UN refugee agency in southern Europe.
“We fail to understand why, at this precise moment, even those individuals with legal protection have been told to leave. The decree is not retroactive, so why are they telling them to leave? Sending families away, women and children, pregnant women. It seems cruel.”
Cities including Bologna, Turin and Rome, the latter two of which are managed by the Five Star Movement, the League’s coalition partner, have refused to implement the measures, arguing they will increase homelessness and risk social unrest.
“We are really worried about a bill that is meant to manage immigration and increase security for citizens, but will instead create social marginality and destroy integration, while also creating social risks and the potential for radicalisation,” said Valeria Carlini, a spokesperson for the Italian Council for Refugees.
▻https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/07/vulnerable-migrants-made-homeless-after-italy-passes-salvini-decree
Migranti: le conseguenze del decreto Salvini e il nuovo “sistema parcheggio”
Dall’entrata in vigore del provvedimento su immigrazione e asilo, decine di persone sono state espulse dai centri di accoglienza e mandate per strada, nonostante vi siano posti liberi e già finanziati. “È illegittimo. Ci troviamo di fronte a un danno per i cittadini stranieri che hanno un titolo di protezione e a una beffa per il contribuente”, denuncia Gianfranco Schiavone, vicepresidente di Asgi
“Quello che sta avvenendo in queste settimane nel nome del decreto Salvini è gravissimo. Non solo le persone finiscono in mezzo alla strada nonostante vi siano nello SPRAR posti liberi (e quindi già finanziati), ma l’intero sistema di protezione e accoglienza è stato spezzato”. Gianfranco Schiavone, vicepresidente dell’Associazione studi giuridici sull’immigrazione (Asgi, www.asgi.it), osserva con preoccupazione gli effetti del provvedimento convertito nella legge 132/2018 (in vigore dal 4 dicembre 2018). Alcuni provvedimenti hanno preso la forma di circolari prefettizie che “invitano” i gestori dei centri di accoglienza straordinaria (CAS) a far uscire dalle strutture le persone in possesso di un permesso di soggiorno per protezione umanitaria, abrogato di fatto dalla legge. È accaduto a Potenza, a metà novembre, dove il dirigente dell’area Immigrazione ha “ricordato” anche ai gestori che il (fu) Sistema di protezione per richiedenti asilo e rifugiati (SPRAR) verrà riservato a titolari di protezione internazionale e minori stranieri non accompagnati. E basta.
Per comprendere natura e legittimità di iniziative come quelle della prefettura di Potenza, Schiavone suggerisce di partire dal nuovo quadro disegnato dalla norma.
GS Il decreto Salvini convertito in legge ha operato un cambiamento molto profondo del sistema nazionale pubblico. Il precedente infatti era imperniato sulla logica del Sistema di protezione per richiedenti asilo e rifugiati (SPRAR) come sistema unico sia per i richiedenti e sia per i titolari di protezione internazionale o umanitaria. Solo in caso di temporanea indisponibilità di posti nel sistema di accoglienza territoriale SPRAR e solo per il tempo strettamente necessario al trasferimento, il richiedente ospitato in un centro governativo di prima accoglienza restava ospitato in tale centro (ovvero in quelli di cui all’art. 11 del d.lgs 142/2015). La norma era pertanto chiara nel disporre che lo SPRAR fosse l’unico sistema di seconda accoglienza per tutti i richiedenti asilo che vi dovevano essere trasferiti nel più breve tempo possibile, dovendosi considerare l’accoglienza straordinaria in strutture temporanee una misura eventuale e limitata al tempo strettamente necessario al trasferimento del richiedente nelle strutture del sistema di accoglienza territoriale.
Questa la teoria. E la pratica?
GS Il sistema delineato dalla norma come straordinario e provvisorio nella prassi era diventato ordinario, a causa di carenze della norma ma anche per l’aumento inaspettato degli arrivi avvenuto nel 2015, 2016 e 2017. È evidente che il sistema straordinario avesse assunto grandissime dimensioni ma si trattava pur sempre di un sistema secondario e “di passaggio”. Questa situazione è stata completamente ribaltata dal decreto ora convertito in legge.
Perché?
GS Si torna a un sistema unico ma in una forma che non è mai esistita in Italia. Sin da quando è stato istituito un programma pubblico di protezione, questo è stato per così dire bicefalo, cioè imperniato su strutture statali e centri SPRAR, articolati grazie al coinvolgimento degli enti locali. Fino al 2015 ha governato una generale confusione, mentre tra 2015 e 2018 il previsto superamento dei CAS è rimasto in larga parte solo sulla carta. Ma, con un pizzico di ironia, oggi diremo che per fortuna il sistema almeno era bicefalo nel senso che conteneva anche spinte positive. Nella logica del Sistema di protezione c’era l’idea della gestione dell’arrivo dei richiedenti, della loro accoglienza e integrazione dentro la rete di servizi del territorio e organizzato dagli enti locali che si occupano di servizi socio-sanitari, come prassi normale per un Paese democratico.
Che fine ha fatto quell’impostazione, pur rimasta sulla carta?
GS È stata cancellata. Il legislatore ha previsto che non potranno più accedere allo SPRAR i richiedenti asilo, i titolari di permesso di soggiorno per motivi umanitari e i titolari di permesso di soggiorno per casi speciali (regime transitorio) rilasciato in seguito alla decisione sulla protezione umanitaria adottata dalla Commissione territoriale prima del 5 ottobre 2018, data di entrata in vigore del decreto Salvini, e infine esclude anche i titolari di permesso di soggiorno per protezione speciale, il nuovo status giuridico che in modo limitatissimo ha sostituito la protezione umanitaria. È un arretramento netto sia perché crea un esercito di nuovi esclusi sia perché indica come unica soluzione quella dei centri a diretta gestione statale. Lì non vi è nessun tipo di radicamento e collegamento con il territorio, al quale invece vengono sottratte funzioni operative e gestionali che gli sono proprie ovvero la gestione. Il sistema dunque mira di nuovo a concepire la presenza dei richiedenti asilo come un fatto di ordine pubblico, comunque straordinario, temporaneo, che prima o poi finirà. Non è scritto esplicitamente ma nella logica del legislatore la situazione è percepita come temporanea. Il che è semplicemente antistorico.
I sostenitori della gestione statale diretta delle misure di accoglienza per i richiedenti asilo sostengono che sia la regola anche altrove.
GS Molti altri Paesi europei hanno un ruolo diretto nella gestione del fenomeno, è vero. Ma si tratta di sistemi molto diversi dal nostro. In quei Paesi la ripartizione di competenze e funzioni tra stato centrale e poteri locali è molto diversa dal caso italiano. Nel nostro ordinamento, le funzioni amministrative oggi svolte impropriamente dallo Stato competono alle autonomie locali. Alla luce degli artt. 118 e 199 della Costituzione non si comprende infatti perché solo nel caso dell’accoglienza ordinaria di richiedenti asilo il sistema non sia gestito con strumenti ordinari in capo agli enti locali, tramite finanziamento statale. Le Prefettura non hanno e non devono avere un’organizzazione funzionale tale da diventare nuovi uffici sociali che svolgono compiti che spettano invece agli enti del territorio. Questo meccanismo è totalmente anomalo e in controtendenza rispetto a quello che è stato fatto negli ultimi anni.
Perché il sistema è stato “spezzato”?
GS Perché per i richiedenti asilo, inseriti in centri straordinari, l’accoglienza è minima, di bassa soglia, con servizi essenziali come vitto, alloggio, un minimo affiancamento legale e linguistico. Ma non sono affatto previste misure di integrazione sociale, di efficace apprendimento della lingua, di riqualificazione professionale. Un’accoglienza cioè che non si occupa di che cosa le persone facciano tutto il giorno, azzerando l’interazione con il territorio. Lo possiamo definire perciò come un gigantesco “sistema parcheggio” che ha costi economici e sociali altissimi.
La propaganda dice che sarà più economico.
GS Da un punto di vista strettamente monetario è vero, perché i servizi sono abbattuti al minimo ma è uno sguardo miope. Le ricadute si misurano su una scala più ampia: un buon sistema di accoglienza alimenta l’economia locale con un numero congruo di operatori qualificati e insegnanti. Spezzandolo, invece, vengono meno campi professionali e di sviluppo a favore di una mera guardiania richiesta alle strutture.
Il risparmio è un’illusione?
GS I costi di gestione dell’accoglienza, pur inizialmente ridotti saranno destinati a esplodere una volta che le persone saranno uscite dalle strutture. Per il semplice fatto che assomiglieranno a quelle appena entrate, con la differenza che quelle in uscita con poche risorse e pochi percorsi avviati saranno costrette ad avviarli dopo. È un enorme allungamento dei tempi che produce costi e un impatto molto più duro sul territorio.
Dove dovranno essere “avviati” quei percorsi?
GS Nell’ormai ex SPRAR, costretto a fare programmi di inserimento da zero in tempi ristretti. È un cortocircuito micidiale che produrrà persone regolarmente soggiornanti ma prive di strumenti e con drammatico impatto sui servizi sociali e quindi sui costi. Ecco perché qualunque analisi economica seria ci dice che il guadagno annunciato è in realtà un gigantesco sperpero di risorse.
Veniamo alla circolare di Potenza. Sostiene che i titolari di protezione umanitaria presenti nelle suddette strutture debbano essere “invitati” a lasciare i centri di accoglienza e che da inizio dicembre non verranno più corrisposte somme per la relativa accoglienza. Inoltre afferma che la nuova legge escluderebbe “la possibilità di trasferimenti negli SPRAR in assenza di permesso di soggiorno per status di rifugiato o per protezione sussidiaria”. È una lettura corretta?
GS Poco fa elencavo chi per legge non potrà più accedere allo SPRAR. Al di là di ogni considerazione sulla legittimità di quella previsione, è evidente non può applicarsi a chi sia già titolare di un permesso di soggiorno per motivi umanitari a seguito di domanda presentata prima del 5 ottobre 2018 (e relativo permesso rilasciato prima del 5 ottobre 2018) o a coloro che otterranno un permesso per “casi speciali” in quanto la loro domanda è stata esaminata con la normativa previgente ma il permesso di soggiorno è stato rilasciato dopo il 5 ottobre 2018.
Perché?
GS Secondo l’ASGI, coloro che avevano presentato domanda di protezione internazionale prima dell’entrata in vigore del decreto Salvini avrebbero avuto pieno diritto di accedere allo SPRAR. Ma c’era mancanza di posti disponibili. Dunque solo un fatto contingente (cioè le persistenti deficienze organizzative della pubblica amministrazione), non da loro dipendente, ha impedito che nei confronti di parte dei richiedenti asilo la norma trovasse piena e corretta applicazione. Ma ciò non significa che queste persone non abbiano diritto di accedere allo SPRAR oggi o, comunque, che alle stesse non debba essere garantito, pur dentro una struttura diversa, il godimento di diritti identici a quelli di chi era già accolto o trasferito in un centro afferente allo SPRAR.
Tradotto: il diritto all’accesso nel sistema è sorto al momento della presentazione della domanda di protezione.
GS Esatto. Quando cioè la norma prevedeva il passaggio allo SPRAR nel minor tempo possibile. Dunque il nuovo “regime” dovrebbe essere applicato solo alle domande presentate dopo il 5 ottobre, i cui esiti ancora non ci sono.
Accade il contrario, però.
GS Ciò che sta avvenendo non dovrebbe in alcun modo avvenire tanto più che abbiamo persino un sistema di protezione sottodimensionato, con posti liberi nel sistema SPRAR. Significa che abbiamo persone in strada nonostante posti liberi e finanziati. Quindi ci troviamo di fronte a un danno per i cittadini stranieri che hanno un titolo di protezione e a una beffa per il contribuente, forse anche simpatizzante della nuova norma, che immagina maggior rigore o controllo e invece misurerà un peggioramento della qualità, dei servizi nonché l’aumento della spesa.
Il ministero dell’Interno sostiene però che anche in precedenza i migranti uscissero dai centri di accoglienza straordinaria.
GS Manca un piccolo dettaglio: uscivano dai CAS e per legge entravano nello SPRAR.
Quali scenari si profilano?
GS È necessario che gli interessati, i richiedenti e i beneficiari, sostenuti da enti che non vogliano essere solamente enti gestori ma anche enti di tutela, avviino una serie di ricorsi mirati a rivendicare la corretta attuazione della legge, con la cessazione immediata di allontanamenti illegittimi dai centri. I quali avvengono sempre in modo informale e totalmente scorretto, con l’ente pubblico che si libera della responsabilità di comunicare un provvedimento che non esiste neppure e demanda lo sgradevole compito all’ente gestore. E così il migrante si ritrova per la strada senza nemmeno un provvedimento da impugnare ma solo un rifiuto dell’ingresso nello SPRAR fatto in forma orale da un operatore sociale o figure assimilabili.
Ecco i primi effetti del #DecretoSicurezza: una circolare della Prefettura di #Potenza invita i gestori CAS a fare uscire dalle strutture le persone in possesso di PDS per protezione umanitaria. Ci domandiamo, è possibile mettere per strada dall’oggi al domani delle persone?
Italie : des migrants hébergés en centre d’accueil jetés à la rue après le « décret Salvini »
Suite à l’adoption d’un décret-loi durcissant l’immigration en Italie, vingt-quatre migrants bénéficiant d’un « titre de séjour humanitaire » ont été expulsés d’un centre d’accueil en Calabre, dans le sud de l’Italie. Ce statut ne permet plus d’accéder à un centre d’hébergement. Les associations s’alarment et cherchent des solutions d’urgence.
En Calabre, dans le sud de l’Italie, le décret anti-immigration de Matteo Salvini, adopté le 28 novembre, a été rapidement appliqué. Deux jours après, 24 migrants ont été expulsés de leur centre d’accueil (CARA d’Isola Capo Rizzuto) à la demande de la préfecture de Crotone, en Italie du sud. Ils ne bénéficiaient plus d’un droit au logement conformément au décret-loi. Pourquoi ? Parce que, selon la nouvelle loi, leur « titre de séjour humanitaire » n’existe plus et ne leur donne plus accès à un toit.
Le décret du Premier ministre italien supprime en effet le « titre de séjour humanitaire », valable deux ans. Il est désormais remplacé par d’autres permis comme celui de « protection spéciale », d’une durée d’un an, ou « catastrophe naturelle dans le pays d’origine », d’une durée de six mois.
>> À lire : « Que contient le décret anti-immigration adopté en Italie ? »
La protection humanitaire était généralement accordée aux personnes qui n’étaient pas éligibles au statut de réfugié mais qui ne pouvaient pas être renvoyées chez elles pour des raisons de sécurité - cela concernait par exemple les homosexuels fuyant des pays aux lois répressives à l’encontre de leur communauté. Au total en 2017, 25 % des demandeurs d’asile en Italie ont reçu un permis de séjour humanitaire, soit plus de 20 000 personnes.
« Ils se retrouvent sans solution »
Avec la nouvelle loi, les centres d’accueil sont désormais réservés aux seuls personnes ayant le statut de réfugié et aux mineurs non accompagnés. Autrement dit, les migrants anciennement sous protection humanitaire ne pourront plus y avoir accès, même avec leur nouveau statut.
« Ces 24 personnes ont reçu un titre de séjour régulier en Italie, mais leur prise en charge dans la première phase d’accueil (CARA) a expiré. Ils se retrouvent donc sans solution », précise à InfoMigrants le père Rino Le Pera, directeur du réseau Caritas dans la province de Crotone.
Parmi les expulsés, il déplore la présence « d’une famille avec une petite fille de 6 mois (voir photo ci-dessous), d’une jeune femme victime d’exploitation sexuelle, d’une autre ayant subi des violences physiques et d’un homme souffrant de problèmes de santé mentale ».
« Ce qui se passe ici est fou », dénonce de son côté Franceso Parisi, président de la Croix-Rouge à Crotone, interrogé par le quotidien britannique The Guardian. « Vous ne pouvez pas laisser des personnes vulnérables à la rue. C’est une violation des droits de l’Homme ».
Prévenus à l’avance de l’expulsion, Caritas et la Croix-Rouge italienne ont réussi à se rendre au CARA d’Isola Capo Rizzuto pour proposer une solution d’hébergement à la famille concernée ainsi qu’aux deux femmes victimes de violences. Quatre migrants ont également été accueillis par une coopérative locale. « Pour ce qui est des autres, nous pensons qu’ils ont pu reprendre la route, ou rejoindre le camp de fortune situé au nord de Crotone, où près d’une centaine de personnes vivent dans des conditions extrêmement précaires sous des tentes », assure le père Rino Le Pera qui s’étonne de la « vitesse » à laquelle les autorités ont mis en oeuvre les nouvelles mesures.
Les prêtres disposés à « ouvrir les portes des églises »
« Nous essayons de nous préparer car d’autres expulsions devraient arriver, mais nous ne savons pas quand ce sera, ni combien de personnes exactement vont être concernées », poursuit-il. À Crotone, Caritas a déjà préparé un dortoir pouvant accueillir 20 personnes, une solution « qui ne sera sûrement pas suffisante » concède son directeur.
Selon l’agence de presse italienne ANSA, environ 200 personnes devraient à leur tour être expulsées du centre d’Isola Capo Rizzuto. À Potenza, dans la région de la Basilicate, le préfet a annoncé au début du mois que les « détenteurs d’une protection humanitaire » devaient être « invités à quitter » les centres d’accueil, rapporte le Guardian. La presse italienne indique encore qu’une dizaine de migrants a reçu l’ordre de quitter leur centre d’accueil à Caserta, en Campagnie. Dans les prochains jours, des centaines de personnes devraient également quitter le CARA de Mineo, en Sicile, le deuxième plus grand centre d’accueil pour migrants en Europe.
Face à cette situation alarmante, les prêtres italiens ont déclaré la semaine dernière être disposés à « ouvrir les portes des églises de chaque paroisse » aux personnes expulsées des centres d’accueil.
▻http://www.infomigrants.net/fr/post/13814/italie-des-migrants-heberges-en-centre-d-accueil-jetes-a-la-rue-apres-
Studenti migranti con il permesso umanitario rischiano l’irregolarità
La storia di Amadou Diallo che a giugno dovrebbe diplomarsi all’Istituto Maiorana di Palermo ma a gennaio non potrà rinnovare il permesso di soggiorno perchè rientra nella tipologia abolita dal decreto sicurezza. I timori del progetto Ragazzi Harraga
▻https://www.rainews.it/tgr/sicilia/video/2018/12/sic-studenti-migranti-permesso-umanitario-irregolarita-1d1c931b-f4ac-4fc4-9f
#decretoinsicurezza Senza integrazione città più insicure. Con tagli allo Sprar solo propaganda. Solo a Pesaro 41 persone per strada da lunedì dalla mattina alla sera. Che non saranno rimpatriate. Più insicurezza e microcriminalità. Ecco gli effetti del decreto Salvini. #wepesaro
▻https://twitter.com/matteoricci/status/1073911256631906305?s=19
Migranti, riforma accoglienza: «In 120 mila destinati a diventare irregolari»
Fotografa le conseguenze della riforma dell’accoglienza il nuovo report di Oxfam. «Oltre 12 mila migranti con permesso di soggiorno rischiano di restare in strada nelle prossime settimane». L’impatto sui bilanci comunali sarà di 280 milioni euro annui (stima Anci). Le testimonianze.
Oltre 12 mila migranti vulnerabili, in regola con il permesso di soggiorno, rischiano di restare in strada nelle prossime settimane, mentre nei prossimi 2 anni circa 120 mila persone sono destinate a scivolare nell’irregolarità, tra permessi per motivi umanitari non rinnovati (circa 32.750), non rilasciati (27.300), e pratiche arretrate che saranno esaminate dalle Commissioni Territoriali secondo le nuove disposizioni di legge (70 mila). Fotografia le conseguenze della riforma del sistema di accoglienza il report I sommersi e i salvati della protezione umanitaria, diffuso oggi da Oxfam, in occasione della Giornata internazionale dei diritti dei migranti, attraverso le testimonianze di chi da un giorno all’altro si sta vedendo negare il diritto all’accoglienza e all’integrazione.
A subire le conseguenze più gravi sono neo-maggiorenni, madri con bimbi piccoli, persone in fuga dall’orrore di guerre, persecuzioni e torture che saranno semplicemente tagliate fuori dal sistema di accoglienza, sottolineano gli osservatoi. «Con un futuro di fronte che, nella migliore delle ipotesi, si presenta pieno di incognite e un percorso di integrazione lasciato a metà. Vittime quasi sempre due volte della disumanità delle politiche migratorie adottate dall’Italia e dall’Europa: prima con l’accordo Italia – Libia e adesso con le politiche introdotte dal Governo». “Su 18mila permessi per protezione umanitaria concessi da gennaio a settembre nel nostro paese, solo una minoranza potrà continuare a seguire un percorso di integrazione virtuoso all’interno dei centri Sprar – ha detto Giulia Capitani, policy advisor per la crisi migratoria di Oxfam Italia - Le Prefetture di tutta Italia nei giorni scorsi hanno inviato agli enti gestori dei Centri di Accoglienza Straordinaria disposizioni per la cessazione immediata dell’accoglienza dei titolari di protezione umanitaria. Migranti vulnerabili sono stati semplicemente gettati in strada, in pieno inverno, senza nessun riguardo per la loro condizione e in totale assenza di soluzioni alternative. Una situazione incredibile da tutti i punti di vista. Ne è riprova la notizia, di queste ore, di una parziale e frettolosa retromarcia del Governo che ha dato “indicazioni verbali” ai Prefetti di sospendere momentaneamente le revoche dell’accoglienza e di attendere una circolare ministeriale in proposito”.
Oxfam ricorda inoltre che non si stanno interrompendo gli arrivi nel nostro paese, anche in inverno: «Oltre 2 mila da inizio ottobre ad oggi. Persone che, in un sistema di accoglienza che privilegia la gestione puramente emergenziale, andranno ad aggravare la situazione». “Il paradosso è che la nuova legge non aumenterà la sicurezza, né produrrà un risparmio per le casse dello Stato. - sottolinea Alessandro Bechini, direttore dei programmi in Italia di Oxfam - Buttando in strada migliaia di persone si pongono le basi per un drammatico incremento del conflitto sociale, della marginalità, del risentimento, della povertà. Si darà nuova linfa al lavoro nero e alla criminalità organizzata, che avrà gioco facile nel reclutare i più disperati. Allo stesso tempo l’aumento del disagio avrà un enorme impatto sui bilanci comunali, stimato da Anci in ben 280 milioni euro annui. Ebbene di fronte a tutto questo chiediamo con forza di riconsiderare l’approccio definito nella riforma, che di fatto nega i diritti delle persone più deboli, tradendo lo spirito della nostra Costituzione, della Dichiarazione universale dei diritti umani, per la quale si sono accese migliaia di fiaccole in tutta Italia solo qualche giorno fa”.
Il rapporto raccoglie diverse videotestimonianze. Come quella di Ibrahim Salifu, richiedente asilo accolto da Oxfam in un Centro di accoglienza straordinaria (Cas). Ricorda gli abusi subiti per 7 anni nell’inferno libico: “Quando sono arrivato in Libia sono stato rapito e portato in prigione. Lì le persone ogni giorno vengono picchiate e molti sono stati uccisi davanti ai miei occhi solo perché chiedevano di essere pagati per il lavoro che avevano svolto”. Per i traumi e gli abusi fisici e psicologici di cui è stato vittima, a Ibrahim è stata da poco riconosciuta la protezione umanitaria, ma dopo il 5 ottobre ossia dopo l’entrata in vigore del Decreto immigrazione e sicurezza, da poco convertito in legge: «Rischia nel prossimo futuro di ritrovarsi per strada, perché non potrà più entrare in un Centro di protezione per richiedenti asilo e rifugiati (Sprar), dove avrebbe dovuto concludere il suo percorso di integrazione».
▻https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbFu4tltStg
E’ inmvece la storia di un’accoglienza forse ancora possibile quella di Beauty Isimhenmhen. “Non mi aspettavo di sopravvivere, né che la mia bambina si salvasse. Per questo l’ho chiamata Miracle…che vuole dire miracolo”. La mamma di 25 anni costretta a fuggire dalle persecuzioni in Nigeria mentre era incinta, ricorda la paura di non farcela, durante il suo viaggio verso l’Italia e l’Europa. La tragedia del suo passaggio obbligato in Libia, durante cui ha perso il marito ed è rimasta sola. Arrivata in Italia al nono mese di gravidanza è riuscita a salvare sua figlia appena in tempo. Oggi sta imparando un lavoro, la lingua, ma famiglie come la sua hanno ancora la possibilità di essere accolte nei centri Sprar, solo perché hanno ottenuto il trasferimento dal Cas in cui si trovavano prima del 5 ottobre, data in cui è entrato in vigore il Decreto immigrazione e sicurezza.
▻https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUvakCk1w24
“È un’assurda lotteria dell’accoglienza, che la nuova legge ha aggravato a dismisura. Non si tiene più conto della condizione dei richiedenti asilo, del loro percorso di integrazione. – sottolinea Bechini – Ci sono capitati casi di persone in grande difficoltà – famiglie con bambini piccoli, vittime di torture, ragazzi e ragazze appena maggiorenni - a cui dopo il riconoscimento dello stato di protezione umanitaria è stata revocata la possibilità di entrare nei centri SPRAR, il giorno stesso dell’entrata in vigore del Decreto. Cosa facciamo con queste persone? Le buttiamo per strada? Per noi operatori del settore è una decisione impossibile da prendere”.
▻http://www.redattoresociale.it/Notiziario/Articolo/612325/Migranti-riforma-accoglienza-In-120-mila-destinati-a-diventare-irre
I sommersi e i salvati della protezione umanitaria
▻https://www.oxfamitalia.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/I-sommersi-e-i-salvati_MB_18dic18_FINAL.pdf
Tra poco, a @gpg_radio1 parliamo delle conseguenze del #DecretoSicurezza (oggi legge) sul numero degli irregolari in Italia. Quasi 700.000 irregolari entro fine 2020, per i quali sarà necessario trovare una soluzione. I rimpatri? Fermi a 7.000 l’anno.
En supprimant les « titres de séjour humanitaires », Salvini contraint des réfugiés à retourner dans l’illégalité
Depuis l’adoption du décret-loi durcissant la politique migratoire en Italie, des milliers de migrants devraient perdre leur statut de "protection humanitaire", qui leur permettait de rester légalement en Italie. Des milliers de personnes légales risquent de se retrouver à nouveau sans-papiers, sans travail.
Le ministre de l’Intérieur et vice-Premier ministre Matteo Salvini, également à la tête de la Ligue (extrême droite) a fait adopter fin novembre, un décret-loi dont la principale mesure est d’abolir les permis de séjour humanitaires. Ce statut était jusque-là accordé aux personnes vulnérables, familles ou femmes seules avec enfants, victimes de traumatismes pendant leur périple vers l’Italie.
Les conséquences sont graves, s’alarment les ONG d’aide aux migrants. Depuis 2008, plus de 120 000 personnes en ont bénéficié. "Et 40 000 personnes depuis deux ans", rappelle Marine de Haas de la Cimade. Ce statut était valable deux ans et renouvelable.
Comment la suppression de ces titres de séjour va-t-elle fonctionner ? "C’est au moment de renouveler leur permis humanitaire que les migrants vont perdre leur ‘régularité’ », rappelle Marine de Haas. Les primo-arrivants, eux, n’en bénéficieront plus. "En perdant ce statut légal, beaucoup vont perdre leur logement" et leur accès au marché du travail.
Ces dernières années et jusqu’en août, les commissions d’asile ont accordé en moyenne le permis humanitaire à 25% des demandeurs. Suite à des consignes de fermeté de Matteo Salvini, elles ont anticipé la fin des permis humanitaires, qui sont passés à 17% en septembre, 13% en octobre et 5% seulement en novembre.
Expulsion des personnes en situation irrégulière
Conséquence direct de la perte de ce statut : l’expulsion des centres d’accueil. Le 30 novembre, 24 migrants ont en effet été expulsés de leur structure d’hébergement d’urgence (CARA d’Isola Capo Rizzuto) à la demande de la préfecture de Crotone. "Les personnes qui avaient ce statut humanitaire perdent le droit d’aller dans les centres d’accueil. Elles repassent en situation irrégulière", explique Marine de Haas.
>> À relire : "En Italie, des migrants hébergés en centre d’accueil jetés à la rue après le ’décret Salvini’"
Matteo Salvini considère que ces personnes ne sont pas des ‘réfugiés’, "qu’elles doivent être expulsées", précise de son côté Eleonora Camilli, journaliste italienne, spécialiste de l’immigration, contactée par InfoMigrants.
Pour rester légalement en Italie, les migrants devraient convertir leur "statut humanitaire" en d’autres titres de séjour (séjour pour motif de travail par exemple), une procédure particulièrement complexe. "Ils peuvent aussi demander l’asile, mais vu le contexte politique, peu de dossiers ont de chances d’aboutir", précise Eleonora Camilli, la journaliste italienne.
La Cimade dénonce "l’hypocrisie" de Matteo Salvini
La Cimade et la journaliste italienne sont sceptiques face aux résultats de cette politique migratoire. "Les personnes en situation irrégulière ne vont pas être toutes renvoyées" précise encore Eleonora Camilli. "L’Italie n’a pas toujours d’accords de rapatriement avec des pays tiers". En effet, l’Italie dispose d’accords bilatéraux avec 24 pays non-européens pour rapatrier les migrants, mais beaucoup refusent de les reconnaître comme leur concitoyens et refusent de les ré-accepter sur leur territoire. Conséquence : l’Italie n’a procédé qu’à 6 514 reconduites à la frontière en 2017 et il n’est pas garanti que ce chiffre soit atteint cette année.
Les associations craignent donc une hausse de la clandestinité sur le sol italien. Beaucoup de migrants installés depuis plusieurs mois voire plusieurs années resteront sans doute en Italie, sans papiers. "Nous dénonçons l’hypocrisie de cette politique qui ‘invisibilise’ les migrants, qui les pousse à retourner dans la clandestinité, qui les pousse à se précariser durement", ajoute Marine de Haas.
>> À relire : "Le bon temps pour les clandestins est fini", affirme Matteo Salvini
Des associations françaises, comme Tous migrants, redoutent, elles, un pic de départ vers les pays limitrophes de l’Italie. "On s’attend à des arrivées prochaines via les Alpes", a expliqué Michel Rousseau, porte-parole de l’association de Briançon, ville non loin de la frontière italienne. Un avis partagé par Rafael Flichman, de la Cimade. "Des personnes avec un titre humanitaire qui expire dans quelques jours ou quelques mois peuvent décider de partir et de prendre la route vers la France".
Au total, entre les permis actuels qui ne seront pas renouvelés et ceux qui ne seront plus accordés, le chiffre de "100 000 clandestins en plus est une estimation basse", explique Valeria Carlini, porte-parole du Conseil italien pour les réfugiés (CIR).
Cambiamenti del “decreto sicurezza e immigrazione”
Quali sono i cambiamenti principali del decreto sicurezza? Cosa cambierà nel mondo dell’accoglienza? Quali saranno le conseguenze? Le risposte nella nuova infografica di Carta di Roma.
Approvato in via definitiva alle fine di novembre, il cosiddetto “decreto sicurezza” produce e produrrà i suoi effetti su tutta la filiera dell’immigrazione in Italia: dall’identificazione all’accoglienza, dalle procedure per la protezione internazionale all’integrazione. Nell’infografica che pubblichiamo oggi abbiamo riassunto alcuni punti fondamentali.
Fine dell’“umanitaria”
Senza addentrasi troppo nell’analisi della norma, alcuni punti importanti si possono segnalare. Fino all’autunno 2018 l’Italia poteva riconoscere 3 tipi di protezione a chi ne facesse richieste: status di rifugiato, protezione sussidiaria e umanitaria (qui ne abbiamo dato una sintetica descrizione). Distribuite così a fine novembre: 6467 status di rifugiato, 3888 protezione sussidiaria e 19841 protezione umanitaria. Oggi, la situazione è cambiata.
Chi ha presentato domanda di protezione internazionale DOPO il 5 ottobre ha due esiti possibili davanti a sé: 1. Se viene riconosciuto il rischio di persecuzione, e gli altri requisiti per lo status di rifugiato, oppure tortura, trattamento inumano e degradante, pena di morte o rischi legati a violenza generalizzata, allora riceverà il permesso per protezione internazionale. 2. E chi godeva della protezione umanitaria in quella fatidica data? Da una parte potrà convertire il permesso in uno per lavoro, altrimenti dovrà tornare davanti a una commissione territoriale per venire valutato secondo la nuova norma. 3. Può ottenere un permesso per casi speciali, per esempio per calamità naturali, per valore civile, per cure mediche, ecc.
Aumentano gli irregolari?
Secondo molti osservatori, il cambiamento della normativa avrà l’effetto di aumentare il numero degli irregolari presenti in Italia. Secondo le stime di Matteo Villa, analista dell’Ispi, in due anni e mezzo questi potrebbero crescere fino a quasi 140mila, tra i cosiddetti “diniegati” – coloro che in virtù della nuova legge non hanno ricevuto alcun tipo di protezione – e coloro che non hanno ottenuto il rinnovo in virtù delle modifiche alla norma. In totale 137mila migranti che dal giugno 2018 al dicembre 2020 sarebbero a spasso in Italia in attesa di un rimpatrio che di fatto è impraticabile senza gli accordi necessari con i paesi di provenienza.
«Il rischio di un’esplosione del numero degli irregolari è concreto, tuttavia io invito a essere molto cauti con le stime» nota Francesco Di Pietro, avvocato e membro dell’Associazione per gli studi giuridici sull’immigrazione. «La situazione è in evoluzione, leggiamo sui giornali di questi giorni di “stop alle espulsioni” e le cronache riportano i casi di famiglie lasciate per strada che devono essere tutelate e dovranno in qualche modo poter rientrare in qualche programma di protezione». È il caso dei migranti del Cara di Mineo o di Crotone e di molte famiglie ospitate in varie regioni italiane che sarebbero dovute uscire dalle strutture di accoglienza e che, per ora, hanno visto bloccato il provvedimento.
C’è un altro aspetto che dovrebbe calmierare, almeno parzialmente, l’aumento di irregolari. Coloro che hanno in mano il permesso umanitario hanno diritto a convertire quel permesso in uno di lavoro. «Tuttavia – nota Di Pietro – il rischio molto concreto con la nuova normativa è che si possa creare un mercato di permessi di lavoro fittizi, finte occupazioni che garantirebbero la permanenza nel nostro paese».
Cambiano gli Sprar
Il sistema Sprar (Sistema di protezione per richiedenti asilo e rifugiati) è stato in questi anni un fiore all’occhiello dell’accoglienza in Italia. Nel luglio 2018 aveva 35.881 posti assegnati (dai 25 in Valle d’Aosta agli oltre 4mila del Lazio e ai quasi 5mila della Sicilia) in 654 comuni italiani pari a 877 progetti in corso. Con la nuova norma firmata Salvini le cose cambiano. Con la scomparsa della protezione umanitaria, gli ospiti dei piccoli centri di accoglienza saranno solo i titolari di protezione internazionale (quindi asilo e sussidiaria) e i minori non accompagnati. Quindi niente più richiedenti asilo che rimarranno nei Cara e nei Cas fino alla decisione.
▻https://www.cartadiroma.org/news/in-evidenza/cambiamenti-del-decreto-sicurezza-e-immigrazione/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
Salvini blocca gli #SPRAR e i ragazzi finiscono in strada
▻https://www.corrieredellacalabria.it/regione/item/162169-salvini-blocca-gli-sprar-e-i-ragazzi-finiscono-in-strad
#San_Ferdinando
Migranti. A centinaia in strada, senza dimora. Pure i bimbi. È il «decreto sicurezza»
Sant’Egidio: «A Catania stanno facendo dimissioni a tutto spiano, anche di donne vulnerabili con bambini piccoli o con problemi psichici. Sono una marea, arrivano anche da altri Cas siciliani».
▻https://www.avvenire.it/attualita/pagine/decreto-sicurezza-a-centinaia-in-strada
Legge Salvini, i primi profughi senzatetto di Milano. L’assessore: «Fantasmi creati dal governo»
Majorino su Facebook fa i nomi: «Ahmad, Alhassane e gli altri. Sono sei ma presto saranno centinaia. Sono tutti titolari di protezione umanitaria»
▻https://milano.repubblica.it/cronaca/2019/01/05/news/decreto_sicurezza_majorino_assessore_primi_sei_migranti_senzatetto
#Milan
Primi effetti del Decreto Sicurezza, a #Firenze 80 migranti dormono al #parco_delle_Cascine
Molti provengono dalle strutture di accoglienza del nord Italia, alcuni da Treviso altri da Milano. In molti casi si tratta di migranti con protezione umanitaria che hanno dovuto lasciare i Cas.
▻https://www.globalist.it/news/2019/01/09/primi-effetti-del-decreto-sicurezza-a-firenze-80-migranti-dormono-al-parco
#Florence
No way back: New law adds pressure on asylum seekers in Italy
Over the last five years, some two million migrants and refugees have made it from the north coast of Africa by sea to the perceived promise and safety of Europe. Almost 650,000 people have survived the longest, most dangerous crossing via the central Mediterranean to Italy.
Saidykhan fled difficult conditions in his home country in 2016, hoping to find a better life in Italy. But things have not been easy. The recent repeal of two-year “humanitarian protection” status for a broad class of asylum seekers leaves people like him even more vulnerable.
From 2015 to 2017, almost 26,000 Gambians sought asylum in Italy. Under the old law, those who didn’t immediately qualify for asylum could still stay in Italy for a certain period and receive some social benefits. But the rules were tightened late last year to include only victims of human trafficking, domestic violence, and other very specific criteria.
Prominent Italians, including the mayors of Milan and Naples, have publicly opposed the new measures on ethical grounds, while the governors of Tuscany and Piedmont have said they will challenge them in court.
But dozens of migrants and asylum seekers have already been evicted from state-organised housing, and thousands more remain concerned. Unwilling to return home and unable to build a future in Italy, they fear they may end up on the street with no access to services or support.
▻https://www.irinnews.org/video/2019/01/08/no-way-back-new-law-adds-pressure-asylum-seekers-italy
En supprimant les « titres de séjour humanitaires », Salvini contraint des réfugiés à retourner dans l’illégalité
Depuis l’adoption du décret-loi durcissant la politique migratoire en Italie, des milliers de migrants devraient perdre leur statut de "protection humanitaire", qui leur permettait de rester légalement en Italie. Des milliers de personnes légales risquent de se retrouver à nouveau sans-papiers, sans travail.
Le ministre de l’Intérieur et vice-Premier ministre Matteo Salvini, également à la tête de la Ligue (extrême droite) a fait adopter fin novembre, un décret-loi dont la principale mesure est d’abolir les permis de séjour humanitaires. Ce statut était jusque-là accordé aux personnes vulnérables, familles ou femmes seules avec enfants, victimes de traumatismes pendant leur périple vers l’Italie.
Les conséquences sont graves, s’alarment les ONG d’aide aux migrants. Depuis 2008, plus de 120 000 personnes en ont bénéficié. "Et 40 000 personnes depuis deux ans", rappelle Marine de Haas de la Cimade. Ce statut était valable deux ans et renouvelable.
Comment la suppression de ces titres de séjour va-t-elle fonctionner ? "C’est au moment de renouveler leur permis humanitaire que les migrants vont perdre leur ‘régularité’ », rappelle Marine de Haas. Les primo-arrivants, eux, n’en bénéficieront plus. "En perdant ce statut légal, beaucoup vont perdre leur logement" et leur accès au marché du travail.
Ces dernières années et jusqu’en août, les commissions d’asile ont accordé en moyenne le permis humanitaire à 25% des demandeurs. Suite à des consignes de fermeté de Matteo Salvini, elles ont anticipé la fin des permis humanitaires, qui sont passés à 17% en septembre, 13% en octobre et 5% seulement en novembre.
Expulsion des personnes en situation irrégulière
Conséquence direct de la perte de ce statut : l’expulsion des centres d’accueil. Le 30 novembre, 24 migrants ont en effet été expulsés de leur structure d’hébergement d’urgence (CARA d’Isola Capo Rizzuto) à la demande de la préfecture de Crotone. "Les personnes qui avaient ce statut humanitaire perdent le droit d’aller dans les centres d’accueil. Elles repassent en situation irrégulière", explique Marine de Haas.
>> À relire : "En Italie, des migrants hébergés en centre d’accueil jetés à la rue après le ’décret Salvini’"
Matteo Salvini considère que ces personnes ne sont pas des ‘réfugiés’, "qu’elles doivent être expulsées", précise de son côté Eleonora Camilli, journaliste italienne, spécialiste de l’immigration, contactée par InfoMigrants.
Pour rester légalement en Italie, les migrants devraient convertir leur "statut humanitaire" en d’autres titres de séjour (séjour pour motif de travail par exemple), une procédure particulièrement complexe. "Ils peuvent aussi demander l’asile, mais vu le contexte politique, peu de dossiers ont de chances d’aboutir", précise Eleonora Camilli, la journaliste italienne.
La Cimade dénonce "l’hypocrisie" de Matteo Salvini
La Cimade et la journaliste italienne sont sceptiques face aux résultats de cette politique migratoire. "Les personnes en situation irrégulière ne vont pas être toutes renvoyées" précise encore Eleonora Camilli. "L’Italie n’a pas toujours d’accords de rapatriement avec des pays tiers". En effet, l’Italie dispose d’accords bilatéraux avec 24 pays non-européens pour rapatrier les migrants, mais beaucoup refusent de les reconnaître comme leur concitoyens et refusent de les ré-accepter sur leur territoire. Conséquence : l’Italie n’a procédé qu’à 6 514 reconduites à la frontière en 2017 et il n’est pas garanti que ce chiffre soit atteint cette année.
Les associations craignent donc une hausse de la clandestinité sur le sol italien. Beaucoup de migrants installés depuis plusieurs mois voire plusieurs années resteront sans doute en Italie, sans papiers. "Nous dénonçons l’hypocrisie de cette politique qui ‘invisibilise’ les migrants, qui les pousse à retourner dans la clandestinité, qui les pousse à se précariser durement", ajoute Marine de Haas.
>> À relire : "Le bon temps pour les clandestins est fini", affirme Matteo Salvini
Des associations françaises, comme Tous migrants, redoutent, elles, un pic de départ vers les pays limitrophes de l’Italie. "On s’attend à des arrivées prochaines via les Alpes", a expliqué Michel Rousseau, porte-parole de l’association de Briançon, ville non loin de la frontière italienne. Un avis partagé par Rafael Flichman, de la Cimade. "Des personnes avec un titre humanitaire qui expire dans quelques jours ou quelques mois peuvent décider de partir et de prendre la route vers la France".
Au total, entre les permis actuels qui ne seront pas renouvelés et ceux qui ne seront plus accordés, le chiffre de "100 000 clandestins en plus est une estimation basse", explique Valeria Carlini, porte-parole du Conseil italien pour les réfugiés (CIR).
►http://www.infomigrants.net/fr/post/13986/en-supprimant-les-titres-de-sejour-humanitaires-salvini-contraint-des-
GDB: Profughi, a #Brescia 1300 “in strada” e 250 giovani licenziati
“Insieme a queste persone alle quali non verrà riconosciuta alcuna forma di protezione – il permesso umanitario, prima dell’entrata in vigore della legge, veniva rilasciato al 40% circa dei richiedenti – rimarranno senza lavoro anche 250 operatori dei Cas e degli Sprar. Italiani giovani e qualificati.
Le 118 persone che vengono espulse in questi giorni dai Centri di accoglienza straordinaria sono in possesso di un permesso di soggiorno umanitario, che può essere convertito in permesso di soggiorno per lavoro. E proprio in questi giorni, come funghi, sono spuntati sedicenti datori di lavoro che, in ambio di denaro – dai 400 ai mille euro – stipulano falsi contratti di lavoro. La questura, tuttavia, per convertire il permesso, verifica che esista un contratto reale e, non trovandolo, ovviamente non procede alla conversione. Per i migranti, la beffa è doppia.
Per “attenuare l’impatto sociale della legge sicurezza” alcuni rappresentanti delle realtà che nella nostra provincia in questi anni si sono occupati di accoglienza di richiedenti asilo e rifugiati, sia nell’ambito dei progetti Sprar sia nella gestione dei Cas stanno valutando un coordinamento tra società civile ed enti locali.”
Italy evicts more than 500 people from refugee centre
Move is first major eviction since rightwing government enacted hardline migration law.
A further 75 were removed on Wednesday, with the remaining 430 to be evicted before the centre’s closure on 31 January.
Uncertain future for refugees after Italy shuts asylum centre
Funding cuts led to imminent closure of Italy’s second-largest centre for asylum seekers amid local protests.
The eviction of refugees from Italy’s second-largest centre for asylum seekers has continued for a second day amid protests from locals and opposition politicians over the way the transfers are being carried out.
The reception centre is located in Castelnuovo di Porto, a town near Rome, and the vast majority of the 540 people there are asylum seekers, including women and children.
The centre, chosen by the pope in 2016 for the traditional Holy Thursday mass, in which the pontiff performs a foot-washing ceremony, is due to close by the end of the month following funding cuts.
The evictions began on Tuesday when 30 people were taken away and another 75, including 10 women, were seen getting on buses on Wednesday without any knowledge of where they were headed.
According to UN’s refugee agency, UNHCR, at least 10 people who hold “humanitarian protection” permits will be left without a roof over their heads.
The recently passed “Salvini law” cracks down on asylum rights by abolishing such permits - issued to people who did not qualify for refugee status but were deemed as vulnerable - and barring those who hold them from receiving aid.
The law is set to leave thousands of people undocumented and without rights in the next two years.
Other centres across Italy are set to close in the coming months as well, including Italy’s largest in Mineo, Sicily.
Observers have criticised the way the government decided to carry out the transfers by sending in the police and the army with barely 48 hours of notice, and without prior coordination with the local authorities or the cooperative running the centre.
The transfers to other areas of the country will inevitably disrupt the lives of asylum seekers, some of whom have lived in Castelnuovo for over a year.
They will also affect asylum applications that must be reviewed by local commissions.
“Fourteen children will have to interrupt their school year,” UNHCR’s spokesperson for southern Europe, Carlotta Sami, told Al Jazeera.
“There’s no clarity on where they will be taken and what will happen to hundreds of asylum applications that were being examined by the local commission.”
More than 100 people, who were employed at the centre as language teachers or psychologists, are also set to lose their jobs.
The centre had been open for over a decade, hosting at one stage up to 1,000 people.
“The centre had become an integral part of Castelnuovo di Porto,” the town’s mayor, Riccardo Travaglini, told a local newspaper.
“I’m not saying the centre shouldn’t be closed, but it should have been coordinated. Castelnuovo has been at the forefront of this emergency for 10 years, 8,000 people came through here. Some respect was due to a community that has done much not only for Italy, but for Europe as well.”
Trade unions have scheduled protests to take place on Thursday. Some locals, including the town’s mayor, took part in a silent march on Tuesday to protest the closure of what many considered a model centre.
Italy’s interior minister and Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini defended the eviction, arguing that a drop in arrivals had freed places in other centres across the country.
“It is a question of common sense and good administration that will save Italians six million euros a year, without taking away the rights of anyone,” Salvini told a local radio station.
“All the guests who have the right to, will be transferred with as much generosity and with as many rights to other structures,” he said in a Facebook Live video.
Chiusura del C.A.R.A. di Castelnuovo di Porto: il commento del Tavolo asilo
Con un comunicato ufficiale le organizzazioni che compongono il Tavolo Asilo nazionale esprimono sconcerto e indignazione per la modalità con cui è gestita la chiusura del secondo centro più grande d’Italia.
Tra i punti evidenziati nella nota stampa, il “brevissimo preavviso” dato agli oltre 300 persone ospiti del centro, tra cui 14 minorenni.
I primi trasferimenti fuori regione, iniziati il 22 gennaio, non prevedono dei percorsi d’inclusione, scolastici, lavorativi e di formazione già intrapresi. Tra gli ospiti del centro, inoltre, ci sono uomini e donne ai quali, a causa del trasferimento, sarà impedito di proseguire i percorsi di riabilitazione e di cura per le violenze subite in Libia.
Un altro punto critico legato alla decisione di chiudere il centro di Castelnuovo è legato all’accoglienza: sono circa 150 i titolari di permesso di soggiorno per motivi umanitari ai quali la legge non garantisce alcuna soluzione alternativa e che rischiano di finire nella marginalità, lasciati per strada, tra questi diversi vulnerabili. Spiace costatare che ancora una volta non è tenuto in alcuna considerazione l’interesse delle persone e delle comunità coinvolte.
“Facciamo appello al Presidente del Consiglio, al Governo e al Parlamento, oltre che alle istituzioni locali – conclude il comunicato – affinché sia garantita a tutte le persone coinvolte una valutazione individuale dei percorsi di integrazione avviati ai fini del trasferimento in strutture nel territorio e non fuori regione; che sia garantita a tutti i minorenni iscritti a scuola la continuità del percorso di istruzione e che nessuno sia lasciato per strada“.
Amnesty International Italia aderisce al Tavolo asilo nazionale insieme a: A Buon Diritto, ACLI, ActionAid, ARCI, ASGI, Associazione Papa Giovanni XXIII, Casa dei Diritti Sociali, Centro Astalli, CIR, CNCA, Comunità di Sant’Egidio, Emergency, Federazione Chiese Evangeliche in Italia, Intersos, Legambiente, Mèdicins du Monde Missione Italia, Medici per i Diritti Umani, Medici Senza Frontiere, Oxfam Italia, Save the Children, Senza Confine del Tavolo Asilo Nazionale.
▻https://www.amnesty.it/chiusura-del-c-r-castelnuovo-porto-commento-del-tavolo-asilo
Castelnuovo di Porto, «non difendiamo i grandi centri, ma così è inumano»
Secondo giorno di trasferimenti. Tensione nella mattinata quando la parlamentare Rossella Muroni ha bloccato uno dei pullman. Il sindaco: «Notizie solo dalla stampa, nessuna comunicazione ufficiale. Noi per primi abbiamo chiesto superamento del Cara ma non accettiamo queste modalità». Il parroco: «Poco dignitoso, si pensa ai soldi e non alle persone»
ROMA - Lamin ha 24 anni e arriva dal Gambia. Da due anni vive nel Cara di Castelnuovo di Porto, ha frequentato un corso sui materiali edili a basso impatto ambientale e iniziato uno stage in una fabbrica a Roma. Domani un pullman, che lo porterà nelle Marche, interromperà questo percorso: “Non so niente di più, non mi hanno detto niente”, racconta da dietro la rete di recinzione che separa gli ospiti di Castelnuovo di Porto dai giornalisti, arrivati per raccontare il secondo giorno di trasferimenti voluti da Viminale, da uno dei Cara più grandi in Italia. Lamin, saluta gli amici che salgono sul pullman che partirà oggi con destinzaione Ancona, poi torna verso la rete: “Mi dispiace, eravamo diventati amici. E’ tutto molto triste”.
I trasferimenti sono iniziati ieri e continueranno per tutta la settimana. Stamattina uno dei pullman con 30 persone a bordo è stato fermato dalla parlamentare di Leu, Rossella Muroni: “Voglio sapere dove vanno queste persone, se sono state prese in considerazione le loro esigenze”, ha detto mettendosi davanti il mezzo, poco dopo la partenza. Il pullman è rientrato nel centro, tra gli applausi delle persone presenti. Poi, dopo circa un’ora è ripartito. “Ho chiesto solo di sapere la destinazione delle persone: da quanto ci è stato detto alla cooperativa è stata fatta solo una suddivisione numerica, ma qui ci sono anche casi vulnerabili e famiglie. Non voglio discutere la legittimità dei trasferimenti - spiega - voglio che siano fatti da paese civile, nel rispetto delle persone. Su ogni pullman che parte ci sono delle storie, che vanno rispettate e tenute in considerazione”.
Il terzo pullman parte intorno alle 12. Il sindaco di Castelnuovo di Porto, Riccardo Travaglini dice di aver appreso della chiusura del centro, gestito dalla cooperativa Auxilium, dagli organi di stampa. “Non siamo stati avvisati ufficialmente né dal prefetto né dal ministero degli Interni - afferma -. Non c’è stato nessun passaggio formale, il ministro Salvini continua a dire che è una scelta che si basa sul risparmio dell’affitto, ma queste persone erano inserite nel tessuto sociale, non si può parlare solo di soldi ma si dovrebbe parlare di valore culturale e sociale, di integrazione. Noi per primi abbiamo detto che il Cara andava superato, non siamo qui a difendere i grandi centri, ma non accettiamo questo tipo di modalità che non tiene conto delle persone - aggiunge -. La scelta non è stata concertata con l’ente locale, noi avevamo fatto anche richiesta per lo Sprar e per un’accoglienza in piccoli numeri”. Anche secondo il parroco della chiesa di Santa Lucia, Josè Manuel Torres, quello che sta succedendo a Castelnuovo di Porto è “poco dignitoso”. “Si tronca un cammino di promozione umane e di integrazione - sottolinea -. Qualcuno di loro aveva iniziato a lavorare, un ragazzo la prossima settimana ha l’esame della patente, un altro mi ha chiesto di portare i documenti al suo avvocato perché non sa dove va a finire. Questo modo brusco non condivisibile, non c’è nessun dialogo. Si parla solo di soldi, non si pensa alle persone”.
Davanti al centro in presidio anche diversi lavoratori che ora rischiano il posto di lavoro. Gli operatori mercoledì saranno in sit-in sotto il ministero dello Sviluppo economico. Rispetto agli ospiti presenti, per ora i trasferimenti riguardano circa 300 persone sulle 500 presenti. 20 persone in possesso della protezione umanitaria non verranno accolte “finiranno in strada - dicono gli operatori - le faranno uscire quando si saranno spente le telecamere. Delle altre 180 che resteranno nella struttura non sappiamo niente”. Dopo i primi trasferimenti, che hanno riguardato solo gli uomini, nei prossimi giorni verranno spostati anche i nuclei familiari. Le regioni di destinazione sono Albruzzo, Basilicata, Molise, Campania, Marche, Piemonte, Lombardia, Toscana, Umbria ed Emilia Romagna. (Eleonora Camilli)
▻http://www.redattoresociale.it/Notiziario/Articolo/616619/Castelnuovo-di-Porto-non-difendiamo-i-grandi-centri-ma-cosi-e-inuma
The New Irregulars in Italy
After the spike in irregular migration to Europe in 2014-2017, many Western European countries have started to restrict the rights they grant to asylum seekers. Sweden tightened its laws already in 2016. In early 2018, France also adopted restrictive asylum laws. And this December, news broke that Denmark is planning to confine rejected asylum seekers to a remote island.
But what happens when a government lowers the level of protection for asylum seekers, especially if it is unable to increase returns of migrants to their countries of origin? The answer seems straightforward: an increase in undocumented migrants stuck in the country. That is precisely what is probably going to happen in Italy over the next two years.
Long story short. Between June 2018 and December 2020, the number of irregulars in Italy will increased by at least 140,000. Part of this increase (about 25,000) has already happened over the past months. But much of it is expected to take place between today and end-2020.
In a “baseline scenario” in which Italy retained its three layers of international protection (refugee status, subsidiary protection, and humanitarian protection), irregulars in Italy would rise by around 60,000. But an October 2018 decree-law (now converted into law) is estimated to add another 70,000 irregular migrants to the baseline scenario, more than doubling the number of new irregulars in Italy. At the current rate, returns of irregular migrants to their countries of origin will only marginally limit such an increase.
This means that, by 2020, the number of irregular migrants in Italy may exceed 670,000. This is more than double the number of irregular migrants that were estimated to be in Italy just five years ago, which was lower than 300,000. It is also the second highest figure ever, second only to the 750,000 irregulars estimated to be present in the country in 2002.
For a quick snapshot, see this figure:
Still here? Great, then you are interested in the longer version. Here you go!
In early October, the Italian government introduced a decree-law (Decreto-Legge n. 113, 4 October 2018) that was converted into law in early December (Legge n. 132, 1 December 2018). Among other things, the law does away with one of three layers of protection for asylum seekers in Italy.
Before the decree-law entered into force, the Italian system of protection offered three layers of protection:
a. Refugee status. Resulting directly from the 1951 Geneva Convention, the status is assigned to asylum seekers who can make the case they have a well-founded fear of being personally persecuted “for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion” (art. 1 of the Convention). To these, two EU Directives have added persecutions for reasons of gender and sexual orientation.
b. Subsidiary protection. Resulting from EU legislation, it is a second, EU-wide layer of protection. It applies to people who, while not qualifying as refugees, “would face a real risk of suffering serious harm” if they returned to their country of origin. This includes the risk of death penalty or execution, the risk of torture or inhumane treatment, and the risk of threat of life by reasons of indiscriminate violence during an armed conflict.
c. Humanitarian protection. This is the third layer of protection, legislated at national level. Many EU countries have alternative forms of protection after refugee and subsidiary protection, but they vary widely across Europe. In Italy, “humanitarian protection” is used as a residual category, and this protection was attributed for different and quite discretionary reasons, ranging from health issues to harsh economic conditions in the applicants’ country of origin. The maximum length of the residence permit tied to humanitarian protection is two years.
The current Italian government has decided to abolish humanitarian protection. The rationale behind this change is that, the government believes, the humanitarian protection layer was too benevolent towards irregular migrants who filed an asylum application. In its place, the government introduced six “special cases” (see table below).
Despite this seemingly vast range of cases, in practice the new “special cases” will probably be applicable to a very small minority of those who were granted humanitarian protection beforehand. On the one hand, it may take some time before the Italian protection system adjusts to a new context in which one layer of protection is almost entirely missing. On the other hand, provisional data seems to point to a scenario in which “special cases” will be very marginal. In the first two months of application of the decree law, humanitarian protection rates dropped from 25% in the previous months, to 12% in October and to just 5% in November.
To assess the effect of the disappearance of humanitarian protection in Italy on the presence of irregular foreigners, I made some quick simulations.
Clearly, I have to make some assumptions:
1. No new irregular entries or overstays. I assume that, between today and December 2020, nobody else will enter Italy irregularly, either by sea, by land or by air, and will therefore not apply for asylum. Also, I assume that no one entering regularly in Italy will overstay their visa. This is highly unrealistic. To stick to asylum applications, this November around 3,800 people applied for asylum in Italy, and while this is a much lower number than the average 11,000 per month that applied for asylum in 2017, it would still amount to almost another 100,000 new asylum seekers between here and December 2020. However, as sea arrivals have remained very low in Italy since mid-July 2017, the volatility of such estimates would be tricky to incorporate into my simulations. Also, these persons would still need to have their asylum request processed before becoming irregulars, so that they may still be regularly residing in Italy as asylum seekers by end-2020. Ultimately, this assumption will lead me to underestimate the number of irregular migrants in Italy in the near future.
2. No irregular migrant leaves Italy. This is an unrealistic assumption as well. But, again, it is hard to estimate how many irregular migrants would leave Italy in a two-year timeframe, especially as border countries in Europe continue to find ways to suspend Schengen rules and tightly control their borders. By official accounts, over the past year more migrants have been intercepted crossing from Austria into Italy than in the opposite direction. Despite this, we could say that this could lead to an overestimate of the number of irregular migrants in Italy in the near future.
3. Protection rates remain the same as in recent past (bar the policy change eliminating humanitarian protection). This is realistic, as protection rates have remained remarkably stable in the past three years.
4. Return rates do not improve substantially. This is realistic: despite electoral promises of rapidly increasing returns of irregulars to their countries of origin, in the first six months of the Conte government, returns have been 20% lower than during the same period of 2017.
For this simulation, I first need to split the June 2018 – December 2020 period into two time windows: the first is the past, between June and end-October 2018. In this period, about 26,000 asylum seekers in Italy were denied protection, thus becoming irregulars. Meanwhile, just 2,165 persons were returned to their countries of origin. The result is that irregulars in Italy increased by almost 24,000.
I can now turn to the present and future, during which humanitarian protection is being eliminated: November 2018 – December 2020. For my baseline scenario, recall that, in the past three years, about 55% of asylum applicants have been denied protection in Italy. In the face of this, as of October 2018, Italy had 107,500 pending asylum applications. This means that just short of 60,000 of these persons will likely become irregulars in the country, even before any policy change. Therefore, this estimate will act as my baseline.
I can then contrast the baseline with the estimated effects of the policy change. The abolition of humanitarian protection will have two effects:
a. Asylum seekers whose request is still pending will no more be able to receive a humanitarian protection, and will be at a higher risk of having their application denied, thus becoming irregulars;
b. Current beneficiaries of humanitarian protection will not be able to renew their protection, thus becoming irregulars.
With regards to (a), in the months before the start of the current government, about 28% received the humanitarian protection. So, out of the pending 107,500 cases, a bit more than 30,000 would have received a humanitarian protection in the baseline scenario, but will now see their application rejected, becoming irregulars.
As to (b), it is not possible to know with certainty how many persons are currently benefitting from humanitarian protection. However, given that this protection usually lasted two years, and that it could be renewed, a conservative estimate is to consider as beneficiaries all those persons that were granted humanitarian protection over the past two years. They amount to just short of 40,000. All these persons will not be able to renew their humanitarian protection once it expires, and will therefore become irregulars in Italy within the next two years.
By adding (a) and (b) together, I arrive at 69,751. Therefore, about 70,000 persons are at risk of becoming irregulars in Italy by end-2020 due to the elimination of humanitarian protection. Compared to my baseline estimate of 60,000 new irregulars by 2020, this is a more than doubling in numbers.
Finally, to get to the full number of new irregulars in Italy by end-2020, I need to subtract those migrants that will be probably returned to their countries of origin. As stated above, in the first 6 months, returns under the current government have been 20% lower than the same period last year.
The full picture is summarized here:
To get a sense of what this means for the total number of irregulars in Italy, take a look at the figure below, which is based on estimates by ISMU. Irregular foreigners in Italy had been declining between 2010-2013, but the increase in sea arrivals and in (rejected) asylum applications have reversed the trend between 2013 and today. ISMU estimates that, on 1 January 2018, irregular foreigners in Italy were around 530,000.
In the baseline scenario, the number of irregulars in Italy would increase again, to around 600,000 in two years. But the abolition of humanitarian protection will bring it to around 670,000 by 2020. The latter is equivalent to a 26% increase from 2018 numbers.
In absolute terms, 670,000 is not a totally unprecedented number. Similar figures have been reached or exceeded in 2002, 2006, and 2008. When this happened, however, the Italian governments of the time decided to proceed with mass regularizations: in 2002-2003, about 700,000 foreigners were regularized; in 2006, regularizations hovered at around 350,000; and, in 2009, they numbered 300,000. The rationale behind regularizations is that irregular foreigners can only make it through the day by relying on illegal employment or criminal activities, and are also exposed to much higher levels of marginalization. This is also why irregularity is associated with very high crime rate proxies.
It is time to ask: when will the next mass regularization in Italy take place?
▻https://www.ispionline.it/en/publication/new-irregulars-italy-21813
Rome veut définitivement faire disparaître le camp de San Ferdinando en Italie
Le bidonville de San Ferdinando dans le sud de l’Italie a été démantelé à grands renforts de bulldozers mercredi 6 mars. Près d’un millier de personnes y avaient élu domicile. Le gouvernement veut à tout prix éviter que le campement se reforme comme c’est le cas régulièrement.
Le campement de San Ferdinando, en Calabre dans l’extrême sud de l’Italie, est connu des autorités depuis des années. Régulièrement démantelé, il se reforme à chaque fois accueillant des migrants dans une extrême précarité dont beaucoup ont un travail saisonnier, parfois au noir, dans les exploitations agricoles de la région.
Mais cette fois-ci, c’est la bonne, à en croire Matteo Salvini, le ministre italien de l’Intérieur et patron de la Ligue (extrême droite antimigrants). Près d’un millier de migrants ont ainsi été évacués mercredi matin dans le calme et leurs baraquements de fortune détruits par des bulldozers. "Comme promis [...] nous sommes passés des paroles aux actes", a réagi l’homme fort du gouvernement populiste italien précisant que 600 policiers et 18 autocars avaient été dépêchés sur place.
Bien que Matteo Salvini ait promis le relogement des migrants dans des centres d’accueil, plusieurs d’entre eux interrogés mercredi après le démantèlement par les médias locaux ne semblaient pas savoir où ils seraient conduits et où ils passeraient la nuit. Le Premier ministre s’est contenté de répondre, toujours sur Twitter, qu’il se félicitait de parvenir à “soustraire [ces migrants] de la mafia et de la criminalité en les répartissant dans des structures plus petites et contrôlables, ainsi qu’en accroissant la transparence” de sa politique migratoire.
Les problèmes sécuritaires étaient très courant dans le bidonville de San Ferdinando. Quatre migrants y ont trouvé la mort, assassinés ou morts dans des incendies accidentels ou volontaires, depuis un an, souligne l’association Médecins pour les droits de l’Homme, présente sur place depuis des années. C’est d’ailleurs la mort d’un Sénégalais de 29 ans, Moussa Ba, qui avait conduit les autorités italiennes à ordonner une nouvelle fois la démolition de ce bidonville.
Une mesure qui ne répond pas au problème, selon les associations de défense. Médecins pour les droits de l’Homme estime que cette "énième" évacuation a été menée "sans prendre en considération ni les droits individuels de ces travailleurs migrants, ni les engagements pris par les institutions et associations régionales et locales en faveur d’actions à long terme destinées à favoriser (leur) insertion sociale".
Sur les réseaux sociaux, de nombreux citoyens et militants ont aussi fait part de leur colère estimant que les bulldozers n’allaient rien changer au fait que ces migrants évacués étaient bien souvent exploités par des patrons du secteur agricole. "Se débarrasser du bidonville n’est pas la solution, mais plutôt le moyen le plus simple [pour le gouvernement] d’obtenir des votes. Et dans tout ça, personne ne combat les exploiteurs", dénonce ainsi Angelo, un militant actif sur Twitter, vidéo à l’appui.
La préfecture de Reggio Calabria a assuré de son côté qu’elle prendrait toutes les mesures nécessaires pour empêcher la reconstruction de ce bidonville, qui certaines années a accueilli jusqu’à 5 000 personnes.
Attirés par le travail saisonnier, des centaines de migrants ont pris l’habitude depuis des années de s’installer dans cette région agricole de la Calabre. La Coldiretti, principal syndicat agricole italien, a d’ailleurs lancé mardi un appel aux autorités pour qu’ils autorisent rapidement l’entrée de travailleurs étrangers en Italie, en raison de l’avancement de la date de certaines récoltes après des températures inhabituellement élevées.
▻https://www.infomigrants.net/fr/post/15573/rome-veut-definitivement-faire-disparaitre-le-camp-de-san-ferdinando-e
Richiedenti asilo ed esiti in Italia 2019, dati aggiornati dopo quattro mesi di interruzione. Gennaio-giugno: ipertrofia dinieghi, umanitaria all’1,6%
Il decreto sicurezza fa aumentare i migranti senza fissa dimora, minando la sicurezza di tutti, dei migranti e delle nostre città.
Nessun supporto per chi aveva un permesso umanitario e ora deve lasciare i Centri. La situazione descritta nel terzo lavoro di monitoraggio dell’Osservatorio dell’associazione Naga, che garantisce assistenza a cittadini stranieri.
L’impatto maggiore del decreto Salvini sulla sicurezza varato dallo scorso governo legastellato è quello dell’aumento dei senza fissa dimora. Sì, perché attraverso il taglio dei fondi ai progetti dei centri di accoglienza, ovvero passando dai tanto famigerati 35 euro a un massimo di 19- 26 euro, si risparmia tantissimo sugli alloggi. Nessun supporto è previsto per coloro che sono costretti a lasciare i centri, ad esempio le persone che avevano un permesso umanitario e che da un giorno all’altro si ritrovano senza più diritto all’accoglienza e quindi per strada.
Questo meccanismo è fortemente patogeno: ritrovarsi per strada comporta i rischi e il degrado psico-fisico che ben si conoscono dagli studi sui senza fissa dimora, riscontrati anche tra i migranti nelle stesse condizioni. In generale, le persone che chiedono asilo arrivano in buona salute, fatte salve le conseguenze delle torture e delle privazioni subite durante i vari episodi di prigionia e lavoro forzato a cui sono stati sottoposti lungo il viaggio per arrivare in Italia.
Ciò è conosciuto come il cosiddetto «healthy migrant effect»: partono le persone più sane, con più probabilità di farcela. Una volta arrivate si scontrano con quello che la ex primo ministro britannica Theresa May chiamò nel 2012 «hostile enviromnent», cioè condizioni che scoraggiano l’integrazione di una data popolazione in un determinato ambiente.
Da qui le condizioni di alloggio spesso proibitive, i lavori precari, saltuari e senza forme di protezione, la salute che via via si deteriora. Senza contare l’impatto psicologico dato dall’isolamento e dalla mancanza dei legami familiari, le conseguenze fisiche ancora attuali e lo stress delle torture subite e l’incertezza per le lungaggini nell’ottenere un permesso di soggiorno pur non definitivo.
Allo stato attuale, se un migrante è senza alloggio è un «senza fissa dimora» e dunque non può avere una residenza. Senza certificato di residenza non può trovare un lavoro regolare. Senza un lavoro regolare non può pensare di poter affittare regolarmente una casa, o nemmeno una stanza. È in una situazione senza vie d’uscita descritta dal terzo lavoro di monitoraggio e analisi compiuto dall’Osservatorio del Naga, un’associazione composta da numerosi volontari che garantiscono assistenza sanitaria, legale e sociale gratuita a cittadini stranieri irregolari e non, a rom, sinti, richiedenti asilo, rifugiati e vittime della tortura, oltre a portare avanti attività di formazione, documentazione e lobbying sulle Istituzioni.
Tale lavoro ha come obiettivo di comprendere i cambiamenti nel sistema di accoglienza per richiedenti asilo e rifugiati con particolare attenzione all’area di Milano in cui il Naga opera dal 1987. E, infatti, proprio a Milano sarebbero almeno 2.608 i senza fissa dimora. I volontari e le volontarie del Naga hanno visitato nel corso della ricerca diverse tipologie di insediamenti informali (strutture coperte abbandonate, spazi all’aperto, palazzine abbandonate e giardini pubblici) per fornire un identikit delle persone fuori dal sistema di accoglienza e restituire una fotografia di queste marginalità.
Le persone incontrate hanno provenienze diverse e status giuridici eterogenei: da stranieri in attesa o nell’iter di formalizzazione della richiesta di protezione internazionale, a titolari di protezione, a stranieri con permesso di soggiorno in corso di validità, a cittadini italiani.
Il minimo comune denominatore sembra essere l’instabilità abitativa, la precarietà occupazionale e salariale e la quasi totale assenza di tutele. Per quanto riguarda chi si trova al di fuori dell’accoglienza, il report descrive anche le risposte istituzionali, che si concretizzano prevalentemente in interventi numericamente insufficienti a favore dei senza fissa dimora e nella pratica costante degli sgomberi senza soluzioni alternative e giustificati dalla retorica della sicurezza e del decoro.
▻https://www.diritti-umani.org/2019/12/il-decreto-sicurezza-fa-aumentare-i.html?m=1
Imposta l’estromissione dal sistema d’accoglienza dei titolari di protezione umanitaria
Ieri, 19 dicembre, il Servizio Centrale Sipromi ha inviato una circolare agli enti locali titolari dei progetti Sprar in scadenza al 31/12 (MA prorogati al 30/06/2020) per “sollecitare” l’uscita dal sistema di accoglienza entro il 31 dicembre 2019 dei titolari di protezione umanitaria in accoglienza.
Con una lettera il Centro Immigrazione Asilo Cooperazione onluns di Parma, ente che da 20 anni accoglie persone per i loro diritti e per i loro bisogni, denuncia una situazione ritenuta inaccettabile ed ingiusta.
“Non possiamo e non vogliamo accettare questa ingiustizia che interrompe percorsi di vita, cura, studio, lavoro, relazione. Per i titolari di protezione umanitaria che sono ancora in accoglienza deve valere il principio per cui un atto amministrativo non può interrompere un percorso di vita”, dicono al CIAC.
«Infatti - ribadisce la onlus - per i titolari di protezione umanitaria, tra cui donne, bambini, nuclei familiari, possibili vittime di tratta, persone con disagio mentale non è prevista nessuna altra possibilità di accoglienza. Uscendo dello Sprar, per una norma palesemente ingiusta e insensata, sono messi in strada, in pieno inverno, interrompendo tutela, cura, lavoro, formazione appunto».
Secondo i dati forniti da CIAC solo in Emilia Romagna sono circa 300 le persone che dovrebbero essere fatte uscire dalle strutture di accoglienza a fine anno. Nella sola provincia di Parma più di 20 persone, tra cui 5 nuclei mamma-bambino.
«Noi - afferma il CIAC - non applicheremo questa direttiva nelle nostre case, sulle persone con le quali abbiamo un patto di tutela e un dovere professionale e morale di accoglienza. Con loro, quale che sia il permesso di soggiorno, abbiamo contratto un patto che ci vincola – esattamente come lo chiediamo a loro - al rispetto del loro progetto individuale di accoglienza. Che questo potesse essere interrotto dall’interpretazione – ribadiamo una interpretazione - di un comma, di un articolo, di una legge palesemente volta a colpire le tutele dei rifugiati non era nelle regole iniziali. E noi i patti li rispettiamo, come dagli accolti ne esigiamo il rispetto».
L’associazione spiega che non ci sono solo ragioni etiche, professionali e morali, ed elenca i punti sui quali si basa la volontà di non mettere in strada nessuno.
Il primo è che «i progetti Sprar/siproimi attivi sono prorogati con decreto del ministro dell’Interno del 13/12/19 sino al giugno 2020 e quanto dice la circolare, giuridicamente è quanto meno opinabile: i progetti non possono dirsi cessati al 31/12/19».
Il secondo è che la circolare «non considera che è appurata la non retroattività della legge 132/18».
«Per tutte queste ragioni - conclude CIAC onlus - profondamente stupiti che l’ufficio che governa il sistema di protezione assecondi una interpretazione che nega i principi stessi sui quali l’accoglienza integrata e diffusa si regge (individualizzazione dei percorsi, emancipazione dall’accoglienza, patto di accoglienza), affermiamo con grande convinzione che, solleciti o non solleciti, a fronte di una crescente marginalità sui territori, a fronte di tanti posti vuoti nel sistema che per quella stessa legge che il Servizio Centrale Siproimi cita e che non possono dare sollievo, accoglienza e integrazione a chi in tutta Italia ne avrebbe bisogno».
▻http://www.vita.it/it/article/2019/12/20/imposta-lestromissione-dal-sistema-daccoglienza-dei-titolari-di-protez/153674
Rapporto “La sicurezza dell’esclusione - Centri d’Italia 2019”
Le prevedibili conseguenze della legge sicurezza: maggiore irregolarità e smantellamento del sistema d’accoglienza.
▻https://www.meltingpot.org/local/cache-vignettes/L440xH542/arton24796-6a3c1.png?1578654230
Aumento consistente del numero di cittadini stranieri irregolari e difficoltà nell’applicazione dei nuovi bandi per la gestione dei centri da parte delle Prefetture. È il quadro che emerge dal rapporto “La sicurezza dell’esclusione – Centri d’Italia 2019”, realizzato da Action Aid e Openpolis che offre una prima valutazione dell’impatto delle politiche migratorie del primo Governo Conte.
Gran parte del lavoro di analisi, suddiviso in due parti, si sofferma sulle conseguenze che la legge sicurezza immigrazione sta producendo sul sistema d’accoglienza nel suo complesso, denunciando nel contempo quanto sia difficile raccogliere le informazioni necessarie per monitorare il sistema dell’accoglienza e le sue evoluzioni per un’assenza quasi totale di trasparenza.
Indicazioni sul disfacimento complessivo di un sistema e delle tutele dei richiedenti asilo che già molti attivisti, enti del terzo settore e operatori coinvolti nel sistema d’accoglienza avevano ampiamente previsto e che i movimenti avevano cercato di contrastare con mobilitazioni territoriali e di carattere nazionale. Ma nonostante un ampio fermento sociale la legge Salvini è ancora lì a far danni, e, a oggi, la sua abrogazione non è tra le priorità del governo 5stelle-PD.
«La soppressione della protezione umanitaria, la forma di protezione maggiormente diffusa per chi fino al decreto sicurezza chiedeva asilo in Italia, - si legge nella prima parte dell’inchiesta - espande sempre più la macchia degli stranieri irregolari, che diventa un’emergenza reale con i conseguenti costi umani, sociali e di illegalità diffusa. Un’emergenza per la quale, in assenza di un meccanismo di regolarizzazione, la soluzione dei rimpatri appare nel caso più ottimistico un’illusione».
Secondo le stime del rapporto sono 40.000 le persone che si sono ritrovate irregolari nel 2019 a causa della soppressione della protezione umanitaria. E queste cifre sono inevitabilmente destinate ad aumentare nel 2020 poiché la legge ha generato una perversa stretta anche nelle procedure e nei responsi delle Commissioni territoriali, sempre più restìe a concedere una forma di protezione. Del resto i rimpatri, che non sono mai stati una reale soluzione ma un altro strumento di propaganda politica, sono stati nel 2018 circa 5.615. A questo ritmo si stima che per rimpatriare i 680mila cittadini stranieri irregolari servirebbero oltre 100 anni, senza contare il costo economico di una tale contestabile operazione.
Il rapporto si sofferma ampiamente anche sulle conseguenze delle nuove regole delle gare di appalto per la gestione dei centri. Regole «volute per razionalizzare il sistema e tagliare i costi e i servizi di inclusione, si scontrano con la difficoltà, anche di natura politica, dei gestori di farvi fronte e delle prefetture di applicarle. Diversi i bandi deserti, quelli ripetuti o che non riescono a coprire il fabbisogno dei posti nei centri». E’ di fatto un ritorno alla logica dei grandi centri di parcheggio per richiedenti asilo, perlopiù dislocati in periferia, e il totale abbandono di un’idea di accoglienza diffusa non solo funzionale alla distribuzione dei richiedenti asilo su tutto il territorio nazionale, ma soprattutto ad una loro inclusione sociale e una reciproca conoscenza con le comunità locali.
«Un affare - continua l’inchiesta - che attrae i gestori a carattere industriale, grandi soggetti privati anche esteri in grado di realizzare economie di scala, e allontana i piccoli con vocazione sociale e personale qualificato». E - aggiungiamo noi - è anche un modello che attrae il malaffare e la criminalità organizzata, la quale è tranquillamente in grado di fare profitto nonostante la fetta di guadagno si sia a prima vista ridotta.
Una totale assenza di programmazione. Il sistema di accoglienza sembra gestito giorno per giorno senza nessuna programmazione strategica.
Nella seconda parte di «La sicurezza dell’esclusione – Centri d’Italia 2019» viene ulteriormente analizzato l’impatto dei nuovi capitolati di gara collegati al decreto sicurezza sul funzionamento della macchina dell’accoglienza. Sistema che al 31 dicembre 2019 accoglie in totale 91.424 persone, delle quali 66.958 con richiesta di protezione internazionale sono accolte nei CAS e 24.388, già riconosciute come titolari di protezione internazionale o protezione umanitaria, nei progetti ex SPRAR, rinominati dal decreto sicurezza SIPROIMI. Su questi ultimi, inoltre, si è abbattuta la scure della circolare del ministero dell’interno di Natale, che prevede la loro uscita forzata o tutt’al più il trasferimento in servizi di bassa soglia. Persone vulnerabili e famiglie che da un giorno all’altro si ritroveranno senza alloggio e assistenza, costretti a rivolgersi ai servizi sociali territoriali, senza trovare poi grandi risposte, o immediatamente a ingrossare le file dei senza tetto.
Nella carrellata di numeri va infine ricordato che tra le conseguenze della legge ci sono anche i 5.000 posti di lavoro persi. Ma al governo Conte bis tutto ciò non sembra destare così grande preoccupazione.
▻https://www.meltingpot.org/Rapporto-La-sicurezza-dell-esclusione-Centri-d-Italia-2019.html
#rapport #Stefano_Bleggi
Les lois anti-migrants de Salvini sont toujours d’actualité en Italie
Fin 2018, l’ancien ministre de l’Intérieur et chef de la Ligue, Matteo Salvini, a fait adopter des mesures anti-migrants très restrictives, parmi lesquelles l’abolition de la protection humanitaire qui représentait 28% des permis de séjour délivrés aux demandeurs d’asile. Ces mesures n’ont pas été modifiées par la coalition formée du Mouvement Cinq étoiles et du Parti démocrate, au pouvoir depuis cinq mois. Et c’est maintenant que leurs effets commencent à être visibles. Quelle est la situation actuelle des migrants qui ne peuvent plus bénéficier du permis de séjour humanitaire ?
C’est une situation qui risque de devenir explosive. Les organisations non gouvernementales estiment à 70 000 le nombre demandeurs d’asile qui vont rejoindre les rangs des clandestins, soit environ 600 000 personnes. C’est en effet maintenant que l’on voit les effets des mesures sécuritaires adoptées il y a plus d’un an. Jusqu’alors, le permis de séjour humanitaire était délivré pour une durée de deux ans, renouvelable. Désormais, s’il arrive à échéance, cela implique le retour à la rue et à l’irrégularité, pour deux raisons : les migrants adultes doivent quitter les centres d’accueil institutionnels et ils n’ont plus accès au travail légal, car un employeur qui embauche, ou maintient à son poste, une personne qui n’a pas de papiers en règle risque des sanctions pénales.
Concrètement, cela signifie donc que ceux qui avaient un contrat de travail en bonne et due forme doivent être licenciés ?
On peut citer à titre d’exemple le cas d’une entreprise de Parme, en Émilie-Romagne, spécialisée dans la logistique, la Number 1 Logistics qui emploie 4 000 salariés. En 2017, elle avait recruté 120 personnes provenant du Ghana, du Nigéria, du Sénégal et du Venezuela et titulaires d’un permis de séjour humanitaire. L’entreprise les a formées, leur a offert un contrat de travail régulier avec une paie de 1 200 euros par mois, qui correspond à ce que perçoit un ouvrier non spécialisé. Mais elles ont dû être licenciées comme l’a récemment déploré le patron de Number 1 Logistics, lors d’une réunion de la Commission parlementaire chargée des affaires constitutionnelles.
Un cas tristement exemplaire. Le nouveau gouvernement, formé il y a cinq mois, envisage-t-il d’abroger ou de modifier les décrets sécuritaires de Matteo Salvini ?
En fait, les divergences entre le Mouvement Cinq étoiles et le Parti démocrate sur un dossier aussi important que celui des migrants cristallisent la situation. Certes, on en est plus à l’époque du Salvini tout puissant et des ports fermés. Mais concernant les politiques d’intégration, on ne note encore aucun changement. Cela dit, la ministre de l’Intérieur, Lucia Lamorgese, une technicienne soutenue par le centre gauche, a annoncé qu’elle voulait assouplir les conditions de régularisation, notamment pour les demandeurs d’asile obtenant un contrat de travail. Un projet en ce sens devrait être présenté devant le Parlement, après les élections régionales du 26 janvier en Émilie-Romagne et en Calabre.
▻https://www.infomigrants.net/fr/post/22186/les-lois-anti-migrants-de-salvini-sont-toujours-d-actualite-en-italie?
La sicurezza dell’esclusione
Aumento consistente del numero di stranieri irregolari e difficoltà nell’applicazione dei nuovi bandi per la gestione dei centri da parte delle Prefetture. È il quadro che emerge dal rapporto “La sicurezza dell’esclusione – Centri d’Italia 2019”, che abbiamo realizzato con openpolis e che offre una prima valutazione dell’impatto delle politiche migratorie del primo Governo Conte.
https://www.actionaid.it/app/uploads/2020/05/CentridItalia_2019.pdf
Pour télécharger le #rapport:
La sicurezza dell’esclusione
Migranti, così i decreti Salvini hanno fatto scivolare 140 mila persone nell’irregolarità
Anticipazione del Dossier statistico 2020. Per la prima volta dopo anni diminuiscono di ben 100 mila unità gli stranieri extra Ue regolarmente soggiornanti in Italia. Effetto in particolare del primo decreto sicurezza, oltre che della perdurante mancanza di programmazione degli ingressi stabili