#renvois

The two sides of TUI : crisis-hit holiday giant turned deportation specialist

https://corporatewatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/TUI-general-730x350.png

2020 was a rough year for the tourism industry, with businesses worldwide cancelling holidays and laying off staff. Yet one company has been weathering the storm with particular ruthlessness: the Anglo-German giant TUI.

TUI (Touristik Union International) has been called the world’s biggest holiday company. While its core business is selling full-package holidays to British and German families, 2020 saw it taking on a new sideline: running deportation charter flights for the UK Home Office. In this report we look at how:

- TUI has become the main airline carrying out charter deportation flights for the UK Home Office. In November 2020 alone it conducted nine mass deportations to 19 destinations as part of Operation Sillath, and its deportation flights continue in 2021.
- TUI lost over €3 billion last year. But the money was made up in bailouts from the German government, totalling over €4 billion.
– TUI’s top owner is oligarch Alexey Mordashov, Russia’s fourth richest billionaire who made his fortune in the “Katastroika” of post-Soviet asset sell-offs. His family holding company made over €100 million in dividends from TUI in 2019.
– In 2020, TUI cut 23,000 jobs, or 32% of its global workforce. But it carried on paying out fat salaries to its bosses – the executive board waived just 5% of their basic pay, with CEO Fritz Joussen pocketing €1.7 million.
– Other cost-cutting measures included delaying payments of over €50m owed to hotels in Greece and Spain.
- TUI is accused of using its tourist industry muscle to pressure the Greek government into dropping COVID quarantine requirements last Summer, just before the tourist influx contributed to a “second wave” of infections.
– It is also accused of pressuring hotels in the Canary Islands to stop hosting migrants arriving on wooden boats, fearing it would damage the islands’ image in the eyes of TUI customers.

https://i.imgur.com/z1VZc7s.png

TUI: from heavy industry to holiday giant

Calling itself the ‘world’s leading tourism group’, TUI has 277 direct and indirect subsidiaries. The parent company is TUI AG, listed on the London Stock Exchange and based in Hannover and Berlin.

TUI describes itself as a ‘vertically-integrated’ tourism business. That means it covers all aspects of a holiday: it can take care of bookings, provide the planes to get there, accommodate guests in hotels and cruises, and connect them with ‘experiences’ such as museum vists, performances and excursions. Recent company strategy buzz highlights the use of digitalisation – ‘driving customers’ into buying more services via its apps and online platforms. Where it can’t do everything in-house, TUI also uses other airlines and works extensively with independent hotels.

TUI’s major assets are:

- Hotels. By September 2020 the company ran over 400 hotels, the most profitable of which is the RIU chain, a company jointly owned by the Mallorca-based RIU family.
- Cruises. TUI owns three cruise companies – TUI Cruises, Hapag-Lloyd Cruises and Marella Cruises – which between them operate 17 vessels.
- Airlines. TUI has five airlines with a total fleet of 137 aircraft. 56 of these are operated by its biggest airline, the British company TUI Airways. Collectively, the airlines under the group are the seventh largest in Europe.

TUI also runs the TUI Care Foundation, its vehicle for green PR, based in the Hague.

The company has a long history dating back to 1923 – though it is barely recognisable from its earlier embodiment as the energy, mining and metalworking group Preussag, originally set up by the German state of Prussia. Described by some as the “heavy industrial arm” of the Nazi economy, Preussag was just one of many German industrial firms which benefited from forced labour under the Third Reich. It transformed itself into a tourism business only in 1997, and completed a long string of acquisitions to become the behemoth it is today – including acquiring leading British travel agents Thomson in 2000 and First Choice Holidays in 2007.

TUI holidaymakers are mostly families from the UK and Germany, with an average ticket for a family of four costing €3,500 . The top five destinations as of Easter 2019 were, in order: Spain, Greece, Egypt, Turkey, and Cape Verde.

The UK branch – including TUI Airways, which is responsible for the deportations – is run out of Wigmore House, next to Luton Airport in Bedfordshire. The UK managing director is Andrew “Andy” Flintham. Flintham has been with TUI for over 15 years, and previously worked for British Airways and Ford.

Dawn Wilson is the managing director of TUI Airways. and head of airline operations on the TUI aviation board, overseeing all five of TUI’s airlines. Wilson is also a director of TUI UK. Originally from Cleethorpes, Wilson’s career in the industry began as cabin crew in the 80s, before rising up the ranks of Britannia Airways. Britannia’s parent company Thomson was acquired by TUI in 2000.
TUI’s crisis measures: mass job losses, deportations, and more

Before the pandemic TUI was a success story, drawing 23 million people a year to sun, sea, snow or sights. In 2019, TUI was riding high following the collapse of its key UK competitor, Thomas Cook. It branched out by adding 21 more aircraft to its fleet and picking up a number of its rival’s former contracts, notably in Turkey. TUI’s extensive work in Turkey has recently made it a target of the Boycott Turkey campaign in solidarity with the Kurdish people. The one bum note had been the grounding of its Boeing 737 MAX airliners, after two crashes involving the aircraft forced the worldwide withdrawal of these planes. Despite that, the company made close to €19 billion in revenues in 2019, and a profit of over €500 million. Most of that profit was handed straight to shareholders, with over €400 million in dividends. (See: Annual Report 2019). And the future looked good, with record bookings for 2020.

Then came COVID-19. By the end of the 2020 financial year, travel closures had resulted in losses of €3 billion for TUI, and a net debt of €4.2bn. To stay afloat, the company has managed to pull in handouts from the German state, as well as backing from its largest shareholder, the Russian oligarch Alexei Mordashov. It has also turned to a number of controversial business practices: from mass job losses to becoming Brexit Britain’s main deportation profiteer.

Here we look at some of what TUI got up to in the last year.
Government bailouts

Had it been left to the free market, TUI might well have gone bust. Fortunately for TUI’s investors, the German government rode to the rescue. In total, the state – working together with some banks and private investors – has provided TUI with €4.8bn in bailout funds to see it through COVID-19.

The vast bulk of this money, €4.3 billion to date, has come from German taxpayers. TUI received a €1.8 rescue loan from state development bank KsF in April 2020, followed by another €1.2 billion package in August. The third bailout, agreed in December 2020, totalled €1.8 billion. €1.3 billion of this was more government money – from the German Economic Support Fund (WSF) as well as KsF.

While some was a straight loan, portions came as a “silent participation” convertible into shares in the company – that is, the state has the option to become a major TUI shareholder. The deal also involved the government having two seats on TUI’s supervisory board. The German state is now intimately involved in TUI’s business.

The other €500m was raised by issuing new shares to private investors. TUI’s largest owner, Alexey Mordashov, agreed to take any of these not bought by others – potentially increasing his stake in the company from 25% to as much as 36% (see below).
Slashing jobs

Alongside bail-outs, another key part of TUI’s response to the COVID crisis has been to hit the staff. Back in May 2020 there was widespread media coverage when TUI announced it would make 8,000 job cuts globally. Then in July 2020, the company announced it would close 166 of its 516 travel agencies in the UK and Ireland at a cost of 900 jobs.

But these announcements turned out to be just the beginning. In the 2020 Annual Report, published in December 2020, TUI quietly announced that it had in fact cut 23,143 jobs – that is 32% of its total staff.

Particularly hard hit were hotel staff, whose numbers fell by over 13,000, 46% of the total. The workforce of TUI’s excursions and activities division, TUI Musement, was cut in half with almost 5,000 job losses (Annual Report, p88). And these figures do not include staff for TUI Cruises (JV), a joint venture company whose employees are mainly hired through agencies on temporary contracts.

https://corporatewatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/TUI-deportation-1536x767.png

Home Office deportation airline of choice

TUI is not known to have been previously involved in deportations from the UK, Germany or any other country. But since August 2020, its UK subsidiary TUI Airways has suddenly become the UK’s top deportation airline. It carried out the vast majority of mass deportation charter flights from the UK between August and December 2020, and continues to do so in January 2021.

This included many of the rush of pre-Brexit “Operation Sillath” deportations to European countries before the New Year – where the Home Office pushed to expel as many refugees as possible under the Dublin Regulation before it crashed out of this EU agreement. But it also works further afield: TUI carried out all charter deportations from the UK in November, including one to Ghana and Nigeria.

Because of this, TUI looked a likely candidate to be operating the so-called ‘Jamaica 50’ flight on 2 December, and was one of a number of possible airlines targeted by a social media campaign. However, the company eventually clarified it would not be doing the flight – Privilege Style, whom Corporate Watch recently reported on, turned out to be the operator. It is unclear whether or not TUI had originally been booked and pulled out after succumbing to public pressure.
No hospitality in the Canary Islands

The company’s disregard for the lives of refugees is not limited to deportation deals. In the Canary Islands, a local mayor revealed that TUI (along with British airline Jet2) had warned hotels not to provide emergency shelter to migrants, threatening it would not ‘send tourists’ if they did.

Record numbers of African migrants arrived on wooden boats to the islands in 2020, and some have been accomodated in the hotels at the state’s expense. Nearly 2,170 migrants died trying to reach Spain that year, the majority en-route to the Canaries. The islands had seen a dramatic fall in holidaymakers due to the pandemic, and many hotel rooms would have sat empty, making TUI’s threats all the more callous.
Pushing back against Greek COVID-19 measures

TUI has been pressing destination countries to reopen to tourists following the first wave of the Coronavirus pandemic. This has become a particular issue in Greece, now the company‘s number one destination where TUI has been accused of exerting pressure on the government to relax anti-COVID measures last Summer.

According to a report in German newspaper BILD (see also report in English here), TUI threatened to cancel all its trips to the country unless the government dropped quarantine regulations for tourists. The threat was reportedly made in negotiations with the Greek tourism minister, who then rushed to call the Prime Minister, who backed down and rewrote the Government’s COVID-19 plans.

Greece had been viewed as a rare success story of the pandemic, with the virus having largely been contained for months – until early August, a few weeks after it welcomed back tourists. Some have blamed the country’s “second wave” of COVID-19 infections on the government’s “gamble of opening up to tourists”.

https://corporatewatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Greece-Covid-chart.png

Leaving hotels in the lurch

Despite having pushed destination countries to increase their COVID-19 exposure risks by encouraging tourism, the company then refused to pay hoteliers in Greece and Spain millions of euros owed to them for the summer season. Contractual changes introduced by TUI forced hotels to wait until March 2021 for three-quarters of the money owed. In Greece, where the company works with over 2,000 hotels, the sum owed is said to be around €50m, with individual hotels reportedly owed hundreds of thousands of euros. This money is essential to many businesses’ survival through the low season.

TUI’s actions are perhaps all the more galling in light of the enormous government bailouts the company received. In the company’s 2020 Annual Report, amid sweeping redundancies and failure to pay hoteliers, CEO Fritz Joussen had the arrogance to claim that “TUI plays a stabilising role in Southern Europe, and in Northern Africa too, with investment, infrastructure and jobs.”
Rolling in it: who gains

The supposed rationale for government COVID bail-outs, in Germany as elsewhere, is to keep the economy turning and secure jobs. But that can’t mean much to the third of its work force TUI has sacked. If not the workers, who does benefit from Germany funneling cash into the holiday giant?

TUI’s bailout deals with the German government forbade it from paying a dividend to shareholders in 2020. Although in previous years the company operated a very high dividend policy indeed: in 2018 it handed over €381 million, or 47% of its total profit, to its shareholders. They did even better in 2019, pocketing €423 million – or no less than 80% of company profits. They will no doubt be hoping that the money will roll in again once COVID-19 travel restrictions are lifted.

https://i.imgur.com/nu5jB1Z.png

Meanwhile, it appears that the crisis barely touched TUI’s executives and directors. According to the 2020 Annual Report (page 130), the company’s executives agreed to a “voluntary waiver of 30% of their fixed remuneration for the months of April and May 2020”. That is: just a portion of their salary, for just two months. This added up to a drop of just 5% in executive salaries over the year compared with 2019.

Again: this was during a year where 32% of TUI staff were laid off, and the company lost over €3 billion.

In a further great show of sacrifice, the Annual Report explains that “none of the members of the Executive Board has made use of their right to reimbursement of holiday trips which they are entitled to according to their service agreements.” TUI is infamous for granting its executives paid holidays “without any limitation as to type of holiday, category or price” as an executive perk (page 126).

After his 5% pay cut, CEO Fritz Joussen still made €1,709,600 last year: a basic salary of €1.08 million, plus another €628,000 in “pension contributions and service costs” including a chauffeur driven car allowance.

The next highest paid was none other than “labour director” Dr Elke Eller with €1.04 million. The other four members of the executive board all received over €800,000.

https://corporatewatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/TUI-money-1536x767.png

The top dogs

Who are these handsomely paid titans of the holiday industry? TUI’s CEO is Friedrich “Fritz” Joussen, based in Germany. Originally hired by TUI as a consultant, Joussen has a background in the German mobile phone industry and was head of Vodafone Germany. The slick CEO can regularly be found giving presentations about the TUI ‘ecosystem’ and the importance of digitisation. Besides his salary, Joussen also benefits from a considerable shareholding accrued through annual bonuses.

Overseeing Joussen’s executive team is the Supervisory Board, chaired by the Walrus-moustachioed Dr. Dieter Zetsche, or ‘Dr. Z’, who made his fortune in the management of Daimler AG (the car giant that also owns Mercedes–Benz, and formerly, Chrysler ). Since leaving that company in 2019, Zetsche has reportedly been enjoying a Daimler pension package of at least €4,250 a day. TUI topped him up with a small fee of €389,500 for his board duties in 2020 (Annual Report p140).

With his notable moustache, Dr. Z is a stand-out character in the mostly drab world of German corporate executives, known for fronting one of Daimler’s US ad campaigns in a “buffoon tycoon” character. At the height of the Refugee Summer of 2015, Dr. Dieter Zetsche abruptly interrupted his Frankfurt Motor Show speech on the future of the car industry to discuss the desperate situation facing Syrian refugees.

He said at the time: “Anybody who knows the past isn’t allowed to turn refugees away. Anybody who sees the present can’t turn them away. Anybody who thinks about the future will not turn them away.” Five years later, with TUI the UK’s top deportation profiteer, this sentiment seems to have been forgotten.

Another key figure on the Supervisory Board is Deputy Chair Peter Long. Long is a veteran of the travel industry, having been CEO of First Choice, which subsequently merged with TUI. He is credited with pioneering Turkey as an industry destination.

Long is a controversial figure who has previously been accused of ‘overboarding’, i.e. sitting on the directors’ boards of too many companies. Described as a “serial part timer”, he was executive chairman of Countrywide PLC, the UK’s largest estate agency group, but stepped down in late November 2020 after apparently ruffling shareholders’ feathers over a move that would have given control of the company to a private equity firm. In 2018, Countrywide was forced to abandon attempts to give bosses – including himself – shares worth more than £20m. Long also previously stepped down as chairman of Royal Mail after similarly losing shareholder support over enormous executive pay packages. In his former role as as head of TUI Travel, he was among the UK’s top five highest earning CEOs, with a salary of £13.3 million for the year 2014 -15.

The man with the money: Alexey Mordashov

But all the above are paupers compared to TUI’s most powerful board member and top shareholder: Alexey Mordashov, a Russian oligarch who is reportedly the country’s fourth richest billionaire, with a fortune of over $23 billion. His family holding company is TUI’s main owner with up to 36% of company shares.

Mordashov’s stake in TUI is held through a Cyprus-registered holding company called Unifirm.

In 2019, Mordashov transferred 65% of his shares in Unifirm to KN-Holding, a Russian company owned jointly by his two sons, Kirill and Nikita, then aged 18 and 19. However, Russian media report that after the younger son Nikita was kicked out of university in 2020, he was sent to the army, and his shares transferred to Kirill.

It may not be massive money to Mordashov, but his family company have certainly done well out of TUI. In 2019 TUI paid out €423 million in dividends to its shareholders, no less than 80% of total profits. At the time Unifirm owned one quarter (24.95%) of TUI. That means the Mordashovs will have received over €100 million on their investment in TUI just in that one year.

“Steel king” Alexey Mordashov’s rise to the height of the global mega-rich began with a typical post-Soviet privatisation story. Born in 1965, the son of steel workers, he studied economics and accountancy and by 1992 was finance director of a steel plant in his hometown of Cherepovets. In the early and mid-1990s, the great Russian “Katastroika” sell-off of state assets saw steel mill and other workers handed shares in the former collective enterprises. In the midst of an economic collapse, workers sold on their shares to pay food and heating bills, while the likes of Mordashov built up massive asset portfolios quick and cheap. In the next privatisation phase, the budding oligarchs were handed whole industries through rigged auctions.

Mordashov turned his steel plant holdings into a company called Severstal, now among the world’s largest steel firms. He then expanded Severstal into Severgroup, a conglomerate with holdings in everything from airports to goldmines (Nordgold) to supermarkets (Lenta), to mobile phone networks (Tele2 Russia), as well as the local hockey team Severstal Cherepovets. Vladimir Lukin, Mordashov’s legal adviser at Severgroup, is also a member of the TUI Supervisory Board.

Business media paint Mordashov as less flamboyant than your average oligarch. His new megayacht Nord, built in Germany and registered in the Cayman Islands, is only 142 metres long – 20 metres shorter than Roman Abramovitch’s Eclipse.

In December 2020, TUI declared that Unifirm owned 25% of its shares. But the number will have increased in TUI’s third bail-out deal in January: as well as more money from the German government and its banks, Unifirm agreed to inject more cash into the company in return for boosting its ownership, buying up new shares to a maximum of 36%. The exact current holding has not yet been announced.

TUI’s increasing control by Mordashov was approved by the German financial regulator Bafin, which stepped in to exempt him from a rule that would have required Unifirm to bid for a full majority of the shares once it held more than 30%.
Other shareholders

Unifirm is the only shareholder with over 10% of TUI shares. Some way behind, Egyptian hotel-owning businessman called Hamed El Chiaty has a stake of just over 5%, via the Cyprus-based DH Deutsche Holdings. But most of TUI’s shares are owned in smaller chunks by the usual suspects: the global investment funds and banks that own the majority of the world’s assets.

In December 2020 these funds each had over 1%: UK investor Standard Life Aberdeen; giant US-based fund Vanguard; Canada’s state pension system; and Norges Bank, which manages the oil-rich national wealth fund of Norway. Two other major investment funds, Pioneer and BlackRock, had around 0.5% each. (NB: these numbers may have changed after the new January share sale.)

TUI can’t take its reputation for granted

https://corporatewatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/ROJAVA-1536x1152.jpeg

A company of TUI’s size backed by the German government and a Russian billionaire may seem impervious to criticism. On the other hand, unlike more specialist charter airlines, it is very much a public facing business, relying above all on the custom of North European families. The endless stream of negative reviews left by disgruntled customers following cancelled TUI holidays in 2020 have already tarnished its image.

In a sign of just how worried the company may be about its reputation, it put out a tender in the autumn for a new PR agency to take care of “relaunching the brand into the post-Covid world”. This was ultimately awarded to the US firm Leo Burnett. If outrage at the UK’s deportation push keeps up, TUI might well need to pay attention to online campaigns or demonstrations at its travel agents.

Another vulnerability the company has itself identified is political instability in destination countries, as evidenced by TUI’s nervousness over migrant arrivals in the Canary Islands. Here too, its image is being harmed by actions such as exerting pressure on the Greek government to relax COVID measures, and its treatment of independent hotels. TUI cannot take public support for granted in top destinations such as Greece and Spain, where campaigning at its resorts could play a role in shifting company policy.

▻https://corporatewatch.org/the-two-sides-of-tui-crisis-hit-holiday-giant-turned-deportation-spe

#renvois #expulsions #tourisme #TUI #asile #migrations #réfugiés #Allemagne #privatisation #complexe_militaro-industriel #business #UK #Angleterre #Touristik_Union_International #compagnie_aérienne #avions #Operation_Sillath #Alexey_Mordashov #Fritz_Joussen #Canaries #îles_Canaries #Preussag #Wigmore_House #Flintham #Andrew_Flintham #Andy_Flintham #Dawn_Wilson #pandémie #coronavirus #covid-19 #KsF #German_Economic_Support_Fund (#WSF) #chômage #licenciements #TUI_Musement #charter #Dublin #renvois_Dublin #Ghana #Nigeria #Jamaica_50 #Jet2 #hôtels #Elke_Eller #Dieter_Zetsche #Peter_Long #Severstal #Severgroup #Nordgold #Lenta #Tele2_Russia #Unifirm #Hamed_El_Chiaty #DH_Deutsche_Holdings #multinationales #Standard_Life_Aberdeen #Vanguard #Norges_Bank #Pioneer #BlackRock #Leo_Burnett

ping @karine4 @isskein @reka

La justice allemande interdit les renvois vers la Grèce

Un tribunal régional refuse de transférer des réfugiés parvenus en Allemagne, contrairement à ce que prévoit l’accord de Dublin. Il craint des #traitements_dégradants.

La justice allemande a décidé que les réfugiés ayant obtenu l’asile en Grèce ne devaient pas être renvoyés là-bas en raison du « risque sérieux de #traitement_inhumain_et_dégradant », selon une décision rendue publique ce mardi.

Le haut tribunal administratif de Münster, dans l’Etat régional de Rhénanie du Nord-Westphalie, a estimé que les demandes d’asile en Allemagne de personnes déjà reconnues comme réfugiées en Grèce ne pouvaient pas être rejetées au motif qu’elles seraient irrecevables.

Les juges ont justifié leur décision prise le 21 janvier par les risques actuellement encourus si elles étaient renvoyées en Grèce.

La Cour avait été chargée de statuer sur le recours en appel de deux plaignants, l’un Palestinien de Syrie et l’autre érythréen, qui avaient obtenu une protection internationale en Grèce.

Les deux avaient ensuite vu leur demande d’asile en Allemagne rejetée mais selon les deux jugements, ces personnes sont menacées « de misère matérielle extrême » si elles sont renvoyées vers Athènes.

Elles ne pourraient être accueillies ni dans un centre d’hébergement pour migrants, ni dans des appartements ou des structures d’accueil de sans-abri qui manquent de place, selon la même source.

« En raison de la situation actuelle sur le marché du travail et de la situation économique, les plaignants ne trouveraient pas de travail en cas de retour en Grèce », poursuivent les juges.
Accueil catastrophique

Les organisations de défense des droits humains et des droits des réfugiés dénoncent régulièrement les conditions d’accueil catastrophiques des demandeurs d’asile en Grèce, en particulier dans les camps insalubres sur les îles de la mer Egée.

Et même une fois reconnus comme réfugiés, certains continuent de survivre dans des conditions très difficiles, parfois sans accès à un logement ou à un travail.

La Grèce est l’un des principaux points d’entrée dans l’Union européenne des réfugiés souvent originaires du Moyen-Orient et d’Afghanistan qui fuient les conflits ou la pauvreté.

▻https://www.tdg.ch/la-justice-allemande-interdit-les-renvois-vers-la-grece-553304674396
#Dublin #règlement_dublin #renvois #expulsions #renvois_Dublin #justice #interdiction #2021

–---

En mars 2016, la commission européenne avait pris la décision de reprendre les renvois Dublin vers la Grèce...
▻https://seenthis.net/messages/549554

... qu’une décision de justice avait interdit en #2011 suite à la décision de la #CourEDH (#Cour_européenne_des_droits_de_l’homme) en lien avec la sentence "#M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece", reconnaissant des défaillances “systémiques” dans l’accueil des demandeurs d’asile et dans les procédures de détermination du besoin de protection.
►https://seenthis.net/messages/779987
#Belgique

ping @isskein @karine4 @_kg_

Appel de Migrant Solidarity Network : non aux #déportations vers l’Ethiopie !

Nous demandons à Karine Keller Suter, Cheffe du Département fédéral de justice et police (DFJP) et Mario Gattiker, Secrétaire d’Etat aux Migration (SEM), ainsi qu’aux autorités compétentes la #suspension du vol spécial vers l’Ethiopie prévu le 27.01.2021 et l’annulation du renvoi forcé des requérant.e.s d’asile éthiopien.ne.s résidant en Suisse

NON aux déportations vers l’Éthiopie ! Non au vol spécial du 27 janvier !

Lundi S.A. a été arrêté et placé en détention à la prison de Frambois en vue d’une expulsion vers l’Éthiopie alors qu’il se rendait au Service de la population vaudoise (SPOP) pour renouveler son papier d’aide d’urgence. En période de COVID, de telles interventions se font loin des regards et loin du bruit !

Dans le contexte de cette arrestation, on apprend que le Secrétariat d’État aux migrations (SEM) organise une #expulsion_collective par vol spécial[1] de Suisse vers l’Éthiopie le 27 janvier 2021, et ceci malgré la guerre, la crise et la pandémie qui frappent ce pays.

En Éthiopie, la situation ne fait qu’empirer !

Alors même que la situation politique se détériore en Éthiopie, nombreuses sont les voix qui s’élèvent pour dénoncer cette pratique et demander « un arrêt immédiat des #renvois_forcés en Éthiopie »[2] , dont l’OSAR – Organisation Suisse d’Aide aux Réfugiés –, la Confédération en profite pour y organiser un vol spécial. De manière plus cynique, pourrait-on dire, qu’elle en profite justement avant que des mesures diplomatiques ne soient prises qui l’en empêcherait ?

Selon des haut-e-s-responsables de l’ONU et de l’UE, il existe des « rapports concordants à propos de violences ciblant certains groupes ethniques, d’assassinats, de pillages massifs, de viols, de retours forcés de réfugiés et de possibles crimes de guerre »[3] (Josep Borrell, Haut représentant de l’Union Européenne pour les affaires étrangères et la politique de sécurité, 15/01/2021).

En avril 2018 déjà, on apprenait que le gouvernement suisse avait signé un accord secret de réadmission avec l’Ethiopie prévoyant la transmission aux services secrets éthiopiens des données personnelles des personnes renvoyées de force[4] les jetant droit dans la gueule du loup. Cet accord avait déjà été dénoncé à l’époque par Amnesty International et Human Rights Watch. Mais le gouvernement persiste et signe !

Pourtant, depuis l’entrée en fonction du premier ministre Abiy Ahmed en 2018, et la mise en œuvre de nombreuses réformes, les tensions entre son gouvernement et le Front de libération du peuple du Tigré (Tigray People’s Liberation Front TPLF), le parti au pouvoir dans la région du Tigré n’ont cessé d’augmenter. En septembre 2020, le gouvernement central a pris la décision d’annuler les élections régionales en raison du COVID 19, mais celles-ci ont eu lieu malgré tout dans la région du Tigré. Le conflit s’est alors amplifié entraînant des centaines de morts et blessés - suite aux attaques aériennes lancées par l’armée éthiopienne - et, selon Amnesty International, des massacres de civils[5].

Lors d’un reportage audio de la RTS[6], les experts interrogés compare cette guerre ethnique actuelle avec le génocide d’ex-yougoslavie, expliquant que celui-ci sera long et violent, les soldats étant entraînés au combat. Les réseaux internet sont coupés rendant l’accès aux informations impossible dans certaines regions du pays, tout comme l’accès de l’aide humanitaire.

S.A. n’a pas pu accepter de retourner volontairement en Éthiopie

Les autorités vaudoises et fédérales sont aveugles aux vies humaines touchées par l’exécution mécanique d’ordres et envoient sans sourciller des personnes au cœur d’une guerre civile naissante. Ces expulsions vers l’Éthiopie mettent délibérément en danger l’intégrité des personnes concernées, elles doivent être impérativement empêchées !

Cela fait plus de 7 ans que S.A. vit dans le canton de Vaud. Jusqu’à ce jour il partageait une chambre dans un foyer d’aide d’urgence avec sa sœur - et son enfant - elle aussi en Suisse depuis près de dix ans. Malgré ces difficultés, c’est ici qu’S.A. tisse des liens et exerces ces activités depuis de nombreuses années. Or, selon les informations qui nous sont parvenues, S.A. se trouve actuellement dans un état critique. Déjà traumatisé, affaibli psychiquement et affecté physiquement, la violence de son arrestation et l’absurdité de cette décision d’expulsion ne font qu’aggraver sa situation, le confrontant encore une fois aux décisions « administratives » aberrantes des autorités vaudoises et fédérales et à leurs conséquences bien réelles et destructrices. Quand cet acharnement de l’État et ces procédures d’expulsion meurtrières s’arrêteront-t-elles ?

Nous ne cesserons de dénoncer cet entêtement absurde, irresponsable et inhumain des autorités et exigeons la libération immédiate de S.A. et de tous ses compatriotes de Frambois et d’ailleurs ! Nous ne cesserons d’exiger l’arrêt total des expulsions et un droit de rester pour toutes et tous.

A lire également l’Appel de Migrant Solidarity Network : Le vol spécial prévu pour l’Éthiopie ne doit pas décoller ▻https://migrant-solidarity-network.ch/2021/01/22/aufruf-der-geplante-sonderflug-nach-aethiopien-darf-nicht [7]

[1] Par vol spécial on entend des déportations forcées, sous la contrainte, lors desquelles les personnes concernées se font ligoter de la tête (casque) aux pieds et aux mains. Elles restent entravées ainsi durant un long vol, encadrées par une dizaine de policier par personne, avant d’être remises par les autorités suisses et européennes aux autorités policières/migratoires du pays vers lequel l’expulsion est opérée.

[2] ▻https://www.osar.ch/publications/news-et-recits/lethiopie-au-bord-de-la-guerre-civile

[3] ▻https://www.mediapart.fr/journal/international/210121/en-ethiopie-la-france-partagee-entre-business-et-defense-des-droits-humain
▻https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-homepage/91459/we-need-humanitarian-access-tigray-urgent-first-step-towards-peace-ethio

►https://www.lemonde.fr/afrique/article/2020/11/13/ethiopie-l-onu-craint-de-possibles-crimes-de-guerre-apres-le-massacre-de-civ

►https://www.lemonde.fr/afrique/article/2020/11/13/ethiopie-l-onu-craint-de-possibles-crimes-de-guerre-apres-le-massacre-de-civ

[4] ▻https://www.lematin.ch/story/asile-l-etrange-accord-de-la-suisse-avec-lethiopie-767317721551

[5] ▻https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/11/ethiopia-over-50-ethnic-amhara-killed-in-attack-on-village-by-armed-group

[6] ▻https://www.rts.ch/info/monde/11744384-comment-lethiopie-sombre-dans-la-guerre-un-an-apres-le-nobel-de-la-paix

[7] Afin de contacter l’Appel de Migrant Solidarity Network, vous pouvez leur adresser un mail à l’adresse suivante : info@migrant-solidarity-network.ch

▻https://droit-de-rester.blogspot.com/2021/01/appel-de-migrant-solidarity-network-non.html
#Ethiopie #asile #migrations #réfugiés #réfugiés_éthiopiens #renvois #expulsions #vol_spécial #Suisse #résistance

#OLAF raided EU border chief’s office over migrant pushback claims

The EU’s anti-fraud watchdog, OLAF, raided the offices of #Frontex Executive Director #Fabrice_Leggeri, as well as his head of Cabinet #Thibauld_de_La_Haye_Jousselin, on December 7, 2020, as part of an investigation into allegations of migrant #pushbacks, according on a document obtained by Kathimerini.

As claimed by the author of the document, who has knowledge of the inner workings of Frontex, Leggeri “actively resisted” the recruitment of the required 40 fundamental rights officers provided for in the regulation of the new European Border and Coast Guard Agency, answering frequent questions from agency staff in early 2020 that “it is not a priority.”

In addition, the author states that the executive director “repeatedly made it clear to staff” that “Frontex is not an expensive lifeguard service,” and staff in operations had been made to understand that “reporting pushbacks involving Frontex personnel is not a route to popularity or promotion” within the agency.

At the same time, reporting of incidents is “intentionally centralized to be slow, cumbersome and very discreet,” according to the same document.

The author also accuses the Frontex chief executive of being in charge of a “comically incompetent” human resources department, which last October told 400 candidates that they had been hired for the agency’s standing corps (Europe’s first uniformed law enforcement service), only to withdraw the job offers the next day.

At the same time, it is reported that no provision has been made for the new border guards to cary firearms legally over EU borders.

Asked by Kathimerini on Tuesday if Leggeri continues to enjoy the trust of the European Commission, a spokesperson distanced himself, expressing confidence that the all issues that have risen will be resolved with the cooperation of both the executive director and Frontex’s board of directors of Frontex.

Both OLAF and Frontex confirmed that the investigation is underway. “OLAF can confirm that it has opened an investigation concerning Frontex. However, as an investigation is on-going, OLAF cannot issue any further comment,” the OLAF press office told Kathimerini.

On its side, a Frontex spokesperson said: “In keeping with its policy of transparency, Frontex is cooperating fully with OLAF. OLAF visits to EU agencies, institutions and entities are a normal practice of good governance. It’s important to note that such visits do not necessarily imply any malpractice.”

Speaking at the European Parliament in December 2020, Leggeri had dismissed media reports that Frontex officers had been involved in pushbacks, arguing that “we have not found evidence” of such incidents.

However, the Party of European Socialists had called for his resignation, while the Greens has called for an investigation by the European Parliament.

The EU border agency is also investigating pushback allegations.

▻https://www.ekathimerini.com/261205/article/ekathimerini/news/olaf-raided-eu-border-chiefs-office-over-migrant-pushback-claims

#fraude #Office_européen_de_lutte_antifraude #renvois #expulsions

–—

ajouté au fil de discussions :
Migrations : l’agence européenne #Frontex mise en cause pour des #refoulements en mer
►https://seenthis.net/messages/882952

EU: Renewed deportation agreement with #Afghanistan close to approval

The EU is close to adopting a renewed agreement with Afghanistan to facilitate further deportations to the war-torn country. A note from the Commission to the Council, dated 13 January, says “all requests made by Member States” are included in the new Joint Declaration on Migration Cooperation.

According to a previous document published by Statewatch (▻https://www.statewatch.org/news/2020/october/eu-deportations-to-afghanistan-member-states-want-to-simplify-expulsion-), member state demands included a more restrictive definition of “vulnerable groups”. The text of the new agreement also explicitly sets out “a ceiling of 500 returnees a month,” at the request of the Afghan authorities.

Deportations to Afghanistan have been stepped up significantly in recent years, with assistance from EU border agency Frontex. This has sparked significant opposition, and the plan to renew the EU-Afghanistan agreement (previously known as the ’Joint Way Forward’) was opposed by a number of civil society organisations. Some 40 groups called on the EU and its member states to:

“Halt forced returns to Afghanistan due to the security situation in the country and the challenge of reintegration for returnees from Europe and the neighbouring region. In particular, vulnerable groups and Afghans who were born and grew up outside of Afghanistan should not be “returned”.”

However, their demands have fallen on deaf ears. The Commission’s note calls on the Council “to endorse the Joint Declaration on Migration Cooperation, prior to its signing by the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the Commissioner for Home Affairs or the person designated by them on behalf of the EU.”

See: NOTE from: Commission to: Delegations: Commission’s request for endorsement of the #Joint_Declaration_on_Migration_Cooperation between Afghanistan and EU (Council document 5223/21, LIMITE, 13 January 2021: ▻https://www.statewatch.org/media/1693/eu-council-com-call-approval-afghanistan-deportation-agreement-5223-21.p):

“...the #JDMC also brings significant improvements based on lessons learned from the implementation of the JWF and requests expressed by Member States, including:

- a tighter definition of vulnerable groups, notably the family unit and seriously sick people (Part I, point 5);
- clarification that all EU Member States may participate in joint return operations by
- non-scheduled flights under the JDMC, even if they have concluded a bilateral agreement or arrangement with Afghanistan, while specifying that joint return flights should be carried out under the JDMC (Part II, point 3; Part X);
- EU escort staff and other accompanying staff do not need to carry a valid Afghan visa unless they must enter the territory of Afghanistan (Part II, point 5);
- all Afghan returnees to be readmitted upon arrival (Part II, point 4);
- indefinite duration of the Declaration (Part VIII).

At the request of the Afghan side, and in line with the ongoing practice, the JDMC sets a maximum number of 50 returnees per non-scheduled flight and a ceiling of 500 returnees per month. Both figures can be increased after prior consultations (Part II, point 4).”

▻https://www.statewatch.org/news/2021/january/eu-renewed-deportation-agreement-with-afghanistan-close-to-approval
#accord #renvois #expulsions #EU #UE #union_européenne #asile #migrations #réfugiés #déboutés #vulnérabilité #Frontex #Joint_Way_Forward #réintégration

Germany eases restrictions on church asylum

https://scd.infomigrants.net/media/resize/my_image_big/af37bd85cbc1ded14ac7b86bf038e087fbe5c7a7.jpeg

Germany’s asylum office has moved away from its restrictive practice against church asylum. The introduced changes pertain to the time limits within which responsibility for an asylum seeker would move to Germany from other EU countries. The obstacles to church asylum had previously been so high that help for hardship cases was made nearly impossible.

Germany’s Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (#BAMF) has changed course in regards to how it deals with church asylum cases, a spokesperson for BAMF confirmed on Thursday (January 14) in a reply to a request by the news agency KNA.

According to BAMF, important changes have been applied to deadlines for transfers in so-called Dublin cases. People sheltering in church asylum now have to stick it out for only six month in order to drop out of the Dublin system. After six month, they no longer qualify to be transferred back to the EU country where they first had claimed asylum.

With the time limit being shortened, the odds of an asylum seeker getting deported are effectively much lower, as the other EU country in such cases will no longer be responsible for people in church asylum after six month, in accordance with the Dublin Regulation
EU regulation that lays down the criteria and mechanisms for determining the EU member state responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the member states by a third-country national or a stateless person. Many asylum seekers are so-called Dublin cases, meaning they first entered the EU in a country other than their current one and will likely be transferred back there since that country is responsible.
.

In other words: asylum seekers can now stay in Germany after spending six months in church asylum.

Germany’s “Ökumenische Bundesarbeitsgemeinschaft Asyl in der Kirche” ("federal ecumenical work group for asylum in the church") welcomed the BAMF decision in an online statement and on Twitter.
Important changes

In 2018, the conference of Germany’s interior ministers had extended this period from 6 to 18 months, which rendered providing church asylum all but impossible.

After the extension, the chances of migrants in church asylum receiving protection against deportation had dropped to nearly zero. In 2019, German authorities stopped such deportations on humanitarian grounds in fewer than 2% of cases.
Court ruling against extension

The German state interior ministers in 2018 decided to enact an extension from 6 to 18 months to make it more difficult for people in church asylum to simply sit out those deadlines.

The basis for the extension was a provision of the Dublin Regulation that allowed an extension of the standard time limit if the asylum seeker is deemed “flüchtig” ("on the run").

However, Germany’s highest court in June last year ruled that this interpretation was against the law. The ruling argued that people who enjoyed church asylum could not be regarded as “flüchtig” as they were not on the run, and their whereabouts were known to the authorities.

As part of an agreement between the churches and German authorities dating back to 2015, churches have to inform authorities about cases of church asylum and the exact whereabouts of the accommodated person.

▻https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2ArdgLTMok&feature=emb_logo

’Overdue step’

The BAMF spokesperson said, however, that according to the law, people in church asylum would have to abandon that status if authorities decided that there was no special, individual case of hardship that needed to be evaluated.

“Ökumenische Bundesarbeitsgemeinschaft Asyl in der Kirche” had called for the implementation of the change since said last year’s court ruling. Chairperson Dietlind Jochims, a woman minister in Hamburg, called it an “overdue step.”

Strain on churches

The one-sided extension of the deadline for Dublin cases in church asylum had put a strain on parishes, monasteries and religious orders.

Jochims said she hoped for a “return to a solutions-oriented communication on humanitarian hardship cases.” She also called for taking back already granted extensions of deadlines in existing church asylum cases.

According to its own information, BAMF received 355 church asylum notifications for 406 persons last year. The highest number of church asylum cases were reported in 2016, when more than 1,000 people, whose official asylum requests had earlier been rejected, sought refuge in German parishes.

▻https://www.infomigrants.net/en/post/29675/germany-eases-restrictions-on-church-asylum

#asile #migrations #réfugiés #Eglises #Eglise #Kirchenasyl
#religion #Dublin #renvois #expulsions #asile_temporaire #temporaire #tolérance #18_mois

ping @karine4 @isskein @_kg_

Αίτημα επιστροφής 1.500 προσφύγων στην Τουρκία κατέθεσε η Ελλάδα στην Ε.Ε.
–-> La Grèce demande à l’UE le #retour de 1 500 réfugiés en Turquie.

Αίτημα προς την Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή και τη Frontex για την άμεση επιστροφή 1.450 προσώπων, των οποίων έχουν απορριφθεί τα αιτήματα παροχής ασύλου, κατέθεσε το υπουργείο Μετανάστευσης και Ασύλου, επικαλούμενο την Κοινή Δήλωση Ε.Ε.-Τουρκίας. Ωστόσο να σημειωθεί ότι πλέον η έκδοση των αποφάσεων παροχής ασύλου σε πρώτο βαθμό γίνονται με διαδικασίες εξπρές, μη εξασφαλίζοντας επαρκή νομική βοήθεια και κατά συνέπεια δίκαιη απόφαση.

Στην ανακοίνωση του υπουργείου Μετανάστευσης αναφέρεται ότι η Ελλάδα ζητά να επιστρέψουν στην Τουρκία 955 αλλοδαποί που μπήκαν στη χώρα μας από την Τουρκία και βρίσκονται στη Λέσβο, 180 που βρίσκονται στη Χίο, 128 που βρίσκονται στη Σάμο και 187 στην Κω, επισημαίνοντας ότι τα αιτήματά τους για άσυλο έχουν απορριφθεί τελεσίδικα και ως εκ τούτου είναι επιστρεπτέοι, βάσει της Κοινής Δήλωσης ΕΕ- Τουρκίας.

Το πρώτο δίμηνο του 2020 καταγράφηκαν συνολικά 139 επιστροφές προς την Τουρκία, με τη διαδικασία να έχει σταματήσει από τις 15 Μαρτίου 2020, καθώς η Τουρκία επικαλέστηκε τις δυσκολίες που επέφερε το ξέσπασμα της πανδημίας του κορονοϊού. Πλέον, το υπουργείο Μετανάστευσης ισχυρίζεται ότι « οι ταχείες διαδικασίες ελέγχων για κορονοϊό στην Ελλάδα και η σημαντική επιτάχυνση της διαδικασίας ασύλου, έχουν δημιουργήσει τις κατάλληλες συνθήκες για την επανέναρξη της διαδικασίας επιστροφών με ασφάλεια όσων αλλοδαπών δεν δικαιούνται διεθνούς προστασίας και εισήλθαν στην Ελλάδα από την Τουρκία ».

Ο υπουργός Μετανάστευσης και Ασύλου, Νότης Μηταράκης, επισημαίνει στη δήλωσή του ότι η Ελλάδα αναμένει από την Τουρκία « να ενισχύσει τις προσπάθειες στα πλαίσια της Κοινής Δήλωσης : πρώτον, στην αποτροπή διέλευσης βαρκών που ξεκινούν από τα παράλιά της με προορισμό τη χώρα μας. Δεύτερον, στην αποδοχή επιστροφών στη βάση της Κοινής Δήλωσης Ε.Ε.-Τουρκίας, αλλά και των διμερών συμφωνιών επανεισδοχής ».

Και αναφερόμενος στην ευρωπαϊκή πολιτική για το προσφυγικό/μεταναστευτικό, σημειώνει ότι « το ζητούμενο για την Ευρώπη είναι να κατοχυρώσει στο νέο Σύμφωνο Μετανάστευσης και Ασύλου έναν κοινό μηχανισμό, καθώς και το απαραίτητο νομικό οπλοστάσιο για επιστροφές. Και να οχυρώσει, με αυτόν τον τρόπο, τις χώρες πρώτης υποδοχής απέναντι σε ανεξέλεγκτες μεταναστευτικές ροές, αλλά και τη δράση κυκλωμάτων λαθροδιακινητών ».

Την ίδια ώρα, με αφορμή το αίτημα του ελληνικού υπουργείου Μετανάστευσης και Ασύλου προς την Κομισιόν και τη Frontex, η οργάνωση-ομπρέλα για τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα HIAS Greece εξέδωσε ανακοίνωση στην οποία σημειώνει ότι η ταχεία διαδικασία που ακολουθείται για την εξέταση των αιτημάτων ασύλου δεν εξασφαλίζει σωστή και δίκαιη απόφαση.

Επίσης οι αιτούντες άσυλο δεν έχουν επαρκή νομική βοήθεια και η διαδικασία της προσφυγής σε δεύτερο βαθμό είναι νομικά περίπλοκη, ουσιαστικά αποτρέποντας τους πρόσφυγες από να διεκδικήσουν την παραμονή τους στη χώρα.

« Καθίσταται σαφές ότι χωρίς νομική συνδρομή είναι αδύνατον οι αιτούντες/ούσες άσυλο να παρουσιάσουν εγγράφως και μάλιστα στην ελληνική γλώσσα, τους νομικούς και πραγματικούς λόγους για τους οποίους προσφεύγουν κατά της απορριπτικής τους απόφασης », σημειώνει μεταξύ άλλων, τονίζοντας επίσης :

« Η έλλειψη δωρεάν νομικής συνδρομής αποβαίνει εις βάρος του δίκαιου και αποτελεσματικού χαρακτήρα που θα έπρεπε να διακρίνει τη διαδικασία ασύλου στο σύνολό της, ιδίως αν ληφθούν υπόψη οι εξαιρετικά σύντομες προθεσμίες που προβλέπονται για διαδικασία των συνόρων και τα σημαντικά κενά στη πρόσβαση σε νομική συνδρομή ήδη από το πρώτο βαθμό της διαδικασίας ασύλου ».

▻https://www.efsyn.gr/node/276785

–—

Traduction de Vicky Skoumbi via la mailing-list Migeurop :

Le ministère de l’Immigration et de l’Asile a soumis une demande à la Commission européenne et à #Frontex pour le #retour_immédiat de 1 450 personnes dont la demande d’asile a été rejetée, citant la déclaration commune UE-Turquie. Cependant, il convient de noter que désormais, les décisions d’asile en première instance sont prises par des procédures expresses, sans que soit assuré une aide juridique suffisante au requérant, ce qui pourrait garantir une décision équitable.

L’annonce du ministère de l’Immigration indique que la Grèce demande le retour en Turquie de 955 étrangers qui sont entrés dans notre pays depuis la Turquie et se trouvent à #Lesbos, 180 à #Chios, 128 à #Samos et 187 à #Kos, notant que leurs demandes d’asile ont été définitivement rejetés et qu’il est possible de les renvoyer, en vertu de la déclaration commune UE-Turquie. Au cours des deux premiers mois de 2020, un total de 139 #retours_forcés en Turquie ont été enregistrés, un processus qui est au point mort depuis le 15 mars 2020, date à laquelle la Turquie a évoqué les difficultés supplémentaires causées par l’apparition de la #pandémie de #coronavirus.

Désormais, le ministère de l’Immigration affirme que "les procédures de #dépistage_rapide du coronavirus en Grèce et l’accélération significative du processus d’asile, ont créé les bonnes conditions pour la #reprise en toute sécurité du processus de retour des étrangers qui n’ont pas droit à une protection internationale et sont entrés en Grèce depuis la Turquie. ». Le ministre de l’Immigration et de l’Asile, #Notis_Mitarakis, souligne dans sa déclaration que la Grèce attend de la Turquie "un renforcement des efforts dans le cadre de la Déclaration commune : premièrement, pour empêcher le passage des bateaux partant de ses côtes vers notre pays". Deuxièmement, par l’acceptation des retours sur la base de la déclaration commune UE-Turquie, mais aussi des accords bilatéraux de #réadmission ". Faisant référence à la politique européenne des réfugiés / immigration, il a noté que « l’objectif de l’Europe est d’établir un mécanisme commun dans le nouveau pacte d’immigration et d’asile, ainsi que l’arsenal juridique nécessaire pour les retours. Et de fortifier, de cette manière, les premiers pays d’accueil contre les flux migratoires incontrôlés, mais aussi l’action des réseaux de passeurs ".

Dans le même temps, à l’occasion de la demande du ministère grec de l’Immigration et de l’asile à la Commission et à Frontex, l’organisation de défense des droits de l’homme HIAS Greece a publié une déclaration dans laquelle elle note que la procédure rapide suivie pour l’examen des demandes d’asile ne garantit pas décision juste et équitable. De plus, les demandeurs d’asile ne bénéficient pas d’une aide juridique suffisante et la procédure de recours en deuxième instance est juridiquement compliquée, ce qui empêche les réfugiés de défendre leur droit de séjour dans le pays. « Il devient clair que sans assistance juridique, il est impossible pour les demandeurs d’asile de présenter par écrit et qui plus est en langue grecque, les raisons juridiques et réelles pour lesquelles ils font appel de la décision de rejet de leur demande », notent-t-ils, entre autres, en soulignant : « L’absence d’assistance juridique gratuite se fait au détriment du caractère équitable et efficace de la #procédure_d'asile dans son ensemble, en particulier compte tenu des délais extrêmement courts prévus de la #procédure_à_la_frontière (#Border_procedure) et des lacunes importantes déjà en matière d’accès à l’#aide_juridique, dès la première instance de la procédure d’asile ".

#Grèce #Turquie #asile #migrations #renvois #expulsions #réfugiés #accord_UE-Turquie #déboutés

ping @isskein @karine4

A Besançon, un boulanger se bat contre l’expulsion de son apprenti guinéen - Page 1 | Mediapart
▻https://www.mediapart.fr/journal/france/050121/besancon-un-boulanger-se-bat-contre-l-expulsion-de-son-apprenti-guineen?us

https://static.mediapart.fr/etmagine/default/files/2021/01/05/image-laye-fode-t-besancon.jpg

Dimanche 3 janvier, Stéphane Ravacley a décidé de ne plus s’alimenter. Le gérant de la Huche à pain, une boulangerie de Besançon (Doubs) employant huit personnes, se dit « prêt à tout » pour garder Laye Fodé Traoréiné, son apprenti, dans son équipe. Ce dernier, de nationalité guinéenne, est sous le coup d’une expulsion du territoire français.

« Je veux que ce soit percutant. Je veux montrer qu’il y a quelqu’un derrière lui pour le soutenir. On ne fait pas n’importe quoi avec des gamins ! », s’exclame le responsable de la boulangerie, dans une colère à peine dissimulée. Une pétition en ligne, adressée entre autres à la préfecture de Haute-Saône et au ministre de l’intérieur Gérald Darmanin, a récolté, au 5 janvier, plus de 110 000 signatures de soutien.

#Centre_Fédéral de renvoi du Grand-Saconnex, la honte

Le COVID a mis un frein à tout… mais pas à la construction du CFA du Grand-Saconnex. Le chantier a démarré, les ouvriers s’activent. Visiblement, les autorités sont pressées de pouvoir enfermer des hommes, des femmes et des enfants dans ce complexe carcéral afin de mieux pouvoir les renvoyer, à l’abri des regards du public.

https://i.imgur.com/XSwL9h6.png

C’est l’entreprise #Rampini qui a décroché ce fabuleux contrat. A l’heure où le terme « entreprise responsable » semble avoir un écho dans la population, nous irons demander à Rampini : Où placez-vous votre responsabilité sociale ? Sous vos talons ? Au fond de vos coffres-forts ?

Nous ne voulons pas d’un centre de renvoi à Genève. Nous ne voulons pas d’une zone de non droit au Grand-Saconnex ni ailleurs.

Honte aux autorités qui ordonnent ce centre !
Honte aux entreprises qui le construisent !

https://i.imgur.com/n0TOAB3.png

Les échos des centres fédéraux d’asile : déplorables

Malgré les clôtures et les restrictions d’accès aux Centres Fédéraux d’Asile (CFA), des requérant-e-s parviennent à nous communiquer ce qui s’y passe :

Délais de séjour dépassés : Alors que, selon le règlement, le séjour maximum dans un CFA est de 140 jours, après quoi les requérant-e-s d’asile doivent être transféré-e-s dans un centre cantonal avec des conditions de vie moins carcérales, ce délai est régulièrement dépassé depuis le début de la crise sanitaire.

Climat de violence : Des requérant-e-s témoignent d’un climat de violence permanent, avec des rixes régulières entre agents de sécurité et requérant-e-s ou entre requérant-e-s eux-elles-mêmes. Les enfants assistent à ces scènes. Des agents de sécurité eux-mêmes craignent un drame.

Règne de l’arbitraire : Les sanctions tout comme les « bons points » (sous forme de tampons !) sont distribués sans explication. Il n’est pas rare qu’un-e requérant-e ne sache pas pourquoi il-elle a reçu une pénalité ! Et les agents de sécurité ne distribuent pas tous le même nombre de tampons aux requérant-e-s d’asile pour les mêmes tâches. Or ces « bons points » permettent d’accéder à des TUP (travaux d’utilité publique) qui sont (légèrement) payés. Ils ont donc une valeur importante pour les requérant-e-s, mais ils sont distribués de manière arbitraire.

Solidarité Tattes a commencé à visiter le CFA de Giffers en début d’année, mais nous avons été stoppé-e-s dans notre action à cause du Covid. D’ailleurs, « visiter » est un bien grand mot, puisque nous avons dû rencontrer les requérant-e-s sur le parking ! Dès que les conditions sanitaires le permettront, nous retournerons à Giffers. Car c’est bien la proximité qui nous a permis de détecter par exemple les graves violences qui se sont déroulées dans ce CFA.

–-> reçu via la mailing-list de Solidarité Tattes, le 24.12.2020

#asile #migrations #réfugiés #centres_fédéraux #aéroport #expulsions #renvois #Suisse #Genève

Ajouté à la métaliste sur le centre du Grand-Saconnex :
▻https://seenthis.net/messages/878315

UK to deny asylum to refugees passing through ’safe’ third country

Immigration rule will also prevent migrants from making a claim in UK territorial waters

Ministers have quietly changed immigration rules to prevent people fleeing war or persecution from claiming asylum in the UK if they have passed through a “safe” third country, prompting accusations of a breach of international law.

From 1 January, claims of asylum from a person who has travelled through or has a connection to a safe third country, including people coming from EU member states, will be treated as inadmissible.

The changes will also prevent asylum seekers from being able to make a claim in the territorial waters of the UK.

The UK government will be able to remove refused asylum seekers not only to the third countries through which they have travelled, but to any safe third country that may agree to receive them, an explanatory memo states.

A 10-page statement (▻https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/943127/CCS207_CCS1220673408-001_Statement_of_changes_in_Immig) outlining the changes to the rules was published online without a press or public announcement.

However, the changes highlight a significant hurdle for the UK government: claims will only be treated as inadmissible if the asylum applicant is accepted for readmission by the third country through which they have travelled or another safe state agrees to take them.

Immigration law experts have said this could render the new policy “pointless” and would most likely delay asylum applications and leave refugees in limbo in the UK.

Colin Yeo, a leading immigration barrister with expertise in asylum law, wrote on Twitter: “The policy is pointless because the govt has negotiated no such return agreements, so all it does is delay decisions on all claims, which is cruel to genuine refugees, and delay removal of non genuine cases.”

https://i.imgur.com/JrPG0G4.png

▻https://twitter.com/ColinYeo1/status/1337069616078721025

The Liberal Democrats’ home affairs spokesperson, Alistair Carmichael, said the changes were “yet another breach of international law”.

He said: “The UK has a proud history of providing sanctuary to those in need, but now the Conservative government is turning its back on refugees. This latest nasty policy from [the home secretary] Priti Patel goes against our commitments under the refugee convention and against everything the UK stands for. It’s yet another breach of international law by this irresponsible tory government.”

Beth Gardiner-Smith, the chief executive of Safe Passage International, a charity that help refugees access safe and legal routes to asylum, said: “The government’s changes to the immigration rules are a direct assault on the fundamental human right to asylum. These chilling changes on International Human Rights Day do a disservice to the UK’s proud record of providing safety to those fleeing persecution and violence.”

The number of small boat arrivals across the Channel has surged to record levels this year, with more than 8,000 migrants and refugees travelling across the Dover Strait, compared with less than 2,000 in 2019. However, total asylum applications are down year on year as the Covid-19 pandemic has cut off other methods of travel and limited migration flows.

Patel has been accused of responding haphazardly with kneejerk proposals ranging from sending asylum seekers thousands of miles away to islands in the South Atlantic, to using giant water cannons to repel boats. The prime minister has reportedly become frustrated with Patel’s handling of the situation.

The UK is a party to the UN’s 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and to its 1967 protocol, a piece of international law designed to protect refugees.

The Home Office provided a statement through the immigration compliance minister, Chris Philp. He said: “We are determined to fix the broken asylum system to make it firm on those who come here through illegally facilitated routes and fair on those who play by the rules. There is no reason to leave a safe country like France to make a dangerous crossing. These measures send a clear message and are just one of the steps th​e government is taking to tackle the unacceptable rise in small boat crossings.”

▻https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/dec/10/uk-to-deny-asylum-to-refugees-passing-through-safe-third-country

#UK #Angleterre #asile #migrations #réfugiés #droit_d'asile #Manche #eaux_territoriales #pays_sûr #transit #pays_tiers_sûr #brexit #EU #Europe #UE #renvois #expulsions #01_janvier_2020 #inadmissibilité #attente #limbe #accords #droit_international #Priti_Patel

ping @isskein

EU: Frontex report on removal operations in the first half of 2020 and fundamental rights observations

https://www.statewatch.org/media/1591/eu-frontex-returns-report.png

Statewatch is publishing Frontex’s report on its forced removal operations in the first half of 2020, along with the observations of the agency’s fundamental rights officer (FRO). The FRO report highlights a number of problems: a failure to correctly brief escorts on fundamental rights; not enough monitors available to cover all flights and not enough monitors on each flight; a failure to protect dignity and privacy during strip searches; wrongful disclosure of medical data to escorts; improper treatment of vulnerable groups; and problematic use of force and coercive measures. On this latter point, the FRO’s report notes that: “A few monitors found that unauthorized coercive measures were used (steel shoes, helmets).”

▻https://www.statewatch.org/news/2020/december/eu-frontex-report-on-removal-operations-in-the-first-half-of-2020-and-fu

Pour télécharger le rapport:
▻https://www.statewatch.org/media/1593/eu-frontex-deportations-report-first-half-2020-13638-20.pdf

#rapport #Frontex #asile #migrations #réfugiés #renvois #expulsions #2020 #droits_fondamentaux #dignité #données_médicales #vulnérabilité #mesures_coercitives #frontières #droits_humains

ping @isskein @karine4 @rhoumour @_kg_

Le nombre de déplacés et de réfugiés dans le monde dépasse la barre des 80 millions (HCR)

Le nombre de déplacés et de réfugiés dans le monde a dépassé le seuil de 80 millions à la mi-2020 alors que la pandémie de Covid-19 met en péril la protection des réfugiés, a indiqué mercredi l’Agence de l’ONU pour les réfugiés.

Des millions de personnes ont déjà été forcées de fuir leur foyer du fait de la persécution, du conflit et des violations des droits humains. Et selon le Haut-Commissariat de l’ONU pour les réfugiés (HCR), la #pandémie du #coronavirus et les conflits existants ou nouveaux ont « dramatiquement affecté leurs conditions ».

Ce chiffre de #80_millions de #déracinés risque de « continuer d’augmenter à moins que les dirigeants mondiaux ne stoppent les guerres », a déclaré le Haut-Commissaire Filippo Grandi.

« Alors que les déplacements forcés ont doublé durant la dernière décennie, la communauté internationale échoue à maintenir la #paix », a ajouté M. Grandi, dans un communiqué.

Au début de cette année, 79,5 millions de personnes étaient déracinées dans le monde. Parmi elles figuraient plus de 45 millions de déplacés internes, 29,6 millions de réfugiés et plus de 4 millions de demandeurs d’asile.

« Aujourd’hui nous passons de nouveau un sombre jalon et cette hausse continuera sauf si les dirigeants mondiaux font cesser les #guerres », a fait valoir le chef du HCR.

Impact sur les réfugiés des mesures prises pour freiner la propagation de la #Covid-19

Malgré l’appel urgent lancé en mars par le Secrétaire général des Nations Unies en faveur d’un cessez-le-feu mondial pendant la pandémie, les conflits et les persécutions se poursuivent, déplore l’agence onusienne. De nouvelles personnes ont été contraintes de fuir leurs domiciles dans des pays comme la Syrie, le Mozambique, la Somalie la République démocratique du Congo (RDC) ou le Yémen.

Des déplacements nouveaux et significatifs ont également été enregistrés à travers la région du Sahel central en Afrique, alors que les civils subissent des violences inqualifiables, y compris des viols et des exécutions. « Alors que les déplacements forcés ont doublé durant la dernière décennie, la communauté internationale échoue à maintenir la paix », a dit M. Grandi.

Par ailleurs, le rapport souligne que certaines des mesures prises pour freiner la propagation de la Covid-19 ont rendu plus difficile l’accès des réfugiés à la #sécurité.

Lors du pic de la première vague de la pandémie en avril dernier, 168 pays avaient fermé entièrement ou partiellement leurs frontières et 90 pays ne faisaient aucune exception pour les demandeurs d’asile.

Pour les personnes déracinées, la pandémie de Covid-19 est finalement devenue « une crise supplémentaire de #protection » et de #moyens_de_subsistance au-delà de la situation d’urgence pour la santé publique à travers le monde.

Selon l’agence onusienne basée à Genève, le virus a altéré tous les aspects de la vie humaine et a sévèrement aggravé les problèmes existants pour les personnes déracinées et les apatrides.

Les nouvelles demandes d’asile ont diminué d’un tiers

Mais depuis lors, avec le soutien et l’expertise du HCR, 111 pays ont trouvé des solutions pratiques pour garantir que leur régime d’asile est pleinement ou partiellement opérationnel, tout en veillant à prendre les mesures nécessaires pour lutter contre la propagation du virus.

Malgré ces mesures, les nouvelles demandes d’asile ont diminué d’un tiers par rapport à la même période en 2019.

De même, moins de solutions durables ont été trouvées pour les déplacés. Seulement plus de 822.000 personnes déracinées sont rentrées chez elles, dont la plupart – 635.000 – étaient des déplacés internes. Avec plus de 102.000 #rapatriements librement consentis au premier semestre 2020, les #retours de réfugiés ont chuté de 22% par rapport à 2019.

Les voyages de réfugiés vers des pays de réinstallation ont été temporairement suspendus à cause des restrictions dues à la pandémie de Covid-19 entre mars et juin dernier. Par conséquent, seuls plus de 17.000 réfugiés ont été réinstallés durant le premier semestre de cette année, selon les statistiques gouvernementales, soit la moitié des réinstallations survenues par rapport à l’année dernière.

▻https://news.un.org/fr/story/2020/12/1084102

#statistiques #chiffres #asile #migrations #réfugiés #monde #2020 #dépacés_internes #IDPs #réinstallation #renvois #expulsions #fermeture_des_frontières

ping @simplicissimus @reka @karine4 @isskein @_kg_

La France et le Maroc signent un #accord pour faciliter le retour des #mineurs_isolés

https://scd.infomigrants.net/media/resize/my_image_big/e333efb77a5e1faa22564a702094532c93093852.jpeg

Un accord concernant la prise en charge des migrants mineurs non accompagnés a été signé lundi par Paris et Rabat. Le texte prévoit notamment la mise en place « d’outils concrets » facilitant le retour des mineurs vers le Maroc.

En déplacement au Maroc, le ministre français de la Justice #Eric_Dupond-Moretti et son homologue marocain #Mohamed_Ben_Abdelkader ont signé, lundi 7 décembre à Rabat, une « #déclaration_d'intention relative à la protection des mineurs non accompagnés ». Il s’agit d’une #entente_judiciaire entre les deux pays visant à mettre en place « des outils concrets » pour la prise en charge des mineurs isolés originaires du Maroc, a déclaré le ministre français après avoir signé le document, rapporte l’AFP.

L’objectif est de « permettre aux magistrats de la jeunesse de disposer des éléments indispensables pour prendre les mesures les plus adaptées à l’intérêt de ces enfants, y compris le retour » au Maroc, a-t-il précisé. Alors que les procédures pour les mineurs sont particulièrement complexes, leur protection étant encadrée par la Convention internationale des droits de l’Enfant, Eric Dupond-Moretti entend ainsi faciliter les retours de #mineurs vers le Maroc.

https://i.imgur.com/h72cd93.png

▻https://twitter.com/E_DupondM/status/1335885943279149056

Le texte, qui n’a pas été rendu public, définit « le cadre judiciaire, selon lequel les différentes entités (juges, parquet, assistantes sociales) interviennent » dans cette prise en charge, a ajouté Mohamed Ben Abdelkader. À terme, il s’agirait de permettre aux juges français d’ordonner des retours sur la base de décisions de #placement prononcées par des juges marocains « dans l’intérêt » des mineurs se trouvant en France, selon les informations obtenues par l’AFP sur place.

Les pouvoirs publics et les ONG estiment qu’il y a entre 16’000 et 40’000 mineurs clandestins en France. Ces dernières années, la question des #mineurs_marocains s’est cristallisée autour de la présence dans un square parisien de quelques dizaines de jeunes en déshérence.

▻https://www.infomigrants.net/fr/post/28965/la-france-et-le-maroc-signent-un-accord-pour-faciliter-le-retour-des-m

#MNA #renvois #expulsions #asile #réfugiés #migrations #Maroc #France #enfance #enfants

ping @isskein @karine4

Home Office proceeds with disputed Jamaica deportation flight

Thirteen of 50 people due to be deported put on controversial flight despite campaigns to prevent it.

The Home Office deported 13 men to Jamaica on a controversial charter flight that left in the early hours of Wednesday morning, but a significant number of other offenders were granted a last-minute reprieve after a legal challenge.

Documents lodged in the high court by the Home Office stated that its intention was to remove as many as 50 Jamaican nationals, but only a fraction of that number boarded the flight, according to ministry sources.

The Home Office minister for immigration compliance, Chris Philp, said the flight had removed 13 “serious foreign criminals” from the UK. A number of others due to be onboard are said to have been granted a reprieve after the ministry acknowledged they may have been victims of modern slavery.

The mass deportation became a high-profile issue after a series of campaigns including one from 82 black public figures – among them the author Bernardine Evaristo, the model Naomi Campbell and the historian David Olusoga – who urged airlines not to operate the Home Office flight.

Several NGOs, dozens of solicitors and barristers including 11 QCs signed a letter saying the deportation flight was unlawful, unjust and racist. More than 60 MPs and peers signed a letter to the home secretary, Priti Patel, calling for the flight to be cancelled, and a petition from BARAC UK and BAME Lawyers for Justice attracted more than 180,000 signatures.

A series of legal challenges were launched in the days before the flight, many of which succeeded.

Charter flights to Jamaica are particularly controversial because of the Windrush scandal, and because some people earmarked for deportation came to the UK as children or have lived in the country for decades with established families.

A last-ditch legal attempt by two children to prevent the deportation of many of those due to be on the flight failed. The two siblings brought the case on behalf of their father, arguing that the Home Office had failed to properly assess the best interests of children whose parents it sought to deport.

The children were hoping to secure an injunction preventing the flight from leaving until an assessment had been carried out in the cases of all of the children about to be separated from their fathers. Their application did not succeed but the case will continue.

The Guardian has seen a letter and drawing from a 10-year-old boy addressed to a judge he hoped would remove his father from the flight. The boy wrote: “People are making decisions about my dad. When they grew up they probably had a dad. The decisions they make mean I won’t have a dad with me.”

No one who arrived in the UK under the age of 12 was put on the flight, after the Home Office and the Jamaican authorities quietly agreed a deal not to remove people who came as children, according to Jamaica’s high commissioner, Seth Ramocan. Documents seen by the Guardian have confirmed the arrangement.

Bella Sankey, the director of Detention Action, said: “This cowboy operation was stopped in its tracks by judges intervening to defend those whose lives are at risk in Jamaica. But the tragedy of this tale is the many devastated children who have had a loving parent forcibly ripped from their lives without any consultation or being able to make their voice heard. This is child cruelty plain and simple and it will not stand.”

Karen Doyle, of Movement for Justice, said: “While there are many families desperately relieved this morning, there are also many children who just lost their father before Christmas at a time of pandemic when children’s mental health is already suffering.”

Philp said: “In the early hours of this morning 13 serious foreign criminals were deported from the UK. It is disappointing that immigration law firms continued to use last-minute tactics to remove a significant number of offenders from this flight.

“These individuals had every opportunity to raise the claims in the days and weeks leading up to the flight. However, a significant number of claims were not submitted until hours before the flight was due to leave – meaning some murderers and rapists were able to stay in the UK.

“They have committed crimes which have a devastating impact on victims and families. We’ll be working through these cases as quickly as we can. I’m committed to removing foreign criminals & anyone with no right to be here to keep the British public safe, which is always my priority.”

▻https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/dec/02/home-office-proceeds-with-disputed-jamaica-deportation-flight
#renvois #expulsions #UK #Angleterre #Jamaïque #Windrush #migrations

New policy brief : Not all returns can result in sustainable reintegration

https://i.imgur.com/4jzlPLH.png

–—

Commentaire de Jill Alpes via la mailing-list Migreurop :

Returns can both exacerbate existing, as well as create new vulnerabilities. #IzabellaMajcher and #Jill_Alpes published a policy brief with UNU-CRIS, entitled “Who can be sustainably reintegrated after return? Using post-return monitoring for rights-based return policies.” (►https://cris.unu.edu/sites/cris.unu.edu/files/PB20.3%20-%20Jill%20Alpes%20and%20Izabella%20Majcher.pdf) In the brief, they argue that rights-based return policies need more robust vulnerability assessments and more extensive monitoring of people’s access to rights and well-being after return.

- For a video presentation of the police brief, please feel free to check out this recorded webinar organised by Statewatch (starting at 54 minutes: ►https://www.statewatch.org/publications/events/deportation-union-revamped-return-policies-and-reckless-forced-removals).
– Thanks to a collaboration with PICUM and a series of artists, we also have an illustrated booklet of selected testimonies. “Removed Stories: Stories of hardship and resilience in facing deportation and its aftermath” (►https://picum.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Removed-stories.pdf) highlights the impact of EU return policies on people’s lives and dreams.
- For a short summary in French of some of the key lessons we can learn from post-return interviews for rights-based return policies, please feel free to explore either the Summary of Workshop - “Au dela du retours” (►https://www.vluchtelingenwerk.be/system/tdf/fr_au-dela_du_retour.pdf?file=1&type=document) -organized by a collective of Belgian NGOs (p. 29 - 31) - or this intervention (►https://vimeo.com/389291559

) at an event organized by the Cimade (starting 14 minutes).

Few selected tweets by the United Nations University - CRIS:
UNU - CRIS Tweets:

- “Returns can create new vulnerabilities for certain profiles of migrants in particular. For example, people might not be vulnerable in Europe but will become so upon deportation to their country of nationality if they do not have families or social networks there, have not spent a significant number of years in their country of nationality (and might thus lack the necessary language skills for basic survival), or had been internally displaced beforehand. Deporting countries should take these specific returnee profiles into consideration when both issuing removal orders and deciding whether and how these removal orders are to be implemented.”
- “The weakness or strength of people’s social networks in countries of nationality should be part of vulnerability assessments prior to return. Deporting countries should also consider not just existing social policies in countries of nationality, but also real impediments to services and entitlements that returnees will likely face upon return. Such barriers are typically stronger for those who are returned after long periods abroad and for those who have other pre-existing vulnerabilities.”
- “States need to implement rights-based post-return monitoring. People who suffer from exacerbated or new vulnerabilities are less likely to be able to build up new life projects necessary for their “sustainable reintegration” in countries of nationality. Financial investments into reintegration assistance would thus not be able to achieve declared policy objectives.”

►https://cris.unu.edu/sites/cris.unu.edu/files/PB20.3%20-%20Jill%20Alpes%20and%20Izabella%20Majcher.pdf

#réintégration #asile #migrations #réfugiés #renvois #expulsions #après-expulsion

ping @_kg_ @rhoumour @karine4

« J’adore mon travail. Et depuis 2019, je ne compte pas mes heures. Après le premier confinement, j’ai touché la prime Covid de 1000 euros attribuée par l’Etat. Et je suis maintenant en CDI. J’ai aussi signé un contrat d’intégration républicaine. Pourtant, le préfet dit que je n’ai pas fait la preuve de mon insertion dans la société française. Je ne comprends pas. J’ai un terrible sentiment d’injustice », confie Lydia qui réside à Montmélian (Savoie).
En Savoie, une aide-soignante d’origine béninoise, veuve d’un français, menacée d’expulsion en pleine épidémie ►https://www.leparisien.fr/societe/en-savoie-une-aide-soignante-menacee-d-expulsion-en-pleine-epidemie-22-11

La ministra de Exteriores cierra en Senegal un acuerdo para reactivar las repatriaciones

González Laya anuncia el envío de una patrullera y un avión de la Guardia Civil para sumarse al dispositivo de vigilancia en el país africano

La ministra de Asuntos Exteriores, #Arancha_González_Laya, ha acordado con las autoridades de Senegal el comienzo “en breve plazo” de los vuelos de repatriación de los ciudadanos de este país que lleguen por vía irregular a Canarias. “Los equipos de ambos países ya están trabajando en ello. Esta medida va a contribuir de manera decisiva a frenar las salidas, como ya ocurrió en 2006”, aseguró la ministra durante su visita a Dakar este domingo y tras reunirse con el presidente, Macky Sall. “Ambos gobiernos estamos de acuerdo en que no habrá rutas para las actividades criminales”, dijo, en referencia a quienes organizan estos viajes. “El presidente Sall nos ha trasladado su intención de colaborar en estas repatriaciones”, añadió.

Pese a la existencia de un acuerdo bilateral entre ambos países, los vuelos de repatriación de ciudadanos senegaleses que llegan a España por vía clandestina se encuentran paralizados a causa de la covid-19, que provocó un cierre de fronteras. El viaje realizado este domingo por González Laya a Dakar, en el que también se entrevistó con la ministra de Asuntos Exteriores senegalesa, Aissata Tall, tenía entre sus objetivos volver a activarlos. “Sabemos que es un tema muy sensible y nosotros también lo seremos”, añadió la ministra española. “Lo haremos en coordinación con Senegal, con toda discreción y respetando la dignidad de las personas”.

González Laya explicó que, además de los equipos de ambos países, ya están trabajando con la Organización Internacional de las Migraciones (OIM) y con la Agencia de Naciones Unidas para los Refugiados (Acnur) en el proceso de identificación de los emigrantes. “Vamos a mandar un mensaje muy claro a las redes criminales de tráfico de personas y es el de no tolerar que hagan grandes beneficios a espaldas de la ley”, añadió. La ministra de Exteriores aclaró que, por ahora, no está previsto retomar estos vuelos de repatriación con Malí -dado que la mayor parte de los malienses transitan por Mauritania para llegar a Canarias y ya pueden ser expulsados a través de este país-, ni con Gambia, pues los ciudadanos de esta nacionalidad que llegan al archipiélago son una minoría.

Además del acuerdo en materia de vuelos de repatriación, González Laya aclaró que había negociado con las autoridades senegalesas el refuerzo de los medios de vigilancia españoles frente a la emigración clandestina. Desde el año 2006, coincidiendo con la anterior crisis de los cayucos, hay dos patrulleras de la Guardia Civil y un helicóptero de la Policía Nacional operando en este país y se prevé que, también a la mayor brevedad, se trasladen a Senegal una patrullera más y un avión. “Trabajamos mano a mano con las autoridades de este país y compartimos la preocupación por la existencia de redes de tráfico de personas que enriquecen a unos pocos y ponen en riesgo a muchos”, manifestó.

González Laya defendió la actuación del Gobierno español en la crisis migratoria en Canarias, a donde han llegado este año unas 18.000 personas por vía irregular, miles de ellos senegaleses que zarpan desde la costa de este país en cayucos. “La covid-19 ha destrozado las economías africanas y sabíamos que una consecuencia iba a ser una mayor emigración. Ha llegado una cantidad muy grande de personas en un corto periodo de tiempo. Pero España estaba preparada, llevamos meses trabajando en este asunto, tanto en la acogida, como en la colaboración de los países de origen y tránsito para impedir los mecanismos de entrada irregular dentro del marco reglamentario europeo”, explicó.

Otro acuerdo alcanzado este domingo entre Senegal y España ha sido el de favorecer la emigración regular y ordenada. “El presidente Macky Sall tiene la voluntad de mejorar las condiciones socioeconómicas de sus ciudadanos y dar mayores oportunidades a los emprendedores, pero al mismo tiempo abrir canales para la emigración legal. Estamos de acuerdo. Vamos a trabajar para abrir una ventana para que quienes quieran ir a España puedan hacerlo de manera ordenada”, dijo González Laya, quien anunció la potenciación de mecanismos de migración circular entre ambos países. En 2019 se puso en marcha una experiencia piloto en este sentido por la que medio centenar de jóvenes pudieron ir a España a trabajar mediante contratación en origen y de manera temporal.

Por último, la ministra de Exteriores anunció la firma de un acuerdo que permitirá a los ciudadanos senegaleses que residen legalmente en España mantener sus derechos adquiridos con la Seguridad Social y sus pensiones si deciden regresar a su país, lo que definió como “portabilidad de derechos”. En la actualidad hay unos 70.000 senegaleses residentes en España. El acuerdo también funciona a la inversa, es decir, con los españoles que viven en este país africano.

La visita de González Laya a Senegal incluyó una visita al Puerto de Dakar para conocer de primera mano los medios con los que cuentan tanto la Guardia Civil española como la Marina senegalesa en la vigilancia de la emigración clandestina, así como un encuentro con los militares españoles de la Operación Marfil, que prestan apoyo logístico a la Operación Barkhane del Ejército francés contra el yihadismo en el Sahel, y con los empresarios españoles representados en la Cámara de Comercio de España en Senegal.

▻https://elpais.com/espana/2020-11-22/la-ministra-de-exteriores-cierra-en-senegal-un-acuerdo-para-reactivar-las-re

#Espagne #Sénégal #accord_de_réadmission #asile #migrations #réfugiés #expulsion #renvois #Méditerranée_Occidentale #militarisation_des_frontières #frontières #Canaries #îles_Canaries #vols

ping @isskein @karine4

Interior aplicará las devoluciones en caliente por el aval del Constitucional

El Tribunal Constitucional respaldará en el pleno que se inicia mañana las devoluciones en caliente o rechazos en frontera regulados en la Ley de Seguridad Ciudadana que aprobó el Gobierno del PP en 2015. El Ministerio del Interior aplicará esta medida pese a que los dos partidos que forman el Gobierno la rechazaban. El PSOE recurrió la ley ante el Constitucional por entender que “vulneraba el derecho de los inmigrantes a la tutela judicial efectiva”. Unidas Podemos prometió impulsar la derogación de la Ley de Seguridad Ciudadana, conocida como ley mordaza, para prohibir las devoluciones en caliente.

El Gobierno quiere esperar a conocer la redacción final de la sentencia al tratarse de un asunto muy delicado que ya enfrentó a los dos socios, PSOE y Unidas Podemos. Fuentes del Ministerio del Interior sostienen que las sentencias del Constitucional están para cumplirse y, por tanto, se seguirá aplicando esta medida con normalidad. Estas fuentes recuerdan, además, que el fallo llega avalado por un pronunciamiento similar del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos. “La política migratoria”, señalan en Interior, “es comunitaria y, por tanto, es difícil adoptar una medida sin contar con el consenso europeo”. La medida a la que se refieren sería una reforma legal para prohibir las devoluciones en caliente, algo que no parece entrar en la agenda del Ejecutivo.

Fuentes de la dirección de Unidas Podemos admiten que para ellos es un tema “muy importante” pero no han tomado una decisión sobre cómo responderán a un fallo del Constitucional que todavía no conocen. En el pasado hubo enfrentamientos entre el ministro del Interior, Fernando Grande-Marlaska, y Pablo Iglesias por este asunto. El acuerdo al que llegaron fue esperar a la sentencia. Una vez publicada, solo quedaría el margen de cambiar la ley. Pero Interior prefiere aplicar el fallo sin más.

El Constitucional avalará en su pleno de esta semana las expulsiones en caliente con algunas excepciones que afectan a los menores y personas o colectivos vulnerables. El texto ha sido acordado en una comisión compuesta por tres magistrados: Ricardo Enríquez, Antonio Narváez y Juan Antonio Xiol. Los dos primeros pertenecen al sector conservador, mayoritario, y el tercero, al progresista. El pacto alcanzado supone un giro radical respecto al texto que había elaborado el anterior encargado de la ponencia, Fernando Valdés, quien renunció a su puesto en el tribunal el mes pasado tras ser procesado por el Supremo por un supuesto delito de maltrato en el ámbito familiar.

Lo que proponía Valdés en su proyecto de sentencia era que solo se consideraran legales las expulsiones en caliente cuando las personas afectadas hubieran entrado en España mediante un asalto masivo y de forma violenta. Valdés entendía que esta era la lectura más correcta de la sentencia dictada en febrero pasado por el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos. Ese fallo dio un aval al Estado español respecto a las devoluciones en caliente al considerar que las autoridades de Melilla no violaron la legalidad cuando acordaron la expulsión inmediata de dos inmigrantes de Mali y Costa de Marfil que saltaron la valla fronteriza en agosto de 2014.

La sentencia pactada en la comisión tendrá un amplio respaldo en el pleno del Constitucional, según fuentes del tribunal. Hasta ahora, lo había impedido la persistencia de Valdés en defender que se pusieran condiciones a estas devoluciones. De hecho, en junio pasado se discutió un proyecto de sentencia que fue rechazado al entender la mayoría conservadora que el fallo de Estrasburgo no requería que solo pudieran acordarse legalmente las devoluciones en caliente para los asaltos masivos y violentos a las vallas de Ceuta o Melilla. De ahí que se formara una comisión paritaria entre conservadores y progresistas de la que, aparte de los tres mencionados, formó parte el propio Valdés hasta su renuncia.

Al producirse la dimisión de este magistrado, el asunto quedó formalmente asignado al presidente del tribunal, Juan José González Rivas, quien como ponente de la resolución asumiría el criterio de la comisión. Ahora bien, este punto fue incluido a mediados de la semana pasada, mediante una adición al orden de día del próximo pleno, ya sobrecargado de materias. Ello provocó gran malestar en un sector minoritario del Constitucional, opuesto a debatir con prisas los aspectos más sensibles de la Ley de Seguridad Ciudadana, entre ellos el de los derechos de los inmigrantes.

Dos factores han influido en las prisas con las que ahora se quiere ventilar un recurso que lleva cinco años pendiente. En primer lugar, el consenso existente sobre la cuestión. El tribunal no quiso hincarle el diente al asunto hasta que se pronunciara Estrasburgo, pero desde febrero, en que falló el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos, hubiera podido abordarlo. La urgencia que se quiere dar a este fallo deriva del interés del presidente del tribunal por dejar despejado el asunto antes de la posible renovación de los mandatos caducados en la institución, entre ellos el de la propia presidencia.
Dos décadas de rechazos en frontera

Las devoluciones en caliente llevan realizándose desde que se concluyó la construcción de las vallas de Ceuta y Melilla a finales de los años noventa. Al principio, las fuerzas de seguridad lo ocultaban, pero esta práctica comenzó a ser ampliamente documentada por diversas ONG a partir de 2002. Desde que el Gobierno de Mariano Rajoy las amparó con la Ley de Seguridad Ciudadana de 2015, tanto el PSOE como Unidas Podemos han prometido desde la oposición que acabarían con ellas, pero la realidad es que se han mantenido independientemente del color de quien gobierne.

La sentencia del 20 de febrero del Tribunal de Estrasburgo, en la que se absolvía a España de haber vulnerado los derechos de dos migrantes cuando fueron entregados a las autoridades marroquíes inmediatamente después de saltar la valla de Melilla en agosto de 2014, generó las primeras tensiones en el Gobierno de coalición apenas seis semanas después de conformarse.

El ministro del Interior, Fernando Grande-Marlaska, recibió con agrado la decisión que justificaba la devolución en el uso de la violencia de los inmigrantes y ya sugirió que la aplicaría, una postura que generó malestar entre los miembros de Unidas Podemos. “Elogiar sentencias que avalan la violación de derechos humanos no solo es lo contrario a lo que figura en el acuerdo de coalición, es además lo contrario de lo que desean la inmensa mayoría de los votantes del PSOE y de Unidas Podemos”, afirmaron entonces a EL PAÍS fuentes del grupo parlamentario de la formación. La polémica, sin embargo, acabó enterrada rápidamente por otras batallas y la emergencia sanitaria.

Las entradas irregulares por tierra a Ceuta y Melilla (que incluyen los saltos, pero también otras vías como el ingreso con documentación falsa o escondidos en vehículos) apenas superan este año las 1.500 personas (la inmensa mayoría en Melilla) frente a las casi 5.000 del año anterior, según datos del Ministerio del Interior. La caída en picado de los intentos de colarse en ambas ciudades autónomas responde a las restricciones de movimientos y el cierre de fronteras impuesto por la pandemia. El foco se ha desviado de las vallas, pero las devoluciones se han seguido realizando, según el veterano activista de Melilla, José Palazón, fundador de la ONG Prodein.

“No ha habido un cambio en la forma de actuación. Ni antes, ni después de la sentencia. En un intento de salto, los que pillan entre vallas han continuado siendo devueltos en caliente a Marruecos”, mantiene Palazón. “Lo conocemos por declaraciones de los que entran o por testimonios de los propios afectados, pero no son expulsiones documentadas”. Desde Ceuta, fuentes de la Guardia Civil, afirman que con la pandemia han dejado de detectarse movimientos de subsaharianos en torno a la valla, por lo que no se han ejecutado devoluciones.

▻https://elpais.com/espana/2020-11-15/interior-aplicara-las-devoluciones-en-caliente-por-el-aval-del-constituciona
#Ceuta #Melilla #Espagne #frontières #devoluciones_en_caliente #push-backs #renvois #expulsions #refoulements #Maroc #justice

–---

FR : « Lors de la session plénière qui commence demain, la #Cour_constitutionnelle appuiera les #refoulements_express à la frontière régis par la loi de sécurité citoyenne que le gouvernement du PP a adoptée en 2015. Le ministère de l’intérieur appliquera cette mesure bien que les deux partis qui forment le gouvernement l’aient rejetée ».

–--------

Sur les « devoluciones en caliente » (►https://seenthis.net/tag/devoluciones_en_caliente)
►https://seenthis.net/tag/devoluciones_en_caliente

ping @isskein

Germany deports Ethiopian asylum seekers

Ten men were deported from Germany to Ethiopia last week. Asylum seeker support groups say deportations should be stopped during the COVID pandemic.

A group of 10 men were deported on a flight from Germany to the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa on Tuesday, October 27.

The plane, chartered by the Federal Interior Ministry and the European border agency, #Frontex, departed from Munich, the #Bavarian_Regional_Office_of_Asylum_and_Returns (#LfAR) confirmed.

The returnees were Ethiopian men aged 24 to 58, LfAR told InfoMigrants.

LfAR also confirmed that a previously scheduled stop in Mogadishu, Somalia, had not taken place “because of a lack of agreement with Somali authorities.” Reports last week from the Bavarian Refugee Council and Pro Asyl, an asylum seeker advocacy organization, had stated that a deportation flight was to take place to both Somalia and Ethiopia.
Rights groups oppose deportations

Almost all deportation flights from Germany have been suspended during the COVID pandemic. Pro Asyl said deporting people during the pandemic, which is ongoing, was irresponsible.

“Rushing through a deportation at this time, before the next lockdown, shows a distinct callousness,” said Günter Burkhardt, Executive Director of Pro Asyl.

Deportation flights are also expected to resume to Afghanistan from mid-November, according to the Bavarian Refugee Council, Pro Asyl as well as the German broadcaster Norddeutscher Rundfunk.

▻https://www.infomigrants.net/en/post/28309/germany-deports-ethiopian-asylum-seekers

#renvois #expulsions #asile #migrations #réfugiés #Ethiopie #Allemagne #réfugiés_éthiopiens #Bavière

ping @rhoumour @isskein @karine4 @_kg_

Rapport d’observation sur les violations des droits des personnes migrantes

https://i.imgur.com/9SZlPcb.png

L’#Association_Malienne_des_Expulsés (AME), dans le cadre de ses activités de défense des droits des migrants vient de publier son premier rapport annuel d’observation sur les violations des droits des personnes migrantes (Édition 2019). L’objectif est de constater et de rendre compte des différentes violations des droits dont les migrants sont l’objet sans exclusion et d’évaluer l’effectivité de l’application des conventions et autres engagements pris par le Mali et les autres pays de l’espace CEDEAO pour la protection des migrants.

https://i.imgur.com/FWhwg7g.png

#rapport #AME #Mali #asile #migrations #réfugiés #déboutés #renvois #rapatriements #expulsions #droits_humains

ping @_kg_ @karine4 @rhoumour @isskein

Bosnia Signs Deal with Pakistan to Send Back Migrants

Bosnia and Herzegovina signed an agreement with Pakistan that opens up the possibility of repatriating some illegal Pakistani migrants who are currently in the Balkan country.

Pakistani Interior Minister Ijaz Ahmed Shah and Bosnian Security Minister Selmo Cikotic signed an agreement and an accompanying protocol in Islamabad on Wednesday which should allow migrants to be returned to their home country.

With the agreement, Pakistan committed itself to accept the return of its citizens who are currently living illegally in Bosnia and vice versa.

According to the agreement, the competent authorities for receiving, submitting and processing readmission requests, as well as those for transit, will be the Bosnian Security Ministry and the Ministry of Interior for Pakistan.

Readmission and reception of citizens of the two countries and the transit of foreigners will take place through the international airports in Sarajevo and Islamabad.

The issue of Pakistani migrants in Bosnia has been the source of problems between the two countries that escalated when Fahrudin Radoncic, the former Bosnian security minister, accused Islamabad in April this year of not wanting to work with Sarajevo on the illegal migration issue.

The dispute started when Radoncic ordered Bosnia’s Service for Foreigners’ Affairs, the SFA, to compile a list of an estimated 9,000 to 10,000 illegal migrants to be deported, excluding refugees from war-torn Syria.

He claimed that there are around 3,000 illegal migrants from Pakistan among them and that that Pakistani embassy didn’t want to co-operate on identifying them.

Radoncic went so far as to demand that the Pakistani ambassador to Sarajevo be declared persona non grata.

However, Radoncic did not receive the support of either state presidency chairman Sefik Dzaferovic or Bisera Turkovic, the Bosnian foreign minister, which is why he resigned in early June.

According to estimates by the International Organisation for Migration, Bosnian authorities and NGOs, there are currently about 10,000 illegal migrants in Bosnia, of whom a significant number are citizens of Pakistan.

Slobodan Ujic, director of Bosnia’s Service for Foreigner’s Affairs, SFA, told BIRN earlier that establishing the identity of migrants had been a problem for years because the embassies of countries where migrants come from do not want to cooperate.

▻https://balkaninsight.com/2020/11/04/bosnia-signs-deal-with-pakistan-to-send-back-migrants
#Bosnie #accord_de_réadmission #asile #migrations #réfugiés #déboutés #renvois #expulsions #accord #Bosnie-Herzégovine

Back to Mauritania: Frontex repatriates migrants arriving on Canary Islands

On Monday, a Frontex operated repatriation flight took off from Spain’s Canary Islands for Mauritania. 51 African migrants were on board. This is the third such flight this year, says the Spanish Ombudsman. The repatriations are a result of a 2003 agreement signed between Spain and Mauritania.

As the Spanish civil guard was still looking for three boats reported missing off the Canary Islands, other reports were coming through of a Frontex repatriation flight. The flight took off on Monday according to the news agency AFP and the Spanish Ombudsman. It was carrying 51 people aboard.

“This is the third such flight this year,” the Spanish Ombudsman told Al Jazeera English. The flights are the result of a 2003 agreement signed between Spain and Mauritania. The agreement is part of the EU policy to tighten its borders.

Officers working with the Spanish Ombudsman (Defensor del Pueblo) and the National Mechanism for the Prevention of Torture (MNP) have inspected each Frontex flight this year and produced reports about them. According to the reports, seen by InfoMigrants, one flight took off from Gran Canaria’s airport on January 20, another on January 27 and the third on February 17, both from Tenerife North airport. All had a destination of Noadhibou in Mauritania.

February 17 flight

On February 17, of the 51 people on board, not one held Mauritanian nationality. 36 were from Mali, 13 from Senegal, one person from Gabon and one from Ivory Coast. MNP personnel said they carried out three interviews during the flight but the results of those interviews have not been made public. In response to a question from InfoMigrants, regarding the 51 people’s arrival date on the Canary Islands, and whether or not they had been given the opportunity to reply for asylum, we were told that this was the only information publically available.

Although there weren’t many details regarding the flight on February 17, for the flight on January 27, MNP officers noted several irregularities. Having pointed them out, they say they received “no response” from the deportation authorities. On this flight, they found that some of the officers conducting the flight failed to wear the requisite identification numbers on their vests.

Irregularities

Secondly, they pointed out that medical personnel who accompany the flights did not have the full clinical histories of the persons on board. Thirdly, they found that each of the 42 people on board the January 27 flight had an identical “fit to travel” document which had been filled out by doctors in the internment centers (CIE) prior to deportation and seemed to suggest that they had no medical problem which could impede their flight.

In this case, states the MNP report, the 42 people on board arrived on the Canary Islands on December 23, 2019. One of those aboard had Mauritanian nationality, 38 people came from Mali and three from Senegal. The report notes that four of the people intended for repatriation to Mali came from regions deemed unsafe by the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR), because of their security and humanitarian situation.

Of these four, the report notes, two of them had applied for asylum inside the internment center for foreigners (CIE). Those two didn’t fly with the others and stayed with the group at the CIE which had applied for asylum. The report also says that all those deported were notified of the deportation the same day and no interpreter was identified.

January 20 flight

On January 20, 46 people were deported from Gran Canaria to Mauritania. On that flight, seven people held Mauritanian citizenship, 34 were from Mali, 4 were from Senegal and one came from Ivory Coast.

On this flight the two officers from MNP noted inaccuracies in the documentation relative to the repatriation. Again, they noted that some of the repatriation officers from Frontex did not wear vests with visible identification numbers. In this case, they also noted “a strong police presence” which accompanied, in convoy, the group of those being deported, parking near the ladder into the plane with “obvious intimidating effect.”
A police van standing in front of the Foreigner Internment Centre CIE in Madrid Spain Photo EPAPACO CAMPOS

https://scd.infomigrants.net/media/resize/my_image_big/8a3c77dec488bbb48a3bf45f23913e454ddf2939.jpeg

Several returnees also claimed to be minors and said that they had not been tested to ascertain their ages. There were also no interpreters present who could speak all the dialects of those being deported. Some of the deportees claimed that they had not been informed of the possibility of applying for asylum and they hadn’t been told in advance that the deportation was to take place.

EU migration policy

All of these flights took place in the framework of a 2003 agreement signed between Spain and Mauritania. According to an Amnesty International report from 2008, the EU’s policy on migration flows hinges around two main axes: “the clauses of readmission and the joint operations of the Frontex Agency.” These so-called “readmission agreements and readmission clauses” are inserted into co-operation and association agreements or development aid deals that various EU countries have made with various countries around its borders, which are designated ’safe’ countries. Amnesty calls this one of the EU’s “preferred weapons against illegal migration.”

It essentially allows EU countries like Spain to send back nationals to Mauritania as well as “nationals of a third country who have entered the territory of one of the two parties irregularly.” The agreements, states Amnesty are “not illegal in themselves.” Amnesty questions however whether such agreements are “fully compliant with the human rights obligations with the states party to the agreement.”

The rights that migrants should enjoy within these agreements are the “right to liberty and freedom from arbitrary detention; protection against torture or other ill-treatment; their rights to access a fair and satisfactory asylum procedure and protection from return to a country or territory where he or she would be at risk of serious human rights violations.”

Frontex operations in West Africa

According to Amnesty, Frontex’s operations added another layer to these agreements when it was set up in 2004. In 2006, Frontex put in place an operation to control irregular migration from West Africa to the Canary Islands. This includes supporting Spain with experts to interview migrants arriving on the Canary Islands in order to establish their country of origin, and to which country they can be sent back; as well as conducting joint sea patrols “close to the West African coast in order to stop unseaworthy boats from continuing their dangerous journey.” Germany, France, Italy, Luxembourg and Portugal have participated in these operations alongside Spain in the past.

In 2015, the Spanish newspaper El País looked into the arrivals of migrants from Mauritania to the Canary Islands. It said that in 2008 the Spanish police “sent a team of five police officers to train their Mauritanian counterparts. A further 25 civil guards then joined them, working with six more local officers.” They have been operating as a single unit ever since, writes El País.

Back in 2015, the unit had a civil guard helicopter for patrolling the Mauritanian coastline, alongside two 30-meter patrol boats and two 15-meter vessels. As well as patrols the team gathers intelligence. Mauritania has introduced harsher prison sentences for anyone caught human trafficking.

El País notes that in return for this close collaboration, between 2007 and 2011, “Spain invested around €150 million in Mauritania.”

‘Hard to reconcile with a respect for fundamental rights’

In 2011, the European Greens and the Migreurop group carried out a detailed report asking whether Frontex was providing guarantees for human rights. In it they noted that sending officers to gather intelligence and effectively try and prevent people from leaving a departure country to reach Europe “was hard to reconcile with a respect for […] fundamental rights.” The report continued: “Intervening upstream to stop the departure of an individual in order to prevent illegal immigration constitutes a violation of the right of every person to leave any country.” They note that this right is “enshrined in various binding international texts.”

Additionally, “intervening to interrupt the journey of a migrant entitled to claim international protection is also a breach of the right to asylum and the principle of non-refoulement.”

They described agreements like that between Spain and Mauritania as “part of a move to outsource migration controls, something that is often incompatible with respect for migrants’ rights.” Specifically, they wrote, “the bilateral agreements between Italy and Libya and between Spain and Mauritania have been and continue to be the framework for regular and unpunished violations of migrants’ fundamental rights.”
Around 42 migrants are rescued off the south coast of Gran Canaria Canary Islands Spain 8 February 2016 Photo EPASpanish Maritime Rescue Service

A report published on the French academic portal HAL in October 2019 also confirmed the earlier reports assessment that Mauritania was playing a key role in EU migration policy. The report written by Philippe Poutignat and Jocelyne Streiff-Fénart described Mauritania as “a testing ground for European policies of migration.” It also found that “successive Mauritanian governments since […] 2005 […] have tended to found their quest for international recognition on the willingness of Mauritania to respond to EU injunctions on the control of migration flows.”

InfoMigrants requested information from Frontex regarding flights from Spain to Mauritania. A Frontex spokesperson said that Frontex provides some funding for these flights but they rely on the national authorities to conduct the flight itself. In 2019, they operated six flights from the Canary Islands to Mauritania, repatriating a total of 146 people.

▻https://www.infomigrants.net/en/post/22908/back-to-mauritania-frontex-repatriates-migrants-arriving-on-canary-isl

–- > publié en février 2020, je mets ici pour archivage

#Mauritanie #Canaries #Frontex #renvois #vols #vols_frontex #asile #migrations #réfugiés #déboutés #réfugiés_mauritaniens #îles_Canaries #Espagne #accord #accord_de_réadmission #accords_de_réadmission

La Belgique condamnée pour l’expulsion d’un demandeur d’asile soudanais

La Belgique a été condamnée mardi par la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme pour avoir renvoyé au Soudan un demandeur d’asile de ce pays, sans avoir suffisamment évalué les risques réellement encourus par ce dernier, et malgré une décision judiciaire ordonnant la suspension de la procédure.

« Les lacunes procédurales dont se sont rendues responsables les autorités belges (...) n’ont pas permis au requérant de poursuivre la démarche de demande d’asile qu’il avait soumise à la Belgique », affirme la Cour dans un arrêt.

Ces lacunes « ont conduit les autorités belges à ne pas suffisamment évaluer les risques réellement encourus par le requérant au Soudan ». La CEDH estime aussi que la Belgique, en renvoyant ce demandeur d’asile au Soudan, a rendu « ineffectifs les recours » qu’il avait "initié avec succès. D’autant que l’Etat belge avait été interdit de rapatrier cet homme dans son pays.

▻https://www.rtbf.be/info/belgique/detail_la-belgique-condamnee-pour-l-expulsion-d-un-demandeur-d-asile-soudanais?
#réfugiés_soudanais #Soudan #renvois #expulsions #asile #migrations #réfugiés #justice #condamnation #Belgique #CEDH #cour_européenne_des_droits_de_l'homme

ping @karine4 @isskein

TF | Renvois objectivement impossible en raison du Covid-19
▻https://asile.ch/2020/10/22/tf-levee-de-detention-pour-insoumission-en-raison-de-periode-de-covid-19

Frappé d’un renvoi en 2019 ordonné par l’Office des migrations du canton de Zurich suite à une non-entrée en matière de demande d’asile, un homme d’origine malienne avait été placé en détention en vue de son retour. Une détention pour insoumission avait également été ordonnée et prolongée plusieurs fois. Le recours formulé par l’homme avait, […]

Proceedings of the conference “Externalisation of borders : detention practices and denial of the right to asylum”

Présentation de la conférence en vidéo :
▻http://www.alessiobarbini.com/Video_Convegno_Def_FR.mp4

–---

In order to strengthen the network among the organizations already engaged in strategic actions against the outsourcing policies implemented by Italy and Europe, during the work of the conference were addressed the issues of the impact of European and Italian policies and regulations, as well as bilateral agreements between European and African countries. Particular attention was given to the phenomenon of trafficking in human beings and detention policies for migrants and asylum seekers.

PANEL I – BILATERAL AGREEMENTS BETWEEN AFRICAN AND EU MEMBER STATES AND THEIR CONSEQUENCES ON DETENTION

Detention and repatriation of migrants in Europe: a comparison between the different Member States of the EU
Francesca Esposito – Border Criminologies, University of Oxford. Esposito ITA; Esposito ENG.

The phenomenon of returnees in Nigeria: penal and administrative consequences after return
Olaide A. Gbadamosi- Osun State University. Gbadamosi ITA; Gbadamosi ENG.

European externalisation policies and the denial of the right to asylum: focus on ruling no. 22917/2019 of the Civil Court of Rome
Loredana Leo – ASGI. Leo ITA; Leo ENG.

PANEL II – THE PHENOMENON OF TRAFFICKING AND THE
RIGHT TO ASYLUM

Recognition of refugee status for victims of trafficking
Nazzarena Zorzella – ASGI. Zorzella ITA; Zorzella ENG; Zorzella FRA.

Voluntariness in return processes: nature of consent and role of the IOM
Jean Pierre Gauci – British Institute of International and Comparative Law. Gauci ITA; Gauci ENG; Gauci FRA.

Conditional refugees: resettlement as a condition to exist
Sara Creta – Independent journalist. Creta ITA; Creta ENG.

Resettlement: legal nature and the Geneva Convention
Giulia Crescini – ASGI. Crescini ITA; Crescini ENG; Crescini FRA.

PANEL III – THE RISKS ARISING FROM THE REFOULEMENT
OF TRAFFICKED PERSONS, MEMBER STATES’ RESPONSIBILITIES
AND LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS

Introduction of Godwin Morka (Director of research and programme development, NAPTIP) and Omoruyi Osula (Head of Admin/Training, ETAHT). Morka ITA; Morka ENG. Osula ITA; Osula ENG.

The phenomenon of re-trafficking of women repatriated in Nigeria
Kokunre Agbontaen-Eghafona – Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Benin. Kokunre ITA; Kokunre ENG.

The phenomenon of trafficking: social conditions before departure from a gender perspective
R. Evon Benson-Idahosa – Pathfinders Justice Initiative. Idahosa ITA; Idahosa ENG.

Strategic litigation on externalisation of borders and lack of access to the right to asylum for victims of trafficking
Cristina Laura Cecchini – ASGI. Cecchini ITA; Cecchini ENG.

Protection for victims of trafficking in transit countries: focus on Niger. Yerima Bako Djibo Moussa – Head of the Department of Legal Affairs and Compensation at the National Agency for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings in Niger. Yerima ITA; Yerima FRA.

PANEL IV – LIBERTÀ DI MOVIMENTO

ECOWAS free movement area: interferences of European policies and remedies
Ibrahim Muhammad Mukhtar – Law Clinic Coordinator, NILE University. Mukhtar ITA; Mukhtar ENG.

The consequences of migration policies on freedom of movement: focus on Niger
Harouna Mounkaila – Professor and Researcher, Department of Geography, Abdou Moumouni University, Niamey. Mounkaila ITA; Mounkaila FRA.

Identification of African citizens in transit to the European Union: functioning of data collection and privacy
Jane Kilpatrick – Statewatch. Kilpatrick ITA; Kilpatrick ENG; Kilpatrick FRA.

EU funding for ECOWAS countries’ biometric data registry systems: level of funding and impact on the population
Giacomo Zandonini – Journalist. Zandonini ITA; Zandonini ENG.

The right to leave any country, including his own, in international law
Francesca Mussi – Research fellow in International Law, University of Trento. Mussi ITA; Mussi ENG; Mussi FRA.

Human Rights Protection Mechanisms in Africa
Giuseppe Pascale – Researcher of International Law, University of Trieste. Pascale ITA; Pascale ENG.

▻https://sciabacaoruka.asgi.it/en/proceedings-of-the-conference-externalisation-of-borders-detention-practices-and-denial-of-the-right-to-asylum/#smooth-scroll-top

#externalisation #asile #migrations #réfugiés #retour_volontaire #renvois #expulsions #détention_administrative #rétention #Nigeria #returnees #droit_d'asile #trafic_d'êtres_humains #IOM #OIM #ASGI #rapport #réinstallation #refoulement #genre #Niger #liberté_de_mouvement #liberté_de_circulation #identification #données #collecte_de_données #biométrie #ECOWAS #droits_humains

–—

Ajouté à la métaliste sur l’externalisation :
►https://seenthis.net/messages/731749

ping @isskein @rhoumour @karine4 @_kg_