• Nigerian migrants struggle to reintegrate after Libya ordeal

    Emerging from her ordeal, Gloria considers herself “privileged”. Last year, the 26-year-old left Nigeria with four other women, dreaming of a better life in Europe.

    On a tortuous journey, three of the five friends died before reaching Libya, where the two survivors were stranded for almost a year. Now only Gloria is back home in Nigeria.

    She dreamed of being a fashion designer but now sews synthetic tracksuits in a shabby workshop in Benin City, southern Nigeria, for 15,000 naira a month ($41.50, 38 euros).

    “After transport, the money is almost finished”, she says.

    Still, she adds quickly, she “thanks God for having a job”.

    Her employment is part of a training programme, set up by southern Edo State, the departure point for most Nigerian migrants.

    Gloria is one of nearly 14,000 young Nigerians to have returned from Libya since 2017 under a United Nations voluntary repatriation programme.

    She and the other returnees quoted in this story asked not to be identified by their real names.

    She is “not asking for too much”, just a roof over her head and to be able to eat, Gloria tells AFP.

    But she blames herself for daring to dream that life could be better elsewhere and believing the smugglers’ promises that they would reach Europe within two weeks.

    – Broke and broken -

    In Libya, prospects of crossing the Mediterranean vanished, after a tightening of European Union immigration policies.

    Many spend months, even years stranded in Libya, sold as slaves by their smugglers.

    But once back home in Nigeria, life is even more difficult than before: saddled with debt, struggling to find work, broken by their treatment at the hands of the traffickers and by their failed dreams.

    Human Rights Watch highlighted the “continuing anguish” that returnees face.

    Many suffer long-term mental and physical health problems as well as social stigma on returning to Nigeria, the report released last month said.

    Government-run centres tasked with looking after them are poorly funded and “unable to meet survivors’ multiple needs for long-term comprehensive assistance”, it added.

    Edo State has set up a support programme which is rare in Nigeria.

    The state hosts some 4,800 of the nearly 14,000 returnees — most aged 17 to 35 and with no diploma or formal qualifications.

    Under the scheme, they can travel for free to Benin City, Edo’s capital, stay two nights in a hotel, receive an hour of psychological support and an about 1,000-euro allowance.

    It barely moves the needle for those starting again but is enough to stoke envy in a country where state aid is scarce and 83 million people live in extreme poverty.

    – Stigma -

    Showing potential students around, Ukinebo Dare, of the Edo Innovates vocational training programme, says many youngsters grumble that returnees get “preferential treatment”.

    In modern classrooms in Benin City, a few hundred students learn to “code”, do photography, start a small business and learn marketing in courses open to all.

    “Classes are both for the youth and returnees, (be)cause we don’t want the stigma to affect them,” Dare said.

    “It’s a priority for us to give youth, who are potential migrants, opportunities in jobs they can be interested in.”

    According to Nigeria’s National Bureau of Statistics, 55 percent of the under-35s were unemployed at the end of last year.

    Tike had a low paying job before leaving Nigeria in February 2017 but since returning from Libya says his life is “more, more, more harder than before”.

    Although he returned “physically” in December 2017 he says his “mindset was fully corrupted”.

    “I got paranoid. I couldn’t think straight. I couldn’t sleep, always looking out if there is any danger,” he said, at the tiny flat he shares with his girlfriend, also back from Libya, and their four-month-old daughter.

    – Crime -

    A few months after returning, and with no psychological support, Tike decided to train to be a butcher.

    But, more than a year since he registered for help with reintegration programmes, including one run by the International Organization for Migration, he has not found a job and has no money to start his own business.

    “We, the youth, we have no job. What we have is cultism (occult gangs),” Tike says.

    “People see it as a way of getting money, an excuse for getting into crime.”

    Since last year, when Nigeria was still in its longest economic recession in decades, crime has increased in the state of Edo, according to official data.

    “Returnees are seen as people who are coming to cause problems in the community,” laments Lilian Garuba, of the Special Force against Illegal Migration.

    “They see them as failure, and not for what they are: victims.”

    – Debt spiral -

    Peter, 24, was arrested a few days after his return.

    His mother had borrowed money from a neighbourhood lender to raise the 1,000 euros needed to pay his smuggler.

    “As soon as he heard I was back, he came to see her. She couldn’t pay (the debt), so I was arrested by the police,” he told AFP, still shaking.

    Financially crippled, his mother had to borrow more money from another lender to pay off her debts.

    Peter’s last trip was already his second attempt.

    “When I first came back from Libya, I thought I was going to try another country. I tried, but in Morocco it was even worse and thank God I was able to return to Nigeria,” he said, three weeks after getting back.

    “Now I have nothing, nothing,” he said, his voice breaking.

    “All I think about is ’kill yourself’, but what would I gain from it? I can’t do that to my mother.”

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/afp/article-7471729/Nigerian-migrants-struggle-reintegrate-Libya-ordeal.html
    #réintégration #Nigeria #asile #Libye #retour_volontaire #retour_au_pays #renvois #expulsions #migrations #réfugiés #Assisted_Return_and_Reintegration_Programmes
    ping @isskein @_kg_

    • Au Nigeria, la difficile réintégration des migrants rapatriés au lendemain du cauchemar libyen

      Après avoir été la proie des passeurs dans l’espoir d’une traversée pour l’Europe, 14 000 Nigérians sont revenus au pays, où ils sont souvent stigmatisés et rejetés.

      Gloria se considère comme une « privilégiée ». Elle est partie avec quatre autres filles vers l’Europe, mais, après avoir vécu l’enfer pendant près d’un an bloquée en Libye, elle est la seule à avoir été rapatriée au Nigeria. Trois de ses amies sont mortes pendant le voyage.

      La jeune femme de 26 ans a même trouvé un petit boulot de retour à Benin City, grâce à un programme de formation mis en place par l’Etat d’Edo, une région du sud du Nigeria d’où partent encore la majorité des candidats nigérians à l’exil.

      Gloria rêvait de devenir styliste. A la place, elle coud des survêtements synthétiques à la chaîne dans un atelier miteux pour 15 000 nairas par mois (40 euros), mais « remercie Dieu d’avoir un travail ».

      « Après avoir payé le transport pour rentrer à la maison, il ne reste presque rien, assure Gloria, dans un joli tee-shirt jaune. Mais je ne me plains pas. Je ne veux pas en demander trop. J’ai juste besoin d’un toit et de quoi manger », confie-t-elle.
      « Ne pas en demander trop »

      Comme beaucoup parmi les 14 000 jeunes Nigérians rentrés de Libye depuis 2017, Gloria « ne “veut” pas en demander trop ». Elle s’en veut encore d’avoir un jour osé rêver que la vie pouvait être meilleure ailleurs, et d’avoir cru naïvement des passeurs promettant de rejoindre l’Europe en moins de deux semaines.

      La plupart des Nigérians rapatriés via le programme de retour volontaire des Nations unies ont entre 17 et 35 ans et sont sans diplôme. Pendant des mois, et pour certains des années, ils sont restés bloqués en Libye, vendus, maltraités, extorqués par leurs passeurs, et incapables de traverser la Méditerranée avec le durcissement des politiques d’immigration de l’Union européenne.

      De retour dans leur pays d’origine, ils se retrouvent souvent confrontés à une vie encore plus difficile que lorsqu’ils sont partis : criblés de dettes, sans emploi, brisés par les tortures de leurs trafiquants et par leurs rêves échoués.

      Un rapport de Human Rights Watch publié le 27 août dénonce l’état terrible des « survivants de la traite » à leur retour. Beaucoup souffrent notamment de « troubles psychologiques graves », de « problèmes de santé et sont stigmatisés ». Les quelques centres ou associations qui existent pour s’occuper d’eux disposent de très peu d’aide financière et « sont incapables de répondre aux besoins des survivants sur le long terme ».

      L’Etat d’Edo, qui a dû accueillir à lui seul 4 800 des 14 000 rapatriés nigérians depuis 2017, a mis en place un rare programme de soutien pour ces populations extrêmement vulnérables : un transport gratuit à leur descente de l’avion de l’aéroport de Lagos jusqu’à Benin City, deux nuits d’hôtel, une heure de soutien psychologique et une allocation d’une centaine d’euros environ. C’est une goutte d’eau pour affronter une nouvelle vie, mais assez pour alimenter les jalousies dans un pays où les aides d’Etat sont quasiment inexistantes et où 83 millions de personnes vivent sous le seuil de l’extrême pauvreté (1,90 dollar par jour et par personne).
      « Retrouver la vie »

      La société les montre du doigt et les surnomme avec dédain les « retournés » ou les « déportés ». « Les gens disent que les “retournés” ont des traitements préférentiels », explique Ukinebo Dare, responsable du programme Edo Innovates de formation professionnelle ouvert à tous à Benin City. Il en fait la visite guidée : des salles de classe ultra modernes où des étudiants apprennent à « coder », à faire de la photographie, à monter une petite entreprise ou le B.A. ba du marketing.

      « Nous veillons à les mélanger avec d’autres jeunes. Nous ne voulons pas qu’ils soient stigmatisés, explique la jeune femme. C’est une priorité d’offrir des formations pour tous les jeunes, car ce sont autant de potentiels migrants. »

      Selon le Bureau national des statistiques, 55 % des moins de 35 ans n’avaient pas d’emploi au Nigeria fin 2018. Des chiffres particulièrement inquiétants dans ce pays qui a l’une des croissances démographiques les plus élevées au monde.

      Tike, lui, avait un petit boulot avant de tenter de gagner l’Europe en février 2017. « Quand je pense au passé, j’ai envie de pleurer », lâche-t-il dans son minuscule appartement où il vit avec sa petite amie, elle aussi de retour de Libye, et leur fille de 4 mois. Tike est rentré « physiquement » en décembre 2017. Son esprit, lui, était encore « là-haut », paralysé dans la « paranoïa » et les « traumas », confie-t-il.

      Mais quelques mois plus tard, sans aucun soutien psychologique, il a « retrouvé la vie », comme il dit, et a décidé de suivre une formation en boucherie. Cela fait plus d’un an qu’il a monté des dossiers auprès de diverses organisations d’aide à la réintégration, dont l’Organisation internationale pour les migrations (OIM), mais il n’a pas trouvé d’emploi et n’a aucun argent pour démarrer sa propre société. « Beaucoup de jeunes se tournent vers les “cultes”, les gangs locaux, reconnaît Tike. Ils sont facilement recrutés par les mafias qui leur promettent un peu d’argent. »
      Spirale de pauvreté

      Depuis l’année 2018, une période très difficile économiquement pour le pays, la criminalité a augmenté dans l’Etat d’Edo, selon les données officielles. « Les “retournés” sont tenus pour responsables, regrette Lilian Garuba, de la Force spéciale contre la migration illégale, une antenne contre le trafic des êtres humains mise en place par l’Etat d’Edo. La société les perçoit comme des problèmes et non pour ce qu’ils sont : des victimes. »

      Peter, 24 ans, a été arrêté quelques jours après son retour. Sa mère avait emprunté de l’argent à un créancier du quartier pour réunir le millier d’euros nécessaire afin de payer les passeurs. « Dès qu’il a entendu dire que j’étais revenu, il a menacé ma famille. La police est venue m’arrêter », raconte-t-il à l’AFP, encore tremblant.

      Sa mère a dû réemprunter de l’argent à un autre créancier pour éponger ses dettes. Une spirale de pauvreté dont Peter ne sait comment s’extraire, sauf peut-être en rêvant, encore et toujours de l’Europe. Il en est déjà à deux tentatives infructueuses.
      « Quand je suis rentré la première fois de Libye, je me suis dit que j’allais essayer en passant par un autre pays. Mais au Maroc, c’était encore pire et, grâce à Dieu j’ai pu rentrer au Nigeria. » C’était il y a quelques semaines. « Depuis je n’ai plus rien, rien, lâche-t-il la gorge nouée. Une voix à l’intérieur de moi me dit “Tue-toi, finis-en !” Mais bon… Ça servirait à quoi ? Je ne peux pas faire ça à ma mère. »

      https://www.lemonde.fr/afrique/article/2019/09/20/au-nigeria-la-reintegration-difficile-des-migrants-rapatries-au-lendemain-du

      #pauvreté #OIM #IOM

  • Le Niger, #nouvelle frontière de l’Europe et #laboratoire de l’asile

    Les politiques migratoires européennes, toujours plus restrictives, se tournent vers le Sahel, et notamment vers le Niger – espace de transit entre le nord et le sud du Sahara. Devenu « frontière » de l’Europe, environné par des pays en conflit, le Niger accueille un nombre important de réfugiés sur son sol et renvoie ceux qui n’ont pas le droit à cette protection. Il ne le fait pas seul. La présence de l’Union européenne et des organisations internationales est visible dans le pays ; des opérations militaires y sont menées par des armées étrangères, notamment pour lutter contre la pression terroriste à ses frontières... au risque de brouiller les cartes entre enjeux sécuritaires et enjeux humanitaires.

    On confond souvent son nom avec celui de son voisin anglophone, le Nigéria, et peu de gens savent le placer sur une carte. Pourtant, le Niger est un des grands pays du Sahel, cette bande désertique qui court de l’Atlantique à la mer Rouge, et l’un des rares pays stables d’Afrique de l’Ouest qui offrent encore une possibilité de transit vers la Libye et la Méditerranée. Environné par des pays en conflit ou touchés par le terrorisme de Boko Haram et d’autres groupes, le Niger accueille les populations qui fuient le Mali et la région du lac Tchad et celles évacuées de Libye.

    « Dans ce contexte d’instabilité régionale et de contrôle accru des déplacements, la distinction entre l’approche sécuritaire et l’approche humanitaire s’est brouillée », explique la chercheuse Florence Boyer, fellow de l’Institut Convergences Migrations, actuellement accueillie au Niger à l’Université Abdou Moumouni de Niamey. Géographe et anthropologue (affiliée à l’Urmis au sein de l’IRD, l’Institut de recherche pour le Développement), elle connaît bien le Niger, où elle se rend régulièrement depuis vingt ans pour étudier les migrations internes et externes des Nigériens vers l’Algérie ou la Libye voisines, au nord, et les pays du Golfe de Guinée, au sud et à l’ouest. Sa recherche porte actuellement sur le rôle que le Niger a accepté d’endosser dans la gestion des migrations depuis 2014, à la demande de plusieurs membres de l’Union européenne (UE) pris dans la crise de l’accueil des migrants.
    De la libre circulation au contrôle des frontières

    « Jusqu’à 2015, le Niger est resté cet espace traversé par des milliers d’Africains de l’Ouest et de Nigériens remontant vers la Libye sans qu’il y ait aucune entrave à la circulation ou presque », raconte la chercheuse. La plupart venaient y travailler. Peu tentaient la traversée vers l’Europe, mais dès le début des années 2000, l’UE, Italie en tête, cherche à freiner ce mouvement en négociant avec Kadhafi, déplaçant ainsi la frontière de l’Europe de l’autre côté de la Méditerranée. La chute du dictateur libyen, dans le contexte des révolutions arabes de 2011, bouleverse la donne. Déchirée par une guerre civile, la Libye peine à retenir les migrants qui cherchent une issue vers l’Europe. Par sa position géographique et sa relative stabilité, le Niger s’impose progressivement comme un partenaire de la politique migratoire de l’UE.

    « Le Niger est la nouvelle frontière de l’Italie. »

    Marco Prencipe, ambassadeur d’Italie à Niamey

    Le rôle croissant du Niger dans la gestion des flux migratoires de l’Afrique vers l’Europe a modifié les parcours des migrants, notamment pour ceux qui passent par Agadez, dernière ville du nord avant la traversée du Sahara. Membre du Groupe d’études et de recherches Migrations internationales, Espaces, Sociétés (Germes) à Niamey, Florence Boyer observe ces mouvements et constate la présence grandissante dans la capitale nigérienne du Haut-Commissariat des Nations-Unies pour les réfugiés (HCR) et de l’Organisation internationale des migrations (OIM) chargée, entre autres missions, d’assister les retours de migrants dans leur pays.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlIwqYKrw7c

    « L’île de Lampedusa se trouve aussi loin du Nord de l’Italie que de la frontière nigérienne, note Marco Prencipe, l’ambassadeur d’Italie à Niamey, le Niger est la nouvelle frontière de l’Italie. » Une affirmation reprise par plusieurs fonctionnaires de la délégation de l’UE au Niger rencontrés par Florence Boyer et Pascaline Chappart. La chercheuse, sur le terrain à Niamey, effectue une étude comparée sur des mécanismes d’externalisation de la frontière au Niger et au Mexique. « Depuis plusieurs années, la politique extérieure des migrations de l’UE vise à délocaliser les contrôles et à les placer de plus en plus au sud du territoire européen, explique la postdoctorante à l’IRD, le mécanisme est complexe : les enjeux pour l’Europe sont à la fois communautaires et nationaux, chaque État membre ayant sa propre politique ».

    En novembre 2015, lors du sommet euro-africain de La Valette sur la migration, les autorités européennes lancent le Fonds fiduciaire d’urgence pour l’Afrique « en faveur de la stabilité et de la lutte contre les causes profondes de la migration irrégulière et du phénomène des personnes déplacées en Afrique ». Doté à ce jour de 4,2 milliards d’euros, le FFUA finance plusieurs types de projets, associant le développement à la sécurité, la gestion des migrations à la protection humanitaire.

    Le président nigérien considère que son pays, un des plus pauvres de la planète, occupe une position privilégiée pour contrôler les migrations dans la région. Le Niger est désormais le premier bénéficiaire du Fonds fiduciaire, devant des pays de départ comme la Somalie, le Nigéria et surtout l’Érythrée d’où vient le plus grand nombre de demandeurs d’asile en Europe.

    « Le Niger s’y retrouve dans ce mélange des genres entre lutte contre le terrorisme et lutte contre l’immigration “irrégulière”. »

    Florence Boyer, géographe et anthropologue

    Pour l’anthropologue Julien Brachet, « le Niger est peu à peu devenu un pays cobaye des politiques anti-migrations de l’Union européenne, (...) les moyens financiers et matériels pour lutter contre l’immigration irrégulière étant décuplés ». Ainsi, la mission européenne EUCAP Sahel Niger a ouvert une antenne permanente à Agadez en 2016 dans le but d’« assister les autorités nigériennes locales et nationales, ainsi que les forces de sécurité, dans le développement de politiques, de techniques et de procédures permettant d’améliorer le contrôle et la lutte contre les migrations irrégulières ».

    « Tout cela ne serait pas possible sans l’aval du Niger, qui est aussi à la table des négociations, rappelle Florence Boyer. Il ne faut pas oublier qu’il doit faire face à la pression de Boko Haram et d’autres groupes terroristes à ses frontières. Il a donc intérêt à se doter d’instruments et de personnels mieux formés. Le Niger s’y retrouve dans ce mélange des genres entre la lutte contre le terrorisme et la lutte contre l’immigration "irrégulière". »

    Peu avant le sommet de La Valette en 2015, le Niger promulgue la loi n°2015-36 sur « le trafic illicite de migrants ». Elle pénalise l’hébergement et le transport des migrants ayant l’intention de franchir illégalement la frontière. Ceux que l’on qualifiait jusque-là de « chauffeurs » ou de « transporteurs » au volant de « voitures taliban » (des 4x4 pick-up transportant entre 20 et 30 personnes) deviennent des « passeurs ». Une centaine d’arrestations et de saisies de véhicules mettent fin à ce qui était de longue date une source légale de revenus au nord du Niger. « Le but reste de bloquer la route qui mène vers la Libye, explique Pascaline Chappart. L’appui qu’apportent l’UE et certains pays européens en coopérant avec la police, les douanes et la justice nigérienne, particulièrement en les formant et les équipant, a pour but de rendre l’État présent sur l’ensemble de son territoire. »

    Des voix s’élèvent contre ces contrôles installés aux frontières du Niger sous la pression de l’Europe. Pour Hamidou Nabara de l’ONG nigérienne JMED (Jeunesse-Enfance-Migration-Développement), qui lutte contre la pauvreté pour retenir les jeunes désireux de quitter le pays, ces dispositifs violent le principe de la liberté de circulation adopté par les pays d’Afrique de l’Ouest dans le cadre de la Cedeao. « La situation des migrants s’est détériorée, dénonce-t-il, car si la migration s’est tarie, elle continue sous des voies différentes et plus dangereuses ». La traversée du Sahara est plus périlleuse que jamais, confirme Florence Boyer : « Le nombre de routes s’est multiplié loin des contrôles, mais aussi des points d’eau et des secours. À ce jour, nous ne disposons pas d’estimations solides sur le nombre de morts dans le désert, contrairement à ce qui se passe en Méditerranée ».

    Partenaire de la politique migratoire de l’Union européenne, le Niger a également développé une politique de l’asile. Il accepte de recevoir des populations en fuite, expulsées ou évacuées des pays voisins : les expulsés d’Algérie recueillis à la frontière, les rapatriés nigériens dont l’État prend en charge le retour de Libye, les réfugiés en lien avec les conflits de la zone, notamment au Mali et dans la région du lac Tchad, et enfin les personnes évacuées de Libye par le HCR. Le Niger octroie le statut de réfugié à ceux installés sur son sol qui y ont droit. Certains, particulièrement vulnérables selon le HCR, pourront être réinstallés en Europe ou en Amérique du Nord dans des pays volontaires.
    Une plateforme pour la « réinstallation »
    en Europe et en Amérique

    Cette procédure de réinstallation à partir du Niger n’a rien d’exceptionnel. Les Syriens réfugiés au Liban, par exemple, bénéficient aussi de l’action du HCR qui les sélectionne pour déposer une demande d’asile dans un pays dit « sûr ». La particularité du Niger est de servir de plateforme pour la réinstallation de personnes évacuées de Libye. « Le Niger est devenu une sorte de laboratoire de l’asile, raconte Florence Boyer, notamment par la mise en place de l’Emergency Transit Mechanism (ETM). »

    L’ETM, proposé par le HCR, est lancé en août 2017 à Paris par l’Allemagne, l’Espagne, la France et l’Italie — côté UE — et le Niger, le Tchad et la Libye — côté africain. Ils publient une déclaration conjointe sur les « missions de protection en vue de la réinstallation de réfugiés en Europe ». Ce dispositif se présente comme le pendant humanitaire de la politique de lutte contre « les réseaux d’immigration économique irrégulière » et les « retours volontaires » des migrants irréguliers dans leur pays effectués par l’OIM. Le processus s’accélère en novembre de la même année, suite à un reportage de CNN sur des cas d’esclavagisme de migrants en Libye. Fin 2017, 3 800 places sont promises par les pays occidentaux qui participent, à des degrés divers, à ce programme d’urgence. Le HCR annonce 6 606 places aujourd’hui, proposées par 14 pays européens et américains1.

    Trois catégories de personnes peuvent bénéficier de la réinstallation grâce à ce programme : évacués d’urgence depuis la Libye, demandeurs d’asile au sein d’un flux dit « mixte » mêlant migrants et réfugiés et personnes fuyant les conflits du Mali ou du Nigéria. Seule une minorité aura la possibilité d’être réinstallée depuis le Niger vers un pays occidental. Le profiling (selon le vocabulaire du HCR) de ceux qui pourront bénéficier de cette protection s’effectue dès les camps de détention libyens. Il consiste à repérer les plus vulnérables qui pourront prétendre au statut de réfugié et à la réinstallation.

    Une fois évacuées de Libye, ces personnes bénéficient d’une procédure accélérée pour l’obtention du statut de réfugié au Niger. Elles ne posent pas de problème au HCR, qui juge leur récit limpide. La Commission nationale d’éligibilité au statut des réfugiés (CNE), qui est l’administration de l’asile au Niger, accepte de valider la sélection de l’organisation onusienne. Les réfugiés sont pris en charge dans le camp du HCR à Hamdallaye, construit récemment à une vingtaine de kilomètres de la capitale nigérienne, le temps que le HCR prépare la demande de réinstallation dans un pays occidental, multipliant les entretiens avec les réfugiés concernés. Certains pays, comme le Canada ou la Suède, ne mandatent pas leurs services sur place, déléguant au HCR la sélection. D’autres, comme la France, envoient leurs agents pour un nouvel entretien (voir ce reportage sur la visite de l’Ofpra à Niamey fin 2018).

    Parmi les évacués de Libye, moins des deux tiers sont éligibles à une réinstallation dans un pays dit « sûr ».

    Depuis deux ans, près de 4 000 personnes ont été évacuées de Libye dans le but d’être réinstallées, selon le HCR (5 300 autres ont été prises en charge par l’OIM et « retournées » dans leur pays). Un millier ont été évacuées directement vers l’Europe et le Canada et près de 3 000 vers le Niger. C’est peu par rapport aux 50 800 réfugiés et demandeurs d’asile enregistrés auprès de l’organisation onusienne en Libye au 12 août 2019. Et très peu sur l’ensemble des 663 400 migrants qui s’y trouvent selon l’OIM. La guerre civile qui déchire le pays rend la situation encore plus urgente.

    Parmi les personnes évacuées de Libye vers le Niger, moins des deux tiers sont éligibles à une réinstallation dans un pays volontaire, selon le HCR. À ce jour, moins de la moitié ont été effectivement réinstallés, notamment en France (voir notre article sur l’accueil de réfugiés dans les communes rurales françaises).

    Malgré la publicité faite autour du programme de réinstallation, le HCR déplore la lenteur du processus pour répondre à cette situation d’urgence. « Le problème est que les pays de réinstallation n’offrent pas de places assez vite, regrette Fatou Ndiaye, en charge du programme ETM au Niger, alors que notre pays hôte a négocié un maximum de 1 500 évacués sur son sol au même moment. » Le programme coordonné du Niger ne fait pas exception : le HCR rappelait en février 2019 que, sur les 19,9 millions de réfugiés relevant de sa compétence à travers le monde, moins d’1 % sont réinstallés dans un pays sûr.

    Le dispositif ETM, que le HCR du Niger qualifie de « couloir de l’espoir », concerne seulement ceux qui se trouvent dans un camp accessible par l’organisation en Libye (l’un d’eux a été bombardé en juillet dernier) et uniquement sept nationalités considérées par les autorités libyennes (qui n’ont pas signé la convention de Genève) comme pouvant relever du droit d’asile (Éthiopiens Oromo, Érythréens, Iraquiens, Somaliens, Syriens, Palestiniens et Soudanais du Darfour).

    « Si les portes étaient ouvertes dès les pays d’origine, les gens ne paieraient pas des sommes astronomiques pour traverser des routes dangereuses. »

    Pascaline Chappart, socio-anthropologue

    En décembre 2018, des Soudanais manifestaient devant les bureaux d’ETM à Niamey pour dénoncer « un traitement discriminatoire (...) par rapport aux Éthiopiens et Somaliens » favorisés, selon eux, par le programme. La représentante du HCR au Niger a répondu à une radio locale que « la plupart de ces Soudanais [venaient] du Tchad où ils ont déjà été reconnus comme réfugiés et que, techniquement, c’est le Tchad qui les protège et fait la réinstallation ». C’est effectivement la règle en matière de droit humanitaire mais, remarque Florence Boyer, « comment demander à des réfugiés qui ont quitté les camps tchadiens, pour beaucoup en raison de l’insécurité, d’y retourner sans avoir aucune garantie ? ».

    La position de la France

    La question du respect des règles en matière de droit d’asile se pose pour les personnes qui bénéficient du programme d’urgence. En France, par exemple, pas de recours possible auprès de l’Ofpra en cas de refus du statut de réfugié. Pour Pascaline Chappart, qui achève deux ans d’enquêtes au Niger et au Mexique, il y a là une part d’hypocrisie : « Si les portes étaient ouvertes dès les pays d’origine, les gens ne paieraient pas des sommes astronomiques pour traverser des routes dangereuses par la mer ou le désert ». « Il est quasiment impossible dans le pays de départ de se présenter aux consulats des pays “sûrs” pour une demande d’asile », renchérit Florence Boyer. Elle donne l’exemple de Centre-Africains qui ont échappé aux combats dans leur pays, puis à la traite et aux violences au Nigéria, en Algérie puis en Libye, avant de redescendre au Niger : « Ils auraient dû avoir la possibilité de déposer une demande d’asile dès Bangui ! Le cadre législatif les y autorise. »

    En ce matin brûlant d’avril, dans le camp du HCR à Hamdallaye, Mebratu2, un jeune Érythréen de 26 ans, affiche un large sourire. À l’ombre de la tente qu’il partage et a décorée avec d’autres jeunes de son pays, il annonce qu’il s’envolera le 9 mai pour Paris. Comme tant d’autres, il a fui le service militaire à vie imposé par la dictature du président Issayas Afeworki. Mebratu était convaincu que l’Europe lui offrirait la liberté, mais il a dû croupir deux ans dans les prisons libyennes. S’il ne connaît pas sa destination finale en France, il sait d’où il vient : « Je ne pensais pas que je serais vivant aujourd’hui. En Libye, on pouvait mourir pour une plaisanterie. Merci la France. »

    Mebratu a pris un vol pour Paris en mai dernier, financé par l’Union européenne et opéré par l’#OIM. En France, la Délégation interministérielle à l’hébergement et à l’accès au logement (Dihal) confie la prise en charge de ces réinstallés à 24 opérateurs, associations nationales ou locales, pendant un an. Plusieurs départements et localités françaises ont accepté d’accueillir ces réfugiés particulièrement vulnérables après des années d’errance et de violences.

    Pour le deuxième article de notre numéro spécial de rentrée, nous nous rendons en Dordogne dans des communes rurales qui accueillent ces « réinstallés » arrivés via le Niger.

    http://icmigrations.fr/2019/08/30/defacto-10
    #externalisation #asile #migrations #réfugiés #frontières #Europe #UE #EU #sécuritaire #humanitaire #approche_sécuritaire #approche_humanitaire #libre_circulation #fermeture_des_frontières #printemps_arabe #Kadhafi #Libye #Agadez #parcours_migratoires #routes_migratoires #HCR #OIM #IOM #retour_au_pays #renvois #expulsions #Fonds_fiduciaire #Fonds_fiduciaire_d'urgence_pour_l'Afrique #FFUA #développement #sécurité #EUCAP_Sahel_Niger #La_Valette #passeurs #politique_d'asile #réinstallation #hub #Emergency_Transit_Mechanism (#ETM) #retours_volontaires #profiling #tri #sélection #vulnérabilité #évacuation #procédure_accélérée #Hamdallaye #camps_de_réfugiés #ofpra #couloir_de_l’espoir

    co-écrit par @pascaline

    ping @karine4 @_kg_ @isskein

    Ajouté à la métaliste sur l’externalisation des frontières :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/731749#message765325

  • After peace deal, a bittersweet homecoming for CAR refugees

    ‘If we want to facilitate repatriations, we need to reinforce schools, water points, health centres.’
    More than six months after rebel groups in the Central African Republic signed a peace deal with the government, a trickle of refugees is returning back to the shattered country, but one in four Central Africans remain either internally displaced or living in neighbouring states.

    https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/photo-feature/2019/09/04/Central-African-Republic-refugees-peace-deal
    #asile #migrations #réfugiés #retour_au_pays #République_centrafricaine #Centrafrique #Mongoumba #centres_de_transit

  • Quando tornai al mio paese del Sud

    Quando tornai al mio paese nel Sud,
    dove ogni cosa, ogni attimo del passato
    somiglia a quei terribili polsi di morti
    che ogni volta rispuntano dalle zolle
    e stancano le pale eternamente implacati,
    compresi allora perché ti dovevo perdere:
    qui s’era fatto il mio volto, lontano da te,
    e il tuo, in altri paesi a cui non posso pensare.

    Quando tornai al mio paese del Sud,
    io mi sentivo morire.

    In: Tutte le poesie (Controluce, 2015)

    https://internopoesia.com/tag/quando-tornai-al-mio-paese-del-sud

    #retour #poésie #migrations #Italie #Italie_du_Sud #Sud #retour_au_pays

    ping @wizo @albertocampiphoto

  • Why Most Syrian Refugees Want to Stay in Germany

    Islamic State has been conquered and the war has ended in large parts of Syria, but most Syrian refugees living in Germany want to stay. Many fear persecution if they go back while others have already established themselves in their new home.

    https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/most-syrian-refugees-want-to-stay-in-germany-a-1275389.html#ref=rss
    #Allemagne #réfugiés #asile #migrations #réfugiés_syriens #retour_au_pays #droit_de_rester

  • Tension grows in Lebanon over refugees in #Beqaa

    Tension remains high on Monday in Lebanon’s Beqaa Valley, following the forced displacement of hundreds of Syrian refugees at the weekend.

    Local media reported the possibility that about 400 refugees, including many women and children, may be forcibly transferred to Syria, which is where they originally fled from the armed conflict that is still underway.

    The epicentre of the refugee tension in Lebanon is in #Deir al-Ahmar in the northern Beqaa Valley.

    Since the start of the civil war in Syria in 2011, over a million Syrians have taken refuge in Lebanon, a country whose own population is less than four million.

    Lebanese authorities have recently intensified the dismantling of refugee camps and increased pressure on the refugee community.

    Lebanon did not sign the 1951 Geneva Refugee Convention, and since 2011 the country has considered the presence of “foreign guests” in its territory as a temporary situation.

    http://www.ansamed.info/ansamed/en/news/sections/generalnews/2019/06/10/tension-grows-in-lebanon-over-refugees-in-beqaa_132742bf-f2d4-48a3-ad21-4b
    #réfugiés #réfugiés_syriens #Liban #asile #migrations #expulsions #renvois #retour_au_pays #camps_de_réfugiés #démantèlement

    • Thousands of Syrian refugees could be sent back, says Lebanese minister

      Gebran Bassil claims many refugees are not living in political fear, but stay for economic reasons.

      As many as three quarters of Syrian refugees in Lebanon could return to Syria because they face no fear of political persecution or threat to their security, Lebanon’s controversial foreign minister has said.

      Gebran Bassil also urged the UK to rethink how it was spending aid money on keeping 1.5 million refugees in Lebanon, where he said they were taking the jobs from the Lebanese, and undercutting wages.

      The UK has supplied as much as £500m to help house, feed and educate Syrian refugees in Lebanon since the start of the ciivl war in 2011.

      Bassil is the son in law of the president, Michel Aoun, and the leader of the Lebanese Free Patriotic Movement, the largest political party in the country’s parliament. Last week he faced allegations of racism that he denies after it was alleged he had implied that some refugees might be corrupt.

      In an interview with the Guardian, he said: “Most of the Syrians – much more than 75% – are no more in security and political fear, but are staying for economic reasons. We know more than 500,000 Syrians working in Lebanon. They are working every where in breach of our labour laws, and yet even though they break the law they are not being repatriated.

      “They are working in Lebanon, taking jobs from the Lebanese because they paid at cheaper rate because they have no taxes to pay and they are being assisted on top of the wages they are paid.”

      Aid agencies working with refugees have cited concerns over loss of property and conscription into the Syrian army and fear of reprisals as major reasons why they did not want to return home. The agencies have resisted Lebanese government efforts to tear down any semi-permanent structure put up by refugees.

      Bassil insisted it was not his government’s policy to try to force Syrians to return to their homeland.

      He added: “The British taxpayers are paying money for an unlimited period of time that is not being spent in the right direction. They should be paid to return to their country. As President Trump said, money spent on a refugee to go back to his country is much much less than to keep him out of his country.”

      He defended his country’s record of welcoming Syrian refugees. He said: “No one country did what Lebanon did. No one country is able to host 200 refugees per square kilometre, more than 40% of its population. Imagine here in Britain you are receiving 50 million people. That is the comparison.

      “Despite all that we have endured we never thought of forcing anyone to return. We are talking of a dignified and safe gradual return for people who are willing. That now applies to the majority of Syrians in Lebanon because now most of Syria is safe and most of those in Lebanon do not face any political or security obstacles for their return. They are staying because they are assisted to stay in the Lebanon, and if they go back to Syria they will lose that assistance. This is the main reason.”

      Bassil added: “They are receiving aid for every aspect of their lives they are receiving free education, shelter and healthcare. They are better covered on health than the Lebanese. They are afraid that once they leave, they will lose the assistance”.

      He said the number of movements across the border is 700,000 to 800,000 a month, and people who hold refugee cards go regularly to Syria and come back to Lebanon.

      “The tension is mounting internally. Our economy is really collapsing. How can you put your own economy on your feet when you carry this burden.”

      Bassil also denied that any of his remarks could be construed as racist, arguing every country puts its citizens first.

      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/15/thousands-of-syrian-refugees-could-be-sent-back-says-lebanese-minister

  • #Mauritanie : 60000 #réfugiés_maliens vivent dans le #camp de #Mbera

    Ils sont #peuls, #touaregs ou #arabes et viennent tous du Mali. Certains fuyant les violences des groupes jihadistes, d’autres celles de l’armée malienne. Depuis 2012, ce sont près de 60 000 réfugiés qui ont élu domicile dans le camp de Mbera, en Mauritanie. Et qui ne sont pas prêts à refranchir la frontière.

    « Nous allons relever sept données biométriques, ce qui nous garantit demain que quiconque ne peut plus se présenter sous cette identité. » Ici, nous sommes au #centre_d’enregistrement du #HCR, le Haut-Commissariat aux réfugiés des Nations unies. Passage obligé pour tout demandeur d’asile.

    Ses #empreintes_digitales, Hamady Ba, 40 ans, les a données il y a quatre ans déjà. Il a fui les persécutions contre les peuls au Mali. « J’ai vu des exactions de la part de l’armée, raconte-t-il. Ils rentraient dans notre village, prenaient des gens, les attachaient, et les frappaient. C’est pour ça que j’ai fui. »

    Zeïna, elle, est arrivée il y a quatre mois à peine. À dos de mulet, pour fuir les jihadistes. Et il n’est pas question de repartir. « On a vraiment essayé de supporter cette situation, mais c’était trop. J’ai décidé de prendre mes enfants pour arrêter d’entendre le bruit des armes, confie-t-elle. J’ai été obligé de fuir, mais je ne supportais vraiment plus cette situation. »

    Sous sa tente bien tenue, mais rudimentaire, Sidi Mohamed est un habitué du camp. En 1991 déjà, il avait trouvé refuge ici. À 70 ans, il a encore de l’espoir. « Chaque prière que je fais, je prie Dieu pour que la paix revienne au Mali et dans le monde. En dehors de tout ça, on veut juste vivre avec dignité », dit-il.

    Le mois dernier, environ 300 réfugiés ont décidé de retourner tenter leur chance au Mali. Contre l’avis du HCR, qui estime que la situation n’est pas prête à se stabiliser.

    http://www.rfi.fr/afrique/20190603-reportage-mauritanie-60000-refugies-maliens-vivent-le-camp-mbera
    #réfugiés #asile #migrations #camps_de_réfugiés #retour_au_pays

    Notez que le titre du sujet parle de #camps , alors que le HCR parle de #centre_d’enregistrement ...
    #cpa_camps #terminologie #vocabulaire #mots

  • CASE LAW ON RETURN OF ASYLUM SEEKERS TO AFGHANISTAN, 2017-2018

    This document compiles information from selected European countries, specifically, Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, The Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland and United Kingdom. It covers cases from 2017 and 2018 that relate to the return of Afghan nationals, assessed in light of their personal circumstances and the security situation in the country. Whilst every effort has been put into finding relevant case law, the cases cited are, by no means, exhaustive. Where court decisions were not available in English ECRE has supplied a translation.

    #Afghanistan #retour_au_pays #expulsions #renvois #asile #migrations #réfugiés #réfugiés_afghans #Autriche #Belgique #Finlande #France #Allemagne #Pays-Bas #Norvège #Suède #Suisse #UK #Angleterre

    ping @karine4

  • The trouble with plans to send 116,000 Burundian refugees home

    Under pressure to go home, Burundian refugees in Tanzania face two bad options: return to face social and economic hardship and possible rights violations; or remain in chronically under-resourced camps that restrict their opportunities.

    With both governments confirming plans to return 116,000 Burundians by the end of 2019, it’s crunch time for the international community if it wants to ensure returns are truly voluntary and offer returnees the level of support they will need to reintegrate properly back in Burundi.

    More than 400,000 people fled Burundi, most into neighbouring Tanzania, following violent unrest and repression that accompanied 2015 elections, which saw former rebel leader Pierre Nkurunziza returned to power for a controversial third presidential term.

    Limited repatriations began in 2017, but funding shortages mean the process has so far been little more than an offer of free transport back across the border, with a return package of food, non-food items, and cash that doesn’t even last the three months it’s expected to cover.

    https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/opinion/2019/03/05/Burundian-refugees-Tanzania-plans-send-home
    #retour_au_pays #asile #migrations #réfugiés #Tanzanie #réfugiés_burundais

    Pour les #retours_volontaires initiés en 2017, voir le doc publié par @reka:
    https://seenthis.net/messages/636524
    #retour_volontaire

    • Tanzania wants Burundian refugees sent home. But they face big challenges

      Tanzania says it has reached an agreement with Burundi to begin sending back all Burundian refugees from October. The repatriation effort will take place in collaboration with the United Nations. Moina Spooner, from The Conversation Africa, asked Amelia Kuch to give some insights into the decision.

      How many Burundian refugees are there in Tanzania and why did they migrate there?

      Tanzania has long been held up as a safe haven for refugees in the region. There’s a long history of refugees from Burundi, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Mozambique seeking refuge and safety there. Burundians have been seeking refuge in Tanzania since 1960, with major waves of displacement happening in 1972, 1988, 1993, and 2015. This was due to several civil wars and genocidal violence.

      The current displacement crisis started in 2015 when President Pierre Nkurunziza sought a third term in office and eventually won. Street protests led to violent clashes. The growing fear and uncertainty pushed over 400 000 Burundians to seek refuge in neighbouring countries. About 60% of them went to Tanzania.

      Interviews with Burundian refugees revealed that if they were not a member of the leading party they faced violent persecution. They shared personal accounts of torture and rape by the Imbonerakure, the youth wing of the ruling party, and of disappearances and executions of family members.

      There’s now a total of about 342 867 Burundian refugees and asylum seekers in Tanzania that are mostly settled in three refugee camps: Nyarugusu, Nduta and Mtendeli.

      Tanzania had previously granted some Burundian refugees citizenship. Why do you think they’re choosing repatriation now?

      Tanzania offered citizenship, through naturalisation, to 160 000 Burundian refugees. But this only benefited individuals and families who fled to Tanzania in 1972 and were settled in the three rural settlements –- Mishamo, Urambo and Katumba. It didn’t include more recent arrivals.

      As much as the announcement of forced repatriation is troubling, it is not surprising. Over the past 15 years Tanzania has been making moves away from acting as a host country.

      The 2005 election manifesto of Tanzania’s ruling party, Chama Cha Mapinduzi, included a pledge to make Tanzania “refugee-free” by 2010. Their justification was that there wasn’t enough international aid to support the camps and that the camps were having a negative impact on neighbouring host communities and Tanzania’s security situation.

      This has already led to repatriations. In 2012 residents of Mtabila refugee camp, most of whom fled to Tanzania in the 1990s, were returned to Burundi against their will and the camp was closed.

      In 2018, Tanzania pulled out of the UN’s Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework – a declaration by countries to commit to respect the human rights of refugees and migrants and to support the countries that welcome them – citing a lack of international funding. The Burundian refugee situation is the lowest funded in the world. In 2018, UNHCR and its partners received just 33% of the required US$391 million requested to support Burundian refugees.

      How should the repatriation process happen?

      First and foremost Burundian refugees need to be able to make an informed decision if they wish to repatriate or remain in Tanzania. It must be a voluntary decision. At the moment it seems like refugees won’t be given a choice and will be forced to repatriate. Tanzanian Interior Minister Kangi Lugola announced that Tanzania will return Burundian refugees at the rate of 2 000 people a week.

      Ideally, people should be allowed to travel back to Burundi to assess the situation for themselves and decide, after that initial first-hand experience, if they wish to repatriate voluntarily.

      If they decide to repatriate, they should be given access to land and the ability to re-establish their livelihoods in Burundi. The support might come in the form of a financial grant, basic household items, food items, as well as financial support so they can access shelter and rent land.

      Following repatriation, it’s essential that the safety of refugees is monitored. Repatriation is a political process and it will be necessary to ensure that returnees are protected and can access the same rights as other citizens.

      Monitoring the reintegration of returnees is a UNHCR commitment under the Tripartite Agreement from 2017 and it is critical that journalists and researchers are safe to report on the reintegration process.

      What do the prospects look like for the refugees once they’re back in Burundi?

      Through current and previous research I’ve done on Burundian refugees who repatriated and then returned to Tanzania, I’ve seen a complex matrix of challenges that they face. These include hunger, the inability to access land and shelter, and a shortage of medicine.

      There are also safety concerns. Today the Burundian government controls the political space and refuses to engage in dialogue with opposition parties. While there is less open violence, refugees still fear going back and for some, that’s with good reason.

      With the closing migratory space in Tanzania, those who won’t be able to safely stay in Burundi will have to seek other destinations of refuge.

      What are Tanzania’s international obligations in terms of protection of refugees?

      The 1951 Refugee Convention – whose core principle asserts that a refugee should not be returned to a country where they face serious threats to their life or freedom – has been ratified by 145 states, including Tanzania.

      The Tanzanian government’s decision to repatriate Burundian refugees, despite evidence that their life and freedom might be threatened in Burundi, breaches the core principle of non-refoulement.

      This, however, must be seen in the global context. The decision of the Tanzanian government to expel refugees is not happening in a political void. Rather, it emulates the policies implemented by some Western countries, including the US, Australia, France, Hungary and Italy.

      These countries are also breaching the Convention; by obstructing refugees from coming, putting their lives in danger and even penalising those who try to assist refugees.

      Rather than an exception, the recent decision by the Tanzanian government to forcefully repatriate Burundian refugees is a reflection of a growing, global hostility towards refugees and other migrants.

      https://theconversation.com/tanzania-wants-burundian-refugees-sent-home-but-they-face-big-chall

    • Tanzania to send back all Burundian refugees from October

      Tanzanian and Burundian officials announce deal but UNHCR says Burundi conditions are not conducive to promote returns.

      Tanzania says it has reached an agreement with neighbouring Burundi to begin sending back all Burundian refugees from October, adding that the repatriation will take place in collaboration with the United Nations.

      However, the UN refugee agency (UNHCR) said in a statement on Tuesday that the conditions in Burundi, which was plunged into a political crisis four years ago, are not “conducive to promote returns” and noted that it is assisting refugees who indicate they have made a voluntary choice to return home.

      Hundreds of people were killed and more than 400,000 fled to neighbouring countries due to violence the UN says was mostly carried out by state security forces following President Pierre Nkurunziza’s decision in April 2015 to run for a third, disputed, term in office.

      Nkurunziza won re-election and, the following year, Burundi suspended all cooperation with the UN human rights office in the country after a UN-commissioned report accused the Bujumbura government and its supporters of being responsible for crimes against humanity.

      Currently, some 200,000 Burundians are in Tanzania, according to government figures.

      Speaking to the AFP news agency, Tanzanian Interior Minister Kangi Lugola said: “In agreement with the Burundian government and in collaboration with the High Commissioner for Refugees, we will start the repatriation of all Burundian refugees on October 1.”

      “Under this agreement, it will be 2,000 refugees who will be repatriated every week until there are no more Burundian refugees in Tanzania,” he said.
      ’Returns should be voluntary’

      Lugola said that Burundi is currently at peace, adding that he had “information whereby people, international organisations, are deceiving people, telling them there is no peace in Burundi”.

      He was speaking after he and Burundian Interior Minister Pascal Barandagiye on Sunday visited a camp where they annouced the return to the refugees themselves.

      In an emailed statement to Al Jazeera, Dana Hughes, the UNHCR spokesperson for East Horn and Great Lakes, said around 75,000 Burundians had returned home in the past two years. She added, however, that hundreds still flee Burundi each month and urged governments in the region to maintain open borders and access to asylum for those who need it.

      UNHCR also called upon the governments of Tanzania and Burundi “to uphold international obligations and ensure that any returns are voluntary in line with the tripartite agreement signed in March of 2018”, referring to a deal covering refugees who wish to return on a voluntary basis.

      “The UNHCR urges states to ensure that no refugee is returned to Burundi against their will, and that measures are taken to make conditions in Burundi more conducive for refugees returns, including confidence-building efforts and incentives for those who have chosen to go home,” Hughes said.

      One Burundian refugee, a man in his 40s who crossed over with his family and now lives in Tanzania’s Nduta camp, said he would not be returning home.

      “We heard that the governments agreed on forced repatriation ... There is no way we can go to Burundi, there is no security there at all,” the man, who declined to be named, told Reuters news agency on Tuesday.

      Human Rights Watch says Burundi’s government does not tolerate criticism, and security services carry out summary executions, rapes, abductions and intimidation of suspected political opponents.

      Burundi’s ruling party denies it carries out systematic human rights violations.

      https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/08/tanzania-send-burundian-refugees-october-190827180318193.html

    • Tanzania begins repatriating Burundian refugees

      Tanzania and Burundi agree to facilitate voluntary repatriation of refugees by the end of 2019.

      Tanzania on Thursday began repatriating 1000 Burundians, who had taken refuge in 2015, following political violence and instability in their country.

      “Today [Thursday] we are repatriating 1000 refugees with all their belongings. All international organizations are aware of this operation,” Director of Information Services and Government Spokesperson, Hassan Abbasi told reporters.

      In April 2015 protests broke out in the landlocked East African country Burundi, when President Pierre Nkurunziza decided to seek a third term in office. A coup attempt failed to dislodge him, leading to a clamp down and arrests. Over 300,000 people left the country, causing a humanitarian crisis.

      In August, Tanzania and Burundi agreed to repatriate all the refugees peacefully to their homes, by the end of 2019. The mass repatriation was supposed to commence from Oct.1.

      Reports said that the first batch of 1000 refugees were transported by buses to Gisuru transit center in eastern Burundi, where they stayed overnight.

      According to officials, they will be transported to their home districts along with rations, that will sustain them for three months.

      Abbasi said the Tanzanian government and the international agencies will ensure the refugees are at peace in their country.

      The UN High Commission for Refugees has asked Tanzania’s government to avoid forceful repatriation of refugees.

      “While an overall security has improved, UNHCR is of the opinion that conditions in Burundi are not currently conducive to promote returns,” the UN agency responsible for the welfare for refugees said in a statement in August.

      However, Abbasi emphasized that repatriation is voluntary. “All those refugees, leaving camps were eager to go home,” he said.

      He stressed that Tanzania respects international agreements on refugees and would ensure the repatriation process takes place well within international humanitarian laws.

      Nestor Bimenyimana, the director general of repatriation and rehabilitation department in Burundi’s Home Ministry told local media that the UNHCR is involved in the identification and registration of Burundian refugees, willing to be repatriated from Tanzania.

      “We don’t force anyone to register,” he said.

      According to the UN agency, as many as 343,000 refugees, were living in the neighboring countries of Tanzania, Rwanda, DR Congo and Uganda as of August 2019.

      Over past two years, refugee agency has facilitated repatriation of 74,600 refugees to their homes in Burundi.

      https://www.aa.com.tr/en/africa/tanzania-begins-repatriating-burundian-refugees/1602122

    • Tanzania: Burundians Pressured into Leaving

      Mounting Intimidation for 163,000 Burundian Refugees and Asylum Seekers.

      The fear of violence, arrest, and deportation is driving many of the 163,000 Burundian refugees and asylum seekers in Tanzania out of the country. Tanzanian authorities have also made it very difficult for the United Nations refugee agency to properly check whether hundreds of refugees’ recent decision to return to Burundi was voluntary.

      In October and November 2019, Tanzanian officials specifically targeted parts of the Burundian refugee population whose insecure legal status and lack of access to aid make them particularly vulnerable to coerced return to Burundi. The actions come after the Tanzanian president, John Magufuli, said on October 11 that Burundian refugees should “go home.”

      “Refugees say police abuses, insecurity in Tanzania’s refugee camps, and deportation threats drove them out of the country,” said Bill Frelick, refugee rights director at Human Rights Watch. “Tanzania should reverse course before it ends up unlawfully coercing thousands more to leave.”

      In mid-November, Human Rights Watch interviewed 20 Burundian refugees in Uganda who described the pressure that caused them to leave Tanzania between August 2018 and October 2019. Seven returned to Burundi but said they then fled to Uganda to escape members of the Burundian ruling party’s youth league, the Imbonerakure, who threatened, intimidated, or arbitrarily arrested them. Thirteen went directly to Uganda.

      Refugees said their reasons for leaving Tanzania include fear of getting caught up in a spate of arrests, and alleged disappearances and killings in or near refugee camps and fear of suspected members of the Imbonerakure and of abusive Burundian refugees working with Tanzanian police on camp security. They also cited the government’s threats to deport Burundian refugees, the closing and destruction of markets, restrictions on commercial activities, and lack of access to services in the camps and freedom of movement.

      On December 3, Tanzanian Home Affairs Minister Kangi Lugola denied that the government is “expelling” refugees, and said the Tanzanian and Burundian authorities “merely mobilize, to encourage those who are ready to return on their own accord, to go back.”

      A refugee who returned from Tanzania to Burundi in August said: “I returned to Burundi because the Tanzanian authorities said those staying would be forced back… The police became increasingly violent and insecurity was the main reason I decided to return.” In late August, Imbonerakure members targeted him: “They arrested me, tied my arms behind my back and said, ‘you said you fled [Burundi] because of the Imbonerakure, but we are still here.’” He said his wife paid a bribe for his release and he fled to Uganda.

      A December 6 Human Rights Watch report documented widespread abuses by members of the youth league, often working with local Burundian administrators. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) said in August that conditions in Burundi were not safe or stable enough for it to encourage refugees to return, and that it would only facilitate voluntary returns.

      The 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1969 African Refugee Convention prohibit refoulement, the return of refugees in any manner whatsoever to places where their lives or freedom would be threatened. UNHCR says that refoulement occurs not only when a government directly rejects or expels a refugee, but also when indirect pressure is so intense that it leads people to believe they have no option but to return to a country where they face a serious risk of harm.

      Between September 2017 and end of October 2019, 78,380 Burundians – about 725 a week – left Tanzania under an agreement between Burundi, Tanzania, and the UNHCR, which tasks UNHCR with conducting detailed interviews with refugees to ensure they are leaving Tanzania voluntarily. The number is well below the target of 2,000 a week Tanzania and Burundi agreed on in March 2018. An August 24, 2019 agreement between Tanzania and Burundi says all the refugees “are to return to their country of origin whether voluntarily or not” by December 31.

      On November 9, UNHCR said that some Burundians signing up for voluntary return with UNHCR had “cited insecurity in refugee camps, fear of enforced return …, deteriorating living conditions …, prohibition of small commercial activities and closure of camp markets as the main reasons for their return.” The agency previously told Human Rights Watch that “push factors play a significant role” in refugees’ return decision, but that UNHCR considers their return to be voluntary because they have “made an informed decision” and “many other refugees” have decided to stay.

      A government’s duty to protect refugee rights should not be assessed based on statistics but on a case-by-case basis, Human Rights Watch said. The fact that some or many refugees can stay in a host country is not evidence that those who leave do so voluntarily or that they did not leave due to coercion.

      Seven of the refugees Human Rights Watch interviewed said they returned to Burundi between March 2018 and June 2019. One refugee who left Tanzania’s Nduta camp for Uganda in August said he had helped many families register for return to Burundi: “Before August 2018, UNHCR asked people who registered many questions about their decision to return and gave them time to change their minds,” he said. “But now they don’t give time to think or ask questions. They immediately process people for return.”

      UNHCR’s mandate requires it to ask refugees signing up for voluntary return about the reasons behind the decision to ensure the decision is truly voluntary.

      A well-informed source said that after a recent “validation exercise” to verify the number of registered and unregistered Burundians living in camps in Tanzania, about 3,300 people were registered but not given “active status,” which means they have no clear legal status or access to assistance, and are particularly vulnerable to government intimidation and coerced return to Burundi.

      In October, the Tanzanian authorities summoned these people and registered “hundreds” who said they wanted to return to Burundi. The authorities told them to report to a departure center, leaving UNHCR, which usually speaks to people leaving a few days beforehand to make sure they are leaving voluntarily, to conduct some interviews at the departure center “in less than ideal circumstances,” it said.

      Human Rights Watch previously reported on the coerced return of hundreds of Burundian asylum seekers on October 15, after camp authorities said that if they did not register to return, they would be in the camps without legal status and aid.

      In late October, UNHCR said Tanzania was increasing “pressure on Burundian refugees and asylum-seekers to return home.” In the second week of November, Tanzanian authorities banned 10 UNHCR staff involved in managing the refugee registration database from the camp.

      Tanzanian authorities should ensure that UNHCR staff are able to properly verify the voluntary nature of refugees’ decision to return to Burundi, Human Rights Watch said. The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the African Union should send a team to visit the refugee camps and urge Tanzania not to directly or indirectly forcibly return asylum seekers or refugees.

      “The African Union should publicly press the Tanzanian authorities to stop trying to bully refugees and the UN into submission,” Frelick said. “Tanzania claims it isn’t doing anything wrong, but Burundian refugees are telling us in clear terms that they are being driven out of the country.”

      Factors Driving Burundian Refugees out of Tanzania

      Twenty Burundian refugees formerly living in three camps – Nduta, Nyarugusu, and Mtendeli – in Tanzania’s northwestern Kigoma region spoke with Human Rights Watch in Uganda in November.

      Tanzanian Deadline; Memories of 2012 Forced Return

      All 20 said they left due to Tanzanian officials’ statements that Burundian refugees should go home. Some said that the combination of Burundian and Tanzanian officials telling refugees to go home, and refugees’ memories of Tanzanian forced refugee return in 2012 had created a climate in which they felt they had no choice but to leave Tanzania.

      Thirteen who went directly to Uganda said they feared for their lives if forced to return to Burundi. Many said they knew other refugees who had returned to Burundi only to flee again to Tanzania to escape ongoing insecurity in Burundi.

      Ten left the camps between August and October, with most citing increased pressure at that time. On August 24, Burundi and Tanzania signed an agreement to ensure that all Burundian refugees would leave Tanzania by the end of 2019. Both countries’ interior ministers jointly visited the camps the following day and said returns would start on October 1.

      A 40-year-old woman said: “I decided to leave the camp when the authorities said they would start sending people back on October 1 and that they didn’t want any more refugees in Tanzania. During the meeting, [the authorities] said they had agreed with the Burundian government to repatriate us. That’s why I left.” She left for Uganda on foot with her young child on September 10. She spent a night in a local family’s compound but became frightened that Tanzanian authorities would catch her and ran away, leaving all her belongings behind.

      Many refugees said they feared Tanzanian officials’ threatening language would turn into forced return. Several cited camp authorities’ phrases such as, “The last cow of the herd is always beaten” or “the cows that go to the trough first drink clean water, those that go last get the dirty water,” which they interpreted as saying that those who do not leave the camp now may be beaten or left without a return support package.

      A refugee who left Mtendeli camp in October said: “Tanzanian authorities intimidated people to make them sign up for repatriation. They said otherwise they would use force and we wouldn’t even have time to collect our belongings or get any assistance. People were afraid, so they registered [to return].”

      Tanzania has hosted hundreds of thousands of refugees over the past few decades and offered citizenship to tens of thousands who had been in the country since 1972. But the country also has a troubling history of forced return. After the forced return of hundreds of thousands of Rwandans in 1996, Tanzania began in 2006 to reduce the number of what it termed “illegal immigrants” by violently expelling thousands of registered Rwandan and Burundian refugees.

      In June 2009, Tanzanian authorities announced the closure of a camp sheltering more than 37,000 Burundian refugees, at Mtabila. Pressure mounted until the camp was closed in December 2012. Some refugees in Uganda said that they had been in Mtabila camp in late 2012 when Tanzanian authorities forced people into returning to Burundi and that they were afraid the Tanzanian authorities would use similar tactics again.

      A refugee leader from Nduta camp said he was summoned to a meeting with Tanzanian authorities on March 14, where refugees were asked: “Do you remember what happened in Mtabila? Our guns still work, you know. Burundi and Tanzania are one country.” A 25-year-old woman who left Tanzania for Uganda in August said: “I left because of what happened in Mtabila. I didn’t want to be forced back while there is insecurity in Burundi.”

      Fear of Insecurity in and Around Refugee Camps

      Most of the refugees said growing insecurity in the camps contributed to their decision to leave Tanzania.

      All said they feared the Tanzanian police, who they believe work closely with the Burundian authorities to encourage refugees to return. Fourteen also said they were afraid of Burundian refugees in charge of refugee camp security, called “Sungu Sungu,” a term used to describe neighborhood militias in Tanzania. Refugees, including a former Sungu Sungu member, and an independent well-informed source in the camps said that Tanzanian police approve the appointment of the most senior Sungu Sungu representatives in the camps, some of whom refugees believed to be Imbonerakure.

      Refugees said Sungu Sungu members had arrested refugees and helped Tanzanian authorities carry out what some called “mobilization efforts” to encourage their return.

      One interviewee said: “In the camps, they [Sungu Sungu members] targeted the [political] opposition, arrested people at night, confiscated phones and demanded bribes. They organized meetings to tell people to return, and said if we don’t return voluntarily, we will be forced back.”

      Some refugees said that Sungu Sungu members came to the houses of those who had registered for return, but had failed to show up on the day of the return convoy, and told people to leave Tanzania, but Human Rights Watch was not able to independently verify these allegations.

      One refugee said he knew four Sungu Sungu members in Nyarugusu camp who were also Imbonerakure members in his home commune in Burundi. He said: “If a normal refugee comes home after 8 p.m., it’s fine, but if an opposition member goes home after 8 p.m., he’s beaten and made to pay a fine of up to 10.000 Shillings (US$4.3).”

      Human Rights Watch independently verified the identity of the four men, as well as that of three other Imbonerakure members in Nduta camp, with a well-informed source in Burundi, who confirmed that at least five of the seven men were Imbonerakure members who either had ties with Tanzania or who had left their home communes in Cankuzo, Ruyigi, Karuzi, and Makamba provinces in Burundi.

      Thirteen interviewees said they had heard of killings, disappearances, and arrests of Burundians in and around Tanzania’s refugee camps since 2018, including when refugees left the camps to look for firewood. The resulting climate of fear and suspicion triggered their decision to leave.

      A 44-year-old man said: “After the August agreement … arrests increased. There were new ones every day. The camp authorities said they wanted to close the camps and that we had to register to go back.” A well-informed source confirmed that reports of disappearances and arrests by Tanzanian police have increased since August. Refugees also said that they believe Tanzanian authorities arrested people suspected of opposing their refugee-return “mobilization efforts.”

      Market Closures; Other Restrictions

      Most refugees said that restrictions that led to market closures, a ban on motorbikes and bicycles, and restrictions on access to services and commercial activities in the camps convinced them that Tanzanian authorities were planning to close the camps. Several also said that police and Sungu Sungu members prevented refugees from moving around the camps at night and prohibited refugees from listening to radio broadcasts by Burundian exiles.

      One refugee who was repatriated to Burundi in August 2018 said: “I didn’t want to leave but they put us in an untenable situation… [The Sungu Sungu] forbade us from listening to the radio and beat us if they found us out after 7 p.m. They worked with the Tanzania police, which collaborates with the Burundian police.”

      “In August, camp authorities closed Nduta camp market,” a 25-year-old woman who left Tanzania in August said. “This meant we had to survive on food rations, as we couldn’t buy vegetables and other small things in the camps anymore.”

      A 35-year-old carpenter, who left Tanzania for Uganda with his wife and four children on September 24 said: “Something changed after August 2019. Assistance for building houses or education programs were suspended. Aid for refugees definitely diminished.”

      Although these restrictions were added incrementally, refugees said that in August they became more severe. One refugee said: “After August, things changed. Markets inside and outside the camps were closed. The camp authorities said it would continue this way until all infrastructure is closed down.”

      Increasing Pressure on Certain Groups

      Human Rights Watch research indicates that as of October 31, there were about 151,000 registered refugees living in Tanzania’s camps together with 12,000 registered asylum seekers who were waiting for the Tanzanian authorities to decide on their individual asylum applications. In their August agreement, the Tanzanian and Burundian authorities erroneously referred to the 12,000 as “illegal migrants.”

      The source said that a recent “validation exercise” in the camps also identified about 2,800 Burundians who arrived in the camps after January 2018, when the Tanzanian authorities stopped registering asylum seekers. The authorities registered their presence in October, but refused to give them “active status,” leaving them without clear legal status and assistance.

      The source said that the exercise also identified and registered the presence of another 500 people whose refugee or asylum seeker status had been deactivated by UNHCR after they failed to show up for three consecutive food distributions, indicating they had left, but who had subsequently returned to the camps. As of early December, hundreds of them remain in the camp without “active status” or assistance.

      In October, sources in the camps said Tanzanian authorities posted lists in the camps of people without active legal status and access to assistance, saying they should report to Home Affairs Ministry officials in the camps. Hundreds did and signed up to return to Burundi. Tanzanian authorities did not follow standard procedure, requiring them to report to UNHCR to verify the Burundians were leaving Tanzania voluntarily. Instead, the authorities told them to report to Nduta camp’s departure center, where returning refugees go with all their belongings ahead of their scheduled return to Burundi. UNHCR said they had to conduct some voluntariness interviews at the departure center “in less than ideal circumstances.”

      UNHCR’s Handbook on Voluntary Repatriation says that “registration for repatriation should not be viewed as a merely clerical task” and that staff should “interview…the potential repatriates to obtain … relevant information, counselling them on issues of concern, answering questions on repatriation related issues [and] assessing vulnerability.”

      The source said that between September 2017 and mid-November 2019, about 10,500 refugees signed up for voluntary return to Burundi but then decided to stay in Tanzania. They informed UNHCR, which took them off the agency’s “pending departure” list.

      Nonetheless, in early October, the Tanzanian authorities posted a list of names in the camps of about 4,000 refugees who had signed up for return but had not shown up on the departure date and summoned them to Home Affairs Ministry representatives in the camps. A few hundred responded and said they wanted to return to Burundi and left in October and November. The rest remain in the camps.

      Returning Refugees Fleeing Burundi Again

      In its September report, the UN Human Rights Council’s Commission of Inquiry on Burundi said that “serious human rights violations – including crimes against humanity – have continued…across the country” and that the targets were real and suspected opposition supporters, including Burundians who had returned from abroad.

      Seven refugees said they had returned to Burundi between March 2018 and August 2019 under the voluntary repatriation program. Four said that members of the Imbonerakure had stolen the money and goods they had received from UNHCR, which include 70,000 Burundian Francs ($37), perishable goods, and cooking and other utensils. All said they left Burundi for Uganda to escape insecurity in Burundi.

      A man who returned to Burundi on September 27, 2018 and left again for Uganda one year later, described the challenges returning refugees face in Burundi:

      The Imbonerakure said we were ibipinga [a pejorative Kirundi expression to designate those who are against the party] and that we would pay for it in [the] 2020 [elections]. When they saw us at the market, they made us pay more. In July, August, and September [2019], CNDD-FDD [ruling party] members forced us to pay contributions for the elections and the ruling party. The Imbonerakure monitored our houses, especially if they suspected people might try and flee, and said they were going to kill us. The [local] authorities made me sign up to become a member of the ruling party... I thought I would be killed.

      Several interviewees said Imbonerakure members accused them of joining rebel groups abroad and threatened to arrest them. One person said that Imbonerakure members beat people trying to get goods at distributions by aid agencies and prevented people from getting food. He said he was forced to give up much of the repatriation-assistance money he had received from UNHCR:

      Of the 70,000 Francs I received [from UNHCR], I had to give 10,000 ($5.3) to the communal counsellor, 5,000 ($2.6) to the hill-level authorities, and 3,000 ($1.6) to the local Imbonerakure chief. Then, whenever an Imbonerakure came to my house, I had to give them 1,000 Francs ($0.5) …The Imbonerakure said they were going to kill me because I didn’t tell them how rebel groups were planning on attacking Burundi. They said they would cut my head off. I was afraid and decided to leave without any belongings – if the Imbonerakure suspected I was fleeing; they would have prevented me from crossing the border.

      An interviewee who returned to Burundi in August said Imbonerakure members arrested and accused him of denouncing Imbonerakure abuses while he was abroad. He said his wife had to sell all the goods they had received from UNHCR in Tanzania to pay for his release, and they both fled the country later the same month.

      https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/12/12/tanzania-burundians-pressured-leaving

  • Lebanon looks to hardline eastern Europe approach for Syrian refugees

    Lebanon said on Wednesday it wanted to follow the example of eastern EU states that have largely rejected refugees as a way of resolving its own refugee crisis.
    Foreign Minister Gebran Bassil sympathized with the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia’s refusal to accept refugee distribution quotas proposed by the EU after the 2015-16 migrant crisis, when more than a million people streamed into Europe, mostly from Syria.
    Populist eastern EU leaders including Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, Poland’s powerbroker Jaroslaw Kaczynski and Czech President Milos Zeman, among others, blasted German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s “open door” policy on accepting migrants during that period.
    These countries “were acting in their national interest and decided that the redistribution of refugees among European countries is not in their national interest, although they faced EU sanctions for that,” Bassil told reporters in Prague.
    “I would like this attitude to be an inspiration for Lebanon, because every state must make national interests its top priority and at this moment Lebanon’s key national interest is the return of Syrian refugees to their homeland,” he added.
    Lebanon says it is hosting 1.5 million Syrians — around a quarter of its own population. Less than one million of them are registered with UN refugee agency the UNHCR.
    Most of the Syrian refugees in Lebanon live in insecurity and depend on international aid.
    The International Monetary Fund has said their presence has led to increased unemployment and a rise in poverty due to greater competition for jobs.
    The influx has also put strain on Lebanese water and electrical infrastructure.
    Lebanese government officials and politicians have ramped up calls for Syrians to return home, but the United Nations has consistently warned that conditions in the war-ravaged country are not suitable for such returns.
    “I would like Prague or Beirut to host a meeting, an initiative of countries seeking to plan and ensure the return of Syrian refugees to their country,” said Bassil.
    “This would be immensely useful for both Lebanon and Syria and in general it would be the best solution to the human, humanitarian and political crisis we have right now and which could get worse in the future,” he said.


    http://www.arabnews.com/node/1473496/middle-east
    #Liban #it_has_begun #modèle_hongrois #asile #migrations #réfugiés #réfugiés_syriens #intérêt_national #populisme #modèle_Visegrad #retour_au_pays

  • Land Confiscation Is Latest Barrier to Return for Myanmar’s Displaced

    An amendment to Myanmar’s land-ownership laws will make it nearly impossible for #Rohingya refugees and Myanmar’s internally displaced to return to land they’ve tilled for generations.


    https://www.newsdeeply.com/refugees/articles/2019/03/15/land-confiscation-is-latest-barrier-to-return-for-myanmars-displaced
    #terres #confiscation_des_terres #Myanmar #Birmanie #retour_au_pays #IDPs #déplacés_internes #réfugiés #asile #migrations #loi #terre #foncier #réfugiés_rohingya #cartographie #visualisation

  • IOM : Over 40.000 migrants voluntarily returned home from Libya since 2015

    After an operation for voluntary returns last week, the UN agency for migration International Organization for Migration (IOM) said that the total number of migrants that had voluntarily returned from Libya to their country of origin since 2015 had risen to 40,000.

    Over 160 Nigerian migrants stuck in southern Libya returned to Nigeria voluntarily on February 21 on a charter flight offered by the International Organization for Migration (IOM) as part of its program for Voluntary Humanitarian Returns (VHR).

    The February operation brought the total number of voluntary repatriations from Libya to 40,000 since 2015, IOM has explained.

    https://www.libyanexpress.com/iom-over-40-000-migrants-voluntarily-returned-home-from-libya-since-2
    #retours_volontaires (sic) #retour_volontaire #retour_au_pays #Libye #asile #migrations #réfugiés #OIM #IOM #organisation_contre_la_migration #statistiques #chiffres #machine_à_rapatriement #rapatriement #nouvelair

    j’ajoute à cette métaliste :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/731749

  • In cooperation with @IOM_Libya 8 stranded Eritrean #migrants returned safely home today via #Mitiga Int. Airport
    #Libya 17.02.19


    https://twitter.com/rgowans/status/1097176169978515456

    L’#OIM n’arrêtera jamais de me surprendre... Mais alors là... L’OIM mérite vraiment qu’on lui change son nom... Organisation Internationale CONTRE la migration !

    8 ressortissants érythréens retournés EN SECURITE au pays... soit donc en Erythrée !

    Et petit détail important...
    Dans ce tweet on parle de #migrants_érythréens... si il s’agit de migrants et non pas de réfugiés... leur retour VOLONTAIRE n’est pas considéré comme un #refoulement (#push-back)
    #mots #terminologie #vocabulaire

    #retour_au_pays #IOM #Erythrée #réfugiés_érythréens #Organisation_Internationale_contre_la_migration #asile #migrations #réfugiés #Libye #retour_volontaire #à_vomir

    @_kg_ : il y a aussi utilisation de ce terme dans le tweet, #stranded_migrants...

  • « Je suis devenu fou, je veux retourner au bled » : les migrants qui optent pour un #retour_volontaire

    L’aide au retour volontaire a concerné en 2018 plus de 10 000 personnes, dont beaucoup d’Afghans.

    Il a les yeux rouge vif. A plusieurs reprises, il demande s’il pourra aller aux toilettes après l’enregistrement. Dans un hall de l’aéroport Roissy-Charles-de-Gaulle, Noorislam Oriakhail vit ses derniers moments en France, fébrile. Il prend l’avion pour la première fois de sa vie. Au bout du voyage : l’Afghanistan. Comme 1 055 Afghans en 2018, des hommes majoritairement, Noorislam a choisi de rentrer. Ils étaient déjà 970 à avoir opté pour un « retour volontaire » depuis la France en 2017. Volet peu connu de la politique d’éloignement des étrangers en situation irrégulière, l’aide au retour volontaire a concerné cette année plus de 10 000 personnes au total, un chiffre en hausse de 58 % sur un an.

    Après les Albanais et devant les Moldaves, les Afghans sont les plus concernés par ce dispositif mis en œuvre par l’Office français de l’immigration et de l’intégration (OFII). Une situation qui s’explique : ils sont les premiers demandeurs d’asile en 2018. En outre, précise Didier Leschi, le directeur général de l’OFII, « lorsqu’ils arrivent en France, ils ont déjà déposé en moyenne près de deux demandes d’asile en Europe, principalement en Allemagne et en Suède, où elle a été rejetée ». Ils entrent donc dans la catégorie dite des « Dublinés », ne peuvent pas demander l’asile en France avant un délai de six à dix-huit mois. Dans l’intervalle, ils sont en situation irrégulière.

    L’OFII assume une politique volontariste à leur endroit : « Nous les démarchons pour leur proposer l’aide au retour, d’autant que les retours forcés sont très difficiles », reconnaît Didier Leschi. Au premier semestre, avec 23 éloignements, le taux d’exécution des obligations de quitter le territoire français prononcées à l’encontre des Afghans atteignait 4 %. En plus d’être moins onéreux qu’un éloignement forcé, les retours volontaires ont beaucoup plus de succès.

    « Trop de pression »

    Noorislam est « fatigué » de ne pas parvenir à s’extirper d’une situation précaire. D’un voyage entamé en 2006 et financé par son père et un oncle, il est arrivé « jeune et fort » sur le continent, avec l’Angleterre en ligne de mire. « C’était un rêve, reconnaît-il. J’ai essayé cinq ou six fois avant de réussir à monter dans un camion. » Outre-Manche, il est pris en charge en tant que mineur. Mais, à sa majorité, sa demande d’asile est rejetée et il devient « illégal ».

    Dans la ville de Loughborough (centre de l’Angleterre), Noorislam s’enfonce, affaibli par des soucis de santé. Le petit sac à dos qui lui fait office d’unique bagage après plus d’une décennie en Europe est « rempli de médicaments ». Le jeune homme souffre d’une dystrophie de la rétine – une maladie génétique caractérisée par un déficit visuel très important – et, depuis un an et demi, il explique avoir des problèmes d’incontinence. « Les médecins disent que c’est dans ma tête, assure-t-il, en montrant sa boîte d’antidépresseurs. Si je n’avais pas été malade, j’aurais pu m’en sortir mais, vu ma situation, je lutte pour tout. »

    « Si je n’avais pas été malade, j’aurais pu m’en sortir mais, vu ma situation, je lutte pour tout », témoigne Noorislam Oriakhail avant de monter dans l’avion

    Avec le sentiment d’avoir « perdu [son] temps », Noorislam s’est glissé dans un camion en janvier pour faire le chemin inverse de celui réussi il y a dix ans. Arrivé à Calais, après une nuit dans « le froid et la pluie », il croise des agents de l’OFII. Il est hébergé et on l’informe sur l’asile et le retour volontaire. « J’avais deux semaines pour choisir ou je devais quitter le centre », se souvient-il. Après des atermoiements, Noorislam s’oriente vers l’asile. Mais il est « dubliné », ce qui signifie qu’il risque d’être transféré vers l’Angleterre ou, à défaut, d’errer plusieurs mois avant de pouvoir déposer une demande en France. Il jette l’éponge. « C’est trop de pression », confie-t-il. Le jeune homme rentre en Afghanistan mais, en réalité, il ne doit pas s’y attarder. Sa famille s’est installée au Pakistan alors qu’il était enfant. « Mon père m’a dit qu’il m’aiderait à passer la frontière. »

    Le jour où Noorislam a embarqué, un autre Afghan devait prendre l’avion, mais il ne s’est jamais présenté. En 2018, quelque 1 500 personnes se sont ainsi désistées après avoir demandé une aide au retour. « Ce sont des gens qui peuvent être instables psychologiquement, justifie Didier Leschi. Il y a quelques semaines, un Pakistanais a fait une crise d’angoisse et a dû être débarqué avant le décollage. Depuis, il veut repartir. »

    Qu’est-ce qui motive un retour au pays ? « On ne connaît pas le parcours de ces gens », reconnaît Nadira Khemliche, adjointe au chef du service voyagiste de l’OFII, qui accompagne les candidats au départ à Roissy ou à Orly, jusqu’à leur embarquement sur des vols commerciaux. Nadira Khemliche ne distingue que des profils, les Arméniens qui voyagent en famille, les Chinois qui ont des vols tous les jours, les Ethiopiens qu’elle ne croise que deux ou trois fois l’an… « Parfois, on se demande pourquoi ils veulent rentrer en sachant qu’il y a des bombes chez eux, confie-t-elle. Mais bon, ici, ils n’ont rien. » « Quel est le choix réel de ces gens ?, s’interroge Clémence Richard, en charge des questions « expulsions » à la Cimade. Ils sont à la rue, épuisés socialement, précarisés administrativement. »

    Candidatures marginales

    Pour promouvoir le retour volontaire, l’OFII se déplace sur des campements, dans des centres d’hébergement du 115 ou des centres de demandeurs d’asile dans lesquels s’éternisent des déboutés. L’office tient même des stands dans des salons « diasporiques ». Le retour volontaire donne droit à un billet d’avion et à un « pécule » dont le montant varie. Les Afghans ont actuellement droit à 1 650 euros. Un programme européen permet aussi de financer un projet de réinsertion à hauteur de 3 500 euros.

    Sur un pan de mur de son bureau, à Calais, Laura Defachel, agent du retour volontaire et de la réinsertion de l’OFII, a accroché des photos d’hommes devant des troupeaux de bêtes, dans les montagnes afghanes. « Beaucoup ont saisi l’opportunité pour se lancer dans l’élevage, ouvrir une épicerie ou un magasin de pièces détachées, devenir taxi, assure-t-elle. C’est déterminant pour ceux qui sont partis de leur pays avec la promesse de faire mieux. » Depuis deux mois, toutefois, ce programme a été suspendu, dans l’attente d’un renouvellement. En 2016, l’année du démantèlement de la « jungle », le bureau de Calais a monté plus de 500 dossiers de départs volontaires, les trois quarts en direction de l’Afghanistan et du Pakistan.

    Les candidats au départ restent toutefois marginaux. « Ce sont surtout les personnes épuisées qui ne souhaitent pas demander l’asile en France ou des personnes qui rentrent pour des raisons familiales », analyse Laura Defachel. Elle se souvient de cet homme qui a souhaité partir après la mort de son frère, qui avait fait le voyage avec lui. Il était monté à bord d’un camion et, réalisant qu’il ne prenait pas la direction de l’Angleterre, est descendu en marche. Il s’est tué sur l’autoroute.

    Warseem Mohamad Kareem rentre dans la première catégorie. « C’est Londres ou l’Afghanistan », résume-t-il. Alors qu’il s’apprête à embarquer pour un vol retour, le jeune homme de 27 ans dit avoir dépensé 11 000 dollars (9 645 euros) pour rejoindre l’Europe. Arrivé en France il y a trois mois, il s’est retrouvé dans un cul-de-sac, à Calais et à Grande-Synthe, dans des tentes ou sous un pont. Avec des passeurs afghans ou kurdes, il a tenté vingt ou trente fois de monter dans des camions pour l’Angleterre. A chaque fois, il a été attrapé par la police.

    Le froid, la pluie, la police qui le chasse tous les matins, l’échec ont finalement eu raison de sa détermination. Lors du dernier démantèlement de Grande-Synthe, il a croisé les maraudeurs de l’OFII. « Nous avons faim de paix, pas d’argent », dit-il à l’agent qui lui remet, dans la salle d’embarquement, une enveloppe de billets. Warseem ne s’interdit pas de revenir, un jour. Il semble ignorer qu’il fait l’objet d’une obligation de quitter le territoire et d’une interdiction de retour pendant un an. Une pratique que toutes les préfectures ne mettent pas en œuvre, mais que l’OFII souhaite développer pour éviter les désistements et les retours. Des méthodes « déloyales », dénonce Clémence Richard : « Cela supprime de fait le droit au désistement. En outre, ces personnes ne rentrent pas dans les catégories de la loi susceptibles de se voir prononcer une interdiction de retour, c’est illégal et ça a aussi des conséquences graves, car cela rend quasi impossible toute demande de visa ultérieure. »

    A court d’argent et d’aide

    En matière de départ volontaire, la contrainte affleure. A partir du 1er janvier 2019, dans le cadre de la loi asile et immigration votée en 2018, les agents de l’OFII iront promouvoir l’aide au retour dans les centres de rétention administrative. Partir de gré, pour ne pas risquer de partir de force. C’est peut-être le dilemme qui aurait fini par se poser à Noorullah Nori. Débouté de l’asile en Allemagne, puis en France, à court d’argent et d’aide, il a signé pour un retour en Afghanistan, après quatre ans en Europe.

    « Moi aussi l’OFII m’a proposé le retour, mais jamais je ne rentrerai », jure Karimi, un Afghan qui a accompagné Noorullah à l’aéroport, après l’avoir recueilli tandis qu’il dormait à la rue. Passé par les errances d’un « Dubliné », Karimi est désormais réfugié en France. A voix basse, il dit à propos de son compatriote : « Il a des problèmes psychologiques. Il est resté longtemps sans parler à personne, avec des pensées négatives. » Il n’est pas le seul, dans le hall de Roissy, à sembler accuser le coup. Un autre Afghan a été déposé à l’aéroport par des infirmiers hospitaliers, prenant de court les agents de l’OFII qui n’avaient pas été informés et ont dû se procurer un fauteuil roulant tandis que l’homme, apathique, laissait son regard se perdre dans le vide, immobile.

    Un Soudanais s’apprête aussi à embarquer. Son air triste intrigue deux Afghans qui veulent savoir ce qui l’accable. Salah Mohamed Yaya a 19 ans. Il dit que depuis des mois il n’a plus de traitement contre le VIH. Cela fait deux ans qu’il est en France, passé par Toulouse, Paris, Nantes, les foyers pour mineurs, la rue, l’hôpital. « Je suis devenu fou, dit-il. Je veux retourner au bled. » Salah n’a pas fait de demande d’asile, sans que l’on sache s’il a vraiment été informé qu’il pouvait le faire. La veille de son départ, il a dormi porte de Villette. Il sent encore le feu de bois.

    https://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2018/12/31/je-suis-devenu-fou-je-veux-retourner-au-bled_5403872_3224.html

    #retour_au_pays #réfugiés_afghans #France #Afghanistan #asile #migrations #réfugiés

  • Proportion of migrants who return to country of birth significantly higher than first thought, study suggests

    Mexico-to-US route sees largest flow in past five years, but also biggest rate of return as study suggests 45 per cent of immigrants eventually return home.

    The new method, published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, found that the higher level of migration can be explained by increases in return migration – back to a person’s country of birth – which was much higher than previously thought.

    Approximately 45 per cent of migrants returned to their home country in the studied period from 1990 to 2015. This appears to be particularly relevant for those displaced by conflict.

    “We estimate a rate of return migration that is significantly higher than other methods, but it is also supported by history,” Professor Raftery said.

    “For example, during the Rwandan genocide in 1994, more than a million migrants left the country, but most returned within three years after the conflict ended.”

    Mass migration is still mainly being driven by major world conflicts and events, the study suggests. The civil war in Syria accounted for two of the top three emigration drivers between 2010 and 2015 in the study with flows from Syria to Turkey and from Syria to Lebanon accounting for 1.5 million people and 1.2 million people respectively.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/migration-refugee-syria-conflict-europe-mexico-conflict-study-a869845
    #statistiques #chiffres #retour_au_pays #solde_migratoire #migrations #émigration #immigration

    Sur la situation entre #Mexique et #Etats-Unis:

    It suggests that emigration from Mexico to the United States was the biggest flow between 2010 and 2015, accounting for 2.1 million people. However the US to Mexico also had the highest rate of return migration, accounting for 1.3 million people – four times the rate of return from the United Arab Emirates to India.

    #USA

    ping @simplicissimus @reka

    • L’article scientifique cité dans l’article de l’Independent :

      Estimation of emigration, return migration, and transit migration between all pairs of countries

      Despite the importance of international migration, estimates of between-country migration flows are still imprecise. Reliable record keeping of migration events is typically available only in the developed world, and the best existing methods to produce global migration flow estimates are burdened by strong assumptions. We produce estimates of migration flows between all pairs of countries at 5-year intervals, revealing patterns obscured by previous estimation methods. In particular, our estimates reveal large bidirectional movements in all global regions, with roughly one-quarter of migration events consisting of returns to an individual’s country of birth.

      https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/12/18/1722334116

  • #ILO Global Estimates on International Migrant Workers – Results and Methodology

    If the right policies are in place, labour migration can help countries respond to shifts in labour supply and demand, stimulate innovation and sustainable development, and transfer and update skills. However, a lack of international standards regarding concepts, definitions and methodologies for measuring labour migration data still needs to be addressed.

    This report gives global and regional estimates, broken down by income group, gender and age. It also describes the data, sources and methodology used, as well as the corresponding limitations.

    The report seeks to contribute to the 2018 Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration and to achieving SDG targets 8.8 and 10.7.


    https://www.ilo.org/global/publications/books/WCMS_652001/lang--en/index.htm

    Le résumé:


    https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---dcomm/---publ/documents/publication/wcms_652029.pdf

    #OIT #statistiques #chiffres #monde #genre #âge #2017 #migrations #travailleurs_migrants #travail #femmes

    • Global migrant numbers up 20 percent

      Migrants of working age make up 4.2 percent of the global population, and the number is growing. A UN report notes how poorer countries are increasingly supplying labor to richer ones to their own detriment.

      There are 277 million international migrants, 234 million migrants of working age (15 and older) and 164 million migrant workers worldwide, according to a UN report.

      Figures for 2017 from the United Nations’ Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN/DESA) published on Wednesday show that migrants of working age make up 4.2 percent of the global population aged 15 and older, while migrant workers constitute 4.7 percent of all workers.

      The numbers rose by almost 20 percent between 2013 and 2017 for international migrants, 13 percent for migrants of working age and 9 percent for migrant workers.

      Distribution

      Of the 164 million migrant workers worldwide, 111.2 million (67.9 percent) are employed in high-income countries, 30.5 million (18.6 percent) in upper middle-income countries, 16.6 million (10.1 percent) in lower middle- income countries and 5.6 million (3.4 percent) in low-income countries.

      From 2013 to 2017, the concentration of migrant workers in high-income countries fell from 74.7 to 67.9 percent, while their share in upper middle-income countries increased, suggesting a shift in the number of migrant workers from high-income to lower-income countries.

      The report noted that this growing number could be attributed to the economic development of some lower-income nations, particularly if these countries are in close proximity to migrant origin countries with close social networks.

      The share of migrant workers in the labor force of destination countries has increased in all income groups except for lower middle-income countries.

      In high-income countries, falling numbers of migrant workers were observed simultaneously with a higher share in the labor force as a result of the sharp fall in the labor force participation of non-migrants, due to a variety of factors such as changes in demographics, technology and immigration policies.

      “Stricter migration policies in high-income countries and stronger economic growth among upper middle-income countries may also contribute to the trends observed,” the report noted.

      Geography

      Some 60.8 percent of all migrant workers are found in three subregions: Northern America (23.0 percent), Northern, Southern and Western Europe (23.9 percent) and Arab States (13.9 percent). The lowest number of migrant workers is hosted by Northern Africa (less than 1 percent).

      The subregion with the largest share of migrant workers as a proportion of all workers is Arab States (40.8 percent), followed by Northern America (20.6 percent) and Northern, Southern and Western Europe (17.8 percent).

      In nine out of 11 subregions, the labor force participation rate of migrants is higher than that of non-migrants. The largest difference is in the Arab States, where the labor force participation rate of migrants (75.4 percent) is substantially higher than that of non-migrants (42.2 percent).

      Gender

      Among migrant workers, 96 million are men and 68 million are women. In 2017, the stock of male migrant workers was estimated to be 95.7 million, while the corresponding estimate for female migrant workers was 68.1 million.

      “The higher proportion of men among migrant workers may also be explained by...the higher likelihood of women to migrate for reasons other than employment (for instance, for family reunification), as well as by possible discrimination against women that reduces their employment opportunities in destination countries,” the report noted.

      It added that societal stigmatization, the discriminatory impacts of policies and legislation and violence and harassment undermine women’s access to decent work and can result in low pay, the absence of equal pay and the undervaluation of female-dominated sectors.

      Age

      Prime-age adults (ages 25-64) constitute nearly 87 percent of migrant workers. Youth workers (aged 15-24) and older workers (aged 65 plus) constitute 8.3 percent and 5.2 percent, respectively, of migrant workers. This age composition holds for male and female migrant workers alike.

      “The fact that the overwhelming majority of migrant workers consist of prime-age adults suggests that some countries of origin are losing the most productive part of their workforce, which could have a negative impact on their economic growth,” the report noted, but it added that emigration of prime-age individuals may also provide a source of remittances for countries of origin.

      Destination countries, meanwhile, benefit from receiving prime-age workers as they are increasingly faced with demographic pressures.

      Labor shortage in Germany

      Germany’s BDI industry association said skilled labor from abroad was key to Germany’s future economic success. “The integration of skilled workers from other countries contributes significantly to growth and jobs,” BDI President Dieter Kempf said.

      The country’s VDE association of electrical, electronic and IT engineering was the latest group in Germany to point to the growing need for foreign experts. Emphasizing that Germany itself was training too few engineers, VDE said there would be a shortage of 100,000 electrical engineers over the next 10 years.

      “We will strive to increase the number of engineers by means of migration,” VDE President Gunther Kegel noted.

      https://www.dw.com/en/global-migrant-numbers-up-20-percent/a-46596757

    • Al menos uno de cada cuatro movimientos migratorios son retornos a los países de origen

      Un estudio estima que entre el 26% y el 31% de los flujos de migración mundiales consisten en regresos a los lugares de partida. En los últimos 25 años apenas ha habido cambios en la proporción de población migrante mundial

      https://ctxt.es/es/20181226/Firmas/23708/ctxt-Observatorio-Social-La-Caixa-migracion.htm
      #retour_au_pays
      source: https://www.pnas.org/content/116/1/116

    • GLOBAL MIGRATION INDICATORS

      Préparé par le Centre mondial d’analyse des données sur la migration (CMADM) de l’OIM, le rapport 2018 sur les indicateurs de la migration dans le monde résume les principales tendances mondiales en fonction des dernières statistiques, présentant 21 indicateurs dans 17 domaines relatifs à la migration.

      Le rapport s’appuie sur des statistiques provenant de sources diverses facilement accessibles sur le Global Migration Data Portal.

      Le rapport regroupe les statistiques les plus récentes dans des domaines comme la migration de main-d’œuvre, les réfugiés, les étudiants internationaux, les envois de fonds, le trafic illicite de migrants, la gouvernance des migrations et bien d’autres, permettant aux responsables politiques et au grand public d’avoir un aperçu de l’ampleur et des dynamiques de la migration à travers le monde.

      Par ailleurs, le rapport est le premier à faire le lien entre le programme mondial de gouvernance des migrations et les débats sur les données migratoires. Les thèmes choisis sont particulièrement pertinents pour le Pacte mondial pour des migrations sûres, ordonnées et régulières et pour les Objectifs de développement durable (ODD). Le rapport fait un état des lieux des données sur chaque thème et propose des solutions pour les améliorer.

      « Bien que le Pacte mondial sur la migration et les ODD soient des cadres importants pour améliorer la façon dont nous gérons les migrations, des données plus précises et fiables sur les sujets relatifs à la migration sont nécessaires pour tirer parti de cette opportunité. Ce rapport donne un aperçu global de ce que nous savons et ne savons pas sur les tendances de la migration dans le monde », a déclaré Frank Laczko, Directeur du CMADM. 

      « La communauté internationale prend des mesures pour renforcer la collecte et la gestion des données sur la migration mais il reste beaucoup à faire. Une base de données solide est essentielle pour éclairer les politiques nationales sur la migration et seront plus que jamais nécessaires à la lumière du Pacte mondial pour des migrations sûres, ordonnées et régulières », a déclaré Antonio Vitorino, le nouveau Directeur général de l’Organisation internationale pour les migrations.

      https://www.iom.int/fr/news/loim-publie-un-rapport-sur-les-indicateurs-de-la-migration-dans-le-monde-2018

      –---------
      Pour télécharger le rapport :

      https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/global_migration_indicators_2018.pdf

      Quelques éléments-clé :


      #indicateurs #femmes #travailleurs_étrangers #étudiants #réfugiés #migrations_forcées #étudiants_étrangers #remittances #trafic_d'êtres_humains #mourir_aux_frontières #esclavage_moderne #exploitation #smuggling #smugglers #passeurs #retours_volontaires #retour_volontaire #renvois #expulsions #IOM #OIM #économie #PIB #femmes #migrations_environnementales #réfugiés_environnementaux #catastrophes_naturelles #attitude #attitude_envers_les_migrants #opinion_publique #environnement

  • #métaliste (qui va être un grand chantier, car il y a plein d’information sur seenthis, qu’il faudrait réorganiser) sur :
    #externalisation #contrôles_frontaliers #frontières #migrations #réfugiés

    Des liens vers des articles généraux sur l’externalisation des frontières de la part de l’ #UE (#EU) :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/569305
    https://seenthis.net/messages/390549
    https://seenthis.net/messages/320101

    Ici une tentative (très mal réussie, car évidement, la divergence entre pratiques et les discours à un moment donné, ça se voit !) de l’UE de faire une brochure pour déconstruire les mythes autour de la migration...
    La question de l’externalisation y est abordée dans différentes parties de la brochure :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/765967

    Petit chapitre/encadré sur l’externalisation des frontières dans l’ouvrage "(Dé)passer la frontière" :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/769367

    Les origines de l’externalisation des contrôles frontaliers (maritimes) : accord #USA-#Haïti de #1981 :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/768694

    L’externalisation des politiques européennes en matière de migration
    https://seenthis.net/messages/787450

    "#Sous-traitance" de la #politique_migratoire en Afrique : l’Europe a-t-elle les mains propres ?
    https://seenthis.net/messages/789048

    Partners in crime ? The impacts of Europe’s outsourced migration controls on peace, stability and rights :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/794636
    #paix #stabilité #droits #Libye #Niger #Turquie

    Proceedings of the conference “Externalisation of borders : detention practices and denial of the right to asylum”
    https://seenthis.net/messages/880193

    Brochure sur l’externalisation des frontières (passamontagna)
    https://seenthis.net/messages/952016

  • Après des décennies au Pakistan, des réfugiés afghans se préparent au retour en Afghanistan

    Le Pakistan cherche à rapatrier vers l’Afghanistan des réfugiés afghans parmi 1,6 million au total qui vivent dans le pays. Le HCR a réservé des fonds pour le rapatriement de 60 000 réfugiés.

    Des familles sont installées, silencieuses. De jeunes enfants se promènent entre les chaises. Ils vont rentrer chez eux en Afghanistan, alors que certains d’entre eux vivent au Pakistan depuis plusieurs décennies. Et ils rentreront chez eux à titre définitif.

    Ce sont des réfugiés afghans et la scène se déroule au Centre de rapatriement volontaire de Peshawar, qui est géré par le HCR, l’Agence des Nations Unies pour les réfugiés.

    Payenda Bibi Shahnaz est installée dans un fauteuil roulant. Son mari Shamamud dans un autre. Cela fait 33 ans qu’ils ont trouvé refuge au Pakistan, mais ils rentrent également en Afghanistan avec leurs deux fils qui s’occuperont d’eux.

    Le HCR les aidera également une fois qu’ils seront rentrés au pays.

    « Je n’ai simplement pas les moyens de payer le coût de mon traitement médical ici », explique-t-elle. « Nous n’avons pas le choix. »

    Le Haut Commissaire des Nations Unies pour les réfugiés Filippo Grandi a eu l’occasion de faire leur connaissance aujourd’hui pendant sa visite au Centre et il leur a souhaité bonne chance. Le HCR apporte également une aide de 200 dollars aux rapatriés destinée à couvrir leurs dépenses initiales de voyage et de logement.

    Le gouvernement du Pakistan met en oeuvre une politique concertée de rapatriement pour beaucoup parmi presque un million de réfugiés qui vivent dans la région de Peshawar. Le HCR a réservé des fonds pour le rapatriement de 60 000 réfugiés.

    Mais depuis le début de l’année, le nombre de réfugiés qui a passé la frontière de manière définitive dépasse tout juste 6000 personnes.

    Pour nombre d’entre eux, le moment de rendre leur carte de réfugié au Pakistan est chargé d’émotions. Les élèves sont souvent en larmes, car ils se disent qu’ils ne reverront jamais leurs amis.

    La pression économique est ce qui les pousse le plus au retour.

    Qudsia a 40 ans et elle a quatre enfants. Elle était elle-même un enfant quand elle est arrivée au Pakistan. Et aujourd’hui son mari et elle ont décidé de rentrer.

    « Nous avons décidé de rentrer, parce que c’est très cher ici. Nous avons beaucoup de problèmes. Mon mari est diabétique et on ne trouve pas de travail ici. »

    Mais ils sont bien plus nombreux à décider de rester. Au cours de la ‘shura’, la réunion de la communauté, ils ont expliqué à Filippo Grandi qu’ils restent au Pakistan à cause des opportunités que le pays offre sur le plan de l’éducation et de l’économie. Ils ont également évoqué leur crainte de la violence qui règne dans leur pays. Quelque 31 des 34 provinces que compte l’Afghanistan ont été le théâtre de conflits ces derniers mois.

    La carte PoR (Proof of Registration) de Preuve d’enregistrement au Pakistan est également cause de souci majeur. Toutes ces cartes arrivent à échéance le 30 juin. Sans ces cartes, les réfugiés sont passibles d’arrestation, voire même d’expulsion. Filippo Grandi a confirmé qu’il avait instamment demandé au Pakistan de proroger la validité des cartes. La décision sera prise par l’exécutif du Pakistan.

    Filippo Grandi a expliqué aux réfugiés qu’il comprenait leurs craintes et leurs inquiétudes par rapport au fait que 200 dollars ne suffisent pas à se réinstaller dans un pays peu sûr.

    « J’ai entendu les participants de la Shura », a-t-il déclaré. « Nous allons très bientôt augmenter l’indemnité de rapatriement. Nous allons œuvrer pour améliorer les conditions de retour des rapatriés. J’en ai parlé avec les dirigeants du gouvernement afghan. »

    Il a parlé de sa rencontre avec le Président afghan Ashraf Ghani. Le Président lui a confirmé qu’il a demandé un inventaire des terrains disponibles appartenant au gouvernement. Il s’agirait de mettre en place un programme de réinstallation des réfugiés similaire au programme pilote de Hérat en faveur des personnes déplacées à l’intérieur du pays.

    Comme pour les personnes déplacées à Hérat, il s’agirait d’attribuer aux réfugiés des terrains à bâtir. L’eau et l’électricité seraient fournies.

    Filippo Grandi a aussi abordé les préoccupations des réfugiés qui craignent de servir de boucs émissaires après des attaques ou des incidents violents le long de la frontière pakistano-afghane.

    « J’ai bien entendu ce que vous dites. Les réfugiés ne sont pas des terroristes. Je suis tout à fait d’accord. »

    Il a déclaré qu’en s’adressant aux dirigeants du gouvernement du Pakistan, il avait souligné qu’on ne pouvait mettre en cause ou pénaliser toute la population de réfugiés quand de tels événements se produisaient.


    http://www.unhcr.org/fr/news/stories/2016/6/576d401ea/apres-decennies-pakistan-refugies-afghans-preparent-retour-afghanistan.html

    #Pakistan #réfugiés_afghans #Afghanistan #réfugiés #asile #migrations #retour_au_pays

    • Amid Mass Returns, a Teacher’s Hopes for Refugee Girls in Afghanistan

      As hundreds of thousands of Afghan refugees return from Pakistan, we speak to Aqeela Asifi, a prize-winning educator of refugee girls in the country’s Punjab province, about how the mass returns will impact girls’ education and thus the future of Afghanistan.

      https://www.newsdeeply.com/refugees/community/2017/03/09/amid-mass-returns-a-teachers-hopes-for-refugee-girls-in-afghanistan
      #filles #femmes #éducation

    • Facing problems in Pakistan, Afghans return home in droves

      For years, Afghans have fled the violence in their country, seeking asylum in Europe or elsewhere in the Middle East. But over the past year, about 600,000 Afghans have crossed the border back into Afghanistan, coming from Pakistan, Iran and Europe when they are denied asylum.

      http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/facing-problems-pakistan-afghans-return-home-droves

    • Afghans Returned from Pakistan Struggle on Kabul Career Ladder

      As hundreds of thousands of Afghans return from neighboring countries, young graduates face discrimination, language barriers and a dearth of connections in a country many had never been to before, Valerie Plesch reports for Al-Fanar Media.


      https://www.newsdeeply.com/refugees/articles/2017/12/11/afghans-returned-from-pakistan-struggle-on-kabul-career-ladder

    • Viaggio tra i rifugiati afghani respinti dal Pakistan

      Fin dagli anni ‘70 gli afghani fuggiti dal proprio paese hanno cercato rifugio in Pakistan. Tuttavia la loro situazione negli ultimi anni è diventata critica. Utilizzati per esercitare pressioni politiche su Kabul, subiscono continue pressione per far ritorno nel loro paese. A queste poi si sono aggiunte minacce e violenze crescenti. Una strategia che ha funzionato, come ci racconta Giuliano Battiston: migliaia sono i rifugiati tornati nel loro paese dove all’assenza di casa e lavoro fa da contraltare la presenza della guerra

      «A Peshawar avevo una mia bottega. Era piccola, ma andava bene. Vendevo zucchero, sale, olio, sapone. Non potevo lamentarmi. Ora eccomi qui, vendo meloni e angurie che compro da altri. Lo faccio da pochi giorni e non so per quanto ancora. Ma non mi basta per mandare avanti la famiglia».

      Rabihullah ha 45 anni e 12 figli. Nato in Afghanistan, fuggito dalla guerra, ha trascorso gran parte della vita in Pakistan, ma pochi mesi fa è stato costretto a tornare. Lo incontriamo all’inizio di una via sterrata che si dipana verso i campi coltivati, all’incrocio con la strada principale che conduce fuori città dal centro di Jalalabad, capoluogo di Nangarhar, provincia orientale al confine con il Pakistan. Seduto sulla paglia, alle spalle decine e decine di meloni profumati, in testa uno zuccotto chiaro, Rabihullah indossa un semplice vestito bianco, rattoppato qua e là. «Sono nato nel distretto di Bati Kut, qui nel Nangarhar. Ci siamo trasferiti in Pakistan quando ero adolescente. Di preciso non saprei quando. Ricordo che il mio primo digiuno per il Ramadan l’ho fatto lì. Non stavamo male a Peshawar. Ma 3 mesi fa siamo dovuti tornare. I poliziotti pachistani prima hanno cominciato a chiederci i documenti, poi a picchiarci. Ci attaccavano perfino di notte. Entravano nelle nostre case all’una, alle due del mattino. Ci dicevano di andar via. Nel nostro quartiere, che era come un villaggio, eravamo tutti afghani. Ci attaccavano per questo».

      La storia di Rabihullah è simile a quella di decine di migliaia di connazionali, costretti a rientrare in Afghanistan a causa delle politiche repressive del governo di Islamabad. Già nel 2015, Human Rights Watch denunciava «minacce ripetute, arresti frequenti, richieste regolari di mazzette, violenze occasionali da parte della polizia pachistana nei mesi successivi all’attacco alla scuola di Peshawar», l’attentato terroristico che il 16 dicembre 2014 ha provocato la morte di 145 persone, tra cui 134 bambini.

      Anche se l’attentato è stato rivendicato dai Talebani pachistani, per le autorità i responsabili andavano cercati all’interno dell’ampia comunità di rifugiati afghani che, sin dalla fine degli anni Settanta, hanno trovato protezione dalla guerra sull’altro lato della Durand Line, in Pakistan. Quei rifugiati erano parte della più ampia diaspora che ha reso l’Afghanistan per molti anni, fino allo scoppio della guerra siriana, il primo Paese al mondo di provenienza per numero di rifugiati. Una diaspora ancora oggi numerosa.

      Secondo i dati dell’ultimo rapporto dell’Alto Commissariato dell’Onu per i rifugiati (Unhcr), Global Trends. Forced Displacement in 2017, nel mondo ci sono 2,6 milioni di rifugiati afghani, il 5% in più rispetto all’anno precedente. L’Afghanistan è il secondo paese di provenienza dei rifugiati dopo la Siria (6,3 milioni). La maggior parte vive in Pakistan (poco meno di 1,4 milioni) e in Iran (poco meno di 1 milione), ma i due Paesi ospitano anche un gran numero di emigrati privi di documenti, non registrati dalle Nazioni Unite (circa 1 milione in Pakistan, 1 milione e mezzo in Iran). «Nel corso degli ultimi 40 anni, dall’inizio della guerra in Afghanistan nel 1978, l’Iran e il Pakistan hanno ospitato il più alto numero di rifugiati afghani», ricorda la ricercatrice Jelena Bjelica, che incontriamo nell’ufficio di Kabul dell’Afghanistan Analysts Network, il più accreditato centro di ricerca del Paese.

      Molti sono tornati. Dal 2001, dal Pakistan sono rientrati ben 3,9 milioni di rifugiati afghani. Quanti non lo hanno fatto sono diventati armi diplomatiche nelle mani del governo di Islamabad, il cui establishment militare è accusato di alimentare il conflitto per ragioni strategiche. «I rifugiati vengono usati per esercitare pressioni politiche su Kabul. La prassi di non estendere la validità dei documenti di registrazione è uno degli strumenti più comuni», nota Jelena Bjelica.

      «Nel 2016 e in parte nel 2017, le autorità pachistane hanno esercitato molte pressioni sugli afghani affinché tornassero indietro» conferma il ricercatore indipendente Wali Mohammad Kandiwal, autore di diverse pubblicazioni sui processi migratori, che incontriamo a Jalalabad. Alle pressioni si sono aggiunte minacce e violenze crescenti, come testimoniato nel 2017 da un altro rapporto di Human Rights Watch. La strategia ha funzionato. Lo certificano i numeri. Tra gennaio 2016 e dicembre 2017, almeno 1,2 milioni di afghani sono rientrati dall’Iran e dal Pakistan. Nel 2017, 460.000 afghani senza documenti sono rientrati o sono stati deportati dall’Iran, 100.000 dal Pakistan e 7.000 da Paesi europei, a cui vanno aggiunti almeno altri 60.000 rifugiati registrati, tornati dal Pakistan. «Il loro è stato un vero dilemma: rimanere o tornare? Entrambe le opzioni erano rischiose. Chi è tornato, spesso non è convinto di aver fatto la scelta giusta», aggiunge Kandiwal.

      Anche Rabihullah non ne è certo. «Il lavoro non c’è, la casa costa troppo, non parliamo della sicurezza: qui si combatte dovunque», spiega sconfortato mentre ci guida lungo i viottoli del quartiere in cui vive, nella periferia di Jalalabad. Dietro un cancello di metallo c’è casa sua. Un atrio di pochi metri quadrati, delimitato da alte mura. Sulla destra, un ripiano di legno con una bombola del gas e qualche stoviglia: «è la cucina». Appena sopra, un filo con dei panni stesi. Una porta blu spicca contro il marrone delle pareti di fango. «Come vedi, la casa è fatta di un’unica stanza». C’è un’unica finestra e, di fronte all’entrata, un letto di corde intrecciate con la base in legno, tipico di queste parti. Una scala in bambù raggiunge il tetto della stanza, dove sono stesi altri panni. «È tutto qui», dice guardandosi intorno e lamentando la scarsa assistenza del governo, inefficiente e corrotto. «Le risorse ci sono, ma vengono dirottate su progetti privati, sottratte, rubate», ci dice un funzionario della sede locale dell’Organizzazione internazionale per le migrazioni (Oim), che chiede l’anonimato.

      Non si tratta soltanto di denaro. La risorsa più importante, qui, è la casa. Meglio ancora, la terra. Secondo il «Policy Framework on IDPs and Returnees» del governo, «l’assegnazione della terra sarà un contributo fondamentale nel successo di soluzione durature» per i rifugiati. Ma la realtà è diversa. «Il piano governativo è molto ambizioso, e i politici non fanno mai mancare promesse elettorali su questo tema. Ma l’assegnazione delle terre è uno dei processi più corrotti che ci siano», nota Jelena Bjelica, che sull’argomento ha scritto un articolo molto informato.

      Lo conferma Wali Mohammad Kandiwal, che ci anticipa i risultati della sua ultima ricerca, promossa dal Feinstein International Center dell’Università statunitense di Tufts. Si intitola «Homeland, but no land for home. A Case Study of Refugees in Towns: Jalalabad» e l’autore la sintetizza così: «la terra è il problema principale soprattutto qui, nella provincia di Nangarhar. Il governo punta a far tornare gli emigrati, ma non riesce a soddisfarne i bisogni e le legittime richieste. La burocrazia e soprattutto la corruzione sull’assegnazione delle terre rendono l’intero sistema dell’accoglienza del tutto fallimentare».

      Alla corruzione e all’inefficienza del governo si sommano altri ostacoli. Il primo è il costo della terra, il bene più ambito. Secondo i dati riportati dallo Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (Sigar), l’organo di controllo che riferisce al Congresso degli Stati Uniti sui soldi pubblici spesi nel Paese centro-asiatico, dal 2001 il costo della terra è aumentato del 1.000%. Un aumento ancora più significativo si registra nella provincia di Nangarhar, a causa delle speculazioni legate al rientro dei profughi dal Pakistan, delle mafie locali, delle dispute sui terreni e del landgrabbing.

      C’è poi il problema strutturale dell’enorme peso demografico, sociale ed economico delle migrazioni forzate. Secondo una recente ricerca coordinata dall’Oim, in 15 delle 34 province afghane con la maggiore mobilità transfrontaliera e interna, tra il 2012 e il 2017 più di 3,5 milioni di persone sono ritornate dall’estero o sono state costrette a lasciare la propria casa, per trasferirsi in altre zone del paese. Tra coloro che sono rientrati in patria, 1 milione e 355 mila provenivano dal Pakistan, 398 mila dall’Iran. Il 25% di tutti i returnees si sono stabiliti proprio nella provincia di Nangarhar, che ha registrato 499,194 nuovi arrivi – ufficiali – tra il 2012 e il 2017.

      Tra questi c’è Hejrat, 33 anni, carnagione scura, occhi celesti e un sorriso rassicurante. «Siamo tornati nel giugno 2017. Era un periodo in cui tante famiglie decidevano di tornare indietro», racconta. «Sono nato in Pakistan, ma la mia famiglia è originaria del distretto di Rodat, non distante da Jalalabad». Hejrat ha vissuto a lungo in Pakistan, a Peshawar, prima di essere costretto a tornare: «per i pachistani, gli afghani sono un fastidio. Abbiamo sopportato a lungo, poi siamo partiti». Per farlo ha dovuto chiedere un prestito: «I miei genitori erano già tornati. Ho chiesto un prestito di 10.000 rupie pachistane (circa 70 euro, ndr), ho fatto i bagagli e sono partito. Eravamo 5 persone, tutta la mia famiglia. Al confine, l’Onu ci ha dato una tenda, 100 chili di farina e 3 coperte. Ora eccoci qui». Hejrat sostiene che l’assistenza ricevuta sia insufficiente. «Abbiamo bisogno di tutto: cibo, lavoro, soldi. Con i soldi potrei cominciare un’attività e restituire quel che devo. Ho ancora debiti da pagare in Pakistan».

      Hejrat è tornato in Afghanistan nel giugno 2017, quando la morsa delle autorità pachistane cominciava ad allentarsi. «In quel periodo le autorità hanno prolungato la validità dei documenti degli afghani e il ministero afghano per i Rifugiati ha trovato un accordo con la controparte a Islamabad», ricorda Kandiwal. Nel 2018, la pressione è ulteriormente diminuita. Eppure, i rientri dal Pakistan continuano, così come gli abusi. Da gennaio a oggi, secondo l’Oim circa 23.000 afghani senza documenti sono tornati in Afghanistan dal Pakistan (mentre sono circa 510.000 quelli rientrati dall’Iran, a causa delle crescenti pressioni delle autorità iraniane e della svalutazione del rial). «Siamo tornati da 5 mesi», racconta Hakim, 25 anni. «Siamo stati costretti ad andarcene. I poliziotti ci picchiavano ogni giorno con i bastoni, ci perseguitavano, continuavano a crearci problemi. Quando hanno esagerato, abbiamo deciso di partire. Molta gente ha preso la nostra stessa decisione».

      Hakim si considera afghano, ma è nato in Pakistan. «Sono nato vicino a Peshawar, nel campo (rifugiati, ndr) di Akora. Poi siamo finiti a vivere su Charsadda road, fuori dai campi, con altre famiglie afghane. La mia famiglia si è trasferita in Pakistan 35 anni fa a causa della guerra». La guerra continua ancora oggi, ma Hakim – pur non essendoci mai vissuto – è tornato nella patria dei genitori. «Non era più possibile vivere a Peshawar: troppi problemi».

      Anche qui non mancano. «In Pakistan facevo il lavoratore a giornata, lo stesso provo a fare qui. Ma è più difficile. Ho provato ad andare a Kabul, ma non ho trovato niente. Vivo con mia madre e mio padre, con mia moglie e i miei 5 figli. In tutto, siamo 8 persone». Hakim ci mostra casa, una tenda di plastica marrone, fornita dal Norwegian Refugee Council. Il tetto è in lamiera, le pareti in plastica e tela. Sopra l’ingresso svetta una bandiera afghana. Sui lati, una stampella di fil di ferro sorregge un vassoio di metallo con qualche utensile. Un intricato giro di fili porta l’elettricità. «Ma va e viene». All’interno, diversi materassi, arrotolati per risparmiare spazio, un peluche spelacchiato e qualche pentola. La tenda si trova in un ampio parcheggio sterrato, per gran parte occupato da ferraglia e calcinacci. Dietro la tenda c’è un palazzo in costruzione, lasciato a metà. Accanto, un’altra tenda, più bassa e più piccola.

      Qualche metro più in là, un orticello di due metri per due. Pomodori, melanzane e poco altro. Hakim vorrebbe tornare nel villaggio dei genitori, nel distretto di Bati Kut, ma non può: «lì c’è la guerra».


      http://openmigration.org/analisi/viaggio-tra-i-rifugiati-afghani-respinti-dal-pakistan

    • Coming home to conflict: Why Afghan returnees say they were better off as refugees

      Life as an Afghan refugee in Pakistan was never easy for Halima Bibi. But living in her own country has been even harder.

      Bibi, 60, is among more than 3.8 million refugee and undocumented Afghans who have returned to Afghanistan – by choice or by force – over the last five years. In 2016, after spending their entire lives as refugees, she and her three children were driven over the border on the back of a truck – one family among hundreds of thousands of Afghans pushed out of Pakistan that year in a refugee crackdown.

      Today, she lives in a small brick house in Bela, a village hosting around 1,500 returnee families outside the eastern Afghan city of Jalalabad. None of her three children have jobs, and Bibi worries about her health: she hasn’t been able to find a clinic to treat complications from her leprosy.

      “Life’s much more difficult here,” she said, sitting on the steps outside her concrete home, tears rolling down her wrinkled cheeks. “All of our extended family is in Pakistan and we struggle to survive.”

      Bibi’s troubles are common among Afghans coming home to a country at war after decades away, but data showing how returnees are faring has been scarce. Now, new research tracking Afghan returnees is painting a clearer picture of what people like Bibi are going through as authorities and aid groups prepare for more returns.

      A study released in July by the World Bank and the UN’s refugee agency, UNHCR, found that most returnees are worse off financially than those who had stayed behind in Pakistan. Researchers interviewed thousands of Afghans who returned between 2014 and 2017 – a period that saw both a sharp rise in civilian casualties in Afghanistan, and mounting pressure on Afghan refugees living on the margins in Pakistan.

      The study found returnees face significantly higher unemployment, resorted to more precarious or unstable jobs like day labouring, and earned lower wages than they did back in Pakistan. They were also more likely to be unemployed or racking up debt compared with Afghans who never left the country.

      The research comes at a critical period for the government and aid groups in Afghanistan. UN agencies are forecasting that at least 680,000 refugees and undocumented migrants will return from Pakistan and Iran this year. But there are few jobs available and little help to reintegrate in a country in crisis.

      A record 3,800 people were killed in conflict last year, and hundreds of thousands were displaced by clashes or by disasters. Afghanistan is heading toward presidential elections in late September, yet insurgent attacks and military operations continue to kill civilians.

      The study’s proponents say the new data can be used to better understand returnees’ humanitarian needs, to shape more targeted aid and development responses – and to prepare for the next wave of returns and displacement.
      War and migration in Afghanistan

      With their country at war for the past four decades, millions of Afghans have been pushed out by both insecurity and a struggling economy. The UNHCR says the global Afghan refugee population – which includes some 2.7 million registered refugees and millions more undocumented – is the second-largest in the world.

      For decades, neighbouring Pakistan and Iran have hosted the majority of these refugees. But returns have surged over the last five years, driven by volatile public sentiment against refugees, geopolitical manoeuvring – Pakistan has previously threatened new rounds of deportation after political tussles with Afghanistan’s main backer, the United States – or economic crises.

      Some Afghans choose to come home, taking advantage of voluntary return programmes that supply cash grants to registered refugees. Other undocumented Afghans are fleeing sporadic police crackdowns in Pakistan. The majority of recent returnees are from Iran, where an economic crisis has driven Afghans out in droves.

      But there are few services for returning refugees and migrants. At Afghanistan’s four main border crossings with Pakistan and Iran, returning refugees are registered and the most vulnerable – unaccompanied children and single women – receive short-term assistance like food, clothing, and onward transport. But most of this assistance is short-lived, and migration flows are difficult to track once people have entered the country.

      Hafizullah Safi, 50, returned to Afghanistan four years ago along with his wife and 10 children. His family had never set foot in Afghanistan. His last visit was 35 years ago.

      Originally from the eastern province of Kunar, a lush rural area with one of Afghanistan’s few remaining forests, Safi decided to settle in Kabul instead – further from the war’s front lines, he said, and closer to schools and hospitals.

      But adjusting to his new life has been difficult. He rents a two-room mud home in Kabul’s city centre, but he struggles to pay the monthly rent of 5,000 afghanis, or about $60.

      “In Pakistan, I owned a small shop selling dried fruit, but here in Kabul I can barely keep my job as a taxi driver,” he said.

      Outside his house, a garbage-filled river breeds mosquitoes and smells of faeces. The roads are unpaved and electricity is scarce, if available at all. His son, a university graduate with a business degree, has been looking for a job since finishing his studies.

      Safi said there’s little to no assistance from both the government and aid groups. Four years after leaving, the family survives on money sent from relatives still in Pakistan.

      High expectations

      Rights groups say Afghanistan has failed to implement large-scale land programmes for refugees. Government policy aims to include returnees and displaced communities within the country’s development programmes, but the conflict itself makes progress difficult for all Afghans.

      “Returnees often have high expectations and it doesn’t line up with what we can provide,” said Abdul Basit Ansari, a spokesman at the Ministry of Refugees and Repatriation, which oversees programmes for returnees and the displaced. “Both security and employment continue to be big challenges – not only for those who return, but for Afghans across the country.”

      The return to Afghanistan has been difficult for Safi and his family, but he said some aspects are better, compared with living an undocumented existence in Pakistan.

      “We were never fully integrated. We always lived in fear of being found out,” he said. “Afghanistan might be dangerous, but in some ways it is safer. This is our home. We are free here.”

      Still, in a crisis marked by precarious returns and long-lasting displacement, many Afghans are looking to leave.

      At Pakistan’s embassies and consulates across Afghanistan, more than 5,000 visa applications are made daily, according to Pakistan’s ambassador, with many people waiting in line for days.

      The Pakistan-Afghanistan border has traditionally been porous, but Safi said regulations have toughened in recent years: “We now need passports and visas to cross the border,” he said. “These are expensive and hard to come by.”

      If it wasn’t for paperwork, he admitted, his family would have returned to Pakistan long ago. Instead, he’s eyeing other migration opportunities for his university-educated but jobless son.

      “Pakistan is becoming less of an option,” he said. “My son is now trying to go to Europe instead.”

      https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news-feature/2019/08/01/Afghan-conflict-returnees-better-off-refugees

      #Pakistan

    • Coming home to conflict: Why Afghan returnees say they were better off as refugees

      Life as an Afghan refugee in Pakistan was never easy for Halima Bibi. But living in her own country has been even harder.

      Bibi, 60, is among more than 3.8 million refugee and undocumented Afghans who have returned to Afghanistan – by choice or by force – over the last five years. In 2016, after spending their entire lives as refugees, she and her three children were driven over the border on the back of a truck – one family among hundreds of thousands of Afghans pushed out of Pakistan that year in a refugee crackdown.

      Today, she lives in a small brick house in Bela, a village hosting around 1,500 returnee families outside the eastern Afghan city of Jalalabad. None of her three children have jobs, and Bibi worries about her health: she hasn’t been able to find a clinic to treat complications from her leprosy.

      “Life’s much more difficult here,” she said, sitting on the steps outside her concrete home, tears rolling down her wrinkled cheeks. “All of our extended family is in Pakistan and we struggle to survive.”

      Bibi’s troubles are common among Afghans coming home to a country at war after decades away, but data showing how returnees are faring has been scarce. Now, new research tracking Afghan returnees is painting a clearer picture of what people like Bibi are going through as authorities and aid groups prepare for more returns.

      A study released in July by the World Bank and the UN’s refugee agency, UNHCR, found that most returnees are worse off financially than those who had stayed behind in Pakistan. Researchers interviewed thousands of Afghans who returned between 2014 and 2017 – a period that saw both a sharp rise in civilian casualties in Afghanistan, and mounting pressure on Afghan refugees living on the margins in Pakistan.

      The study found returnees face significantly higher unemployment, resorted to more precarious or unstable jobs like day labouring, and earned lower wages than they did back in Pakistan. They were also more likely to be unemployed or racking up debt compared with Afghans who never left the country.

      The research comes at a critical period for the government and aid groups in Afghanistan. UN agencies are forecasting that at least 680,000 refugees and undocumented migrants will return from Pakistan and Iran this year. But there are few jobs available and little help to reintegrate in a country in crisis.

      A record 3,800 people were killed in conflict last year, and hundreds of thousands were displaced by clashes or by disasters. Afghanistan is heading toward presidential elections in late September, yet insurgent attacks and military operations continue to kill civilians.

      The study’s proponents say the new data can be used to better understand returnees’ humanitarian needs, to shape more targeted aid and development responses – and to prepare for the next wave of returns and displacement.
      War and migration in Afghanistan

      With their country at war for the past four decades, millions of Afghans have been pushed out by both insecurity and a struggling economy. The UNHCR says the global Afghan refugee population – which includes some 2.7 million registered refugees and millions more undocumented – is the second-largest in the world.

      For decades, neighbouring Pakistan and Iran have hosted the majority of these refugees. But returns have surged over the last five years, driven by volatile public sentiment against refugees, geopolitical manoeuvring – Pakistan has previously threatened new rounds of deportation after political tussles with Afghanistan’s main backer, the United States – or economic crises.

      Some Afghans choose to come home, taking advantage of voluntary return programmes that supply cash grants to registered refugees. Other undocumented Afghans are fleeing sporadic police crackdowns in Pakistan. The majority of recent returnees are from Iran, where an economic crisis has driven Afghans out in droves.

      But there are few services for returning refugees and migrants. At Afghanistan’s four main border crossings with Pakistan and Iran, returning refugees are registered and the most vulnerable – unaccompanied children and single women – receive short-term assistance like food, clothing, and onward transport. But most of this assistance is short-lived, and migration flows are difficult to track once people have entered the country.

      Hafizullah Safi, 50, returned to Afghanistan four years ago along with his wife and 10 children. His family had never set foot in Afghanistan. His last visit was 35 years ago.

      Originally from the eastern province of Kunar, a lush rural area with one of Afghanistan’s few remaining forests, Safi decided to settle in Kabul instead – further from the war’s front lines, he said, and closer to schools and hospitals.

      But adjusting to his new life has been difficult. He rents a two-room mud home in Kabul’s city centre, but he struggles to pay the monthly rent of 5,000 afghanis, or about $60.

      “In Pakistan, I owned a small shop selling dried fruit, but here in Kabul I can barely keep my job as a taxi driver,” he said.

      Outside his house, a garbage-filled river breeds mosquitoes and smells of faeces. The roads are unpaved and electricity is scarce, if available at all. His son, a university graduate with a business degree, has been looking for a job since finishing his studies.

      Safi said there’s little to no assistance from both the government and aid groups. Four years after leaving, the family survives on money sent from relatives still in Pakistan.

      High expectations

      Rights groups say Afghanistan has failed to implement large-scale land programmes for refugees. Government policy aims to include returnees and displaced communities within the country’s development programmes, but the conflict itself makes progress difficult for all Afghans.

      “Returnees often have high expectations and it doesn’t line up with what we can provide,” said Abdul Basit Ansari, a spokesman at the Ministry of Refugees and Repatriation, which oversees programmes for returnees and the displaced. “Both security and employment continue to be big challenges – not only for those who return, but for Afghans across the country.”

      The return to Afghanistan has been difficult for Safi and his family, but he said some aspects are better, compared with living an undocumented existence in Pakistan.

      “We were never fully integrated. We always lived in fear of being found out,” he said. “Afghanistan might be dangerous, but in some ways it is safer. This is our home. We are free here.”

      Still, in a crisis marked by precarious returns and long-lasting displacement, many Afghans are looking to leave.

      At Pakistan’s embassies and consulates across Afghanistan, more than 5,000 visa applications are made daily, according to Pakistan’s ambassador, with many people waiting in line for days.

      The Pakistan-Afghanistan border has traditionally been porous, but Safi said regulations have toughened in recent years: “We now need passports and visas to cross the border,” he said. “These are expensive and hard to come by.”

      If it wasn’t for paperwork, he admitted, his family would have returned to Pakistan long ago. Instead, he’s eyeing other migration opportunities for his university-educated but jobless son.

      “Pakistan is becoming less of an option,” he said. “My son is now trying to go to Europe instead.”

      https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news-feature/2019/08/01/Afghan-conflict-returnees-better-off-refugees

  • Bosnians’ Homecoming Marred by Post-War Tensions and Poverty

    People who returned to Bosnia and Herzegovina in the years after they fled the war say they face poverty, discrimination and occasionally #violence - especially in areas where they are the ethnic minority.

    Out of the 2.2 million people who left Bosnia and Herzegovina during the 1992-95 war, a total of 1,025,011 have now returned.


    http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/bosnians-homecoming-marred-by-post-war-tensions-and-poverty-02-21-201
    #réfugiés_bosniens #retour_au_pays #Bosnie #Bosnie-Herzégovine #asile #migrations #pauvreté #discriminations

  • Chibanis, l’éternel exil des travailleurs maghrébins
    http://webdoc.france24.com/chibanis-france-travailleurs-immigration-maghreb

    On les appelle les chibanis. Ces petits vieux (littéralement cheveux blancs en arabe dialectal) représentent environ 235 000 personnes, majoritairement des hommes âgés de plus de 65 ans. Ils ont quitté l’Algérie, le Maroc et la Tunisie alors qu’ils étaient de jeunes adultes, voire adolescents pour certains, dans l’espoir de construire un avenir meilleur en France. Arrivés durant les Trente Glorieuses pour reconstruire un pays meurtri par la Seconde Guerre mondiale, ils ont passé toute leur vie à travailler. Aujourd’hui à la retraite, ces « invisibles », ces « sans-voix » n’ont pas retrouvé leur terre natale. Un choix pour certains, une obligation pour d’autres.

    #chibanias #chibanis
    #postcolonialisme
    #retraite #Aspa
    #guerre_aux_pauvres

  • Gambian migrants’ choice: bury the straggler alive or be killed

    Water was running low as the convoy drove through the desert into Libya, so Khadim was given a terrible choice: bury a sickly fellow migrant alive, or be killed by their smugglers.

    “They told us to bury him in the sand,” said Khadim, 29. “They started waving their guns. ‘If you refuse, you’re dead.’ We started digging and digging. As we buried him he said, ‘I’m not dead yet, why are you doing this to me?’ ”

    Khadim is one of about 2,600 migrants repatriated to the Gambia from Libya on flights paid for by European countries trying to stem crossings of the Mediterranean. The vast majority of those coming home are young men, who arrive at Banjul airport with at most a few belongings in a plastic bag, sometimes after spending years in Libyan detention centres.

    They are the among the first to be sent back since footage emerged in November of migrants being sold at slave markets in Libya. African and EU leaders agreed an emergency plan shortly afterwards to repatriate thousands.

    Many tell stories of frequent beatings, or of fellow migrants dying from hunger or violence. Others described watching companions drown on sinking boats in the Mediterranean.

    Like many others, Khadim was betrayed by smugglers and drivers before he saw the sea. He was kidnapped for ransom, arrested and put in a detention centre before he could reach Tripoli.

    He is relieved to have landed back in Banjul, the Gambian capital. Not only is he alive but there are promises of money to help him make a fresh start.

    The UN’s migration agency, as part of an EU-funded plan, can support people to go to college, start a business or buy livestock. Other EU help offers grants to those aged 15 to 35, returning or potential migrants, to start businesses.

    It likely to be just the beginning. The International Organisation for Migration estimates that up to a million migrants remain in Libya. Since late 2015, the EU has spent more than €2 billion in African countries trying to create jobs in the hope that people will stay.

    Those returning to the Gambia, where almost half of the two million population live below the poverty line, are provided with just enough cash to go home and live for a few weeks, after which they can apply for more help.

    Last week, a group of former Gambian migrants, with some funding from the German government, began touring the country to warn young people of the dangers of taking the “back way”, as the journey through the desert and across the Mediterranean is called.

    “Before we go we knew the risks involved, but we didn’t believe,” said Mustapha Sallah. “Most of the people that talked to us were government officials, activists who are living good. I was thinking they were just trying to discourage us.”

    With fellow Gambians who were incarcerated in Libyan detention centres, he has now started Youths Against Irregular Migration. As well as sharing their harrowing experiences, they try to persuade people to stop dreaming of Europe and make a living at home, through education, setting up in business, or agriculture.

    The Gambia’s nascent democracy, restored after the former dictator Yahya Jammeh was deposed last year, has prompted many to return from exile, as the fear of arbitrary arrest, detention and torture dissolved.

    The economy is growing at about 5 per cent but youth unemployment is about 44 per cent. Rising food prices mean many struggle. “The opportunities are not many and they’re not easy to get right now,” said Mr Sallah.

    Paul Jatta, 23, came home on a repatriation flight a few months ago and is trying to put the trauma behind him. Three times he tried and failed to cross to Italy in flimsy boats. On the last attempt he watched five people die as the vessel started to sink. “I seriously cried that day. Because I saw them drown but I couldn’t do anything to help,” he said.

    He said he had not received any support and was back doing what he used to, working in a computer repair shop and cleaning swimming pools in his spare time. He works up to 12 hours a day most days but earns less than £100 a month, and most of that goes to support his extended family.

    After spending his savings of more than £1,000 trying to reach Europe, he is now in a worse financial situation than he was two years ago, and has even less to lose. “I still want to go to Europe. I’m waiting for a miracle,” he said. “There are no opportunities here.”

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/world/gambian-migrants-choice-bury-the-straggler-alive-or-be-killed-62qf0qjbl
    #retour_volontaire #Libye #asile #migrations #réfugiés #retour_au_pays #renvois #Gambie

    Possible/probable future #migrerrance:

    After spending his savings of more than £1,000 trying to reach Europe, he is now in a worse financial situation than he was two years ago, and has even less to lose. “I still want to go to Europe. I’m waiting for a miracle,” he said. “There are no opportunities here.”

  • The point of no return: the case against Rohingya repatriation

    Despite the ongoing, tragic Rohingya crisis, involving 620,000 people fleeing Myanmar to Bangladesh, a repatriation deal between the two countries was struck on November 16 to start returning refugees at the beginning of 2018. Jade Huynh explains why this is near-sighted, premature and very dangerous if we wish to protect the rights of this persecuted community.


    http://openmigration.org/en/op-ed/the-point-of-no-return-the-case-against-rohingya-repatriation
    #asile #migrations #réfugiés #Rohingya #Birmanie #Myanmar #rapatriement #retour_au_pays