Joint letter to the Prime Minister regarding the on-going detention of 9 men

Hon. Prime Minister,

We the undersigned NGOs, all of whom are actively involved in the field of migration, are writing this open letter to express our grave concern about the situation of the nine Malian nationals who are currently in detention supposedly awaiting to be returned to Mali.

We firmly believe that their continued detention is unlawful, for all of the reasons outlined below, and we call upon the government to release them from detention immediately.

 All nine have been in detention since November 14, 2016, after they were apprehended with a view to deportation when they went to the Immigration Office to extend their stay in Malta, as they were required to do.

According to information provided by government spokespersons, all nine were positively identified as Malian nationals, albeit only verbally, by the delegation from Mali that visited Malta on the 6th and 7th December to conduct interviews for the purpose of identification.

In spite of this, to date, over 2 months after their visit, the Malian authorities have not yet issued the documents required for repatriation to take place. It is therefore clearly impossible for the Maltese authorities to affect the removal of these individuals, at least in the near future.

EU and national law clearly state that a government’s power to detain migrants for the purposes of removal is not absolute. Detention should only be used as a measure of last resort, where it is strictly necessary and where it is not possible to use other less coercive measure to effect return, particularly because of a risk of absconding or lack of cooperation on the part of the individual concerned.

Further, the law clearly states that detention should be for the shortest time possible and, where removal cannot take place due to legal or other considerations, the individual concerned should be immediately released. These legal requirements are also clearly included in the right to liberty protect in Article 5 of the European Convention of Human Rights.

In our view these legal provisions raise serious questions about the lawfulness of the ongoing detention of these nine men, especially in the light of the conditions in which they are detained.

We also wish to underline that these nine individuals have always abided by the law: they were honest about their nationality from the day they were apprehended by the Immigration Police, they did not apply for asylum elsewhere, and they reported regularly to the immigration authorities as they were required to do in order to extend their stay. In the circumstances, we believe that it is indeed difficult to argue that it is not possible to use less coercive measures in order to affect their removal.

Ultimately, the above-mentioned legal provisions clearly require government to demonstrate that individual assessments have been undertaken in order to reach the conclusion that detention is, in fact and in law, both necessary and proportionate. It is not clear whether such individual assessments have been carried out in this present context, raising further questions as to its compliance with human rights, EU and national law.

Together with the legality or otherwise of this continued detention, we believe that it is an affront to human dignity to treat in this way law-abiding persons who have lived in our midst for several years and contributed to our society. They have done nothing to deserve to be treated like criminals, deprived of their liberty in difficult conditions and carted around in handcuffs, portraying them as posing a great danger to our society.

While we acknowledge that the State has the right to affect the removal of those who have no legal permission to stay, we strongly underline this must be done in a way that respects the fundamental dignity of each individual.

Achieving what is possibly a legitimate end in any other way undermines not only the humanity of the individuals directly impacted, but also our own.

We therefore reiterate our request for the immediate release of the nine Malians currently held in detention.

Letter sent by the following NGOs:

aditus foundation, African Media Association, The Critical Institute, Integra Foundation, International Association for Refugees, JRS Malta, KOPIN, Malta Emigrants’ Commission, Migrant Women Association Malta, Migrant Network for Equality, Moviment Graffitti, Organisation for Friendship in Diversity, People for Change Foundation, SOS Malta, Spark15.

Background Note

On 14 November 2016 and the days following, some 33 Malian migrants were apprehended by the immigration authorities as they went to the Central Immigration Office to extend their stay in Malta.

All were adult men who had arrived in Malta by boat from Libya between 2007 and 2015. All had been issued with a Removal Order within days of their arrival and had subsequently applied for asylum. All had their asylum applications rejected. All spent some time in detention following their arrival in Malta – the duration of their detention varies but most spent between 12 or 18 months in detention.

Following their release from detention all enjoyed tolerated stay – this means that, although they were still subject to a removal order and therefore still considered ‘prohibited’ immigrants in term of the Immigration Act, the immigration authorities granted them temporary permission to stay until removal could be effected in terms of law.

All of them worked, most of them regularly. Those who worked regularly paid tax and national insurance contributions.

On the 6 and 7 December 2016 a delegation from Mali visited the detainees for the purposes of identification, with a view to issuing the documentation required for repatriation. In the days that followed the visit it emerged that only 10 of the individuals in detention were positively identified as Malian nationals by the delegation, and this only verbally.

One of these 10 was released from detention on 23 December, following a decision of the Court of Magistrates (dated 22 December) declaring his detention unlawful.

The 15 migrants about whose identity doubts were expressed were also released from detention on 23 December.

There are currently 9 men left in detention, supposedly pending deportation. In the week before Christmas, they instituted legal proceedings before the Constitutional Court challenging, among other things, the lawfulness of their detention. Their lawyer also asked to court to release them from detention pending the outcome of the proceedings, however this was refused on 4 January 2017.

The case is currently on-going.



An absolute no to exploring legal ways of returning refugees!

The Government of Malta’s call on the European Commission to look into bypassing, waiving or otherwise ignoring the principle of non-refoulement should absolutely not be entertained by the European Union’s executive body. It is this fundamental principle that, for centuries, has protected the lives of millions of refugees. Setting it aside would effectively sign the death sentence for all those people who continue to run away from their homes in search of safety.

Enshrined in the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and a host of other human rights instruments, the rule strictly prohibits States from returning refugees to places where their lives are threatened on account of their race, religion, nationality, political opinion and membership of a particular social group. It also protects all persons from being sent to countries where they would face serious human rights violations such as the death penalty, torture and inhuman or degrading treatment.

Yet the rule is more than a legal principle. It understands that some governments simply cannot, or refuse to protect their own citizens. In such situations, other states are called to intervene and to offer protection to persons who would otherwise be left stranded, vulnerable to terrible treatment and, at worst, killed. At its heart, the principle embodies humanity’s spirit of solidarity with one another.

It is therefore with extreme repulsion that the undersigned Maltese non-governmental organisations read of Malta’s appeal to brush this value aside. As with all state policies, migration and asylum management can never be based on an approach that tramples on the dignity and rights of persons.

We therefore strongly urge the European Commission to refrain from taking any action at all on Malta’s requests. Anything short of an absolute and clear non-engagement will inevitably result in complicity in flouting the Union’s values and making these Europe’s darkest days.

#maltapresidencylegacy #maltasummit

Press Statement of:

aditus foundation, African Media Association, Arab-Maltese Community, The Critical Institute, Integra Foundation, International Association for Refugees, JRS Malta, Malta Emigrants’ Commission, Migrants’ Network for Equality, Moviment Graffitti, Organisation for Friendship in Diversity, The People for Change Foundation, Platform of Human Rights Organisations in Malta, SOS Malta, Spark 15, Sudanese Community in Malta.


Struggling to Survive: research into poverty among refugees in Malta

Yesterday we launched the research report Struggling to Survive: An investigation into the Risk of Poverty among Asylum-Seekers in Malta. The report is a joint initiative with JRS Malta, and based on data collected from over 80 interviews with refugees and other migrants.

Our findings are quite staggering, indicating that 80% of refugees in Malta are living in poverty. Contributing factors include difficulties find stable and regular employment, low wages, high rent prices, insufficiency of social welfare support, language barriers, and limited childcare possibilities. The situation of refugee women is of particular concern.

Main recommendations include:

  • use the Minimum Essential Budgets concept as a guiding benchmark;
  • increase statutory minimum wage;
  • strengthen social security benefits;
  • broaden the scope of employment support services, with a particular focus on refugee women;
  • regulate temporary employment;
  • implement a national integration programme;
  • prioritise individual need over status, when determining social welfare support eligibility;
  • engage in further research into the theme.

The report, part of the broader Project Integrated, was published with the support of UNHCR and the Malta Community Chest fund.

It may be downloaded here (.pdf).


Malta’s EU Presidency legacy: a (legal) death-sentence for refugees!

When rickety boats laden with irregular migrants reach our shores, we see the suffering and the loss of dignity etched on these people’s faces. We understand that they are caught in a web of poverty and exploitation.

We feel for those fleeing persecution and poverty, in search of safety and prosperity. And we do everything we can to provide them with the help they need, offering refuge and respite.

It would be easy to flip channels once again; to park it in someone else’s back yard. But it is not someone else’s problem.

Prime Minister Joseph Muscat, Sixty-Eighth Session of the UN General Assembly, 2013.

Herman Grech: Prime Minister, at the beginning of the legislature you considered returning to Libya a group of immigrants. Was that a mistake?

Prime Minister Joseph Muscat: Yes.

Times Talk interview, 2015.

In the document, the Commission is called on to “examine how to interpret and apply” the legal implications of a key humanitarian rule that protects migrants from being returned to a country where they may have reason to fear persecution, the so-called non-refoulement principle.

Malta’s Presidency of the EU Council to the EU Commission, 2016.