Admissibility, responsibility and safety in European asylum procedures

In the implementation of their international obligations, European and EU states have devised sophisticated asylum systems based on complex procedural tools. In some cases, tools are designed and used for the purpose of avoiding responsibility for refugees, because they allow claims to be dismissed as inadmissible before looking at the substance of the claim.

The recent EU-Turkey deal and the European Commission’s proposal for harmonised asylum procedures under an Asylum Procedures Regulation, for instance, revolve around concepts such as “safe third country” and “first country of asylum”.

A report launched today by the Asylum Information Database (AIDA), managed by the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE), documents the limited and fragmented application of admissibility and safe country concepts in 20 European countries.

“The latest reform of the Common European Asylum System brings the concepts of admissibility, responsibility and safety to the forefront of European asylum procedures, by introducing an obligation on Member States to deem applications inadmissible on the basis of ‘first country of asylum’ and ‘safe third country’ grounds”, says Minos Mouzourakis, AIDA Coordinator.

“Yet such a move seems ill-fitted in the absence of evidence-based knowledge on the use and interpretation of these concepts throughout the continent.”

The recent introduction of broad lists of “safe third countries” in countries such as Hungary, as well as the pressure placed on Greece to apply the concept following the EU-Turkey deal, run counter to practice in countries with longer-entrenched safe country concepts in asylum procedures. Countries with longer experience, and often judicial guidance, in the application of the “safe third country” concept have clarified that an asylum seeker cannot be considered to have a “sufficient connection” with a third country merely on the basis of transit or short stay.

The report also discusses the implementation of the Dublin Regulation and the emergency relocation scheme, two instruments regulating the allocation of asylum responsibility within the EU. As far as relocation is concerned, despite extremely slow rates of implementation in Europe, countries such as France and Portugal have designed processes for the swift processing of claims by persons relocated to their territory and their allocation to the different regions where applicants will be accommodated.

Drawing on the AIDA report, ECRE calls on European countries and EU institutions to:

  • Proactively publish detailed statistics on key elements of their asylum procedures, such as inadmissibility decisions and the application of the Dublin Regulation, to promote evidence-based debates on the functioning of and challenges facing their asylum systems;
  • Retain the 1951 Refugee Convention as the standard of international protection and apply the “first country of asylum” and “safe third country” concepts only to an asylum seeker who has already been recognised as a refugee or may be recognised as a refugee in line with the Convention, and may effectively benefit from such protection;
  • Rigorously interpret the “sufficient connection” criterion for the purpose of the “safe third country” concept, so as to refrain from declaring asylum applications inadmissible on the sole reason that an asylum seeker has transited through a country considered safe;
  • Firmly suspend the use of the Dublin procedure in respect of countries demonstrating human rights risks, in line with national and European jurisprudence. Clear suspension of Dublin procedures will ensure legal certainty to asylum seekers, but also more efficient administration and allocation of national authorities’ administrative and financial resources;
  • Step up their efforts to honour the commitments set out in the Relocation Decisions, building on experience and good practices developed by the Member States implementing relocation to date. States should also refrain from initiating Dublin procedures regarding the countries benefitting from the relocation scheme, Italy and Greece, as the application of the Dublin Regulation is counter-intuitive to the aim of alleviating pressure on those countries’ asylum systems.

Notes to Editors:

The Asylum Information Database (AIDA) is a database managed by ECRE, containing information on asylum procedures, reception conditions and detention across 20 countries. This includes 17 EU Member States (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Germany, Spain, France, Greece, Croatia, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, United Kingdom) and 3 non-EU countries (Switzerland, Serbia, Turkey).

The overall goal of the database is to contribute to the improvement of asylum policies and practices in Europe and the situation of asylum seekers by providing all relevant actors with appropriate tools and information to support their advocacy and litigation efforts, both at the national and European level.

In Malta, the AIDA partners and researchers are aditus foundation and JRS Malta.

THE REPORT IS AVAILABLE HERE.


Summertime…

…and we’re being kept busy! For most, summer is generally a quiet period, with offices on shut-down, staff enjoying their holidays and a general sense of lingering in slow motion.

Although our office is in fact closed for two weeks – giving our Operational Team a much-needed break – we’re still busy with several projects and initiatives! This is a general round-up of what we’re busy with at the moment.

Trans policy for prison

Today Government announced the launch of a policy on trans and intersex inmates at Corradino Correctional Facility. We’re very happy with the news, also because we’ve been advocating for this policy for quite some time together with our colleagues at MGRM.

It is regrettable that a large push for the policy needed to come from a human rights Constitutional application filed by a group of trans inmates, with the support of our Pro Bono Unit and of our Litigation Partners Mifsud & Mifsud Advocates.

Projects

Large projects remain underway. Carla is reviewing training modules in a project that will train lawyers on human rights of migrant children (FAIR project), whilst Claire is compiling a national report on Malta’s procedures for identifying asylum-seekers who have been victims of violence (Time for Needs project) and working on reports on Malta’s asylum procedure (AIDA project).

In Project Integrated, Antonella’s analysing piles of data collected from visits to refugee homes and from interviews with migrants, for a report that will comment on the relationship between immigration status and poverty.

Pro Bono Unit

We’re terribly excited with Dylan’s fantastic work on our new client database, giving our Pro Bono Unit the technical backing it needs to be more effective and efficient. Clients keep pouring in, either referred by other organisations – including governmental entities – or spontaneously.

Our ATLAS project should boost legal aid provision services for persons unable to afford a private lawyer, or ineligible for such a service, whilst we have amazing plans in the pipeline for what we think could be great developments in the area of access to justice.

Research & Other

National research for the EU Fundamental Rights Agency remains on-going, now starting to look into national thematic developments throughout 2016 for FRA’s Annual Report, its major publication.

In the coming weeks Neil will be busy coming and going, attending ECRE Board Meetings and participating in ECRE’s Annual General Conference where he’ll be discussing an ECRE policy paper he’s been working on for some time, on safe and legal access to Europe for refugees. He’ll also be attending a TGEU workshop on trans asylum-seekers and refugees, as well as a conference on social innovation in relation to refugee inclusion.


If you’re interested in our work and would like to know more, just get in touch with us with any question, feedback or idea.


Want to support our human rights work? Have you considered a donation, either as a one-off or as a regular contribution?

It’s thanks to this support that we are able to continue advocating for better human rights in Malta, and to provide free legal support to marginalised individuals.


Court Action: “Malta cannot wave the LGBTIQ flag, here and overseas, if it refuses to protect the most vulnerable and marginalised persons in the community.”

On 12 July we filed a human rights application in Court, together with our Litigation Partners Mifsud and Mifsud Advocates, on behalf of 7 trans women currently inmates at Corradino Correctional Facility.

The 7 women are alleging that their experiences in Corradino amount to serious violations of their right to be protected from inhuman and degrading treatment, their right to a private life and their right to be free from discrimination.

Our application stresses the duty of Government to ensure the dignified treatment and protection of all inmates, with specific attention required for particular groups persons such as vulnerable groups.

This particular attention is also required in the context of assessments as to whether treatment amounts to inhuman and degrading under the European Convention on Human Rights and the Constitution of Malta.

“Our application comes after years of battling with Government, demanding guarantees of the physical and psychological safety of our clients and repeatedly offering our support to facilitate this process.

The application is, in its essence, seeking justice for the humiliation suffered by these woman as a direct consequence of Government action.

Malta cannot wave the LGBTIQ flag, here and overseas, if it refuses to protect the most vulnerable and marginalised persons in the community.” (Dr. Neil Falzon, aditus foundation Director)

The case was filed against the Director of Prisons and of the Minister for Home Affairs and National Security.


Joint NGO statement ahead of the European Council of 28-29 June 2016: NGOs strongly condemn new EU policies to contain migration

At the upcoming European Council, European Union (EU) leaders will discuss the European Commission’s Communication on a new Partnership Framework with third countries. The Communication proposes an approach which aims to leverage existing EU and Member States’ external cooperation instruments and tools in order to stem migration to Europe. The undersigned organisations express their grave concern about the direction the EU is taking by making deterrence and return the main objective of the Union’s relationship with third countries. More broadly, this new Partnership Framework risks cementing a shift towards a foreign policy that serves one single objective, to curb migration, at the expense of European credibility and leverage in defence of fundamental values and human rights.

The proposed approach is inspired by the EU-Turkey deal which although touted as a successful example of cooperation, has actually left thousands people stranded in Greece in inhumane and degrading conditions. This has particularly affected children, with the result that hundreds of unaccompanied children have been held in closed detention facilities on the islands or forced to sleep in police cells on the Greek mainland. The wider repercussions of this should not be underestimated. It is hard to see how Europe can ask partner countries to keep their doors open, to host large-scale refugee populations and prevent further movements while at the same time Member States refuse to shoulder their fair share of responsibility for protecting people who flee their homes. The right to asylum is being significantly undermined, and it will become more and more challenging for civilians in conflict zones to seek international protection.

The Commission’s proposal ignores all the evidence on the ineffectiveness of deterrence strategies aimed at stopping migration. This approach will not only fail to “break the business-model” of smugglers but increase human suffering as people are forced into taking more dangerous routes. Moreover, despite the stated commitment to respect the principle of non-refoulement, there are no safeguards envisaged to ensure that human rights, rule of law standards and protection mechanisms are in place.  As a result, people risk being deported to countries where their rights are not safeguarded.  Responsibility and liability for human rights violations do not end at Europe’s borders.

We are disappointed to see that once again the emphasis on deterrence leaves no clear commitments to open up safe and regular channels to Europe for those in need of international protection and for other migrants, e.g. through resettlement, humanitarian admission schemes, family reunification, educational visas, labour mobility and visa liberalisation. Resettlement, labour migration and visa liberalisation are only mentioned as possible leverage with partner countries in a quid pro quo approach.

Another major concern is the financing of the proposed Partnership Framework which would represent a wholesale re-orientation of Europe’s development programming towards stopping migration. This is an unacceptable contradiction to the commitment to use development cooperation with the aim to eradicate poverty, as enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty. Aid is for the benefit of people in need, and should not be used as a leverage for migration control.  EU funding should be transparent and adhere to clearly established principles, such as the Busan principles on effectiveness and the Paris principles of ownership by and alignment to partner countries’ strategies. In addition, striking ‘migration management’ agreements with countries where grave human rights violations are committed will be counter-productive in the longer term – undermining human rights around the globe and perpetuating the cycle of abuse and repression that causes people to flee.

Migration has many drivers; people may be on the move in search of new livelihood opportunities, an education or to reunite with family, while conflict and violence, human rights violations, climate change, poverty and unemployment can all trigger migration and forced displacement. Any cooperation to manage migration should take into consideration this complex and multi-faceted reality, be evidence and needs-based, and ensure that the benefits of migration are maximised and the risks are mitigated.

If the EU wants to call for more global solidarity, it needs to set the right example. The EU, a project built on the rubble of a devastating war, is about to embark on a dark chapter of its history. We urge EU leaders to choose a rights-based system to manage migration, based on a viable long-term strategic vision, rather than pursuing an unattainable and inhumane deterrence objective and thereby abandoning its core founding principles.

As human rights, humanitarian, medical, migration and development agencies, and key implementing partners of development programmes in third countries, we call on European leaders to:

  1. Reject the current Commission Communication and develop a sustainable long-term and evidence-based strategy for migration management, in consultation with civil society and experts.
  2. Facilitate safe mobility by opening and strengthening safe and regular channels to Europe both for those in need of international protection and other migrants including through resettlement, humanitarian admission and humanitarian visas, family reunification, worker mobility across skill levels and student visas. Member States must commit to clear benchmarks and appropriate timelines for implementing a migration framework that meets the needs of migrants, asylum-seekers and refugees, their families, as well as the needs and obligations of Member States.
  3. Exclude any conditionality based on migration control indicators in the allocation of development aid to third countries. Development aid is a tool to fight poverty and inequality, not to manage migration. Vulnerable populations should not be punished because of concerns that are largely political.
  4. Stop any readmissions or removals of people by the EU to a third country that violate – or risk violating – fundamental rights and rule of law, including the principle of non-refoulement. Ensure access to protection, justice and effective remedy for all people in migration and asylum procedures.
  5. Ensure transparency in the development of any instruments to manage migration and accountability for human rights violations resulting from EU migration policies.
  6. Commit to a foreign policy and action focused on preventing and unlocking protracted crises. While the Communication mentions the need to address root causes of displacement in the long term, it does not include engagement to prevent and manage crises.
Want to sign up?

Signatories

  1.                     11.11.11
  2.                     ACT Alliance EU
  3.                     Action Contre la Faim (ACF)
  4.                     ActionAid
  5.                     Aditus Foundation
  6.                     Afrique Culture Maroc
  7.                     Agir Ensemble pour les Droits de l’Homme
  8.                     Aid Services
  9.                     AMERA International/ Rights in Exile
  10.                 Amnesty International
  11.                 Amycos
  12.                 Andalucía Acoge
  13.                 ARCI
  14.                 ARDD-Legal Aid
  15.                 Asamblea de Cooperacion Por la Paz ACPP
  16.                 Asgi – Associazione per gli Studi Giuridici sull’Immigrazione
  17.                 Asociacion por ti mujer
  18.                 Asociacion Salud y Familia – Spain
  19.           Association for action against violence and trafficking in human beings-Open Gate La  Strada Macedonia
  20.                 Association for the Social Support of Youth
  21.                 Ayuda en Acción
  22.                 Bienvenidos Refugiados España
  23.                 British Refugee Council
  24.                 CAFOD
  25.                 Care International
  26.                 Caritas International Belgium
  27.                 CCOO de Andalucia
  28.                 Center for Development of International Law
  29.                 Centre for Legal Aid – Voice in Bulgaria
  30.                 Centre for Youths Integrated Development
  31.                 Centro de Investigaciones en Derechos Humanos PRO IGUAL
  32.                 ChildFund Alliance
  33.                 Church of Sweden
  34.                 Churches’ Commission for Migrants in Europe
  35.                 Citizens’ association for combating trafficking in human beings and all forms of gender-based violence
  36.                 CNCD-11.11.11
  37.                 Comisión Española de Ayuda al Refugiado – CEAR
  38.                 Concern Worldwide
  39.                 CONCORD Europe
  40.                 CONCORD Sweden
  41.                 Conseil des Béninois de France
  42.                 Consortium of Migrants Assisting Organizations in the Czech Republic
  43.                 Coordinadora Andaluza de ONGD
  44.                 Coordinadora Cantabra de ONGD
  45.                 Coordinadora de Barrios
  46.                 Coordinadora de ONGD de  la Región de Murcia
  47.                 Coordinadora de ONGD del Principado de Asturias
  48.                 Coordinadora de ONGD España
  49.                 Coordinadora de ONGD Navarra
  50.                 Coordinadora Extremeña de ONGD
  51.                 Coordinadora Gallega de ONGD
  52.                 Coordinadora ONGD de Castilla y León
  53.                 Coordinadora Valenciana de ONGD
  54.                 Coordination des ONG pour les droits d’enfant
  55.                 Coordination et Initiatives pour Réfugiés et Étrangers (CIRÉ)
  56.                 Cordaid
  57.                 Detention Action
  58.                 Detention Forum
  59.                 Doctors of the World International network
  60.                 EMERGENCY ONG ONLUS
  61.                 EU-CORD Network
  62.                 Eurochild
  63.                 EuroMed Rights
  64.                 European Association for the Defence of Human Rights
  65.                 European Council on Refugees and Exiles
  66.                 European Youth Forum
  67.                 Federación Aragonesa de ONGD
  68.                 Federación de Asociaciones de Derechos Humanos
  69.                 Federation of Christian NGOs in Italy
  70.                 FIACAT
  71.                 FIDH
  72.                 FIZ advocacy and support for migrant women and victims of trafficking
  73.                 Flüchtlingsrat Niedersachsen e.V.
  74.                 Forum des Organisations de Solidarité Internationale issues des Migrations
  75.                 France terre d’asile
  76.                 Fundacion 1º de Mayo de Comisiones Obreras
  77.                 Fundación Alianza por los Derechos, la Igualdad y la Solidaridad Internacional –APS-
  78.                 Greek Forum of Refugees
  79.                 Habitat for Humanity International, Europe, Middle East and Africa
  80.                 Handicap International
  81.                 Hellenic Platform for Development
  82.                 Human Rights Watch
  83.                 Human Rights Without Frontiers
  84.                 Humanist Institute for Co-operation with Developing Countries
  85.                 Inspiraction
  86.                 Instituto Sindical de Cooperación al Desarrollo – ISCOD
  87.                 InteRed
  88.                 INTERSOS
  89.                 Islamic Relief UK
  90.                 Jesuit Refugee Service Europe
  91.                 Justice and Peace Netherlands
  92.                 KISA-Action for Equality, Support, Antiracism
  93.                 Koordinierungsstelle der Österreichischen Bischofskonferenz für internationale Entwicklung und Mission
  94.                 La Strada International
  95.                 Lafede.cat – Organitzacions per a la Justícia Global
  96.                 Le Monde des Possibles
  97.                 Lebanon Humanitarian INGO Forum
  98.                 Macedonian Young Lawyers Association
  99.                 Médecins Sans Frontières
  100.              Menedék – Hungarian Association for Migrants
  101.              Migrant Voice UK
  102.              Migrants’ Rights Network
  103.              Movimiento contra la Intolerancia
  104.              Movimiento por la Paz – MPDL
  105.              Nasc, the Irish Immigrant Support Centre
  106.              Norwegian Refugee Council
  107.              Oxfam
  108.              PAX
  109.              Pax Christi International
  110.              PICUM-Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants
  111.              Plan International EU office
  112.              Platform Minors in exile / Plate-forme Mineurs en exil / Platform Kinderen op de vlucht (Belgium)
  113.              PRO ASYL
  114.              Red Acoge
  115.              Refugee Aid Serbia
  116.           Réseau de Compétences Solidaires – Groupement d’Economie Sociale et Solidaire      France – Europe – Afrique
  117.              Réseau Immigration Développement Démocratie –  IDD
  118.              Respect Network in Europe
  119.              Safer World
  120.              Save the Children
  121.              SOS Children’s Villages International
  122.              SOS Racisme – Touche pas à mon pote
  123.              Stichting LOS
  124.              Swedish Refugee Advice Centre
  125.              Tamkeen Fields for Aid- Jordan
  126.              Télécoms Sans Frontières
  127.              Terre des Hommes International Federation
  128.              The International Federation of Social Workers European Region
  129.              The International Rehabilitation Council for Torture victims
  130.              The Norwegian Centre Against Racism
  131.              Translators without Borders
  132.              Transnational Migrant Platform
  133.              Trócaire
  134.              United for Intercultural Action
  135.              Vluchtelingenwerk Vlaanderen (Flemish Refugee Action)
  136.              Welthungerhilfe
  137.              World Federalist Movement-Institute for Global Policy
  138.              World Vision Brussels and EU Representation
  139.              ZOA

“Journeys of Hope: We urge Malta to grant safe and legal access to refugees”

Press Statement on World Refugee Day 2016

On World Refugee Day 2016 Jesuit Refugee Service Malta, aditus foundation, Integra Foundation and the Malta Emigrants’ Commission underline the need to allow refugees safe and legal access to protection.

To highlight the urgency of this call, JRS Europe yesterday launched ‘Journeys of Hope’, a collection of personal encounters with men, women and children as they hope, yet struggle, to reach European safety. Gathering stories from Greece, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Serbia, Croatia, Italy, Austria and Germany, ‘Journeys of Hope’ is a stark reminder of the difficulties refugees face as they are repeatedly denied access to their most basic fundamental human rights.

Importantly, it talks about the dangerous journeys they must take in order to survive.

SONY DSC

Fatumo has been living in Malta for six years. Malta believes she does not qualify for refugee status, yet has granted her subsidiary protection on the basis of the conflict that has been tearing Somalia apart for the past 20 years.

Her three children are living with her sister in Kenya, but life in the refugee camp is extremely tough and their futures uncertain. Fatumo doubts she’ll ever see her children again.

Subsidiary protection, like refugee status, acknowledges that it is impossible for beneficiaries to return back to their homes. It is renewed every three years for as long as is necessary. Many subsidiary protection beneficiaries have been living in Malta for several years.

Unlike many EU Member States, Malta does not permit beneficiaries of subsidiary protection to be reunited with their families. This right is only granted to refugees, denying all others a future with their close and loves ones. Many of these persons have made Malta their homes, having arrived here several years ago.

Nonetheless, their daily lives are consumed by their anxiety about the safety of their spouses and children.

Mohamed chose not to risk his life by getting on the little boats leaving Libya. Instead, and because he had the means to, he obtained a false Libyan passport and used it to fly to Malta. Upon arrival he was arrested, and subsequently faced criminal charges in Court. He was found guilty and sentenced to six months imprisonment.

A young Libyan man, Mohamed felt he had to flee Libya in order to survive.

Article 31 of the 1951 Refugee Convention prohibits States from penalizing refugees who irregularly enter their territory. The Article understands the difficulty faced by most refugees in obtaining legal access to a State that could offer them the protection they need.

We welcomed Malta’s recent review of its detention policy insofar as it embraced this understanding within the administrative context.

Yet we underline the inconsistency of this review with legislation that imprisons the same refugees who would be exempt from detention had they risked their lives to enter Malta.

Providing safe and legal ways to reach a place of safety is the most effective way to prevent refugees from resorting to unsafe and irregular means of travel to access Europe, thereby saving lives. We feel there is much Malta can do to advocate for such means at EU level, including urging a more meaningful resettlement commitment and encouraging a broader and more proactive use of humanitarian visas.

Yet we also feel Malta may make significant contributions towards preventing additional dangerous and illegal journeys, specifically:

  1. Agree to reunite at least 500 spouses and children with their family members (beneficiaries of subsidiary protection) already living in Malta within the next 12 months; and
  2. Provide refugees an exemption from prosecution for using false documents to travel to Malta.

JRS Malta, aditus foundation, Integra Foundation and the Malta Emigrants’ Commission are eager to explore possibilities of cooperating with Government in the implementation of these measures.

We are confident that our joint efforts could facilitate the process in a spirit of cooperation and mutual understanding.

For further information:

 JRS Malta – Katrine Camilleri (79858099)

aditus foundation – Neil Falzon (99892191)

Integra Foundation – Maria Pisani (79618367)

Malta Emigrants’ Commission – Mgr. Alfred Vella (99440025)

world refugee day 2016 (2)