(Please reply to Claudia Tazreiter <[log in to unmask]>.)
In early October, Tony Morris from the Australian Catholic University
visited [RSC] in Oxford to discuss research he is co-ordinating about
returned asylum seekers.
I am working with Tony on internationalising this research and seeking
out international partners, both NGOs and academics. Tony mentioned that you
may be able to publicise the research through your networks and that you
asked for a short version of the proposal. We already have Canadian and U.S.
partners on board. We are seeking U.K. and European partners. Can you
recommend European partners? Tony has sent the proposal to the British
Refugee Council, and Amnesty International in London.
Please find [below] the full framework and a short version that you
could use in your newsletter.
Many thanks.
Claudia Tazreiter
Lecturer
School of Sociology and Anthropology
University of New South Wales
Excerpt from A Draft Research Framework
for the International Monitoring of Returned Asylum Seekers
Preamble
At the 54th Executive Committee of the UNHCR in Geneva in September/October,
2003, Dr. Tony Morris (Australian Catholic University) and Mr. Philip
Glendenning (Director, Edmund Rice Centre, Sydney) presented their interim
findings on a research project which explored the life circumstances of asylum
seekers rejected by the Australian Government and returned to various
countries (Leavey et.al. 2003). The results were startling. Evidence strongly
suggests that many returned asylum seekers are in grave fear of their lives.
At EXCOM several delegations made representations to Morris and Glendenning to
internationalise this research in two ways; explore the situations of asylum
seekers who had been deported from several other countries of asylum, and
develop a standard protocol to assist NGOs in the international monitoring of
such returnees. The inference from these representations is that the
international protection system is flawed in meeting the needs of returnees.
The following is an excerpt of the draft framework for this proposed research.
Introduction
Significant numbers of asylum seekers who have been deemed by states as not in
need of protection are deported from countries of asylum each year. Little is
known of the fate of these people once they are removed from a country of
asylum. Evidence suggests that people are being sent to places where they have
been subject to persecution or death.
The existing approach to monitoring the return of these failed asylum seekers
seems seriously flawed. Both state and non state actors in the international
protection system are not adequately monitoring the method of deportation, and
importantly, the day-to-day living circumstance and human rights situations of
the deportee in the place to which they are sent. This means, in effect, that
the international protection system is failing those it seeks to protect.
The Monitoring Process
States have the primary responsibility in the international protection system.
They generally maintain that they only return or deport those individuals who
do not have a need for protection. However, as already argued, evidence
suggests the contrary - that returnees are experiencing unsafe and life
threatening circumstances.(1) Further, no official monitoring processes are
in place to track the fate and life circumstances of returnees. No
comprehensive and consistent monitoring system is in place within and between
the states that are signatories to the 1951 Refugee Convention and the
Protocol of 1967. State sovereignty is a standard defence used by states to
argue that monitoring outside their own territory is not appropriate.(2)
Rationale
The international protection system is failing asylum seekers. Some asylum
seekers are being sent to countries which are not safe. The existing processes
for monitoring rejected asylum seekers are inadequate. Investigation is
required in order to strengthen the international protection system for asylum
seekers.
Accordingly, this research has two inter-connected parts. First, information
will be gathered from various sources in order to establish the circumstances
of people deported from countries of asylum. Asylum seekers who have claimed
protection but been rejected from the countries involved in this project need
to have their stories documented and their situations upon return made
public.
Having identified that people are returned to situations of danger, the
research can move to its central purpose which is to establish an effective
NGO protocol for monitoring returnees. This research acknowledges that NGOs
are a powerful, yet under-utilised resource in the monitoring process.
Accordingly, the approach which NGOs currently take to monitoring will be
explored and a standard, universal protocol will be developed for the use of
all NGOs involved in monitoring rejected asylum seekers.
This protocol and the way it is implemented internationally is intended to
assist states and international bodies such as the UNHCR in providing
effective protection to those persons needing it. States which comply with
their protection obligations should welcome such a protocol. Further, the
Senate Legal and Constitutional Reference Committee of the Australian
Parliament (2000), suggest that NGOs should have a role in monitoring
returned asylum seekers, and that such a process would provide government
bureaucracies with relevant information to be used in their decision making.
Several research questions emerge from this rationale:
1) What is the situation of those asylum seekers who are deemed by countries
of asylum not to be in need of protection and subsequently removed to
countries known for human rights abuses?
2) Which organisations are monitoring the situation of these people?
3) Which NGOs are involved? And how?
4) What aspects of this monitoring is working/not working?
5) What are issues emanating from NGO monitoring?
6) What should the focus of a universal NGO protocol be?
What the research aims to do
i) Understand the situation of asylum seekers who are deemed by countries of
asylum not to be in need of protection and removed.
ii) Identify a 'best practice' model for NGO monitoring of such returnees.
iii) Clarify the role of the UNHCR and the collaboration of the various UNHCR
country representatives (in consultation with UNHCR Department of
International Protection).
v) Set out ways to strengthen the capacity of NGOs to implement the monitoring
protocol.
Organisational structure of the research
This research project will draw together expertise in three areas; academic,
national and international NGOs, and international organisations.
It is anticipated that academic researchers and NGOs in the following
countries of asylum will participate as partners in the research project:
Great Britain, the United States of America, Canada, and Australia. In
addition it is hoped that the European Council for Refugees and Exiles will
assist in identifying project partners from member states of the European
Union. The research project will cluster into national research teams and be
co-ordinated by an international research leader, Dr. Tony Morris.
Key partners
UNHCR Department of International Protection
UNHCR Evaluation and Policy Analysis Unit.
British Refugee Council & and a local academic
Canadian Refugee Council and a local academic eg York
USA Refuge Council and a local academic
Australian Refugee Council and a local academic
European Council for Refugees and Exiles (ECRE), London.
Amnesty International (AI) Refugee Section, International Secretariat, London
Human Rights Watch (HRW)
International Council of Voluntary Agencies (ICVA )
Oxfam International
(1) See ICVA Submission on International Protection to the 54th Session of
EXCOM, 2003.
(2) see page 5 of Chapter 11, Senate Legal and Constitutional Reference
Committee, A Sanctuary Under review: An Examination of Australia’s Refugee and
Humanitarian Determination Processes: http://www.aph.gov.au
[List mod's note: The full-text of the report referenced in footnote 2 is
available at:
http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/legcon_ctte/refugees/report/index.htm.]
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Note: The material contained in this communication comes to you from the
Forced Migration Discussion List which is moderated by the Refugee Studies
Centre (RSC), University of Oxford. It does not necessarily reflect the
views of the RSC or the University. If you re-print, copy, archive or
re-post this message please retain this disclaimer. Quotations or extracts
should include attribution to the original sources.
|
