About Refugees
About Refugees
About Refugees > Anti-Warehousing > Released Bulletins
  1.  Souleymane and MacGoddins
    Souleymane Kabwe, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kelly Ryan, and MacGoddins Lushimba.  
    Messrs. Kabwe and Lushimba go to Washington
  7. United States: Protection Groups Weigh in on “Foreign Assistance Reform”

 

1. Messrs. Kabwe and Lushimba go to Washington

Association for the Defense of Refugee Rights (ADR) leaders MacGoddins Lushimba and Souleymane Kabwe, having suffered ten years between them in Osire Refugee Camp, enduring several arrests for their refugee rights activism, resettled in the United States this fall.  Remembering the refugees left behind, however, they plan to continue their advocacy as “ambassadors” for warehoused refugees around the world.

They came to Washington DC December 10-15, 2006 as USCRI guests of honor and presented the story of their struggle and recommendations for future action to NGO and Congressional staffers and U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kelly Ryan and others at the State Department.

See also ADR’s April-June 2006 edition of The Voice of Refugees, which includes a stirring ode to “Human Rights Defender” by MacGoddins Lushimba and another great cartoon, “The Luckiest Asylum Seekers rescued … after many years of warehousing,” showing a helicopter lifting refugees out for resettlement.


2. Thailand:  USCRI Opens Office

USCRI has just opened an office in Bangkok with the hiring of Dr. Pradit Chatcharatkoon as Country Director and two Program Officers to help implement UNHCR’s Strengthening Protection Capacity Project in Thailand.  Dr. Pradit and his staff will be working with Thai civil society including the business, labor, academic, faith, and human rights/legal communities to build public awareness about refugees and support for their rights to work and freedom of movement.  For more information, please contact PChatcharatkoon (at-sign) USCRIThailand.org.

UNHCR Publishes Analysis of Protection Gaps

The UNHCR published November 2006 its “Analysis of Gaps in Refugee Protection Capacity: Thailand.”  The report recognizes the majority of refugees in Thailand do not live in the camps.  Excerpts follow.

In general:

Refugees and asylum seekers are not legally entitled to work in Thailand, either within or outside the camps.  This leaves them entirely dependent on outside assistance, which not only is psychologically debilitating but also generally insufficient to meet their food and non-food needs.  As a result many seek work informally, which leaves them open to the very real risk of arrest and deportation.  Employment is generally seasonal and intermittent.  Remuneration is low and refugees are known to work in exploitative working conditions, made possible by the illegality of their situation.  [p. 6]

Refugees and asylum seekers are not free to move in Thailand.  Those who live in the camps are not permitted to leave them.  Although in previous years some movement to other camps to visit families and attend trainings was permitted, and trips outside camps to buy medicine, supplies and even to work was tolerated, this is now more tightly controlled.  Those caught outside the camps are frequently deported. 

Refugees and asylum-seekers who reside in urban areas are also vulnerable to arrest, detention, prosecution and deportation for being illegally in Thailand.  [p. 14]

In the camps:

Rape, high levels of domestic violence, recruitment of child soldiers and summary arrest, detention and deportation are among the chronic problems experienced by camp based refugees.  [p. 18]

Armed conflict within Myanmar, chiefly involving the SPDC and ethnic resistance groups such as the KNU and the KNPP, render the camps in a chronic state of insecurity.

The border camps are particularly vulnerable to infiltration by armed elements and military recruitment.  …  Refugees have reported many incidences of abuse and even death at the hands of the KNU and KNPP, especially of ethnic minorities or those perceived to have supported opposition groups.  [p. 24]

The procedures, penalties and remedies that are applied by [alternative justice] systems are often not in accordance with either Thai law or international human rights standards.  They also tend to be highly politicized, since they are administered by camp committees and linked directly with the ethnic military and political groups that exercise social and political control over the camps.  Crimes against less powerful groups often go unaddressed, victims of crimes often do not report them for fear of threats to their security if they do and perpetrators belonging to the group administering the camps frequently go unpunished.  [p. 36]

Poll Shows Weak Support for Migrants

The ABAC agency of Assumption University released the results of a public opinion poll December 18, 2006 on attitudes toward migrants generally (i.e., without distinguishing the refugees among them who fled persecution).  According to the press release (also available in Thai) of the UN Development Fund for Women and the International Labour Organization, who sponsored the poll:

most respondents believed Thailand does not need migrant workers for sustaining the industrial and agricultural economy and about 58.6% of respondents said the Thai government should not admit more foreigners to work in Thailand compared with only 9.7% that believed otherwise.  The respondents believed that hiring more migrant workers will have negative impacts on Thai workers, such as making it more difficult for Thai workers to find a job, making employers value them less and forcing them to settle for lower wages.  …

When asked about equal working conditions for migrant and Thai workers, Thais seemed to agree on equal working hours and holidays, but not on equal wages.  Compared with more than 75% of the respondents who agreed on equal working hours and holidays, only 40% of the respondents agreed on equal wages.  The respondents justified their response, in part, by adding that the wages migrants received in Thailand, even though lower than those of Thai workers, were still better than what the migrants earned in their home countries.

According to the poll, 67.3% of the respondents said migrant workers should not be able to apply for any job available in Thailand, and roughly one-in-two respondents (50.3%) said migrant workers should not be provided with the same legal working conditions as Thais.  More than half (59.7%) said migrant workers should also not be allowed freedom of expression.  About 77.3% agreed that migrant workers should not have the right to form unions.  …

Four out of five people (79.9%) who remembered media reports recalled reading about migrant workers who had committed serious crimes in Thailand while only 41.4% recalled reports where migrants had been cheated or abused by employers in the industrial and agricultural sectors and only 29% had read about domestic workers being cheated or abused.

On a positive note, the poll showed that Thai people do have sympathy toward migrant workers when they are abused by employers. Most of the respondents said they would report abuse to the police, relevant government agencies and organizations and the media. Only 15.1 % of the respondents said they would do nothing.

The same day, the Nation reported:

labour activist Janya Yimprasert disclosed at a seminar yesterday that about 50 foreign migrants would today call on Labour Minister Apai Chandanachulaka to allow their representation in labour unions.

"Their pleas should be heeded," Janya said.

Janya said Burmese workers - whose number was estimated at over two million in Thailand - should be allowed to form their own unions or at least join the Thai unions so that they can together protect their rights.

Not Enough Teachers for Refugees Who Want to Learn Thai

According to “Popular Camp Language Program Understaffed” in the December 7, 2006 Irrawaddy, an RTG-sponsored, UNCHR-funded program to teach refugees the Thai language has a severe shortage of instructors.  (The Government presently does not allow camp-based children to leave the camps to attend public schools alongside Thai children.)  Excerpts:

“Currently, there are just four teachers for a camp responsible for 500 students,” [Uraiwan Inthayarat, the director of Tak Province’s Non-formal Education Department] said.  The classrooms we use are temporary shelters in the camp, which are too small, and we still need more teaching equipment.” …

The Thai language program is the first step in the government’s efforts, beginning in December 2005, to provide increased educational services to refugees from Burma living in camps along the Thailand border.

Goals for the first phase of the program include Thai language instruction for some 1,500 refugees in three camps—Umpium, Noh Poe and Mae La.

3. Egypt:  Schools Expel Iraqi Refugee Children, Parents Protest

According to a December 5, 2006 AP article:

Dozens of angry Iraqis protested on Sunday at the Education Ministry after schools expelled their children because their visas were no longer valid, the Al-Gomhoria newspaper reported.  The demonstrators demanded their children be allowed to take midyear exams this month.

Many Iraqis say they have to pay bribes to get or renew their permits.

4. Jordan: Scant Refuge

Bill Frelick of Human Rights Watch reports in the November 30, 2006, International Herald Tribune that “authorities expect Iraqis resident in Jordan to remain self-sufficient, but often deny them permission to work.  Iraqi children are not permitted to attend public schools, and if they don't have residence permits they are not even allowed to attend private schools.”

Forgotten Gaza Refugee:  Allow my Son to Work

A December 17, 2006 IRIN report features the story of Widow Noora Nadi, a Palestinian refugee from Gaza, living in Baqaa camp west of Amman, Jordan struggling to support three children after her husband died two years ago:

"UNRWA [UN Agency for Relief and Work for Palestine Refugees in the Near East] does not provide me with financial assistance and officials from the Jordanian government say I do not qualify for social aid like many widows in this country because I do not have Jordanian nationality.

I am paying the price of my parent's decision to come to Jordan after the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.  Refugees who came to the country after that date were given temporary passports but not Jordanian nationality, contrary to those who arrived in Jordan after [the Arab-Israeli conflict in] 1948.  The latter can work everywhere and enter government-run universities, but we are treated like foreigners.

My 22-year-old son is not allowed to work in the government because he is not considered Jordanian, although he was born here.

I work in nearby farms picking fruits and taking care of animals from early morning to sunset.  My mother is sick and too old to take care of herself.  …

In Jordan, I am treated as if I were a rich tourist.  I am not allowed to go to a government-run hospital for free treatment, while waiting lists at the UNRWA clinics are very long. I am afraid if one of my kids falls ill I will have to sell my furniture to provide medication.  …

I am still a refugee who lost everything: my home country, my husband and now I am afraid I will also lose my children.  The UN must live up to its responsibility and provide me with help.  If not, Jordan must step in and do something to allow my son to work."

5. Kenya: Refugees Bill Passes

On November 29, 2006, the Kenyan Parliament finally passed the Refugees Bill, drafted and pending since 1991, the first legislation specifically addressing the status of refugees, of whom the country hosts more than 300,000, mostly in wretched conditions in the desolate northern camps of Dadaab and Kakuma.

The bill calls for the Government to create an inter-ministerial Refugee Status Determination Committee to adjudicate asylum applications under the Commissioner for Refugee Affairs.  If implemented, applicants could appeal rejected cases to a Refugee Appeal Board and to the High Court.  A number of restrictions remain (see our October 31, 2006 Bulletin for more analysis).  According to Jesuit Refugee Service’s December 15 briefing, there were also a number of amendments to the May 26 draft that are not yet available, and the attorney-general’s office has not yet prepared them for President Kibaki’s signature.

Somalis who Reject Camp Struggle in Eastleigh

Tia Goldenberg reports on refugees in Nairobi for Deutsche Presse-Agentur on December 15, 2006:

Rather than settling in overflowing refugee camps along the Somali-Kenyan border and getting by on aid agency hand-outs, the Somali residents of Eastleigh chose to live independently.

Muhamed Hussein Samow, 20, is one of thousands who now lead a life similar to his former one in Somalia, but where the prospects of work for urban refugees are negligible.

With an a burgeoning unemployment rate, Kenya has strict refugee laws that do not allow them to work legally. Many are forced to find casual jobs in the informal sector.

6. South Africa: Partial Victory on Livelihoods

According to the December 13, 2006 Pretoria News, the Constitutional Court improved refugees’ chances of working in the private security industry:

Lawyers for Human Rights (LHR), who assisted the refugees in their application, said the majority of the judges found that a total exclusion of refugees from the private security industry was unlawful.

The court also ordered that the industry's regulatory authority had to pay the legal costs of the refugee applicants.

Frits Gaerdes of LHR said although the court found that refugees did not have an unconditional right to be registered as security service providers, refugees had to be permitted to prove on a case by case basis that they were fit and proper persons to be registered.  …

"The constitutional court confirmed that our law regards refugees as a vulnerable group in our society, whose plight calls for compassion," Gaerdes said.

7. United States:  Protection Groups Weigh in on “Foreign Assistance Reform”

Big changes are in store for U.S. foreign aid as the State Department pursues structural changes to reflect unified and “strategic” goals.  What could this mean for refugees?  All of the nearly two-dozen members of Refugee Council USA endorsed an October 16, 2006 letter to Ambassador Randall Tobias, the State Department’s new director of foreign assistance.  Some of their key points include:

  • integrate refugee protection and/or rights-friendly aid into all foreign aid functions, not just humanitarian “care and maintenance,” otherwise there will be no end to warehousing;
  • make protection a key component of humanitarian action, including refugee rights and the restoration of normal livelihoods;
  • ensure that promotion of economic growth includes refugees’ rights to engage in livelihoods;
  • include international refugee law in the promotion of just governance;
  • development programs often exclude refugees, make sure “investing in people” includes them; and
  • durable solutions for refugees are indicators for peace and security and help reinforce it; gross violations of refugee rights are also a threat to peace.