Skip to content or view screen version

Refugees being starved out of camps - UNHCR complicit

posted by megan | 28.09.2008 22:38

Refugees in South Africa have been tricked by government. They moved to camps where they were led to believe they would have a fair hearing by government but instead ALL asylum cases have been refused, irrespective of country of origin, and people are due to be returned to Somalia, DRC, Zimbabwe.

UNHCR have gone on the offensive, attacking civil rights groups trying to defend refugees displaced in the May attacks in South Africa who criticised UNHCR for not doing their job effectively. The fact is that UNHCR temper human rights according to the country they are operating in. Thus there are real human rights for some people in some parts of the world and a lower grade of human rights or expectations of what people in other parts of the world are expected to endure - global apartheid with sails billowing.

Cape Town, South Africa: This week, Marti, camp manager at Blue Waters site C, was warned off speaking to the press 3 times in 24 hrs by 2 unknown men (who on the last occasion threatened her family). Marti is a phenomenally brave and dedicated woman who has done her utmost for the refugees since her first month as a volunteer, through her recruitment as assistant camp manager at Soetwater, to her attempts to make the transition to Blue Waters as untraumatic as possible. The travesty of the Home Affairs Rapid Status Assessment led her to finally speak out as she felt she could no longer, in good conscience, operate within the system without drawing attention to the govt’s grave abuse of human rights in the camps.

rest of story at eMzantsi Ubuntu coalition web site:
 http://emuc.ilocals.info/

posted by megan

Comments

Hide 1 hidden comment or hide all comments

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

Applies to Britain also

29.09.2008 13:51

"......ALL asylum cases have been refused, irrespective of country of origin......"

TECHNICALLY "country of origin" is not an issue in an ASSYLUM case.

Please do not misunderstand what I just said. There might be VERY good reasons (humanitarian reasons) not to kick out people who would be under dire threat in their countries of origin. I might very well argue that for those OTHER reasons they should be granted some sort of refugee status even though not a pure assylum case.

Remember -- for ASSYLUM to be claimed this has to be the FIRST safe country. The person must not have left another country where they were safe from the initial threat.

The way most people get into trouble with this ..........
1) They escape from initial country A where they were at risk inot country B where they were safe from this risk. They have a valid assylum claim in country B.
2) Unfortunately, they cannot easily survive in country B. It's not that they are threatened, but no support service, they would starve there. So they leave country B and enter country C and try to make a claim for assylum.
3) They are now in a potentially bad situation. Because they voluntarily left country B they no longer have a valid assylum claim there. And they do not technically have a valid claim in country C since they were NOT there at risk from whatever the problem was with country A.

Again please note -- I am NOT suggesting that these people be sent back, just that we might need something else BESIDES "assylum" here. A new expanded concept?

Mike Novack
mail e-mail: stepbyspefarm mtdata.com

Hide 1 hidden comment or hide all comments