Recognition of refugees is but the beginning
Charles HectorPublished: Dec 17, 2004 6:21 AM | Updated: Jan 29, 2008 10:21 AM
"A refugee is a person who owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality, and is unable to or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country..." - The 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees.
"A refugee is a person who owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality, and is unable to or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country..." - The 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees.
There is a growing number of persons coming to Malaysia seeking political asylum, and according to international standards these people should rightly be recognised as refugees.
Refugees, unlike economic migrants, are persons fleeing their countries by reason of political, religious, racial or cultural discrimination and persecution in their own country, to such an extent that returning home puts them in the real risk of being arrested, tortured and/or even executed (in some cases).
The refugees in Malaysia today include those from Aceh (Indonesia), Southern Thailand, Burma (being those who were involved in the pro-democracy struggle and Rohingya Muslims) and southern Filipino Muslims.
Our minister in the Prime Minister's Department, Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz, at the end of Oct 2004 announced that the government has decided to recognise Rohingyas as refugees.
In the Nov 2 malaysiakini report, Minister Aziz was reported to have said that the move to recognise Burmese Muslims or Rohingyas as refugees became policy last November, but has yet to be implemented.
In that report, he was also reported to have said that the Internal Security Division of the Home Ministry had agreed to recognise the Rohingyas as refugees in a meeting on Nov 13 last year following a co-ordination meeting on Oct 6.
On Dec 6 2004, Home Minister Azmi Khalid denied that there is a process to provide Rohingyas with identity documents. However four days later, Nazri again came out and confirmed the proposal would be implemented soon. To date, the Home Ministry has not received approval to recognise Rohingyas as refugees.
Confusion lingers in the air as to the status of the Rohingyas, and on the face of it, the home minister, or maybe even the prime minister, would be the appropriate minister to clarify matters but alas, there is silence.
Ministers and state officials must be very careful when they go to the media and make announcements or promises because people do rely on them. It is a gross injustice for those who relied on these representations to later find out that these statements were nothing but empty promises.
According to an earlier malaysiakini report entitled UNHCR: View our papers to avoid influx of economic migrants, it was stated that "this year alone, the UNHCR office here registered about 6,000 asylum seekers. To date, 30,000 asylum seekers have been registered in KL, with 20,000 of them documented, while another 9,000 applications are still being processed."
Recognition
These figures, however, are only of those who have applied, and as such the actual figures of persons who would fall into the category of 'refugee' may in reality be double or more.
Recognition as a refugee is not the end of the problem. What then will happen to him/her? Should a 'refugee' be allowed to roam freely or should he be placed in a refugee camp until he leaves for a receiving country? Should a 'refugee' be allowed to work and earn an income, or just reside idly in a refugee camp?
After the Sept 11 incident in the United States, and the US' proclamation of the "war on terror", there has been growing discrimination towards Muslims by first and second world countries, and the result is that there is now almost no rich country in the west that is willing to accept refugees, especially Muslim refugees.
The UNHCR is fully aware of this fact, however to set up refugee camps, where refugees may reside permanently (or for a very long time) would be a rather expensive affair and is not a viable solution to the refugee predicament.
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), after all, only provides funding assistance not full funding.
We remember some time ago the arrival of the Vietnamese boat people on our Malaysian shores. These were refugees fleeing Vietnam following the fall of the US backed, South Vietnamese regime.
Refugee camps were set up, housing thousands of refugees for several years. What many are unaware of was that many of the receiving countries of the west were only interested in taking the 'best quality refugees' that being the educated, the skilled, the professionals and/or the 'rich' refugees, and many a refugee that 'did not qualify' were later just sent back to Vietnam to face the music.
The global community, the United Nations and the UNHCR must go beyond calling on nation states to recognise refugees and provide asylum, but must work out practical and workable solutions as to the future of these refugees.
The housing and feeding of refugees in refugee camps requires manpower and resources, and this, I believe, must be borne wholly by the UN and/or the UNHCR.
Rich nation states, with sufficient resources to absorb refugees must be compelled to absorb all refugees into their societies, without any discrimination irrespective of education levels, cultural backgrounds, religion and/or or any other discriminatory criteria.
Without such assurances, it becomes more difficult for countries like Malaysia or other third world countries to just jump up, accept and recognise persons as refugees.
In Malaysia, a citizen is free to work. On the other hand, a documented migrant worker can only work provided he has the required work permit and the ability to attain a permit is determined by the existence of a memorandum of understanding (MOU), treaty and/or agreement between the sending nation and the receiving country.
With regard to refugees who are leaving their country without the blessing and approval of their government, it becomes near impossible for Malaysia to provide them with a work permit.
Bilateral relationships with one's neighbors is but one factor. Suhakam proposes that refugees be allowed to work (malaysiakini, Dec 14) but a statement of intent is insufficient without real analysis of the situation and a workable solution.
UN citizenship
Maybe the UN could grant refugees UN citizenship and hence enter into agreements with nation states to get work permits for its citizens.
When Libya refused to hand over two of their citizens suspected in the Lockerbie incident, the global community reacted by placing extreme sanctions on the country and its citizens for years.
When the Afghan government refused to hand over a suspect in the person of "Osama bin Laden", the US (without UN approval) invaded and overthrew the ruling government of Afghanistan.
Now, when it comes to 'refugees', being people who have fled their home countries, it is always possible that these neighboring countries may demand their return what then will happen?
We must never forget that Malaysia, with a population of about 25 over million, is small compared to many of the nation states these 'refugees' come from. Malaysia is also dependant on many of its ASEAN neighbors. If, the refugees become UN citizens, then maybe the problem may be alleviated.
It is insufficient for the global community, be it the United Nations, or other rich nations to sit in their comfortable sofas dictating principles and standards, without also giving a firm commitment with regard to resources, manpower and workable solutions.
Recognition of refugees and their rights must also mean a willingness to take refugees into one's community as a fellow citizen with equal rights. Is the west and the United States willing to do this, without any forms of discrimination with humanitarianism being the only consideration?
In Malaysia, to resolve the refugee problem, there is a serious need for the state to consider a 'refugee work permit', which will allow the tens of thousands of refugees to at least be able to work and support themselves.
The present stance of treating refugees as undocumented (or illegal) migrants has to be revamped. Arrest, detain and deport back to the country of origin is an unacceptable option.
Deporting economic migrants is very different from deporting refugees, for many refugees may likely be arrested, tortured and/or even summarily executed when they arrive back to their home country. As such deportation is a morally unacceptable solution to the refugee problem.
The refugee problem is more complex than what many believe, and to deal with this problem, there is a need for a serious brain-storming - not just on the part of the Malaysian government but also the UNHCR and the global community.
To ignore the problem is not a solution. To delay taking a position is not a solution. To "close one eye" is not a solution.
Is Malaysia recognising Rohingyas as refugees? If yes, very good, but then let us be fair and just, and not forget that our federal constitution provides for equal protection under the law. As such other refugees, be they from Aceh, Burma, Thailand, Philippines or other places must also be recognised and accorded the refugee status.
CHARLES HECTOR is a human rights activist and a lawyer.
There is a growing number of persons coming to Malaysia seeking political asylum, and according to international standards these people should rightly be recognised as refugees.
Refugees, unlike economic migrants, are persons fleeing their countries by reason of political, religious, racial or cultural discrimination and persecution in their own country, to such an extent that returning home puts them in the real risk of being arrested, tortured and/or even executed (in some cases).
The refugees in Malaysia today include those from Aceh (Indonesia), Southern Thailand, Burma (being those who were involved in the pro-democracy struggle and Rohingya Muslims) and southern Filipino Muslims.
Our minister in the Prime Minister's Department, Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz, at the end of Oct 2004 announced that the government has decided to recognise Rohingyas as refugees.
In the Nov 2 malaysiakini report, Minister Aziz was reported to have said that the move to recognise Burmese Muslims or Rohingyas as refugees became policy last November, but has yet to be implemented.
In that report, he was also reported to have said that the Internal Security Division of the Home Ministry had agreed to recognise the Rohingyas as refugees in a meeting on Nov 13 last year following a co-ordination meeting on Oct 6.
On Dec 6 2004, Home Minister Azmi Khalid denied that there is a process to provide Rohingyas with identity documents. However four days later, Nazri again came out and confirmed the proposal would be implemented soon. To date, the Home Ministry has not received approval to recognise Rohingyas as refugees.
Confusion lingers in the air as to the status of the Rohingyas, and on the face of it, the home minister, or maybe even the prime minister, would be the appropriate minister to clarify matters but alas, there is silence.
Ministers and state officials must be very careful when they go to the media and make announcements or promises because people do rely on them. It is a gross injustice for those who relied on these representations to later find out that these statements were nothing but empty promises.
According to an earlier malaysiakini report entitled UNHCR: View our papers to avoid influx of economic migrants, it was stated that "this year alone, the UNHCR office here registered about 6,000 asylum seekers. To date, 30,000 asylum seekers have been registered in KL, with 20,000 of them documented, while another 9,000 applications are still being processed."
Recognition
These figures, however, are only of those who have applied, and as such the actual figures of persons who would fall into the category of 'refugee' may in reality be double or more.
Recognition as a refugee is not the end of the problem. What then will happen to him/her? Should a 'refugee' be allowed to roam freely or should he be placed in a refugee camp until he leaves for a receiving country? Should a 'refugee' be allowed to work and earn an income, or just reside idly in a refugee camp?
After the Sept 11 incident in the United States, and the US' proclamation of the "war on terror", there has been growing discrimination towards Muslims by first and second world countries, and the result is that there is now almost no rich country in the west that is willing to accept refugees, especially Muslim refugees.
The UNHCR is fully aware of this fact, however to set up refugee camps, where refugees may reside permanently (or for a very long time) would be a rather expensive affair and is not a viable solution to the refugee predicament.
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), after all, only provides funding assistance not full funding.
We remember some time ago the arrival of the Vietnamese boat people on our Malaysian shores. These were refugees fleeing Vietnam following the fall of the US backed, South Vietnamese regime.
Refugee camps were set up, housing thousands of refugees for several years. What many are unaware of was that many of the receiving countries of the west were only interested in taking the 'best quality refugees' that being the educated, the skilled, the professionals and/or the 'rich' refugees, and many a refugee that 'did not qualify' were later just sent back to Vietnam to face the music.
The global community, the United Nations and the UNHCR must go beyond calling on nation states to recognise refugees and provide asylum, but must work out practical and workable solutions as to the future of these refugees.
The housing and feeding of refugees in refugee camps requires manpower and resources, and this, I believe, must be borne wholly by the UN and/or the UNHCR.
Rich nation states, with sufficient resources to absorb refugees must be compelled to absorb all refugees into their societies, without any discrimination irrespective of education levels, cultural backgrounds, religion and/or or any other discriminatory criteria.
Without such assurances, it becomes more difficult for countries like Malaysia or other third world countries to just jump up, accept and recognise persons as refugees.
In Malaysia, a citizen is free to work. On the other hand, a documented migrant worker can only work provided he has the required work permit and the ability to attain a permit is determined by the existence of a memorandum of understanding (MOU), treaty and/or agreement between the sending nation and the receiving country.
With regard to refugees who are leaving their country without the blessing and approval of their government, it becomes near impossible for Malaysia to provide them with a work permit.
Bilateral relationships with one's neighbors is but one factor. Suhakam proposes that refugees be allowed to work (malaysiakini, Dec 14) but a statement of intent is insufficient without real analysis of the situation and a workable solution.
UN citizenship
Maybe the UN could grant refugees UN citizenship and hence enter into agreements with nation states to get work permits for its citizens.
When Libya refused to hand over two of their citizens suspected in the Lockerbie incident, the global community reacted by placing extreme sanctions on the country and its citizens for years.
When the Afghan government refused to hand over a suspect in the person of "Osama bin Laden", the US (without UN approval) invaded and overthrew the ruling government of Afghanistan.
Now, when it comes to 'refugees', being people who have fled their home countries, it is always possible that these neighboring countries may demand their return what then will happen?
We must never forget that Malaysia, with a population of about 25 over million, is small compared to many of the nation states these 'refugees' come from. Malaysia is also dependant on many of its ASEAN neighbors. If, the refugees become UN citizens, then maybe the problem may be alleviated.
It is insufficient for the global community, be it the United Nations, or other rich nations to sit in their comfortable sofas dictating principles and standards, without also giving a firm commitment with regard to resources, manpower and workable solutions.
Recognition of refugees and their rights must also mean a willingness to take refugees into one's community as a fellow citizen with equal rights. Is the west and the United States willing to do this, without any forms of discrimination with humanitarianism being the only consideration?
In Malaysia, to resolve the refugee problem, there is a serious need for the state to consider a 'refugee work permit', which will allow the tens of thousands of refugees to at least be able to work and support themselves.
The present stance of treating refugees as undocumented (or illegal) migrants has to be revamped. Arrest, detain and deport back to the country of origin is an unacceptable option.
Deporting economic migrants is very different from deporting refugees, for many refugees may likely be arrested, tortured and/or even summarily executed when they arrive back to their home country. As such deportation is a morally unacceptable solution to the refugee problem.
The refugee problem is more complex than what many believe, and to deal with this problem, there is a need for a serious brain-storming - not just on the part of the Malaysian government but also the UNHCR and the global community.
To ignore the problem is not a solution. To delay taking a position is not a solution. To "close one eye" is not a solution.
Is Malaysia recognising Rohingyas as refugees? If yes, very good, but then let us be fair and just, and not forget that our federal constitution provides for equal protection under the law. As such other refugees, be they from Aceh, Burma, Thailand, Philippines or other places must also be recognised and accorded the refugee status.
CHARLES HECTOR is a human rights activist and a lawyer.
View Comments0