Non-Governmental Organizations' Submission to the Standing Committee of the Executive Committee of the United Nations High Commissioner's Programme

15 Meeting, Geneva, June 28, 1999

Agenda Item 3 (i), Note on International Protection

International solidarity and responsibility sharing

1. The on-going crisis in Kosovo has focused international attention on the plight of refugees in a way few other refugee emergencies ever have. We welcome the unprecedented outpouring of international concern and assistance for the Kosovar refugees. The international community has proven through its actions that it has the capacity to respond generously and speedily to alleviate the plight of refugees and the internally displaced.

2. The international refugee problem does not, unfortunately, end in Kosovo. Some 800,000 refugees were forced to flee Kosovo over the past years, while an estimated 600,000 people were internally displaced. This represents a fraction of the 14 million refugees, and 22 million internally displaced persons worldwide. Sadly, the majority of these people have not benefited from the level of international solidarity and assistance provided to the Kosovar refugees. UNHCR, for example, had a budget of US$10 million a week for the Kosovar refugees in neighbouring countries. At the same time, UNHCR has only been able to raise US$ 1.3 million of its annual US$8 million appeal for the nearly half a million Sierra Leonean refugees in Guinea and Liberia, many of whom have fled the most unspeakable atrocities. International efforts to assist refugees and seek solutions to their plight must be equitable and based on human need, regardless of the nationality, race, geographic, political, or military importance of the refugee population.

3. We are particularly concerned about the ways in which governments respond to situations of large-scale influx. In 1981, this Executive Committee adopted Conclusion 22 which states that,in situations of large-scale influx, asylum seekers should be admitted to the State in which they first seek refuge and if that State is unable to admit them on a durable basis, it should always admit them at least on a temporary basis and provide them with protection....0/00 The Conclusion continues by reinforcing the fundamental principle of non-refoulement, including non-rejection at the border. Recognizing the unduly heavy burden that a large-scale influx of refugees may place on certain countries of asylum, the Conclusion also promotes international co-operation and assistance for host countries, within a framework of international solidarity and burden sharing.

4. We welcome the readiness of governments to share responsibility for the Kosovar refugees through the humanitarian evacuation programme. However, we are concerned that the Humanitarian Evacuation Programme was introduced mainly because a country of first asylum closed its borders to a large scale influx of refugees and refused to fully honour its obligations as stipulated in the 1951 Refugee Convention and elaborated in Conclusion 22. Governments throughout the world, regardless of their internal political, economic, or strategic circumstances, have an obligation not to return refugees to a country where they could face persecution or serious human rights violations. Failure to allow refugees entry into a country, or expulsion at the border, constitute a violation of the fundamental principle of non-refoulement.

5. International solidarity and "burden sharing" can not obscure governments , failure to observe fundamental obligations under international refugee law. Neither can refugees be held hostage to a government's political demands. We are deeply concerned at the precedent this could set for refugee crises elsewhere, where the international community may be less willing to intervene.

6. We endorse the position taken by UNHCR that those who fled Kosovo should be considered as refugees as defined under Article 1A of the 1951 Convention, and treated as such. There is, however, no uniformity in the legal status afforded to refugees under the humanitarian evacuation programme. In some countries, evacuated refugees have been given full refugee status and guaranteed long-term protection. In other countries, refugees have been given a discretionary, temporary status, with no guarantee that they will have access to an individual determination of their asylum claim once this status is lifted. Governments, obligations towards those who are evacuated have not always been clearly defined, and there is no guarantee that return will be conducted according to international standards.

7. The right to seek and enjoy asylum can not be bargained with. Yet, we are dismayed at the myriad of obstructive practices and policies, many of which are highlighted in this year's Note on International Protection, that countries, particularly wealthy, industrialized countries, continue to mount to prevent asylum seekers from entering their territory. Many of these policies are inconsistent with international refugee law. Moreover, restrictive policies in western Europe, north America, and Australia have contributed to a global climate in which refugees and asylum seekers everywhere find it increasingly difficult to find safe asylum.

Refugees in situations of armed conflict

8. The civilian and humanitarian character of refugee camps and settlements has not been upheld over the past year. Most strikingly, during the Kosovo refugee crisis humanitarian, political, and military mandates have sometimes been indistinguishable, and the strictly humanitarian and non-political nature of refugee work has not been observed.

9. While we recognize the logistical support that NATO troops and national military contingents provided at the beginning of the Kosovo crisis, the continuing involvement of these military units in various aspects of the humanitarian refugee assistance and return operation has seriously undermined the civilian nature of the refugee programme and compromised the independence of humanitarian action. We are worried about the precedent such developments could set for refugee emergencies elsewhere in the world.

10. We are seriously concerned about the number of attacks on refugee camps and settlements over the past year and, again, we wish to draw attention to the discrepancies in the international response to this problem. A striking example is the situation in Guinea, where refugee camps continue to be located too close to the border with Sierra Leone and have been the target of repeated cross-border attacks and military incursions during which refugees have been killed, abducted, mutilated and seriously maimed. Only a few weeks ago, on May 22, one camp in the Forecariah area of Guinea was attacked and eleven civilians were killed. For over a year, NGOs have been calling for refugee camps to be relocated away from the border. To date, a severe shortage of funds, bad roads, and a shameful lack of international concern, have meant that less than 10 percent of the refugees have been moved to safety. The insecure location of refugee camps exposes women to rape and sexual violence, and increases the possibility of forced recruitment of refugee children and adolescents. We call on Member States to cooperate with UNHCR and to provide the necessary funding to ensure that the security of all refugees is guaranteed, regardless of where they are from or where they seek refuge.

Groups with special protection needs

11. We welcome the initiatives to promote the interests of refugee women and children highlighted in this year's Note on International Protection and are glad to see the prominence UNHCR is attaching to these issues. Nevertheless, in the course of our work we continue to find countless instances where the rights of refugee women and children are not respected and their needs are blatantly ignored.

12. In Guinea, for example, UNHCR has failed to identify and assist the large number of unaccompanied children who have been separated from their families, most of whom are staying with "caretaker" families. Children are subjected to physical and sexual abuse, exploitation, hazardous labour, and other ill treatment, with little or no protection from UNHCR field staff and protection officers. A chronic shortage of funds and severe problems in the delivery of assistance has meant that many camps have been without food distribution for months on end. At the same time, failures to register "vulnerable" groups in a recent census operation, have meant that large numbers of separated children, and other refugees who are entitled to special assistance, have been excluded from all assistance. Lack of assistance is the root cause of many of the human rights abuses identified in the refugee camps. Refugee girls are forced into prostitution in order to meet their daily needs, and children risk their lives crossing the border in search of food.

13. In Tanzania, Kenya, Afghanistan, and Guinea, amongst other countries, NGOs have found that women and girl refugees are subjected to high levels of domestic and sexual violence in refugee camps and settlements. Unfortunately, government authorities and UNHCR staff do not always pay adequate attention to these problems. Incidents of sexual violence are often not reported, and when they are, little action is taken to protect the women and bring the perpetrators to justice. Although many women suffer from serious domestic abuse in refugee settings, UNHCR staff and government authorities often do not view the problem as a serious protection concern. Domestic abuse is considered to be a "private issue" that does not warrant official intervention.

14. UNHCR guidelines and policies on refugee women and children are frequently not implemented, even by UNHCR's own staff. At every level, UNHCR staff must be held accountable for the implementation of policies on women and children, and member states should provide the necessary funding for on-going activities in this regard. The posts of senior coordinators for refugee women and children must be given the funding, staff, and authority to effectively carry out their functions in order to ensure that the interests of women and children are represented throughout the organization. Member states must also comply with their obligations under international law to defend the rights of women and children. In particular, we call on member states not to let domestic political interests stand in the way of international efforts to cease the recruitment of child soldiers.

The Search for Solutions

15. Over the past weeks we have witnessed the mass return of thousands of refugees back to their homes, or the remnants of their homes, in Kosovo. While we acknowledge the desire of many refugees to return early, we are concerned that their security and protection must be paramount in any return operation. Refugees should be provided with full and objective information about the security conditions inside Kosovo, and no one should be forced or intimidated into returning. We are also concerned that international protection should continue to be provided to those unable to return due to a well-founded fear of persecution in Kosovo. Alternative durable solutions, including resettlement or local integration, should be available for those unable to return.

16. The scenes of thousands of refugees returning to their homes in Kosovo brings to mind the millions of refugees throughout the world who, due to international neglect and a lack of concerted political will, are unable to realize their right to return. The 3.5 million Palestinian refugees dispersed throughout the Middle East remain one of the world's largest and oldest refugee populations, some of whom have been living in exile for over 50 years. 100,000 Bhutanese refugees, one sixth of the entire population of that country, have been in exile in Nepal for the past decade, with little prospect of an early solution to their plight. Elsewhere, refugees from Burma, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, and Sudan, to name but a few countries, remain in exile for years, unable to return to their country because the insecurity, conflict, human rights abuses, and absence of rule of law that caused their flight, continue to exist. Whole communities have been rendered to a life of dependency, unable to lead active lives as full citizens of their countries. Whole generations of children and young people have known no other life but that of a refugee camp. These are the "lost generations", the victims of shameful neglect by the international community.

17. We note that in many cases, statelessness, lack of an effective nationality, or disputed nationality, remain a serious obstacle to return. We call on states to cooperate with UNHCR in the pursuit of solutions to these problems so that refugees are able to regain their citizenship and return to their countries of origin.

18. We appeal to member states to urgently address these protracted and unresolved refugee problems. We call on you to seek durable, political solutions to these situations so that millions of refugees and internally displaced persons can return to their homes in safety and dignity, with full respect for their human rights. We also call on the international community to reinvigorate alternative durable solutions, including local integration and third country resettlement, for those refugees unable to return to their homes.

19. In particular, we urge countries to increase their resettlement quotas to respond equitably to the needs of thousands of refugees throughout the world, especially those in protracted refugee situations for whom there is no other solution. We note the need for resettlement opportunities for those refugees who have no option of local integration or voluntary repatriation, including urban refugees and "vulnerable" refugees with special protection needs. We rely on UNHCR to provide states with regular and well-informed estimates about global numbers of refugees in need of resettlement. We are concerned that governments should not view the Kosovo humanitarian evacuation programme as a substitute for regular resettlement quotas for refugees elsewhere in the world. Nor should states vary their resettlement quotas on the basis of the number of asylum seekers in their territory.

Towards a global partnership for protection

20. Finally, we firmly support the need for states and civil society to work together to revitalize and uphold fundamental refugee protection principles. The role of NGOs in this partnership is critical, and we look forward to a more open and meaningful dialogue with states and UNHCR based on a common commitment to defending the rights and needs of refugees and displaced persons worldwide. More specifically, we look forward to wider NGO representation and participation in refugee policy forums and greater access to decision-making processes, including the drafting of the Executive Committee Conclusions.

21. We recognize that there are still serious gaps in refugee protection worldwide. In particular, we note the absence of an effective refugee protection regime in Asia, where there is no regional refugee instrument, very few countries have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention, and few governments have developed national refugee and asylum legislation which is consistent with international refugee standards and principles. We also note with concern the large number of internally displaced persons worldwide who do not benefit from any kind of national or international protection and assistance.

22. At the same time we concur with the Note that the failure of states to comply with their existing obligations under international refugee law remains a serious problem. We stress the need for an independent, international monitoring mechanism to ensure state compliance and accountability and we urge the Executive Committee to give serious consideration to this matter.

23. As we enter a new millennium, we appeal to states not to abandon age-old institutions of asylum and refugee protection for shorter-term financial, political and strategic interests. Ultimately, the human cost of such policies is too high.