Global Posts

Pretoria, South Africa, 23 September, 2008

Lawyers for Human Rights has been monitoring the situation in the recently consolidated camps for the victims of May’s xenophobic violence.  We have also been following the court process taking place in the Constitutional Court and await the directions from the Court regarding the future of the camps. 

While LHR believes that the camps should be phased out in the near future, we are of the opinion that the delay and lack of willingness on the part of government to make a concrete re-integration plan for these individuals has created a situation where victims of violence do not know whether they can integrate into communities in safety or not. 

We are deeply concerned about reports that methods of coercion and intimidation have been employed in the camps to force residents to leave the sites.  These methods include the removal of identity cards from residents, removing their property, including clothes, arresting residents for “trespassing” and then withdrawing the charges after a weekend in detention. To make things worse, the notorious “Red Ants” was deployed to remove the tents from the residents of the Akasia camps leaving refugees without shelter.

In similar fashion, residents from the Rand Airport site were evicted without notice or court order in breach of its commitment to the Constitutional Court that the government will obtain proper eviction court orders in terms if the Prevention of Illegal Evictions Act before forcing residents to leave the camps.

While we have always taken the position that permanent refugee camps are not an option in South Africa, we feel that the government has a responsibility to create a concrete plan of action for re-integration of camp residents.  While we note that government agents have been working on the ground to investigate conditions in the communities, this appears to have been on an ad hoc basis with no formal plan in place.  We further note that funds have been provided by aid agencies such as the UNHCR and UNICEF to residents to incentivise them to integrate into the community.  While these efforts are assisting individuals to re-integrate into communities, there are still large numbers who fear returning to communities. 

Intimidation and threats cannot replace a concrete plan for re-integration.  We immediately call on government to:

• Stop all acts of intimidation against camp residents;
• Not remove the temporary immigration exemption cards issued under section 31(2)(b) of the Immigration  Act;
• Allow residents access to their property from the camp;
• To honor its commitment to the Constitutional Court not to evict any residents without a court order authorizing it;
• Immediately call off the Red Ants who have been deployed in the Akasia camp. 

LHR is concerned that these intimidation methods will lead to further distrust of the government and make it even more difficult for the refugee and migrant communities to integrate into South African society.  Integration of refugees is a legal obligation on the South African government, both in terms of domestic and international law.  We call on government to respect that obligation and assist in the re-integration of these victims of violence.

For more information, please contact:

David Cote, Lawyers for Human Rights,                 

012-320-2943    072-628-7698   david@lhr.org.za

Tuesday 23 September 2008

On Friday 19 September 2008 the UNHCR office in South Africa released a press statement criticizing the “negative role civil society has played” in the xenophobia crisis since May 2008. The UNHCR press statement was in response to a joint civil society report which, amongst other areas of attention, detailed the failure of the UNHCR to act according to its’ mandate during the crisis.

At the beginning of the crisis civil society recognized the importance of utilizing the expertise and practical support of the UNHCR as the internationally experienced and mandated body in dealing with issues of displacement. With this in mind, many attempts were made to invite the UNHCR to meetings, address concerns to them via correspondence and work together with them.

The UNHCR press statement singles out the AIDS Law Project and TAC for specific criticism, yet at all meetings they have met with all civil society organizations involved in the crisis.

• On 3 June 2008 civil society issued a joint appeal to the UNHCR to act according to its’ mandate in assisting displaced people. There was no response.
• On 20 June 2008- World Refugee Day- civil society issued a memorandum to the UNHCR addressing the failure of that agency to act during the crisis. There was no response.
• The UNHCR issued an undated letter that gave insubstantial information to displaced people.
• On 9 July 2008 civil society called for clarification on the undated letter issued by the UNHCR. There was no response.
• The UNHCR walked out of one meeting with refugee leadership at Soetwater camp. (Minutes available on request).
• The UNHCR has failed to respond to several letters from civil society expressing concerns regarding conditions in camps and issues surrounding repatriation, reintegration and resettlement.

The issues about which civil society is concerned are not frivolous criticism. It is documented that the UNHCR has, amongst other failures during the crisis:

· Observed the horrific conditions in the camps over several months without appropriate intervention.

· Observed a clumsy consolidation process that led to people being exposed to a massive storm and several violations to human rights.

· Have allowed undocumented displaced people to remain vulnerable and without access to the rights enjoyed by those documented people protected by its’ mandate. The UNHCR should have put more pressure on government to provide legal status to those requiring it.

· Delayed processes of repatriation, reintegration and resettlement causing fear, uncertainty and further trauma to displaced people.

· Refused to engage with individual displaced people, and not established a team capable of dealing with the magnitude of the crisis. There have been two UNHCR officials in the Western Cape- it is obvious that these individuals cannot adequately monitor the situation.

· Partnered with the Cape Town Refugee Centre, an organization which has also failed miserably in providing support during the crisis. Civil society expressed dismay at this relationship in a formal letter to the UN.

· Failed to critically engage with government on issues relating to the rights of refugees.

· Failed to adequately advise the government on issues related to site planning. One site, Wadeville, had to be closed due to poor planning, and one site, Vickers Road, was never utilised due to a court interdict, obtained by civil society and humanitarian organisations, mandating government not to relocate the displaced there because it was unsuitable and unsafe.

· Supported camp closure, with no reintegration plan. This UNHCR supported plan was ruled against by the Constitutional court.

Civil society organizations have performed the following tasks during the crisis:

• Mobilising and distributing vast amounts of humanitarian aid, in terms of food and non-food items to camps and safety sites.
• Carrying out continuous site assessments to ascertain the numbers of people requiring humanitarian aid, and pinpointing areas where this aid has been insufficient.
• Drafted lengthy reports making practical and urgent recommendations to government and the UNHCR.
• Monitoring that human rights within the camps and sites have not been compromised, and making recommendations to government and the UNHCR where rights such as protection against violence, food, shelter and dignity have been compromised.
• Assisting displaced people by providing access to legal assistance.
• Put pressure on government to ensure that displaced people are protected during reintegration.
• Consulted with representative refugee leadership throughout the crisis.
• Provided legal support, especially the Legal Resources Centre, in the form of advice, written moratoriums, affidavits and other legal documents, direct intervention where displaced people have been arrested and consultatively when civil society has at all times intended to operate within the framework of South African law.
• Khayelitsha TAC assisted people with reintegration, TAC also sheltered people at two sites, and fed and clothed people during the crisis, spending 3 million Rand on humanitarian relief. (See attached list).

Civil society calls on the UNHCR to produce their own report documenting their involvement during the crisis, and their claimed adherence to international principles and human rights law. This report must indicate the exact movements of their local staff, their attendance at meetings, actions taken, and recommendations given to government. Civil society also calls on the international office of the UNHCR to instigate an inquiry into the actions and inactions of the South African office during the crisis.

ENDORSED BY THE FOLLOWING ORGANISATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS AS PART OF CIVIL SOCIETY:

Cosatu

Displaced Refugee Network

Tracey Saunders, independent volunteer

Sam Pearce, independent volunteer

Sonke Gender Justice Network

Social Justice Coalition

Treatment Action Campaign

AIDS Law Project

Joint Refugee Leadership Committee of the Western Cape

Legal Resources Centre

For Further comment or details, call:

Scott Dunlop, Communications TAC Xenophobia Task Team

084 719 8258

(021) 422 1490

SOME ADDITIONAL COMMENTS BY CIVIL SOCIETY AND OTHER VOLUNTEERS

The JCSMF noted the inadequate role played by UNHCR in upholding its mandate to protect refugees in South Africa. The UNHCR has consistently abdicated its responsibility and has supported government policies that negatively impact on refugee protection – including but not limited to the issue of camp closure. UNHCR has not adequately consulted and communicated with the displaced, which has resulted in misplaced policy and operational decisions. The JCSMF calls on UNHCR to uphold its mandate and to critically engage with government (in consultation with the displaced and civil society) on matters impacting on refugee protection.

Joint Civil Society Monitoring Forum:

(All founding members present at the meeting endorsed these resolutions: ALP, TAC UCT, MSF, PSAM

Also endorsed by HST, ARASA, OUT, RHRU, SWEAT, CSPRI, ALN, SCAT, Sonke Gender Justice)

“In the four months since the first camps were opened, very little has changed in Cape Town. People are still being housed in leaking tents in beach camp sites which are exposed to the harsh weather conditions .Nutritional needs of babies, infants and children are still not being met.   Access to education and health facilities is limited. There is no assurance of security and meaningful dialogue with government has been so pitiful that it is hardly worth mentioning. People are still despondent and signs of trauma are still evident. The one thing that has changed is that the constant pleas I initially heard for intervention by the UNHCR have become inaudible. Not only have displaced foreign nationals lost hope in the South African government but they have also lost hope in the international body that is mandated to protect them.

I can’t help but draw a parallel between the UNHCR’s role and the tents that they have provided. Neither has offered any protection. The tents lie strewn around the camp site at Blue Waters .Those that are still standing are leaking.They have been as insubstantial and meaningless as the constant assurance provide by the UNHCR that all is well and the crisis is being addressed adequately”.

Tracey Saunders

Independent volunteer,

“What “negative impact”? If it was not for TAC,ALP and others the displaced would have been at the absolute mercy of an agency that up till today has still not displayed the ability to resolve the problem. Who co-ordinated and provided humanitarian relief from day one when all the UNHCR was concerned about was the protocols to be adhered to for fear of embarrassing the state? This conformity with its mandate is obviously not what was required at the time given the unique nature of the situation. The UNHCR must take full responsibility for the negative impression that currently prevails amongst volunteers and foreign nationals which is due to their own inadequate response and seeming buckling to the dictates of the state rather than the needs of the victims”.

Mike Louw, Cosatu

Sorry for my slack updates. It’s hard to write about the endlessly sad saga sometimes, and difficult to identify its gaps, needs, and concerns in quick ways.

It was a blur at Harmony Park today. UNHCR and UNICEF representatives were visiting en masse, engaged in long and drawn out meetings with the leaders over the voluntary registration process, which only started as I was leaving. The two options were outlined, the reintegration ‘package’ discussed, and the terms of participation made clear. I was troubled by the overemphasis of the readily accessible assistance from the Cape Town Refugee Center. Towards, the end of the meeting, a representative of UNICEF said, as it had not been said until this point, that the camp will close in a few months: this broke the otherwise cooperative mood. Harsh voices were raised (an acute comment from a Burundian resident on the importance of not calling reintegration an ‘opportunity’, for example) and tempers frayed. The major concerns surround the uncertainty for those who are still in the camp on the day of its closing and of the time after the two-months of UNHCR-sponsored rent ends (which seems to be allocated in problematically formal ways). I think that most residents will try to participate in one of the two options (reintegration, repatriation). The Congolese and Burundians residents (the ‘no hopers’, according to one mediator I spoke with, cynically but wisely) are a group with particular needs and myriad complex situations that I remain unconvinced have been adequately thought about on part of the state.
Home Affairs and UCT Law Clinic lawyers will come tomorrow, I hear. Mediator teams are large in Harmony and the surrounding areas. The extensive camp management seem to have most things under control, and they remain extremely cooperative and responsive to questions. Security has improved. There were troubling rumors of an event at Blue Waters in which a civil society group was quoted as actively telling people to not participate in the UNHCR processes and not to leave the camp (I’m unsure what to make of any rumors like this). There has been some circulated print material from Prosec Professional Security (B. Sithole, 021 551 4533) that says that foreign workers will no longer be employed by their company.
Some basic data I could get: 476 men, 131 women, 139 children (where have the children come from?!). Total camp population: 746.
83 tents (including 54 family tents). 58 toilets (12 male, 12 female indoor ones). 24 showers (12 for men, 12 for women). 50 dustbins…
Since the arrest of the oldest leader, I’m increasingly being used as a mediator to the mediators and camp management. It feels tiring at times, though it is usually helpful in relaying messages between people during the more heated moments. I continue to go to the camp as often as I can, and stay in regular phone contact with residents, camp management, and the mediator team by phone and email in between my visits.

Written by longterm volunteer

REINTEGRATION IS NOT AN OPTION

On Thursday, 18 September 2008, we received the delegates from Provincial Government, City of Cape Town, UNHCR, UNICEF headed by CTRC Director, Ms Christine Henda. In a meeting together with the Bluewaters Leaders, after reluctantly holding a meeting with Leaders before they should embark to the process of registering IDP, they said that their main purpose was to register IDP’s and thereafter reintegrate them. This meeting was held out of their will. It was held because the Leaders insisted that they could not pitch up in camp and start attending IDP’s when the Leaders do not know what exactly going on. This was seen by Leaders as to take advantage of desperate refugees who have been in dilemma of reintegration, repatriation or resettlement.

There were many questions that were asked. These questions were not given satisfactory answers. Many questions were addressed to the UNHCR Field Assistant, Ms Diana hence the UNHCR has indicated several times that it is monitoring the development of the government in fighting against xenophobia. The following are some of the questions that were asked:

1. Are they happy with what the government is doing so that now it is safe for the IDP’s to go back?
2. Does it (UNHCR) see that the 2 months accommodation money is enough for someone who his/ her belongings were being taken away or her business looted?
3. Why does the government want to reintegrate undocumented people, while the cards were given are not being recognized by any institution?
4. How the UNHCR think that IDP’s will resume his/her life back into community with the threats that going on of closing down businesses, are we going to be employed by the government this time around if we cannot run businesses?
5. How should we survive since we do not have a piece of land where we can cultivate even a cabbage or spinach!
6. Why the UNHCR that supposed to protect us is sending us in hell as the same as one we ran from back home?

She (UNHCR) said that she was following orders from above. She did not disclose who has given her orders. Ms Christine Henda said that she was running out of funds. If we do not cooperate with them, we will be stuck in the camp and nobody who will be coming to help us because the camp will be closing very soon. But first of all, who did she spend money to? The delegates from Provincial government and City of Cape Town had nothing to say, they excluded themselves in this process.

We have questioned several times the role of CTRC (Cape Town Refugee Centre) in the path to reintegration and which criteria an IDP must met to qualify to be reintegrated. She (Ms. Christine) refused to answer a letter that was sent to her by TAC on behalf of IDP’s asking her role in reintegration, despite of answering the letter, she did not attend the meeting with civil societies together with JRLC thereafter. Likewise, the UNHCR South Africa refused to answer the letter that was sent to them asking clarification about their role and the role of CTRC.

On this day, we were told that they wanted to know how many people who want to cooperate with them so that they can help them with reintegration. They said that they are willing to pay a rent fee of not more than R750 per month per a single and between R1200 - R1500 per family with a condition that a person may go to look for accommodation by himself. And after finding a vacant accommodation you were looking for, you have to come back and see Ms. Christine at her office in Wynberg together with the landlord’s account number in your hand! She will be paying the accommodation through landlords’ account since she will not be giving any body cash. There won’t be any other assistance to help someone to start off a living; everybody must start a new life as it was the case when first arrived in SA!

For those who may be willing to reintegrate in another communities as you know that nobody who is willing to go back in the community that he/she is once chased from. This proposal may not work out easily as they anticipated because it is not easy to find an accommodation here in the Western Cape normally. Eventually, that is why people ended up staying in black suburbs. There is other people who went to stay in these areas according to what their pockets may afford, the question is if someone was able to pay R200 a month, and now is taken back into community where he/she has to rent a room of R 1500 per month, and Reintegration Facilitators Team pay only for 2 months, and then after 2 months, this person is left to sustain him/herself, that is to pay a rent and to take care of his/her family. Do you think really this person will manage to live in this community that he or she would be settled? Or they want to throw us on to streets again!

Unfortunately, we were attacked because we were blamed for social problems that we have no control over such as drugs, theft, robbery, unemployment and poor service delivery, etc. How is South Africans going to feel if we go around asking their account numbers? Are not going to have this feeling that we are going to steal their money from their accounts? Who may give account to someone he/she does not know (I mean who is not yet his lessee)? Merely because you will be coming to lease his/her house at indeterminable day and month! It sounds to us as more prejudice if not apathy.

However, reintegration into communities that expelled us is not an option and UNHCR and government ought not to take advantage of hopeless IDP by enticing them with ridiculous monetary or force us to go where life may be taken away any time any minute because “a life taken away may never be returned”

At this stage where South Africa is facing political crisis, I fear that refugees may be left to die with nobody noticing what is going on the ground, because now, Xenophobia is not what matters to the nation! Though, we are disappointed by the UNHCR supporting inconsiderate reintegration.

Kavuro Callixte

Senior Member of Bluewaters Committee and JRLC.

Letter to the Argus

In response to the statement by the UNHCR (UNHCR rejects criticism, 19 September 2008), I wish the UNHCR had been as vocal in deploring the inhumane conditions endured by foreign nationals as they now are in their knee jerk response to the request by the ALP to an enquiry in to their role in the past 4 months .

The UNHCR would be advised to read Amnesty International’s report (AFR 53/012/2008) on the xenophobic violence and the humanitarian crisis which resulted .AI recommends that the UNHCR and other UN agencies “provide adequate and sufficient monitoring of the protection and human rights situation of all”. One would think that the ongoing monitoring by civil society would be welcomed by the UN rather than dismissed as “systematic criticism”.

In the four months since the first camps were opened, very little has changed in Cape Town . People are still being housed in leaking tents in beach camp sites which are exposed to the harsh weather conditions .Nutritional needs of babies, infants and children are still not being met. Access to education and health facilities is limited. There is no assurance of security and meaningful dialogue with government has been so pitiful that it is hardly worth mentioning. People are still despondent and signs of trauma are still evident. The one thing that has changed is that the constant pleas I initially heard for intervention by the UNHCR have become inaudible. Not only have displaced foreign nationals lost hope in the South African government but they have also lost hope in the international body which is mandated to protect them.

I can’t help but draw a parallel between the UNHCR’s role and the tents that they have provided. Neither has offered any protection. The tents lie strewn around the camp site at Blue Waters .Those that are still standing are leaking.They have been as insubstantial and meaningless as the constant assurance provide by the UNHCR that all is well and the crisis is being addressed adequately.

While Hildegaard Fast continues to “carefully craft “ her reintegration plan , 4 months after people were forced from their homes , and mediators in the office of the Premier continue fumbling  around , organisations and individuals will continue to do what they have done for the past 4 months ; provide basic humanitarian assistance , monitor the situation , report on humans rights abuses and give what little comfort we can to those who are still caught up in this never ending nightmare.It is a pity that the UNHCR has little more than criticism to offer.

Tracey Saunders - Volunteer

Some civil society groups have had a “negative impact” on efforts to solve the refugee crisis, the Southern African office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees said on Friday.
It was reacting to an announcement by the Aids Law Project that it and other organisations would ask the UN to set up a formal inquiry into the way the office had dealt with xenophobia victims.
The ALP said the office had stood by while the rights of people who sought its protection had been violated.
However, the office said in a statement that since the May 2008 attacks on foreigners, the UNHCR had played its role in conformity with its mandate and had worked closely with the government in addressing the problems of displaced people.
Among them had been refugees and asylum seekers, as well as others who did not fall under the agency’s mandate.
Given the broad composition of the groups, a response had called for the involvement of other humanitarian agencies as well, with whom the UNHCR had worked closely.
“UNHCR deplores the negative role played by some civil society groups, which have failed to make any constructive contribution to the search for solutions to this problem, but have rather systematically criticised those who are genuinely trying to tackle the problem at hand,” the statement said.
“This has had a negative impact on the search for solutions for the displaced”.
The office said it had engaged groups including the Treatment Action Campaign and the ALP, and clearly explained to them UNHCR’s mandate and role in South Africa.
“Regrettably, these groups have failed to understand or accept the explanations”. - Sapa

Published on the Web by IOL on 2008-09-19 10:24:18

Account of 2nd weekly standing meeting below comes on the heels of
province’s failure to collect 2 Joint Refugee Leadership Committee reps to
attend the JOC twice in the last 2 weeks. Now with the cancellation of the
JOC, and the poor efforts to meaningfully engage with the JRLC, leaders are
concluding there is no genuine commitment to dialogue from govt.

From: “CALLIXTE KAVURO” <2831938@uwc.ac.za>

Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 4:37 PM

Subject: Re: JRLC standing meeting at H Park 16th Sept

Hello my dear Sam!
Here there is a report that I have compiled from the leaders who attended the meeting at Harmony Park. I was not able to join others in the meeting because as I have planned with my colleague, they supposed to pick me up from Bellville since I was at the campus. I was called by Yves in the afternoon informing that there was no transport that was sent by provincial government.  Therefore, I thought that the meeting was cancelled! I do not have a number of the people who are in charge of communication; I mean those whom have assumed Tracy and Sam’s role to facilitate the interaction between the government and refugees so I should not reach them to know what happened.
However, the provincial government sent a Toyota Tazz to pick up the leaders from the two camps of Bluewaters. The car arrived late, around 15 o clock when, the meeting has already started in Harmony Park at 14 H00! Only 4 Leaders were able to get in the car, that is Said, Yves, Bienvenue, and one lady representing women from the DRC. You can see that the car was so full, so they did not bother to pass by to camp “C” see to pick up other leaders (Somalis).
Meanwhile, Ghalib had called leaders in Bluewaters to tell them that the car will be arriving. He said that the car will be late because the driver did not know very well the way to our camp, as a result he got lost in her way to Bluewaters. What I do not know is whether he (Ghalib) tried to reach other leaders to let them know of the inconveniences, or any other problem that came up that prompted inconveniences.
They arrived at Harmony park at 15h40, the mood that was found there was like the meeting was over, and leaders from Bluwaters asked themselves why they should attend such meeting because the meeting was about to be called the day, and cannot participate unless to sit down and listen at this point. After sitting down, they came to realize Young field was not represented as well. This was seen like the meeting was only for Harmony Park, and others were only lobbying or excluded from the meeting!
The meeting was chaired and conducted by Ghalib, despite another lady who was writing everything said in a meeting down. He was with another lady that came from UNHCR, whom they were not able to identify by her name as Blue waters found that the meeting was already started, the introduction was already done! They did not have a chance to know the name of the visitor.
Mr. Said from Bluewaters, a Tanzanian asked that they might be briefed since their presence and intention were to attend the meeting. They are not going to come back without any information about what have been said or agreed, or reached in a meeting. Gharib briefly explained them. He told them that he (I think now this is a second time) was not able to arrange a meeting, where the officials from the DHA should have attended the meeting in order that their can give all the information about registration, and issuing of the document to IDP’s, and why the Provincial Government of the Western Cape wants to use the same team from Gauteng that issued only rejected to IDP’s from Gauteng. The issuing of these documents have resulted in people being unwillingly repatriated and others are in Lindela waiting for deportation. We wonder why they choose to  call that team when here in W Cape, there is Home Affaires department.
His briefing, according to Ghalib was the only issue of paramount importance to tell the leaders from Bluewaters, and he told them that there is no other thing which is important has been raised in that meeting. While a meeting was around to finish, there was a leader who questioned about the threats that is happening in Khayelitsha and other places. He wanted to know what the govt is doing about such threats on foreigners who are running businesses especially Somalis, what the government is doing to eradicate such threats.
Then, Ghalib acknowledged this new cold wave of xenophobia of threatening foreigners that it is very serious issue. He said that the government is doing its best so foreigners and the locals may live together side by side, but Khayelitsha is a poor location, and the government will not deal with this problem easily because the inhabitants are adamant due to the government lack of service delivery. This includes other poor places, but the government to deal with this problem it has first to alleviate the locations so that people may be with at least a better life. This will take a quite long time to come up with satisfied solution to both side, he said.
A lady from the UNHCR told leaders that the UNHCR cannot implement their own policy of which may be in conflict with the government. They respect the Republic of SA as a sovereign country; therefore, they cannot interfere with its own policy. She said that what the UNHCR is doing now is to advise the govt and monitor the commitment of it in resolving the Xeno problem.  So, the refugees should not hope that UNHCR is the one that should sort out Xenophobia problem.
Due to disappointment, the leaders seemed so nervous and they were not in mood of asking questions because the last promises were not kept, and it seemed like there was something going on, like to divide the refugees, if you consider that there was no transport that was provided, firstly on time and secondly, to the other camps.
They told me that after the meeting, they did not get a time even to chat to their counterpart because they were rushed back. If the driver was acting according to the orders given, he was under Ghalib’s instructions, but not Blue waters Leaders, so they had to leave.
I may conclude that if the meeting is going to be carried out in this manner, then we are heading no where, and this makes me believe that this how way the government wants to sort out the problem, leave them stranded at the end they will look for themselves another alternatives. They have showing such attitudes, thanks to Tracy’s and your pressure. We should not have managed to sit with these guys in the first place. Now that you are no longer with us, one week only, see how they are holding a meeting.
Please, keep in touch with Nancy or any other leaders from Harmony Park so that she can give you more details about the meeting, so that you do alteration and additional to this report.
Callixte Kavuro

Good news- the Con Court today postponed the case to 20 Nov and will issue interim directions re the camps- this means the Gauteng deadline of 30 Sept for closure falls away. Will send more details as we get it. In the meantime here is a piece on the Gauteng situation from yesterday.

NOWHERE TO GO – DISPLACED PEOPLE IN GAUTENG CAMPS

FATIMA HASSAN 

From May 2008 several thousand people were displaced in Gauteng by xenophobic violence. They were subsequently sheltered in several ‘refugee camps’ around Johannesburg under conditions that have been condemned by international agencies and civil society organisations. Eventually, without consultation and due process, or any regard for human dignity, the Gauteng government forcibly consolidated these camps. A handful now remains open.

Nevertheless, because people in the camps continue to fear for their lives, and have lost all or most of their possessions and livelihoods, they are unable to return to their communities. They stay in intolerable camps because they have no choice and no where else to go.

Some camps do not have electricity, insufficient food, are unsafe for women and girls or have inadequate sanitation facilities. Despite the best efforts of relief agencies on the ground, these camps are not 5 star guest houses. Such conditions I believe are deliberate – an attempt by authorities to make it dire so that people are forced to leave the camps – but without the protection and offer of safety and / or financial assistance.

While some people have returned to their home country (mainly Mozambique, Tanzania) and a handful to their original communities through fairly uncreative and sporadic reintegration assistance programmes (some people have been given R 500 to reintegrate), about 3500 people remain in the camps. It is these people that have turned to the Constitutional Court for protection. They have done so because they have had little or no meaningful assistance from the UNHCR and the Gauteng authorities to reintegrate, repatriate or resettle. They are stuck.

• They cannot reintegrate if they fear for their lives in the absence of proper security measures.
• Repatriation is a voluntary process, so no person who has or applied for status in SA can be forced to go back home as that would be tantamount to an illegal deportation. Also, in a dilemma for the authorities, Somalis and Congolese who may voluntarily choose to go back home, cannot do so because their countries are considered ‘unsafe’ and they will be refused assistance from the UNHCR and SA government with such repatriation. But, because they do have asylum status, they cannot be deported either. They are stuck in SA until other options are sought.
• Those who cannot return to their communities and who wish to leave SA but cannot do so because of the above considerations have no option but to ask to be resettled – a process that can take years mainly because of the refusal and reluctance, to date, of the UNHCR SA office to seek resettlement options (how will this fare for the image of SA?)
• Finally, there is deportation- an all too easy process for the authorities - but a process that cannot be easily invoked if our law is to be followed properly. After all, all government conduct and actions must be based on law, not political or other expediency. This is because our Immigration Act and Constitution provide safeguards where government wishes to deport someone. First, a person who has regularised their stay in SA cannot be deported. A person who has applied for their stay to be regularised and is awaiting a decision cannot be deported. A person who is appealing a decision not to grant them regular stay in SA cannot be deported. A person who has no documentation through a dysfunctional DHA permit system cannot be deported. Finally, a person who wishes to appeal a decision to deport him/her cannot be deported until that appeal process is exhausted. Significantly, a deportation order has to be issued by a judicial officer, not the MEC for Housing or an official at Lindela.

This is why the hearing tomorrow by the Constitutional Court is important. It is an opportunity to set the record straight and keep the camps open until proper, legal and lawful solutions are found to this crisis. No one who has no where to go due to no fault of their own can be forced out onto the streets.

A few weeks ago when the Constitutional Court was first presented with the concerns of displaced people they issued an Order to deal with the interim process of consolidating the camps (not closure). Unfortunately, the Order has been misinterpreted by the Gauteng authorities to mean permission to close the camps – in the weeks since the order the Gauteng authorities consolidated camps in a manner reminiscent of forced removals into three camps then topped it off with a ‘letter’ informing people that the camps will be closed by the end of September 2008 as sanctioned “by the Constitutional Court”. However, this is not what the Court ordered. It agreed that the authorities could for practical reasons consolidate the camps but did not authorise the closure. That will only be decided after it hears argument and evidence as to whether it will grant the applicants leave to appeal the decision of the Pretoria High Court.

Deliberate confusion and misapplication of the Order is something that the Gauteng authorities are using to justify their historical and original plan of closure- they are blatantly ignoring the instructions of the Court.

Let us hope that when the court does hear the matter they accept that there is a huge difference between repatriation and deportation – the former is voluntary, the latter is not. It is worrying that there appears to be a conflation of the two both by the Gauteng authorities and the Order of the Court. Each process requires different levels of scrutiny and the Court should not be used as the means to justify the blurring of two very separate processes with separate sets of rules and vastly different purposes.

What this means is that the Court must look closely at the sinister motives of the Gauteng authorities when it recently (after the initial Order) conducted accelerated status determinations of all people in the Gauteng camps BUT rejected 98% of them! It is these people that the Court must protect from deportation and removal from the camps because their appeal processes have not been exhausted or even initiated as yet. The failures of a dysfunctional DHA should not be the reason why people are wrongly and illegally deported. In an election year, after all, what better way is there to justify closing the camps than by arguing that people are there ‘illegally’ -anyway.

Hi All,

Just to let you know, Community Development finally started handing out the access cards on Sunday and are only giving cards to those who can produce one of the previous id cards.  This is a considerable problem as there were a number of people who a) already had papers, b) missed the registration process for one reason or another or c) lost their cards in the storm two weeks ago.  Many people are upset about this turn of events.

We will keep you updated!

Ali and Lynsey

Hi there

Below is the update on Blue Waters . As for most of the other sites , things have not changed that much . I think one of the things I get most despondent about is that sometimes it feels as if we could just reprint the reports that  that we wrote in June, July and August  and just amend the date.

One good thing over the weekend was that one of the ex-resident from Soetwater, Israel , prepared a traditional Ethiopian meal for the 18 Ethiopians in Blue Waters to enable then to celebrate  a belated Ethiopian New  Year on Saturday evening. It was a small highlight but something that made a big difference to the guys.

After a very long discussion the 3 remaining residents of Soetwater were persuaded to move to Blue Waters on Sunday . I have assured them that the  repatriation, registration, all the other formalities  WILL be done now that they are at Blue Waters. I hope I am not made out to be a liar again.

Tracey

Blue Waters C Rapid Assessment Saturday 13 & Sunday 14 September 2008

I haven’t confirmed numbers with Marti but will do in the day. I brought the last 3 residents from Soetwater to Blue Waters today. There were 3 men who had been refusing to move. One of the men seems to be mentally disturbed and I think that we should try and get him medical attention as soon as possible .

SHELTER

There are still a few large marquee tents which people have either divided by means of partitions or been very inventive and erected the UNHCT tents inside the big tents. The UNHCR tents leak in the rain and several of them can be seen strewn around the site. Justin who is 9 commented that it was much better at Soetwater and that these new tents were crazy . He wanted his big tent back. The major benefit of the smaller tents is that people have some privacy at least. They are too low to stand up in tough so I suspect that people are going to neck pain. Just from visiting mine is stiff. Because of the inclement weather people spend almost all their time in the tents .

There is a tent which has been erected to use as a church.

WATER & SANITATION

The toilets are spread out around the camp. They are demarcated with a gender sign but am not sure if this is adhered to. The fixed ablution block is in quite a bad state, Because there is only cold water and it is a fair distance from most of the tents people are not really using them. The portable ablution block has not met with much favour .Some people reported not showering since they moved to Blue Waters (3 weeks ago)

Woman walk to the guardhouse to fetch warn water in buckets . They also fetch boiled water from there to make baby bottles.

The basins at the standpipes do seem to work quite well and it does mean that there are at least hand washing facilities now.

FOOD

The quantity of food delivered seems to be diminishing. Although people continue to complain about the quality of the food I think that have almost become resigned to the idea that that is what they will continue to get. It is the question I have the most difficult time asking as people initial had an expectation I think that if they complained enough things would change. Their resignation is indicative of a general sense of despondency.

There is not enough baby formula or cereal and mothers are still complaining about that and about the lack of facilities to make baby bottles. Many families are using 2 plate electric stoves to cook for themselves.

HEALTH

Mary, an elderly Congolese woman is very, very ill and was taken to Jooste over the weekend. Another volunteer who is a nurse had been visiting her last week and her prognosis is not good. We are going to arrange a roster and try and get people to be able to visit her in hospital. I don’t think she will be returning the camp.

There is a clinic on Monday, Wednesday and Friday . The First Aid Kit was put to good use when someone cut their foot whiles I was there . Marti seems be very competent in attending to minor medical emergencies. I am concerned about one small boy’s skin condition, he was white patches all over his head and the areas behind his ears have become infected I am encouraging his mom to take him to the clinic again.

EDUCATION

Al of the children expect the Somalians are being transported to school. Ingrid has done an amazing job of ensuring that all the kids have gone back. On Thursday the container (donated by Breadline Africa) was opened which has been kitted out as a school. It will be mostly used by Somalia children and pre-school children of other nationalities in the morning and as a place to do homework by the other children in the afternoon. Ingrid has been trying to get a teacher to help with a madressa via the MJC.

There does not seem to have been any progress with regard to reintegration or repatriation. The disastrous meeting with the JRLC which was held last Tuesday was indicative of the stalemate which seems to have been reached.

Here was a lot of tension today as 2 Somalians had been shot in Delft , 1 was killed and the other is still in hospital . It was reported to me that he had reintegrated from Blue Waters. I will get more information on this during the week. When people hear of these incidents though it is very difficult for them to take the agreement signed by NAFCOC and the Somalia Traders association seriously .

The body of Fahaar, who drowned last weekend has still not been recovered.

Generally the mood in the camp is quite low although quiet. This site is very exposed to the sea and the wind and rain over the past weeks has been very bad. People are really just trying to stay warm and dry at the moment.