Decision to remove temporary protection for migrants will drag them into poverty Dr Colin Calleja
Withdrawing the Temporary Humanitarian Protection-new status for migrants will drag them into poverty, Dr Colin Calleja, who forms part of the Solidarity with Migrants group, told The Malta Independent.
“As a result of the withdrawal of their documents, all would face problems in their daily lives, including difficulties obtaining medication, inability to cash cheques, and problems maintaining bank accounts. Concern has also been expressed by Maltese employers, wondering how this decision will impact their ability to retain these employees. We believe that such a decision will continue to drag these migrants into poverty, risk of exploitation and abuse. We are sure that this is not what the government wants.”
Migrants with THPn status have been told that they must procure their passport from the country of origin by 31 October, however Dr Calleja has previously stressed that many of these countries of origin have problems and thus this might not be possible. “They are told that once they have the passport, they can apply for residency permits or work permits. For an undocumented migrant to procure such a passport is almost an impossible feat.” Once the 31 October deadline passes, they would lose their protection.
Speaking to this newsroom, Dr Calleja said that he has full confidence that the government will eventually come to the realisation that what the NGOs are asking (in relation to allowing the migrants to remain in Malta) is fair and just. “Migrants with THPn status have been given this status because of their commitment to integrate. In fact, in order to qualify, applicants for Temporary Humanitarian Protection had to have lodged their application for international protection at least four years prior to the date of the submission of an application for Temporary Humanitarian Protection under the present procedure; and, to provide evidence that they have been staying in Malta. In addition they were required to provide relevant documentary evidence of their integration efforts and employment history in Malta when renewing their THPn certificate.”
This, he said, meant that they have worked hard to get this status.
“Therefore these individuals had been here gainfully employed and contributing to our economy for at least 10 years and some up to 18 years. Throughout this time they paid their taxes and national insurance contributions. Over these years they have formed families and made friends – they have truly become part of our society.”
“This decision regarding THPn protection has put these individuals, yet again, in an unsecured situation – unsettling their lives and those of their entire families. The difficulty in procuring a passport from their country of origin can be seen with the present experience of the group of Malians, who for the past two months have been waiting for documentation from Mali. Therefore asking these individuals to procure a passport from their country of origin is to say the least an unfair demand. Most of these individuals came as undocumented individuals ... they have nothing to show that they are from that country, so these countries have nothing to identify them as their nationals and they will not provide them with documentation.
“I truly hope that in the coming days those joining the informal EU meeting here in Malta with migration on their agenda, will discuss this situation and help our government to settle this issue.”
Human lives are at stake
Asked whether allowing the migrants to remain in Malta will create a precedent, he does not believe so. “Human lives are at stake and politicians should be able to make the right decision. These migrants that we are talking about have proved themselves and cannot be offered as a sacrifice for what could happen in the future. What we are asking is to allow those who have this status to continue to have this protection – other decisions for future migrants will be taken according to the needs of the time. We believe that a government has no right to take away a status which was given with the inevitable consequence of putting these individuals in a state of vulnerability.”
Turning to migrant deaths in the Mediterranean, he believes that a multi-pronged approach should be taken.
“There is no single solution. Migration is a reflection of what is happening in Africa – poverty, corruption, war, tribal warfare and persecution by certain groups on others. These are all causes for people to migrate. Therefore we cannot stop migration before finding or help find solution to these problems that the African continent is struggling with.
“We should also realise that migration in itself is not something bad. People have the right to seek better lives, so Europe should create legal pathways for those who want a better and safer life and want to live in Europe.
“I also believe that the three ways suggested by William Lacy Swing, the Director General for the International Organisation for Migration, are also key things that one could work on. These suggestions are: To address the drivers of involuntary migration and create more legal avenues of migration; to go back to the basics – to the historically positive nature of migration; and to dispel stereotypes through education.”
Effective return policies and practices for nonrefugees essential UNHCR –
This newsroom also sent questions to the UNHCR. Asked about the THPn protection situation, they urged the Maltese authorities to exercise caution when effecting returns as some persons may still be at risk of persecution and other serious human rights violations.
“Persons who are found not to be in need of international protection, after due consideration of their claim, generally fall outside UNHCR’s mandate. That said, a functioning migration management system is one which also provides outcomes for persons who are not refugees or beneficiaries of international protection in a timely manner. Effective return policies and practices for persons who are not refugees are essential in maintaining credible asylum systems and to prevent onward movement.”
Regardless of status, any return to one’s country of origin should take place in safety and in dignity, in line with international and European human rights standards, the organisation said. In this respect, the UNHCR urges authorities to consider voluntary return options for persons who are found not to be in need of international protection and to organise information campaigns on return options. UNHCR also urges the authorities to initiate a dialogue with relevant civil society organisations on the review of THPn status.”
Turning to migrants crossing the Mediterranean, the UNHCR said that one main reason for people undertaking such a dangerous journey is the lack of legal avenues to access protection or opportunities in Europe. “States have committed to expanding opportunities for safe pathways, recognising that this could help to reduce the likelihood that people will risk unsafe journeys to find protection. Providing such pathways in significant numbers would help to share the responsibility for refugees with the countries hosting the largest populations of refugees. Safe legal pathways include the granting of visas, creating humanitarian corridors to evacuate those in urgent need of protection, resettlement, family reunification opportunities. These measures would diminish the need for people to resort to smugglers to obtain a dangerous passage to Europe. With less people making such a dangerous journey the number of people dying in the Mediterranean Sea is highly likely to drop.”
The UNHCR were also asked about the challenges of migration, and the rise of right-wing political groups who use the situation for their own benefit. The organisation said that there are challenges to migration, “especially if it is not well managed. There is, however, also a need to acknowledge that migration brings many opportunities for the host country. Foreign workers contribute to both economic growth of a country as well as public finances. The Central Bank of Malta report – Understanding the Macroeconomic Impact of Migration in Malta (published in December 2015) – makes for an interesting read on the subject.
“But the issue of asylum goes beyond migration. It needs to be stressed that accessing asylum is a fundamental human right and there are legal obligations in granting protection to people who are fleeing from persecution or war. It is good to remember that the current refugee protection framework was created to provide solutions for mass displacement during the Second World War. It was essentially created to help European refugees during the war.”
“Today just 6% of the global refugee population are hosted in Europe. 29% are in Africa while 39% are in Middle East and North Africa. There is an argument for European countries and other developed countries to do more, and not less.”
Turning to whether Mali is considered a safe country, the UNHCR argues that Mali is not amongst the countries where asylum applicants are not granted refugee status. “The list referred to in this question is the so-called ‘safe countries’ list, which is a list annexed to the Refugees Act. In asylum procedures, the safe country of origin concept is often used to determine the admissibility or otherwise of an asylum application. However, it does not necessarily mean that people from those countries on the list cannot be refugees. In fact, the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees makes no reference to a ‘safe country’ list when defining who is a refugee.”
“All asylum applications should be assessed on an individual basis, looking at the facts and the law. Persons found to have a well-founded fear of persecution, or fleeing from indiscriminate violence and other human rights violations should be granted international protection, including refugee status.”