New research on mental health of LGBT refugees

Image via Wikipedia

The Research Institute Without Walls, an NGO that does collaborative research on the impact of human rights violations on LGBT mental health, invites you to join the Collaborative Working Group for LGBT Asylum and Refugees.

Physician for Human Rights, Immigration Equality, and Psychologists for Social Responsibility are our first member groups.

The purpose of the Collaborative Working Group is to share information and coordinate research on the psychological effects of persecution and torture because of sexual orientation and gender identity in asylum seekers. This population faces special mental health challenges when navigating the challenges of rebuilding their lives.

We invite groups and individuals to join us in the formation and development of a working group that will allow us to collaborate on documenting the experiences of our clients. Gathering empirical data will allow us to more effectively help LGBT asylum seekers and refugees.

Our first project is a collaboration with Mike Corradini, asylum advocacy associate and attorney at Physicians for Human Rights. We are conducting the first empirical study on the impact of immigration detention on the mental health of LGBT refugees.

We are seeking LGBT persons who have been in detention who are willing to be interviewed about their experiences.

Please let us know if you would be interested in joining the Collaborative Working Group and/or might be able to refer to us LGBT persons who’ve been in immigration detention, who may be willing to be interviewed. Participation is confidential and interviews can be conducted by telephone. For more information you can contact Ariel Shidlo, PhD at ariel.shidlo@riww.org

Worries on Canadian refugee rule change, impact on LGBT

Image via Wikipedia

Source: Xtra

By Dale Smith

The Canadian Council of Refugees (CCR) is worried proposed government changes to Canada’s refugee regulations could mean refugees who have been persecuted for being gay will not be allowed to apply.

Janet Dench, executive director of CCR, says the new rules would mean gay claimants and other marginalized refugees would be excluded or face much bigger hurdles.

The Department of Citizenship and Immigration (CIC) recently published the proposed changes in the Canada Gazette. The changes would limit refugees sponsored under the groups of five (G5s) and community sponsors (CS) categories.

Refugees entering under the G5 category are sponsored by five or more Canadian citizens or permanent residents who act as guarantors for the claimant. Meanwhile, community sponsors include both for-profit and non-profit organizations willing to sponsor refugees and provide funds for them after they are in Canada.

The government would instead bring in refugees recognized by either the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) or a state.

This follows a move to cap the number of refugees brought into the country by sponsorship agreement holders (SAHs). These are usually religious, cultural or humanitarian groups that have signed multiyear agreements with the ministry in order to be able to sponsor refugees more than once.

The government instead pledged to bring in more government-assisted refugees solely from the UNHCR list.

“Certain groups of people would be excluded,” says Dench. “In quite a lot of countries in Africa, it’s not the UNHCR that does the recognition but the state – but if that state does not recognize applications from refugees on the basis of sexual orientation, which is not by any means universally applied, then that would mean that the G5s couldn’t respond to them.”

At the moment, G5s annually sponsor approximately 40 percent of all refugees, and SAHs sponsor around 60 percent, with community sponsors submitting a handful every year.

Dench says a great strength of the private sponsorship program is that it has allowed Canadians to respond to refugees who are otherwise ignored, discounted or marginalized.

“Every time you try to build up a new requirement, there are new categories of refugees who will continue to be marginalized, and Canadians won’t be able to respond to them,” she says.

Read more »

Israel passes 'harsh' immigration law

Photo by runran

By Paul Canning

A law which could lead to the indefinite detention of asylum seekers has been passed by the Israeli parliament.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu voted for the bill, which his spokesman called part of a “multitiered strategy to deal with the challenge of illegal immigration to Israel.”

The bill has been sharply criticized by refugee advocates, and is seen as targeting some 50,000 Africans who have entered Israel illegally since 2005, according to Israeli government estimates.

And in a country built by refugees it has caused soul-searching with the conservative Jerusalem Post in a November 11 Editorial saying:

Now with a sovereign country of its own the Jewish people must not only serve as a moral example of how developed countries should deal with refugees and asylum-seekers, but also make sure that a strong Jewish majority is maintained in a sovereign Jewish state.

The law is the first one dealing with refugees - until now they have been managed under an emergency law from 1954.

The amended law will enable the Israeli authorities to hold in administrative detention for up to three years migrant workers and asylum seekers with their children. This is not unusual, although harsh. Australia, for example, also holds asylum seekers in detention for long periods although it is retreating from that policy because of the growing evidence that it produces serious mental harm. Contrary to that trend, the Israeli law's proponents argued that long detention periods would deter refugees.

Anyone who is fleeing from a so-called “enemy” country can be held indefinitely. This can mean those refugees and their children fleeing genocide from the Darfur region of Sudan or gays fleeing Iraq. The law stipulates that persons originating from such countries or areas are not to be bailed from detention under any conditions.

Any refugee or migrant committing the most minor infraction of Israeli law could be jailed from three years to life.

"This is extremely irregular, because in Israel today it is legally impossible to keep a person in custody for years without putting him on trial and proving his guilt in a legal procedure," Knesset legal advisor Eyal Yinon told the Constitution Committee last month.

The law will criminalize what it calls ‘irregular entry’ and makes no provision for those fleeing persecution.

It creates a summary removal procedure — within 72 hours — without giving the individual an adequate opportunity to challenge their deportation. There is no distinction made for how children will be treated.

The Justice Ministry had proposed that those aiding refugees could be criminally prosecuted - providing them with shelter could mean a prison sentence of between five and 15 years. That provision was amended at the last moment, so it no longer applies to organizations or people who provide humanitarian aid.

The Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) has called the law:

“one of the most dangerous bills ever presented in the Knesset.”

Israeli activist Elizabeth Tsurkov wrote that:

The law is designed to target the weakest of the groups living in Israel – survivors of genocide, civil war, prolonged servitude, torture and rape – by using a law originally intended to combat armed saboteurs. Past attempts to pass this law (which was first drafted in 2006) were foiled due to a harsh public response. However, following years of systematic incitement against refugees by Israel government officials, the Israeli public now largely sees refugees as illegal migrants, undeserving of sympathy, and as a result, this inhumane law has now become reality.

The
 Hebrew
 Immigrant
 Aid
 Society,
 a
 critical
 contributor
 to
 training
 and 
monitoring
 the 
Israeli 
immigration
 system,
 recently withdrew its
 presence
 in
 Israel
 in
 protest
 of
 Israeli
 treatment
 of
 asylum
 seekers.
 The 
US
 Department
 of
 State
 has
 echoed 
criticism
 of 
Israeli 
treatment
 of 
asylum
 seekers, 
condemning 
a lack
 of 
legal 
representation, 
lack
 of
 interpretation,
 in
judicial hearings 
and 
extended 
detention.

The Africans reaching Israel face appalling conditions on the way with NGO EveryOne Group reporting only yesterday about 44 more Eritreans kidnapped for ransom in the Northern Sinai, including six children. They also reported that another African released by traffickers had then been tortured and shot in the leg by Egyptian police.

There have also been multiple, grisly reports of migrants in Egypt being targeted for body parts.

Related articles

• Israel proposing indefinite detention of refugees (madikazemi.blogspot.com) 
• Video: The law that crosses the line (madikazemi.blogspot.com)

South Korea reforms refugee and asylum law

Image by skinnylawyer via Flickr

Source: Fahamu Refugee Legal Aid

This news was submitted by HoTaeg Lee, head of Refugee pNan in Korea.

I just want to inform you all that the new Refugee Act, apart from Immigration Control Act, finally passed the National Assembly in Korea on 29 December 2011.

Asia Pacific Refugee Rights Network president PhilKyu Hwang, along with attorney JongChul Kim, WonGuen Choi of Nancen, HoTaeg Lee of the Refuge pNan, National Human Rights Commission and UNHCR provided excellent leadership and devotion in making this new law. Lawmaker Woo Yer Hwang played the key role in passing the Act.

The main victory of our legislative activities is that during all refugee application processes, including judicial procedures, refugee applicants will now have legal status to stay in Korea and will be protected by a work permit, subsistence allowances, housing, medical care, and education.

The Act also stipulates detailed RSD procedures, including the procedure at ports of entry, an information guide, interpretation, legal assistance, NGO presences, video and audio recording, confirmation and copy of the interview records, confidentiality, detention for identification, and an appeals committee, amongst other details.

Under the Act, a first instance decision should be made within six months of the application, but if necessary it can be extended for six months with seven days prior notice. The appeal process is  the same. Applications submitted with false and fraudulent documents, re-applications submitted without a basic situation change or applications submitted in in order to avoid or delay imminent removal after a stay in Korea of more than one year can be handled by simplified or accelerated process.

The Act also adds clauses for recognized refugees beyond the protection of the refugee convention, related to family unity and recognition of academic diplomas and qualification licence.

The new Refugee Act will come into effect on 1 July 2013 for cases filed thereafter.

Related articles

• Resource: UNHCR guidance note: LGBTI refugees in forced displacement (madikazemi.blogspot.com)

Indonesia 'mistreating' refugee disaster survivors

Image via Wikipedia

By Paul Canning

Two new boats have arrived in Australia carrying asylum seekers as a group who survived a disaster began a hunger strike in Indonesia.

The 18 December boat disaster off the Indonesian island of Java left an estimated 200 dead.

Those who survived have begun a hunger strike after being moved to a detention centre where as many as 12 people are sharing each cell and they claim they are being taunted by guards and kept in inhumane conditions.

''One of us has lost 11 members of his family,'' said Noroz Yousefi, an Iranian asylum seeker.

 ''He is going crazy in here. There are 12 of us in one room and they won't let us go outside, even to get some air."

''When we asked, the guards shouted at us and said, 'This is our country and we can do with you what we want'.''

Activists have put part of the blame for the tragedy on Australian policy.

"The policy of detaining asylum seekers in Indonesia means asylum seekers risk imprisonment if they contact authorities if they are concerned about the seaworthiness of any boat. The fact that Australia impounds and destroys the vessels that bring asylum seekers here means boats used are more likely to be unseaworthy. The crossing from Indonesia is these boats’ last voyage,” said Ian Rintoul, Refugee Action Collective (RAC) spokesperson.

"It doesn’t matter how unsafe the boat is, refugees will try to get to Australia because that is often the only place where they can be safe.”

Meanwhile, controversy has erupted over claims that new media guidelines on privacy could lead to the disappearance of shots of arriving boats on TV. The Immigration Department say non-identification of asylum seekers had long been department policy, in part because identification could pose a threat to the families of asylum seekers in their home countries. But they have also been criticised for blocking investigation of detention centres and allowing cameras into them.

Sue Bolton, a spokeswoman for RAC, told the Sydney Morning Herald that identification was an important part of ensuring asylum seekers did not become dehumanised but stressed their consent should be sought.

Related articles

• 2011 round-up: Part six: Asylum and refugees (madikazemi.blogspot.com)
• Activists say Australia shares responsibility for latest asylum seeker deaths at sea (madikazemi.blogspot.com)

2011 round-up: Part six: Asylum and refugees

Image by gianlucacostantini via Flickr

By Paul Canning

I'm rounding up the year in a series of posts - in which no doubt I've missed something, so please let me know what I've missed in the comments!

Asylum and refugees

In May a Spanish academic estimated that 6000 LGBT Africans flee to Europe each year.

In the UK, authorities bureaucratically codified the landmark Supreme Court decision of 2010 ending the concept that refused asylum seekers could (and should) 'go home and be discreet' or relocate to avoid repression. They also began to record sexuality-based asylum claims.

This 'discretion' argument, widely employed to refuse asylum, was rejected by a US Ninth Circuit court in March but used in cases elsewhere.

In the Netherlands, 'westernization' after being in the country for a decade became an argument against the removal of an Afghan refugee, and by extension for others, that was accepted by the government. The Netherlands also created liberal rules for immigration of partners of gay people and said they'd consider extending a existing legal presumption in favour of LGBT asylum seekers from Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan to those from Uganda.


In the UK in an important precedent a court accepted that an individual who does not live a ‘heterosexual narrative’ (i.e. have men ‘calling’ or have a boyfriend/husband and/or have children) can suffer persecution and therefore have an asylum claim in a Jamaican lesbian case.

In the US there were numerous formal complaints over the treatment of LGBT immigration detainees, which includes asylum seekers. The complaints included sexual abuse but the administration refused to extend rules offering protection against rape and other sexual abuse to criminals in jails to immigration detainees. A number of prominent 'undocumented' immigrants came out, including many young people in the movement for a DREAM act which would regularize the status of those brought to the US as children. There were reports that Mexican asylum seekers' claims in the US are increasingly being rejected, using the 'relocation=safety' argument.

Human rights groups started to focus on the position of LGBT in African refugee camps and the thousands believed to have made their way to relative safety in South Africa. The first LGBT refugee project started in May in South Africa. A landmark conference in Kampala in July covered the problem of LGBT refugees in East Africa.

In May the first public appearance of Iranian LGBT refugees happened in Turkey during Ankara Pride.

LGBT asylum seekers continue to face problems in Europe with campaigning attention in 2011 including: a Swiss attempt to remove a gay Iranian; a gay Cameroonian in France; several gay Ugandan, Burundian, Cameroonian and Nigerian cases in UK; a Norwegian gay Iraqi case; a transgender Turkish case in Austria. In Canada, a loud campaign in Toronto stopped the removal of a gay Nicaraguan, as did support for a Sri Lankan in Australia. Most - though not all - such cases demonstrated how campaigning can help stop removals. In the UK, in several cases, judges ordered the anonimization of lesbian and gay asylum seekers supposedly for their protection but also stemming both media coverage and campaigning highlighting such egregious asylum decisions.

In September a first comprehensive report showed prejudiced treatment of LGBT asylum seekers happening in many European countries. But in October, most EU nations adopted rules recognising repression for sexuality reasons as grounds for asylum claims and also gender identity for the first time. They also agreed to share best practice on treatment of LGBT asylum cases.

In Australia a law was passed clarifying protection rights for homosexual refugees.

It emerged in October that key global south LGBT activists are increasingly encountering visa problems when they are invited to events in western countries.

Azerbaijani gay artist Babi Badalov finally won asylum in France after being deported by the UK two years previously, then fleeing to Russia and finally reaching Paris.

In Canada, the conservative government reached out to LGBT groups and the community to support LGBT refugees - and provided funding to help. In the US the administration provided funding for a first LGBT asylum support project in Chicago and a new refugee route began to deliver LGBT to sanctuary in San Francisco.

In August a report confirmed significant progress in UNHCR and other agency handling of gay refugees, mostly Iranians, in Turkey, an example of growing engagement by UNHCR with the issue.

Related articles

• Voice of LGBT asylum seekers raised at Manchester Pride (madikazemi.blogspot.com)
• Paper: LGBT refugees looking for protection and safety: Challenges in refugee status determination and living conditions in Turkey. (madikazemi.blogspot.com)
• Contradiction in how Obama admin treating LGBT refugees (ilga.org)
• Norway refuses gay Iraqi asylum (madikazemi.blogspot.com)

Video: A gay Sri Lankan migrant story

Access Alliance Multicultural Health and Community Services is a community health centre in Toronto, working to improve health outcomes for the most vulnerable immigrants, refugees, and their communities.

Ranjith Kulatilake, an immigrant from Sri Lanka, has been a volunteer at the Access Alliance Multicultural Health and Community Services for the past five years. He is a founding member of "Among Friends", a three-year initiative to improve access to public services for lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and queer (LGBTQ) refugees and immigrants in Toronto.

Ranjith's story describes his journey as a new immigrant to Canada after fleeing his home country due to sexual persecution. It is a story about building new friendships amongst others facing similar challenges and dealing with the stigma of homosexuality within his community.

Related articles

• Resource: The Positive Spaces Initiative (videos) (madikazemi.blogspot.com)
• In Canada, what happened to the refugee private sponsorship route? (madikazemi.blogspot.com)

Activists say Australia shares responsibility for latest asylum seeker deaths at sea

Image via Wikipedia

Source: Refugee Action Coalition

Australia cannot evade its share of the responsibility for yesterday’s tragic sinking of another asylum boat off Java, according to advocates from the Refugee Action Coalition. The boat is believed to have been carrying Afghan and Iranian refugees.

“Australia’s push for Indonesia to detain asylum seekers and to criminalize people smuggling directly leads to the kind of tragedy we’ve seen yet again today,” said Ian Rintoul, RAC spokesperson.

“There’s nothing inherently dangerous about the passage from Indonesia – if it’s in proper boats. If the government is worried about people losing their lives at sea, they should decriminalize people-smuggling so that the voyages can be planned in the open and seaworthy boats can come here without having to sneak into Australian waters in secret.”

“But the policy of detaining asylum seekers in Indonesia means asylum seekers risk imprisonment if they contact authorities if they are concerned about the seaworthiness of any boat. The fact that Australia impounds and destroys the vessels that bring asylum seekers here means boats used are more likely to be unseaworthy. The crossing from Indonesia is these boats’ last voyage.”

“This time we tragically have hundreds of people likely to be dead. No doubt we’ll hear a lot of hypocrisy from government and opposition about the tragedy of lost lives. They’ll say the sinking shows Australia has to deter people from undertaking boat trips. But talk of stopping the boats only makes the situation worse. It doesn’t matter how unsafe the boat is, refugees will try to get to Australia because that is often the only place where they can be safe.”

“According to reports earlier this year, there were 1462 civilian deaths in Afghanistan in the first half of 2011 alone – a 15% increase. May this year was the deadliest month of the war for civilians since 2007. It’s no surprise that people are willing to risk their lives on the trip to Australia."

“Sending people to Nauru or Malaysia will make no difference. People trying to escape war and persecution in Afghanistan or Iran are still going to try and come here because they have no other option. And any refugees who are prevented from coming to Australia by government policies will just undertake other dangerous journeys to Europe or America, with just as much risk to their lives.”

“Australia’s obligation is to welcome asylum seekers. We have resettled a minuscule number of refugees from our region.”

“If the government and opposition really had a concern for asylum seekers’ lives they would institute the humane refugee policy Australia has needed for so long. They’d massively increase our refugee intake from the region, they’d end mandatory detention, decriminalize people-smuggling, remove offshore processing as a policy option, and process and resettle refugees from Indonesia.”

Related articles

• 'No politics' over tragedy (theage.com.au)
• Govt blamed for asylum boat sinking (news.theage.com.au)

Victory for refugees in Johannesburg

Image by UN in Armenia via Flickr

Source: Lawyers for Human Rights

The North Gauteng High Court handed down judgment 14 December setting aside Department of Home Affairs' decision not to open a refugee reception office in Johannesburg and directing the Director-General to reconsider his decision.

Lawyers for Human Rights was representing the Consortium for Refugees and Migrants and the Coordinating Body of the Refugee Communities. These groups challenged the decision by the Department of Home Affairs not to open a new refugee reception office in Johannesburg after the existing office was closed down at the end of May 2011.  The Department claimed that it had made no such decision and was in fact ordered to close the refugee reception office by another court application brought by the surrounding businesses in Crown Mines.

The Court found that a decision had indeed been taken in line with an apparent policy pronouncement by Cabinet to move all asylum services to border posts.  It was agreed between all parties that if a decision was found to have been taken, the necessary public consultation and consultation with the Standing Committee for Refugee Affairs had not taken place as required by the law.

According to Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh, head of the Refugee and Migrant Rights Programme at LHR, “We are encouraged by the court’s decision in this matter.” She added, “We continue to be extremely concerned about the closures of the metropolitan refugee reception offices. The Department of Home Affairs has not carried out any public consultations on a decision which will negatively affect a vulnerable group. Further, the department has so far failed to put up any infrastructure or make contingency arrangements to provide services to refugees and asylum seekers. Notwithstanding, they have started closing down refugee reception offices.”

Lawyers for Human Rights has also challenged the closure of the Port Elizabeth Refugee Reception Office.  This centre was closed as of 30 November 2011 apparently in line with the same Cabinet policy.  That matter is due to be heard on 9 February 2012 in the Eastern Cape High Court in Port Elizabeth.

Related articles

• South Africa 'reviewing' asylum seeker's rights (madikazemi.blogspot.com)

US must not abandon Iraqi refugees

Image via Wikipedia

Source: Human Rights First
By Ruthie Epstein,Researcher and Advocate, Refugee Protection Program

11 December, two major items regarding the U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq made the news, and together they created a profound cognitive dissonance.

First, the White House announced that President Obama will deliver a major speech about the end of the war at Fort Bragg next Wednesday. The Wall Street Journal reported that, according to the announcement:

“The president will speak about the enormous sacrifices and achievements of the brave Americans who served in the Iraq War, and he will speak about the extraordinary milestone of bringing the war in Iraq to an end.”

Second, the Pentagon gave what will likely be its final formal press briefing from Baghdad. The most striking comments from Deputy Commanding General, U.S. Forces-Iraq, Lt. Gen. Frank G. Helmick:

Are the Iraqi security forces ready?… Since 2010, the Iraqis have been in the lead in operations for the internal defense of their country. There are challenges: external security threats, Iranian-backed militias, al-Qaida, other violent extremist organizations; that the Iraqis must continue to put constant pressure on those groups. Lingering ethnic tensions; Sunni-Shia, Arab-Kurd relations aren’t what they need to be, and the Iraqis continue to work on that as well. And the government still is not completely formed.  As you know, the elections occurred in March of 2010, and we still do not have a permanent minister of defense or a minister of the interior.  The prime minister is heading up both of those organizations.  We do have an acting minister of defense. And then there are some — still some security gaps that exist: their air sovereignty, their air defense capability, the ability to protect the two oil platforms, and then the ability to do combined arms operations for an external defense, synchronizing their infantry with their armor, with their artillery, with their engineers. They’re not quite there with that capability.

Read more »

Contradiction in how Obama admin treating LGBT refugees

By Paul Canning

In his 'international LGBT rights Tuesday' policy announcement President Obama pledged support for LGBT refugees and asylum seekers. In a memorandum , he directed agencies, including Homeland Security, to "protect vulnerable LGBT refugees and asylum seekers".

The State Department laid out work it is doing on plans on supporting LGBT refugees, in conjunction with UNHCR and NGOs, and even pledged to directly help with relocation if activists are under dire threat.

In the US, a recent announcement on how immigration cases will be prioritised for decision to focus on those involving criminals has draw LGBT criticism because it does not offer explicit protection for lesbian and gay bi-national couples. However the new policy has drawn little attention for its impact on LGBT asylum seekers, those the President said Tuesday that his administration will protect.

Asylum lawyer Jason Dzubow points out that the new shifting of priorities on decision making has put asylum seekers at the bottom of the pile and describes the impact as "devastating".

The Executive Office for Immigration Review (“EOIR”, the Immigration Courts) is re-arranging its dockets to expedite priority cases in a pilot program running in Baltimore and Denver. Dzubow has already seen the impact in one case, of an Eritrean almost certain to receive sanctuary, re-scheduled from this December to May 2014.

According to EOIR, the goal of the Pilot Program is “to ensure that [limited] resources are focused on the Administration’s highest immigration enforcement priorities.” 

"Unfortunately, in this case, the Administration’s “enforcement priorities” (i.e., removal of aliens) comes at the expense of our country’s humanitarian obligations," says Dzubow.

"Delaying asylum hearings for 2+ years is devastating to many asylum seekers."

The stress of delayed decisions is well-documented around the world. Homeland Security could adopt a policy, Dzubow says, of starting the 'Asylum Clock' if decisions are delayed, which would at least allow asylum seekers to work. It should also offer at least some space in the courts for decision making for asylum seekers within a reasonable time frame for those like his Eritrean client.

The Obama administration has also been accused of doing nothing to protect detained LGBT asylum seekers in the US, from either maltreatment by those running detention centers or sexual violence, even rape. Here, 'protection' from such threats can often mean being held for long periods in solitary confinement - recognised as a form of torture.

There are also ongoing concerns about how LGBT asylum cases are treated in the immigration courts, with vastly differing approaches in different court systems across the US with many cases showing either a too high 'bar' for asylum seekers to reach or even homophobic treatment.

Said Physicians for Human Rights (PHR):

"This memorandum is a step in the right direction. But we urge the Obama administration to take a close look at the treatment of LGBT immigrants and asylum seekers in the US and work to reform our nation’s broken asylum and immigration detention systems, especially for the most vulnerable. We cannot expect to credibly protect the human rights of LGBT persons abroad when we cannot do so at home."

Dzubow says that "it might be futile to argue that we should not be prioritizing removals over protecting people fleeing persecution." However given Obama's pledge on LGBT asylum seekers the administration appears to have set up a clear conflict of priorities with how these refugees are actually treated by them.

Related articles

• Obama admin to 'leverage' foreign aid for LGBT Rights (madikazemi.blogspot.com)
• Report: Asylum and 'credible fear' issues in US immigration policy (madikazemi.blogspot.com)
• Why is Arizona shacking, isolating gay, raped immigration detainees? (madikazemi.blogspot.com)
• Obama Offers Asylum to Overseas Gays (usnews.com)

Obama admin to 'leverage' foreign aid for LGBT Rights

Image via Wikipedia

By Paul Canning

In a major foreign policy announcement, timed for the anniversary of adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the White House has issued a memorandum (copy below) ordering all government agencies to promote LGBT rights internationally.

The memorandum directs agencies to:

• Combat the criminalization of LGBT status or conduct abroad.
• Protect vulnerable LGBT refugees and asylum seekers.
• Leverage foreign assistance to protect human rights and advance nondiscrimination.
• Ensure swift and meaningful U.S. responses to human rights abuses of LGBT persons abroad.
• Engage International Organizations in the fight against LGBT discrimination.

The use of aid ('foreign assistance') as a factor in promoting LGBT rights has recently come into focus with a major media storm in many countries following reports of the UK government withholding aid to countries criminalizing homosexuality.

The UK has clarified that it is not reducing but will consider redirecting aid from government budgets to other routes. It has also clarified that aid policy has four 'pillars', one of which is human rights and that includes LGBT rights.

Exactly how the UK will apply its policy remains unclear, however it is known to have used 'aid conditionality' in attempts to pressure Uganda to withdraw its 'Kill gays' bill and criminalisation of lesbianism in Malawi was a minor factor in a recent aid redirection, alongside a serious backsliding on human rights in that country.

The Obama memorandum also does not clarify how it will 'leverage' aid.

The White House said:

The Administration’s dedication to LGBT rights does not stop at our borders, as the President made clear at the United Nations in September of this year when he said: “no country should deny people their rights because of who they love, which is why we must stand up for the rights of gays and lesbians everywhere.”

Following an interagency process coordinated by the National Security Staff, this memorandum directs the first-ever U.S. government strategy dedicated to combating human rights abuses against LGBT persons abroad. Today’s memorandum applies to the Departments of State, the Treasury, Defense, Justice, Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the Millennium Challenge Corporation, the Export-Import Bank, the United States Trade Representative, and such other agencies as the President may designate.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke on the policy in Geneva, today, 6 December. She announced a new 'Global Equality Fund', which will be a 'public-private' partnership and to which the State Department is contributing $3m. Amongst the work of this fund, it will:

Provide emergency assistance to NGOs and human rights defenders facing governmental or societal threats, and increase organizational capacity to respond to security concerns.

It specifically mentions support for Sierra Leonean activists, who have recently reported coming under attack following a media appearance. It also mentions that "where necessary" the Fund will support relocation of key activists.

In a briefing [PDF], the State Department laid out its ongoing work on LGBT asylum seekers and refugees. It said:

The Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) is working to improve the security of LGBT refugees, asylum seekers, and migrants by implementing a comprehensive LGBT refugee protection strategy developed in coordination with the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Health and Human Services, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and NGOs.

Progress includes additional funding to UNHCR in places such as Turkey to help with resettlement of LGBT refugees, training for staff working on refugee protection, and the expansion of  NGO guidelines to ensure partners know that LGBT refugees and asylum seekers are a priority population of concern.

PRM is also funding new programs in this area, including research to develop best practices for serving LGBT refugees in urban areas and a pilot initiative in Costa Rica on the needs of LGBT migrants.

Presidential Memorandum -- International Initiatives to Advance the Human Rights of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual,...

Read more »

A hard life for gay refugees in Kenya

Source: Global Post

By Jonathan Kalan

The two tender, soft-spoken Ugandans shared a circle of good friends back in their hometown of Kampala. They were close with their families and they started a restaurant together. Life was good.

That was before everything went wrong. They were disowned by their families. Their restaurant was burned down. Their car was stoned and set ablaze.

And so they fled Uganda and came here, thousands hundreds of kilometers east with little more than the clothes on their backs. They came as brothers to live in a scorching refugee camp in northern Kenya.

Surrounded by thousands of others who have fled wars and drought in neighboring countries, they came here to save their own lives.

These two men are not rebel soldiers. They are not fleeing war or drought, and they aren’t really brothers. They are lovers, and they came here to escape what they feared would be certain death after being outed last year in a country where homosexuality is widely considered a mortal sin, as "unnatural" as it is "un-African."

Alex and his partner Michael — whose real names cannot be used because of a continued threat of violence against them — were the target of a series of violent attacks inspired, they say, by an American evangelical campaign that began in 2009, and inspired legislation that, if passed, would have made gay acts punishable by the death penalty.

“I’m not a fighter,” said Alex, a former youth and community leader back in Uganda.

He is timid, unwilling to throw his elbows against hardened Somalis and Sudanese in the food line at the camp. As a result, he now shows signs of malnourishment.

Today the men have been pushed to their limits, living as refugees far from their friends, family and allies. Although they had hoped for a better life in a new land, the camp has proven to be yet another dangerous place for the two polite young Ugandans.

“LGBT people are perhaps the most persecuted group in the world,” said Neil Grungras, founder of the Organization for Refuge, Asylum and Migration (ORAM). “They are persecuted in countries of origin, but neighboring countries share similar cultural values. If you go across the border, you’re not any less likely to be persecuted.”

Read more »

The hypocrisy of stopping the boats

Image via Wikipedia

Source: ASRC

By Vince

For quite some time now, a more compassionate policy response to asylum seekers has been undermined by a campaign of delegitimisation and dehumanisation. This has partly been achieved by a series of popular untruths captured into oft repeated slogans that have come to dominate the national discussion.

Oversimplified and misleading catch phrases such as ‘illegals’, ‘queue jumpers’, ‘proper channels’, ‘border security’ and ‘stop the boats’ have caused many Australians to question how compassionate we ought to be to those arriving on our shores. Even though these myths have been thoroughly debunked time and time again, they continue to persist and fuel our prejudices.

But what if we were to put our prejudices towards today’s boat arrivals aside for one moment and consider how we would judge the national debate if it were being conducted about Jewish refugees fleeing the rise of fascism and Nazism in Europe prior to World War II? How would we react to those who labelled Jewish refugees ‘illegals’ and questioned their failure to arrive in a queue-like orderly fashion?

The analogy becomes more apt when we acknowledge that we had similar prejudices towards Jewish refugees during their time of persecution. At the Evian Conference in France in 1938 which was established to deal with the Jewish refugee issue, Australia’s delegate, Thomas W. White, declared that we could not increase our meagre annual quota of 5000 refugees because “as we have no racial problem, we are not desirous of importing one.”

In an attempt to bypass our quota system, what if Jewish refugees had made it to Australia’s shores in large numbers and the government’s response was to detain them for months and years to the point where they began self-harming and suiciding? Would the appropriate response have been to focus on their illegality, their use of improper channels, the threats they might pose to border security or the most effective way to ‘stop the boats?’

Would it not be considered abhorrent if someone today were to retrospectively ask what we could have done to stop Jewish ‘boat people’ fleeing Nazi persecution and to trap them in places of desperation and destitution without adequate protection for their basic human rights? Unfortunately, we don’t have to imagine. Boats filled with Jewish refugees fleeing persecution were turned back by western countries with horrific consequences.

In hindsight, even raising such options, let alone having them dominate the national discussion, would no doubt be considered highly offensive and extremely distasteful. The reaction is instinctive because we can all connect with the Jewish experience of persecution. Yet today, because of the campaign to delegitimise the current wave of ‘boat people’, many Australians have become so detached from the reality of the asylum seeker experience that we cannot make the same connection with an Afghan fleeing the Taliban or an Iranian fleeing an oppressive regime.

Indeed, the chairman of the human rights arm of B’nai B’rith Australia, Anton Block, remarked in a press statement late last year that the official government practice of detaining women and children asylum seekers “revived memories of a darker period of Jewish history” and endorsed the call of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry to end mandatory detention for these vulnerable groups, a position also outlined in their policy platform.

Such analogies are relevant not because the comparisons of suffering are identical. It is both callous and futile to measure one person’s experience of persecution against another. The point is that whether it’s the Jewish refugees of the past or the vast majority of those arriving on Australia’s shores today, all faced persecution and all are deserving of our willingness and capacity to provide protection and the provision of basic human rights. An inability to recognise this fact reveals our own deep-seated prejudices.

Such prejudices, fuelled by misleading slogans, do more than just undermine a more compassionate response; they distract us from acknowledging our own contribution to the problem.

For example, calls for ‘orderly processing’ are framed as legitimate moral concerns for fair and equitable treatment. Yet despite the fact that there is no just and orderly queue, the question that’s never asked is where are we implying asylum seekers go to find protection or await a durable solution? Australia’s answer (along with many other developed nations) is anywhere but here. The result is that over 80 percent of the world’s refugees are hosted in developing nations, often for decades, with minimal support from rich countries. In reality, pushing asylum seekers back into the ‘queue’ results in shifting what is an international problem over to the third world.

Of course, like all slogans and stereotypes, there often exists an element of truth hidden within the gross generalisations. There are legitimate concerns to be addressed when processing undocumented arrivals such as conducting identity, security and health checks. Yet none of these concerns require indefinite and non-reviewable mandatory detention which inevitably results in horrific physical and mental health outcomes. There are legitimate concerns, but there are also choices.

Read more »

Video: The law that crosses the line

Video by STOP The Infiltration Prevention Law campaign - Hotline for Migrant Workers (Israel).

Migrants in Egypt targeted for body parts

By Paul Canning

People fleeing persecution in countries like Eritrea are being killed in Egypt for their body parts.

According to a doctor in a town on the Sudan-Egypt border quoted by South Africa's Weekend Argus newspaper, a number of “disemboweled bodies” have been discovered. Organs, especially kidneys, were missing.

A recent car crash in Sinai provided evidence. The doctor who was driving the car was killed and, inside the vehicle, officials discovered a small refrigerator containing several human organs. There is other evidence including photographs from a morgue in the Egyptian port town of al-Arish showing scars in the abdomens of refugees who did not make it.

At least 27 refugees have alleged that Egyptian Bedouin people-smugglers have threatened to steal their organs unless they or their families paid money, Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) Israel says.

The Egyptian authorities are known for ignoring the treatment of migrants by traffickers and others, or, in the case of those trying for the Israeli border, actually shooting to kill. They deny the evidence of any trade in body parts.

Italian-based Eritrean agency Agenzia Habeshia provided evidence of some 300 Eritreans and Ethiopians who are being held in police stations in Aswan in Southern Egypt and in the military camp of Shelal in “inhuman and degrading conditions”.

The inter-governmental organisation International Organisation for Migrants (IOM) has listed the situation in Aswan as “very serious”.

Beatings are a regular feature of detention and political and religious refugees in particular are subjected to torture to make them sign “voluntary repatriation requests”.

IOM say that last week more than 100 Christian Eritreans who suffer religious persecution and fear for their lives in Eritrea, were beaten repeatedly until they signed.

“Refugees and asylum-seekers returned to Eritrea have been detained incommunicado and tortured upon return,” Amnesty International said. They have accused the Egyptians of denying refugees access to UNHCR.

The situation in camps run by traffickers is worse, with slavery well documented aside from the alleged, lucrative body parts trade. In the Sinai, criminals hold hostage, kill, torture, and rape migrants.

PHR Israel earlier this year published a survey based on interviews with 284 asylum seekers who made it to Israel. Some 44 per cent said they witnessed violence and/or fatalities of other asylum seekers while they were in the Sinai and the vast majority (88 per cent) stated they experienced severe hunger and food deprivation.

Many women have asked for abortions after being raped.

A leader from the largest Bedouin tribe told CNN said he was aware that rogue elements of his tribe are engaged in people trafficking, bonded labor and torture.

Several hundred Eritreans were recently released from hostage by local Bedouin police working with an NGO coalition. But authorities have been slow to act, if at all, despite being given details about individual criminals.

Related articles

• Israel proposing indefinite detention of refugees (madikazemi.blogspot.com)
• Scores freed after CNN documentary (thecnnfreedomproject.blogs.cnn.com)

Resource: The Positive Spaces Initiative (videos)

The Positive Spaces Initiative (PSI), now in its third phase, is part of the Creating Safe and Positive Space for LGBTQ Newcomers Initiative. This project is funded by the Government of Canada through Citizenship and Immigration Canada and runs in Ontario.

The main objective of this project is to support the immigrant and refugee serving sector to more effectively serve LGBTQ (Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and/or questioning) newcomers.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered (LGBT) individuals are an integral, though often invisible, part of immigrant and refugee communities. Immigrant and refugee-serving organizations have an obligation and responsibility to provide relevant, effective and appropriate services for these immigrants and refugees who are often marginalized within multiple communities.

The project says:

One of the most common misconceptions we heard throughout our provincial consultations was that LGBTQ newcomers do not exist, and there is therefore no need for LGBTQ-inclusive settlement services. From others, we were told there is little understanding about how settlement issues are experienced differently by LGBTQ newcomers. Finally, we heard that queer colleagues working in the settlement sector do not feel safe or fully supported in their workplaces. The invisibility and silencing of LGBTQ peoples daily lived experience was further bolstered by very little formal documentation of LGBTQ newcomers and settlement service providers in Ontario. It was in this context that the need for this research emerged.

Main activities to achieve the project’s objective include:

• Conduct regional and provincial consultations
• Provide sector wide training and information sessions
• Promotion of settlement services to LGBTQ newcomers
• Enhance the anti-oppression strategies within the sector, in partnership with other organizations
• To work with community partners and others to collect resources, information and tools to be included on settlement.org and etablissement.org
• Identification of safe, positive and welcoming spaces for LGBTQ newcomers

The project is now running facilitator lead training that addresses all components of service delivery within the Settlement Services for the  Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans., Queer/Questioning (LGBTQ) communities. It has also created E-Learning Modules, information and fact sheets.

Videos made by PSI









More videos

Beirut as an LGBT refuge? "It’s not great"

Image via Wikipedia

Source: Globalpost

By Don Duncan

The Algerian secret service gave transsexual Randa Lamri an ultimatum: Leave the country within 10 days or risk imprisonment and the defamation of her family.

Lamri, like many persecuted gays, lesbians and transexuals in the region, looked to Beirut for refuge.

“I was scared for my security and for the future of my family,” says Lamri, 39, who came to Lebanon on a tourist visa and immediately set about securing a work visa so that she could stay longer.

A founding member of an underground lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) rights association in Algeria called Abu Nahas, Lamri’s way of life had begun to provoke anonymous death threats from Islamist groups and persistent calls and visits to her workplace and family home from authorities.

Finally, the pressure became too much for her to bear.

“My brother-in-law told me: ‘If you die or go to prison and we find out why, your family will be disgraced and I’ll divorce your sister,’” Lamri says over coffee recently in an east Beirut café. She is tall with long jet-black hair and speaks in hushed words punctuated by the occasional toothy giggle.

Like many of the dozens of LGBTI people who flee to Lebanon from Middle Eastern and North African countries each year, Lamri joined up with a network of acquaintances, many of whom she’d met through activism back in Algeria. Relieved to have escaped the dangers facing her at home, Lamri quickly settled into her new-found freedoms in Lebanon.

“Life is much better here than in Algeria,” she says. “Dressing like a woman in Algeria can lead you to anything from three months to three years in prison. Here, there are no laws against transsexualism.”

Many LGBTI refugees here depart home in such haste that there is not enough time to go through the minimum two-month long visa process to get to Europe or North America. So Lebanon has, for many, become the only feasible refuge. It has a simpler visa procedure (many can get it on arrival at the airport) and enjoys a general perception in the region that its capital Beirut is a liberal, relatively gay-friendly city.

“I think the first place they think of [coming to if they can't get to Europe or North America] would be Beirut, primarily because there is an LGBT infrastructure,” says Rasha Moumneh, researcher for the Middle East and North Africa for Human Rights Watch. “You have LGBT organizations, you have the UNHCR here, which is very aware of the specificities of LGBT asylum seekers and refugees.”

The “LGBT infrastructure” Moumneh mentions includes the only openly active LGBTI NGO in the region, Helem, as well as various LGBTI-sensitized services such as ReStart, a clinic which offers psychological counseling for refugees fleeing traumatic conditions, a UNHCR office which is familiar with and sensitized to the specific needs and vulnerabilities of the LGBTI community, as well as a pretty vibrant gay scene of bars, cafes and nightclubs.

“I didn’t think Lebanon was going to be as liberal as it is,” says Lamri, who entered the country in 2009.

It is hard to find an accurate figure of how many LGBTI people fleeing their countries arrive in Lebanon yearly. Out of fear of deportation, many stay away from registering themselves with any NGO or with the UNHCR. Many of those who do register, cite other reasons for fleeing, such as war and internal strife in the case of Iraqis and Syrians. The UNHCR office in Beirut says it gets up to two dozen people annually claiming refugee status for reasons related to their sexuality or gender status. Gay rights groups cite similar figures but acknowledge that this may be just the tip of the iceberg. Some activists say the true figure could be as much as triple the UNHCR figure.

From time to time the numbers spike severely, when there are political developments in other countries, sending members of the LGBTI community fleeing. A coordinated campaign in Iraq in 2009, against gay men primarily, led by the Shia Mahadi Army militia and the Sunni Al Qaeda in Mespotamia militia, claimed the lives of hundreds. Iraqi gay men, or men suspected of being gay, were hunted down in a move to “clean” the morality of Iraq which had been “corrupted” by the foreign influence brought by the U.S invasion in 2003.

A Human Rights Watch report details a litany of threats and torture that Iraqi men faced – being burnt alive, being hung in public places, decapitations, castrations, rape, anuses being glued shut. The campaign sent hundreds fleeing, many to Beirut.

Hamdia, a 20-year-old Iraqi gay man living in Beirut, had already fled before the 2009 homophobic campaign of violence, which has made it unlikely he will ever move back. His family fled to Syria in 2006, after his 11-year-old brother was kidnapped by a gang and was released for a $60,000 ransom. Hamida, who goes by a pseudonym, was still in high school at the time and finished it in Damascus, but the $60,000 ransom meant that his family could no longer afford to send him to London for university as planned. He now studies fashion design in Beirut.

“In Syria, you don’t feel safe. You have the secret police and they are watching you,” he says in his apartment in the west Beirut neighborhood of Hamra. “In Iraq, they think Beirut is like Europe and they have this picture that it is perfect. Beirut is better, sure, but it’s not great.”

Read more »

Museum curator remembers those who weren't allowed into Canada

Image by gianlucacostantini via Flickr

Source: Winnipeg Free Press

While Canada's proudly welcomed 700,000 refugees since the Second World War it has silently kept the door shut on certain groups over the years, says the curator of the Canadian Museum for Human Rights.

"It has been a little bit quiet about the people we don't allow," Armando Perla told a conference at the University of Manitoba.

War resisters, homosexual refugees and Roma refugees from Eastern Europe haven't always received a warm welcome, said the refugee from El Salvador who's working on the refugees exhibit for the new museum.

If history's taught the world anything, it's that human rights and refugee protection go hand in hand, said lawyer David Matas.

"If you say no to refugees, you're saying yes to the violation of human rights," he said at the Strangers in a New Homeland conference that ends today.

When Jews in Hitler's Germany and other parts of Europe were in danger, countries like Canada and the U.S. wouldn't take them, said Matas. Delegates who attended the Evian conference in France in 1938 to find refuge for threatened Jews expressed sympathy but failed to help. In 1939, close to 1,000 Jewish passengers aboard the ocean liner St. Louis were turned away from safe harbours and returned to Europe. An estimated 254 ended up dead in the Holocaust, said Matas.

The Nazis could see that the world didn't care about what happened to the Jews, and that sent the signal they could get away with genocide, said Matas. Doing nothing for refugees eventually resulted in the slaughter of six million people, he added.

When countries don't act, they're complicit in refugee persecution, he said.

"Today we shake our heads. It was obvious the Jews needed protection from the Nazis." That kind of hindsight hasn't improved the vision of countries that champion human rights today, said Matas.

Targets set by the United Nations High Commission on Refugees for finding safe countries for refugees to go aren't being met, even though there aren't that many in a world of seven billion people.

"What's striking is that the numbers are so low," said Matas.

For example, only half of the target of 1,351 refugees who fled Sudan found a country to call home, he said.

Thousands of freedom fighters who fled Iran and have taken refuge in the chaos of Iraq and millions Falun Gong practitioners in China are persecuted and can't get refugee status, said Matas.

Tamil refugees from Sri Lanka, those who had to flee Myanmar and Sudan are still stuck in refugee camps because so many countries don't want to help people and acknowledge the unbearable conditions of the places they fled.

"The message to the Sri Lankan government is 'Go ahead and mistreat the Tamil minority - we don't care,' " said Matas.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper recently condemned plans to hold a summit in Sri Lanka because of the country's human rights record. But Canada has failed to offer protection to Tamil refugees who fled Sri Lanka, said Matas.

Countries that condemn a country's human rights record then refuse to offer the people who've fled from it refugee status "don't really know what they're saying," said Matas.

Related articles

• Resource: UNHCR guidance note: LGBTI refugees in forced displacement (madikazemi.blogspot.com)
• 60th anniversary of Refugee Convention (madikazemi.blogspot.com)

Video: Barcelona or Barsakh

"Barcelona or Barsakh" Trailer from Refugees Doc on Vimeo.

Trailer for the short-documentary about the struggle of Senegalese people risking their lives in their pursuit of reaching Spain, crossing the Atlantic Ocean for days in precarious fishing boats. Such perilous quest is rooted in the desertification of their habitat, absence of work and government support, and the lack of food due to massive fishing along the Senegalese coast by major foreign fishing companies. Our main protagonist, Keba, takes us along his journey as he prepares for another attempt to leave Senegal and illegally enter Spain by boat.

• More information on this documentary

Related articles

• Video: Interview with Marianna, Senegalese lesbian, asylum seeker (madikazemi.blogspot.com)
• Senegal: Religious Leaders Fuel Homophobia Says Amnesty International (mask.org.za)