No consensus on implementation of cessation clause for Rwandan refugees
KAMPALA/JOHANNESBURG, 12 July 2013 (IRIN) - The future of tens of thousands
of Rwandan refugees living in Africa remains uncertain nearly two weeks
after the 30 June deadline recommended by the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) for
the discontinuation of their refugee status.
UNHCR has recommended countries invoke the “ceased circumstances”
<
http://www.refworld.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/rwmain?docid=47fdfaf1d> clause
for Rwandans who fled their country between 1959 and 1998. The cessation
clause forms part of the 1951 Refugee Convention and can be applied when
fundamental and durable changes in a refugee’s country of origin, such that
they no longer have a well-founded fear of persecution, remove the need for
international protection. Both UNHCR and the Rwandan government have pointed
out that since the end of the civil war and the 1994 genocide, Rwanda has
been peaceful, and more than three million exiled Rwandans have returned
home.
However, many of the estimated 100,000 Rwandans who continue to live outside
the country - mainly in eastern, central and southern Africa - remain
unwilling to repatriate, citing fear of persecution by the government.
Refugee rights organizations have also warned that human rights abuses by
the current government have caused a continued exodus of Rwandan
<
http://www.irinnews.org/report/94029/migration-rwandan-refugees-reluctant-t
o-repatriate> asylum seekers.
“We have been told time and again that Rwanda is safe and there might be
some truth in that. However, one wonders why the call for cessation is
happening while there are still people who are seeking asylum,” Dismas
Nkunda, co-director of the International Refugee Rights Initiative, told
IRIN.
Differing views on protection
So far only four countries in Africa - Malawi, the Republic of Congo, Zambia
and Zimbabwe - have followed UNHCR’s recommendation to invoke the cessation
clause, a fact that, according to Nkunda, “speaks volumes” about how
different African countries view this group’s need for protection.
In an
<
http://frlan.tumblr.com/post/54334445025/unhcr-africa-bureau-announces-only
-three-states-to> article in the July issue of a newsletter produced by the
Fahamu Refugee Programme, a refugee legal aid group, John Cacharani and
Guillaume Cliche-Rivard accused UNHCR of pressuring states to follow its
recommendation, “holding hostage the fate of more than 100,000 Rwandan
refugees who, of their own volition, have decided not to repatriate, yet
continue to fear the end of their international protection.”
"One wonders why the call for cessation is happening while there are still
people who are seeking asylum"
But in response to questions from IRIN, Clementine Nkweta-Salami, UNHCR
regional representative for southern Africa, emphasized, “It is the
responsibility and prerogative of states to declare the cessation of refugee
status.” She said UNHCR’s role was only to make a recommendation based on
its analysis of conditions in the country of origin and how they relate to
the refugees’ reasons for flight.
That only four states had agreed to implement cessation as of 30 June did
not in any way indicate that UNHCR’s recommendation was premature, she
insisted. At an April 2013 meeting of host states held in Pretoria, “some
states underscored that, for various legal, logistical, practical or other
considerations, they are not in a position to apply the cessation clauses by
30 June 2013. Others have specified that, for the time being, they will
concentrate on taking forward other components of the [comprehensive durable
solutions] strategy, namely voluntary repatriation and local integration”.
Preparing for returnees
Meanwhile, Rwandan officials say the country is prepared to receive the
<
http://www.midimar.gov.rw/index.php/news/223-minister-mukantabana-calls-ref
ugees-to-return-before-the-cessation-clause-come-into-effect> refugees, and
has developed a comprehensive plan to repatriate and reintegrate returnees.
So far this year, an estimated 1,500 Rwandans have returned home following
government-operated “go-and-see” programmes.
“The conditions that forced them to flee no longer exist,” Rwandan High
Commissioner to Uganda, Maj Gen Frank Mugambagye, told IRIN. “The government
has established three transit centres which are well equipped with shelter,
education and health services. These people will be given packages for three
months. We have mobilized the local authorities to receive and help them
reintegrate into the communities.”
He added that for Rwandans seeking local integration in host countries
rather than repatriation, the government will issue national identity cards
and passports that will allow them to retain their nationality.
IRIN spoke to government officials and UNHCR representatives in several of
the African countries that are hosting significant numbers of Rwandan
refugees to find out how they are handling the cessation clause.
Countries invoking the clause
Malawi
Although Malawi is among the countries said to be invoking the cessation
clause, the process is still in its early stages. According to George
Kuchio, UNCHR representative for Malawi, the first step of informing the 660
refugees covered by the clause of their right to apply for exemption has
just been completed, and the government has yet to decide what options it
will offer for local integration.
“If there are people who still have compelling reasons for not returning,
they’ll be given the opportunity to have their say,” Kuchio told IRIN.
However, the principal secretary in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and
International Cooperation, Besten Chisamile, was
<
http://www.nyasatimes.com/2013/06/23/malawi-to-repatriate-rwanda-refugees/>
quoted in the local media as saying, “The situation in Rwanda stabilized
long ago, and there is every reason for the remaining ones [refugees] to
return to their home. We are working with UNHCR on ensuring we repatriate
them.”
Malawi is host to a further 500 Rwandan asylum seekers whose refugee status
has yet to be determined but who are unlikely to be covered by the cessation
clause.
Republic of Congo
In June, the Republic of Congo
<
http://www.midimar.gov.rw/index.php/news/260-reunion-bilaterale-congo-rwand
a> announced that it would invoke the cessation clause for the 8,404 Rwandan
refugees it hosts. They will now have to choose between voluntary
repatriation, naturalization or applying for exemption.
"Those who fail to choose one of these options will be subject to the laws
pertaining to foreigners' entry, residence and departure," said Chantal
Itoua Apoyolo, director of multilateral affairs in the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs and Cooperation.
Juvenal Turatsinzé, 49, who is among 2,500 Rwandan refugees living in
Loukolela, in the northern Cuvette region, said: "We've been worried since
hearing about the loss of our status. We'd love to go back to Rwanda, but
the conditions that would allow us to do that willingly are not yet in
place.
"There are often arbitrary arrests in Rwanda. There is no freedom of
expression, no democracy. We don’t think the time is right for voluntary
repatriation... There are no security guarantees there."
He added, "I have already put in my request for naturalization as a
Congolese citizen.”
Zambia
Zambia hosts 6,000 Rwandan refugees, about 4,000 of whom are covered by the
cessation clause. According to Peter Janssen, a senior protection officer
with UNHCR, the majority of these have applied for exemption, but most have
been rejected. “Officially their refugee status has ceased, but the
government has made it known that there will be a possibility for people to
acquire an alternative status,” said Janssen.
“That still needs to be fine-tuned, but it is positive because, until a
while ago, it looked like people would be left without a status and have to
return to Rwanda.”
Zimbabwe
Zimbabwe, which is also following the recommendation to invoke the cessation
clause, is further along with the process.
Prior to 30 June, 72 cases comprising over 200 individuals who left their
country before 1999 were identified as falling within the scope of the
clause, out of about 800 Rwandan refugee and asylum seekers living in the
country. Those unwilling to repatriate who qualify for local integration,
either through marriage to a local or through employment in certain
professions, such as lawyers, doctors and teachers, have been encouraged to
apply for permanent residence or work permits. However, they cannot be
issued permits until they are in possession of Rwandan passports, which the
Rwandan government have yet to issue.
The majority who do not qualify for local integration but do not want to
return home have already applied for exemption from the cessation clause.
According to Ray Chikwanda, a national protection officer with UNHCR in
Zimbabwe, only six out of the 60 cases that applied were successful. Those
who were rejected have been encouraged to appeal.
“Our reading of the situation is that until there is a political consensus
in the region [about invoking the cessation clause], these appeal decisions
are unlikely to be released,” said Chikwanda.
Countries not invoking the clause
Democratic Republic of Congo
The government of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has said it will
not immediately invoke the cessation clause for the estimated 47,500 Rwandan
refugees it hosts, but will instead adopt a phased approach.
Rwandan refugees will first be identified, registered and asked if they want
to return. Following a meeting in October, a repatriation plan will be drawn
up. Julien Paluku, governor of North Kivu Province, where most of the
Rwandan refugees have settled, told the Associated Press that refugees who
do not want to return home will be allowed to apply either for a residence
permit or for Congolese nationality, which may be granted on a case-by-case
basis.
UNHCR has helped some 8,000 Rwandans return home from DRC since 2012 and
says it will continue to assist with repatriation.
Uganda
Out of 14,811 Rwandan refugees living in Uganda, about 4,100 individuals
fall within the scope of the cessation clause. However, the government has
not invoked cessation because ambiguities in the country’s Immigration Act
and Constitution would hinder local integration - an alternative to
voluntary repatriation that host states are supposed to make available as
part of the comprehensive solutions strategy.
For example, Article 12 of the Constitution bars the children of refugees
from qualifying for citizenship, while sections of the Immigration Act
effectively preclude refugees from qualifying for permanent residence or
work permits.
“The government of Uganda has declared that, pending the resolution of the
[legal] ambiguities and the charting of a way forward towards implementing
local integration and alternative legal status, they will not be invoking
the ceased circumstances clause,” Esther Kiragu, UNHCR assistant
representative for protection, told IRIN. “They will, however, announce a
date for invocation in due course once the road map is clearly drawn.”
South Africa
At a ministerial meeting convened by UNHCR in Pretoria in April 2013, South
Africa’s Minister of Home Affairs Naledi Pandor said, “The position of the
UNHCR in relation to Rwanda has created anguish and uncertainty among the
refugee community in South Africa”, suggesting that much work remained to be
done to clearly articulate the reasons for the clause being invoked.
The South African government has since informed UNHCR that it will conduct
its own research into existing conditions in Rwanda and consult extensively
with the local Rwandan community before making a decision on invoking the
cessation clause.
A local Rwandan refugee leader, who did not wish to be named, commended
South Africa’s Department of Home Affairs for “welcoming Rwandan refugee
leaders, listening to their concerns and fears of being returned to Rwanda,
and sharing with refugees the government of South Africa’s position around
the cessation clause”.
------------[ Sent via the dehai-wn mailing list by dehai.org]--------------
Received on Fri Jul 12 2013 - 15:30:25 EDT