|
Dutch
Asylum Policies Breach Rights
Source
for this page: Human Rights Watch
The
Netherlands' Humanitarian Tradition Erodes
Critical
aspects of Dutch asylum policy violate international refugee standards,
Human Rights Watch said ina new
report released in Brussels, April 9th 2003.
"In
its efforts to control immigration, the Dutch government cannot violate
fundamental rights. The new government in formation should prioritize
asylum reform and return the Netherlands to its traditional role as a
leader in the defense of human rights and refugee protection in Europe."
Elizabeth Andersen, Executive Director of Human Rights
Watch's Europe and Central Asia Division
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Human Rights
Watch urged the new Dutch government being formed to prioritize reforms
to bring asylum policy back in line with international standards.
The 33-page
report, "Fleeting
Refuge: The Triumph of Efficiency Over Protection in Dutch Asylum Policy,"
raises concern about recent policies adopted to hasten the processing
of asylum claims at the expense of the protection needs of refugees.
"In its
efforts to control immigration, the Dutch government cannot violate fundamental
rights," said Elizabeth Andersen, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch's
Europe and Central Asia Division. "The new government in formation should
prioritize asylum reform and return the Netherlands to its traditional
role as a leader in the defense of human rights and refugee protection
in Europe."
The Human
Rights Watch report is based on three months of research involving review
of dozens of transcripts and decisions in asylum cases and extensive interviews
with asylum lawyers, humanitarian and human rights organizations, and
representatives of the Dutch immigration agency. The report highlights
Human Rights Watch concerns in three areas: violations of the right to
seek asylum in a routinely-used accelerated determination procedure; the
improper treatment of migrant children; and restrictions on asylum seekers'
rights to basic material support, including food and adequate housing.
Human Rights
Watch reports that the Dutch accelerated "AC Procedure" is being used
to process cases for which it is inappropriate. The 48-hour procedure
was originally designed to screen out clearly unfounded cases, but is
now used to process 60 percent of asylum claims, with government officials
aiming to process 80 percent through this accelerated review.
Human Rights
Watch said the process gives applicants little opportunity to document
their need for protection, receive meaningful advice from a lawyer, or
effectively challenge a negative decision on appeal. Particularly for
cases involving humanitarian concerns or complex legal or factual questions,
Human Rights Watch said the AC procedures are inadequate.
"The accelerated
determination procedures are regularly used to assess the claims of people
suffering trauma or fleeing countries torn by war or repression," said
Andersen. "Under these circumstances, the authorities run a very real
risk of sending people back to face persecution."
The Human
Rights Watch report also charges that certain aspects of Dutch immigration
policy fail to serve the best interests of migrant children as required
under the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Specifically, Human Rights
Watch expressed concern that more than 30 percent of child asylum seekers
have their claims reviewed in the cursory AC procedure.
Human Rights
Watch found that interviews of children are often conducted in a manner
inappropriate for their age and maturity and without the benefit of consistent
assistance from a lawyer or guardian. Human Rights Watch also concluded
that Dutch government determinations that a child is "accompanied" by
a relative in the Netherlands do not sufficiently assess whether those
relatives are willing or able to provide children with long-term care.
In a third
area of concern, Human Rights Watch criticized Dutch policy to deny basic
material support, including food and housing, to asylum seekers still
in various stages of the asylum process. Human Rights Watch says this
policy leaves asylum seekers, including families with children, homeless
and dependent on charity for basic survival while awaiting a final determination
on appeal from the AC procedure. In one case reported by Human Rights
Watch, a family from Rwanda was evicted from the asylum reception center
after the immigration authorities rejected their asylum claim. When a
court later overturned that decision, the family could not be found.
"People
seeking asylum cannot do so effectively if they are worried about where
they and their families will sleep," said Andersen. "Policies that deny
basic assistance to those in need are inconsistent with the Netherlands'
humanitarian tradition."
The
report includes detailed recommendations intended to assist any new government
in the effort to ensure that asylum and immigration policies comply with
the Netherlands' international and regional legal obligations. To read
these recommendations to the Dutch government, please click here.
Source
for this page: Human Rights Watch
The
contents of this page are the sole responsibility of the author/s.
==============
Disclaimer (1): NCADC's web site is an important part of our work
in educating the public on immigration, asylum and anti-deportation issues.
As part of that work our web site hosts news and views from different
individuals, organisations and campaigns working in the same field as
us. The contents of named/signed articles are the sole responsibility
of the author/s and should not be taken as endorsement of any kind.
Disclaimer (2): NCADC takes no responsibility for the content of
external websites linked from ncadc.org.uk and links should not be taken
as endorsement of any kind.
|