Meeting with UNHCR Middle East and North Africa Bureau

20 June 2016

This is a report of the meeting on 20 June 2016 between Australian NGO and community representatives with UNHCR Middle East and North Africa Bureau. The first part of this report outlines the concerns raised at the meeting and the responses of UNHCR. The second part of this report sets out the concerns raised in more detail.

Report of the meeting

The representatives from Australian NGOs at this meeting were Louise Olliff and Paul Power, representing Refugee Council of Australia (RCOA), and Shaun Nemorin, representing STARTTS. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) Africa Bureau was represented by Ann Encontre (Deputy Director), Nagette Belgacem (Senior Legal Officer), Wendy Rappeport (Senior External Relations Officer) and Monique Sokhan (Senior Regional Legal Officer).

Banyamulenge community concerns about resettlement

The concerns of Australia’s Banyamulenge community from the Congo regarding the misappropriation of identity were raised. In response, UNHCR noted that it has had an enhanced resettlement program for Congolese since 2012, because the US Government is very keen to resettle as many Congolese as UNHCR can submit. Given the very large number of Congolese refugees in the Great Lakes region, UNHCR has needed to identify fair resettlement criteria. The criteria are not based on ethnicity but on date of arrival, as UNHCR wants to target those who have been displaced for a very long time, given the vulnerability associated with long-term displacement.

The main criterion is the cut-off date which has been 2005, but UNHCR is now discussing a cut-off date of 2008 with the US Government. The other criterion used was region of origin, with the prioritised areas being North Kivu and South Kivu and Gaumba. Ethnicity doesn’t make a difference. Priority is also given to survivors of violence from the Gatumba refugee camp. UNHCR understands that identity is important for Banyamulenge but cases are nor prioritised because of identity. Refugees falsely claiming to be Banyamulenge gain no advantage by doing so.

Resettlement from Africa

UNHCR has submitted more than 50,000 cases over a five-year period. It would be good if Australia took more. Resettlement has helped UNHCR in many countries like Rwanda and Burundi where integration is quite difficult. US has agreed to continue resettlement which is very good news. However, Australia accepted no new referrals from the region since 2012. Those currently being resettled by Australia were referred four or more years ago. The resettlement criteria being used are those outlined in UNHCR’s Global Resettlement Needs document. It would be helpful if diaspora could play a role in advocating for greater use of alternative pathways for resettlement.

Oromo community concerns

RCOA outlined the concerns of Australia’s Oromo community. UNHCR responded that the offer of Oromo community members to assist with language verification was kind but the Africa Bureau would need to discuss this with resettlement colleagues. Among the refugees being referred for resettlement, Oromo are not large in numbers. The Africa Bureau has discussed access to resettlement for Oromo with UNHCR colleagues in Nairobi, observing that it is a pity that more Oromo do not have access to resettlement because they are in great need.

RCOA advocated for the Africa Bureau to ensure that UNHCR officers in Indonesia involved in refugee status determination are well-informed about conditions in Ethiopia. The UNHCR Africa Bureau official replied by commenting that Oromo are being targeted in Ethiopia right now because they are prepared to speak out. There have been worrying developments, even on that day (20 June) and yesterday. UNHCR Africa Bureau agreed to share updated information about the situation for Oromo people in Ethiopia with Asia Bureau colleagues.

UNHCR Africa Bureau was not aware of Mr Guyyo’s case, noting that UNHCR does not always have access to information on such cases. UNHCR will come back to RCOA on this case if more information is needed.

Sudan

RCOA asked whether there is there any way of building better connections between community structures and UNHCR in Sudan. UNHCR Africa Bureau noted that it should be happening but acknowledged that difficulties exist. Engaging with the diaspora is something UNHCR is trying to do better. This is potentially difficult because of the political agendas of different organisations. The Africa Bureau been working closely with the Norwegian Refugee Council which has teamed up with the Solutions Alliance to work with diasporas.

Regarding Eritreans in Sudan, the resettlement criteria are the same for refugees in the camp as they are in Khartoum. There is a perception that those in Khartoum have greater access to resettlement but the UNHCR Africa Bureau has observed the resettlement process both in the refugee camps and in Khartoum and is confident that access is not more limited for those based in camps. In fact, the majority of resettlement referrals are made from the camp.

RCOA reported that members of the Eritrean diaspora had built a school in Shegarab camp and want to build another three classrooms. They are asking about the potential for them to be seen as a partner by UNHCR. Africa Bureau staff asked whether they had approached the UNHCR office in Khartoum and regional offices in Sudan. Once the group has the blessing of the UNHCR representation in Sudan, this will facilitate contact. Group members should keep in mind that UNHCR is naturally cautious about outside groups coming into refugee camps because there are so many traffickers and smugglers attempting to infiltrate the camps. Without the formal permission of UNHCR’s Sudan office, UNHCR staff in each camp would be very suspicious of any group attempting to work in the camp.

South Sudan

The issues from South Sudan raised in RCOA’s brief were covered in the Africa Bureau session of the UNHCR NGO Consultation. Ann Encontre of Africa Bureau also spoke to Elizabeth Lang about issues in the Nuba Mountains region.

Issues Raised by Refugee Communities in Australia: Africa Region

The following summarises issues and concerns identified through extensive and ongoing consultations involving refugee communities across Australia. Members of RCOA worked together to prioritise the issues and questions summarised below.

Banyamulenge

Members of the Banyamulenge community in Australia have raised concerns about the misidentification of resettlement cases. Community members report that a number of families have arrived in Australia under the Banyamulenge caseload since 1996 from various African countries who do not speak the language. While these cases may have had legitimate refugee claims, they are concerned about the misappropriation of Banyamulenge identity and how this may affect those who are still awaiting resettlement, particularly family members of the Gatumba massacre who they believe should be prioritised.

The community reports that there are cases where Banyamulenge family names had been used by people from other nationalities (especially in Ethiopia and Burundi) and that there are Banyamulenge refugees who are still in refugee camps whose names are on lists of resettled refugees. Community leaders in Australia have said that their colleagues in Ethiopia who have tried to raise these issues with the Administration for Refugee and Returnee Affairs (ARRA), have been beaten and imprisoned as a result of reporting incidents of fraud. Community leaders in Australia have asked for greater community engagement in verification of Banyamulenge cases for resettlement, and suggested that this could be done through embassies in collaboration with UNHCR and with Banyamulenge community leaders.

Can UNHCR provide any information on the current status of the Banyamulenge caseload in Burundi, Rwanda and Ethiopia and advise what steps have been taken to ensure verification of Banyamulenge resettlement cases?

Members of the Banyamulenge community in Australia have requested a meeting be arranged with appropriate UNHCR staff from the Africa Bureau regarding possible diaspora community involvement in verification processes.

Oromo

Members of the Oromo community in Australia have been working actively with Oromo community leaders in many different countries, particularly in the context of ongoing protests in Ethiopia. They have raised the following concerns:

·  Kenya — ongoing experiences of insecurity, lack of durable solutions, and fears of Ethiopian state influence in both urban areas and camps. Community members report that fears and frustration were heightened after Ethiopian security forces in collaboration with Kenyan police allegedly kidnapped and forcefully deported a UNHCR registered and mandated Oromo refugee, Mr Dhabasa Guyyo, from Nairobi in August 2015. The community believe Mr Guyyo's is currently imprisoned in Ethiopia.

·  Sudan — Oromo community members continue to report abuse and harassment by Ethiopian and Sudanese government security forces in Sudan. The community report identity fraud and long waiting periods for first instance interviews as the most common problems. They report that local UNHCR staff and the Sudanese government office that deal with refugee issues have openly advised Oromo community members not to lodge refugee protection applications accusing the Ethiopia government of human rights abuses. Finally, the community report the inappropriate use of non-Oromo interpreters in the Khartoum office. They recommended greater engagement with Oromo community groups in Sudan to verify identities, particularly in the case of resettlement. This has also been confirmed by community members in Australia working in settlement services who have been referred cases of new arrivals who are listed as Oromo but who cannot speak Afaan Oromo.

·  Indonesia — Oromo diaspora in Australia have been actively supporting the small group of Oromo asylum seekers in Jakarta. Their main concerns are: recent rejection of Oromo cases heightening the already considerable community fears and feelings of insecurity; ongoing issues with fly-in interpreters (lack of proficiency in Afaan Oromo, and a previous interpreter having reportedly been flown in directly from Addis Ababa by IOM); and acute lack of support with housing, education and health services. Community leaders in Indonesia also report harassment by Ethiopian state security forces, with warning phone calls being received on personal mobile phones. (Note: these concerns will be raised with the Asia bureau.)

·  Egypt — Community members report poor treatment by national staff in the UNHCR office in Cairo, general lack of accessibility to UNHCR and lack of appropriate Afaan Oromo interpreters. General insecurity, long waiting periods for RSD, and the reported high rejection rate of Oromo cases are forcing Oromo community members to move irregularly and seek asylum in Europe. Community members report that experiences of hostility and harassment have escalated in the context of the current standoff between Ethiopia and Egypt over the Blue Nile Dam and local resentment against Oromo refugees. (Note: these concerns will be raised with the MENA bureau.)

Oromo community members have asked that (1) better legal advice about the Oromo caseload be provided to field offices outside of the Africa region (e.g. Indonesia and Egypt) to ensure the most up-to-date information is being considered in RSD processes, particularly in light of the recent crackdown on protests in the Oromia region and concerns about the possibility of safe returns; and (2) that UNHCR review its policy and practices with regards to Afaan Oromo interpreters to ensure that interpreters are appropriately available in all field operations. Oromo interpreters in Australia have expressed a willingness to join a pool of interpreters that can be accredited for Skype or phone interpreting as required.

Can UNHCR provide any information on how returns to Ethiopia of rejected Oromo cases are being considered and monitored, particularly in light of ongoing protests in the Oromia region?

South Sudan

Members of the South Sudanese diaspora have received accounts from the residents of Yida camp that UNHCR does not allow education to be provided in Yida and has withheld formal learning opportunities for youth in the camp for four years now. Furthermore, some allege that UNHCR has used education as bait to manipulate refugees into relocating to other refugee camps such as Ajuong Thok and Pamir, creating protection concerns as unaccompanied minors have been forced to leave their families to attend school. They subsequently report that moving to Ajuong Thok is not an adequate alternative for educational purposes as classes are full to an extent the students cannot see a teacher, hence impacting on their learning abilities and opportunities. It is our understanding that UNHCR is scheduled to close Yida by 30 June 2016.

What strategies are UNHCR pursuing to improve quality and quantity of educational programs in these camps? Will there be an opportunity for NGOs to assist in the development of practical strategies in this area?

Community members have also raised concerns about the ongoing conflict in the Nuba mountains region and the lack of access by humanitarian organisations to people in this area. The community would welcome information and advocacy on how populations in this region can be supported.

Sudan

Eritrean community members expressed concern over the perceived prioritisation for resettlement of cases of those registered and living in Khartoum over those who are highly vulnerable and have fewer resources in camps like Shegarab. They are concerned that this is leading to more people trying to leave camps and move to Khartoum. Community members have called for a greater presence by UNHCR field staff at Shegarab.

Members of the Eritrean diaspora in Australia have been actively supporting a number of small education projects in Kassala and Shegarab refugee camp, including funding the construction of a 6-room school building in Shegarab. A number of people have asked how they can make these initiatives more effective by coordinating with UNHCR, and whether there is a possibility for a joint project to be identified involving members of Eritrean diaspora communities (in Australia and Europe). Community members have suggested that funding for education projects can be raised from within the diaspora and implementation can be undertaken also by diaspora members, but assistance is required to be able to navigate Sudanese authorities to be given access to camps.

Can the bureau make any suggestions for how an Eritrean diaspora-led education project may be pursued in Sudan?

4