• Large building
    Refugee Rights Reports

    Colombia Initiates Opening of Migrant Processing Centers

    August 8, 2023 - By 

    In a move to address irregular border crossings, Colombian officials have declared the establishment of three “safe mobility” centers. These sites are intended to facilitate the processing of migrants and asylum seekers from Haiti, Venezuela, and Cuba who are en route to the United States. These migrant processing centers are a part of a broader regional endeavor to manage and regulate border movements.

    Outlined by the Colombian Foreign Ministry on Thursday, this endeavor marks the commencement of a six-month “exploratory phase.” Two of these miigrant processing centers will be situated in Soacha and Cali. Notably, the third center, located in Medellín, has already commenced operations since August 1st. The objective behind these sites is to provide a structured and secure environment for migrants and asylum seekers. Thuus, offering a streamlined process. Also, ensuring their safety while on the move.

    What is the Colombian government’s take on this initiative?

    “This initiative reflects the dedication of both nations to establish an environment conducive to secure, organized, compassionate, and lawful migration, while also reinforcing global protection and cooperation frameworks,” stated the press release from the ministry, Al-Jazeera reported.

    These immigration migrant processing centers form a component of the broader strategy. It is led by the administration of US President Joe Biden. It’s aim is to reduce the volume of individuals seeking refuge through irregular means at the US-Mexico border.

    What is the statistics on border crossings?

    In 2022, irregular border crossings at the US-Mexico border reached an unprecedented peak.

    As the contentious Title 42 border expulsion policy approaches its expiration date, Republican officials expressed concerns that arrivals could surge dramatically,. This could potentially straining border resources to their limits.

    To address these challenges, “safe mobility” sites, similar to the initiative introduced by Colombia, were suggested as potential solutions.

    These migrant processing centers were positioned as an alternative for migrants and asylum seekers. That is those who might otherwise embark on the arduous and risky journey northward to the US-Mexico border to seek refuge.

    This approach aimed to provide a safer and more organized avenue. All individuals seeking protection will get assistance. Thus, mitigating the strain on border infrastructure.

    What is the US objective concerning migrant processing centers?

    The objective, as articulated by the Biden administration, is to dissuade those with intentions of embarking on irregular migration journeys to the United States or other destinations. This includes those planning to go to Canada, from undertaking such perilous risks.

    In addition to Colombia, other nations are also in the process of establishing migration processing sites.

    An illustrative example is the collaboration between the US and Guatemala, where migration processing centers were unveiled in June.

    Furthermore, an alliance involving the US, Panama, and Colombia began in April. The idea is to collectively address irregular migration through the treacherous Darien Gap—a well-trodden path that migrants and asylum seekers take when journeying from South to Central America.

    This gap, characterized by its hazardous terrain and vulnerability to flooding, poses grave dangers to those attempting to traverse it. Criminal groups have exploited these conditions, posing additional threats to migrants along the route.

    What are the effects?

    Following the conclusion of the Title 42 border expulsion policy, there was a notable reduction in irregular border crossings from Mexico into the United States. The numbers decreased from 206,702 in May to 144,571 in June.

    The Biden administration highlighted these figures as indicative of the desired impact of its immigration policies. However, recent reports revealed a noteworthy development. Border apprehensions surged by over 30 percent in July, underscoring a rebound in activity. Despite this increase, the apprehension rates remain below the levels observed before the expiration of Title 42.

    My take on migrant processing centers

    While the United States has shown generosity in welcoming migrants, I believe that this initiative stands out as one of the most effective approaches. It not only addresses the issue of irregular migration but also serves to mitigate, if not entirely prevent, tragic scenarios where migrants and asylum seekers lose their lives on perilous journeys. The toll of countless lives lost during such ventures is a somber reality.

    By encouraging migrants to seek asylum in the first country of entry, this initiative not only aligns with international migration law but also prioritizes safety and human lives. It offers a solution that goes beyond curbing illegal migration by promoting a more humane and organized approach to seeking refuge. In doing so, it holds the potential to significantly reduce the occurrence of dangerous and often deadly journeys that many individuals undertake in search of a better life.

    In essence, this approach addresses both the practical and ethical dimensions of migration management. By providing a structured pathway for asylum seekers, it not only upholds legal principles but also honors the value of human lives. This initiative marks a significant step forward in fostering a more compassionate and responsible approach to migration, reflecting a commitment to protecting vulnerable individuals while ensuring orderly processes.

    Click this link to read more stories about migrants and refugees.

  • Asylum seekers waiting at a hall
    Refugee Rights Reports

    The reason why UK is sending asylum seekers to Rwanda

    July 1, 2023 - By 

                                                                                                                                                   

    Recently, the UK captured global attention by unveiling a novel initiative to relocate asylum seekers to Rwanda.

    This move has sparked widespread apprehension, particularly among rights organizations that are scrutinizing the government’s motives. Despite these pressing inquiries, the government persists in its plan to transfer certain asylum seekers to Rwanda.

    Nonetheless, this strategy has faced allegations of unlawfulness, a verdict reinforced by the Court of Appeal.

    Numerous human rights advocates contend that this ruling might find itself challenged at the Supreme Court, thus casting a cloud of speculation across the international landscape.

                                                                                                     

    What is the Rwanda asylum seekers plan?

    According to international law, people can seek asylum in any country they chose. For asylees in the UK, there has been a five-year trial related to their transfer.

    The decision which was announced in April 2022 stated that asylees will be sent to Rwanda on a one way ticket.

    The strangest thing about this new plan is that, these people will not get an automatic acceptance into Rwanda.

    They might be granted the refugee status. It is uncertain. Otherwise, they can settle there on other grounds. In other words, they can seek asylum in another  “safe third country”.

    Why is UK considering this plan?

    The answer to this question will not be acceptable to everyone. However, it is important. The UK government says this plan will deter people arriving in the UK through “illegal, dangerous or unnecessary methods”, such as on small boats which cross the English Channel, the BBC reported.

    Apparently, the decision for some people to risk their lives to come to UK is beyond comprehension. In 2022, more than 45,700 people used this route to come to the UK.  Those were the highest figure since records began.

    It is reported that, there are small-boat crossings almost every month since 2023. Though it has decreased compared to last year, the numbers are expected to rise in the coming months. 

    It is one year now since the first flight was scheduled for asylees to be sent to Rwanda. This   trip was cancelled mainly because of legal challenges. There is uncertainty as to when the next flight will be planned, but speculations are high as the UK government continues talks about the issue.

    What was the Court of Appeal’s decision about asylum seekers?

    Regarding the huge question about Rwanda’s safety in relation to this plan, the Court of Appeal overturned an earlier ruling by the High Court. This decision which came in June 2023 proclaimed the Rwanda plan was lawful.

    The judges opinioned that, Rwanda is not a safe third country. This is because there are some inconsistencies with its asylum system. One of which is that, asylum seekers could be sent back to their home countries, thus compelling them to be exposed to persecution again. 

    It said that “unless and until” those deficiencies are corrected, removal of asylum seekers to Rwanda is unlawful, BBC reported.

    From the regional perspective, this Rwanda policy breaches Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which prohibits torture and inhuman treatment.

    The final decision on this case was rather unclear. It was not a unanimous one. Among the three judges who precided, two agreed to reverse the High Court’s decision, but the third did not.

    The judges said their decision does not imply a view about the “political merits” of the policy.

    Who brought this case against the government?

    Asylum Aid is a British charity working to support asylum seekers in the UK. They brought this case claiming it violates the rights of asylees in the UK.

    Regarding the judgement, they said it was a “vindication of the importance of the rule of law and basic fairness when fundamental rights are at stake”.

    What is UNHCR’s position?

    The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees advised the court in the appeal as it related to international refugee law.

    They agreed with the ruling, and urged the UK government to “pursue other measures” instead.

    How did the UK government respond to the decision about asylum seekers?

    Representing the government, Home Secretary Suella Braverman called the judgement “disappointing”. On the other hand, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak confirmed the government will be sought permission to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court. This means the legal proceedings might take a long time. 

    The pressure from other refugee charities seems to be making positive effects. Airlines such as Privilege Style and two others who had previously conducted deportation flights  withdrew from their Home Office contract regarding the Rwanda scheme.

    How many people might be sent to Rwanda’as asylum seekers?

    To indicate the number of people who might be possibly sent to Rwanda, the government had previously said anyone entering the UK illegally after 1 January 2022 could be sent. In this statement, there was no limit about the number. 

    On the side of Rwanda, it claims to be able to handle a 1,000 asylum seekers during the trial period. There could be space for more people they added.

    This plan will not benefit only the UK. It is said to be an exchange wherein, Rwanda can request the UK to take in some of its most vulnerable refugees.

    How much does the asylum seeker plan cost?

    Reports have it that the UK has paid the Rwandan government £140m. The overall cost is not clear to the public.

    An economic-impact assessment was done for the government’s Illegal Migration Bill.  It estimated that removing each individual to a third country, such as Rwanda, would cost £63,000 more than keeping them in the UK. 

    This huge figure is the difference between the total cost of removing an individual – estimated to be £169,000 – and the £106,000 spent on housing support if they remain in the UK.

    In unclear terms, the Home office claims this policy is aimed at deterring illegal individuals. The figures of the number remain undefined. 

    Generally, the UK’s asylum system costs £3bn a year.  This massive amount means almost £7m a day is spent on hotel accommodation for refugees and asylum seekers.

    Several critics claim the daily cost is so high because of the long time taken to decide on applications. Also, the strict ban on asylum seekers working while waiting for confirmation of their status is irrelevant. 

    Are you interested in reading more articles about refugees? Click here.