UNHCR: Protecting refugees or those who harm them?

On Sept. 1, Israeli army Brig.-Gen Yoel Strick said in a deposition to Israel’s Supreme Court that is a matter of public record that Israel had “returned” 91 African “infiltrators”—official parlance for asylum seekers—to Egypt in late August.

Yesterday, Israeli state attorney Yochi Gnessin repeated in the court that 91 people have been returned to Egypt, where human rights activists believe there is a grave danger they will be—or may have already been–forcibly repatriated to their countries of origin, including Sudan and Eritrea. The actual number of those expelled is slightly higher when one takes into account reports by (distressed) Israeli soldiers of additional returns.

One of the expulsions back to Egypt was carried out only twenty minutes after refugees had been fired on by Egyptian soldiers, according to an Israeli reservist. Brig-Gen. Strick, in his deposition, conceded that a “specific failure” had occurred and that the army had violated its own regulations in not interviewing the “infiltrators” before they were expelled.

Egypt is by no means the final stop for these unfortunate human beings who were essentially thrown to the sharks by Israel. In June, Egypt forcibly repatriated 1200 refugees to Eritrea– where many of them ended up in incommunicado detention in harsh military prisons according to Amnesty International. And if and when expellees arrive back in Sudan, as happened to some after an August, 2007 Israeli return of refugees to Egypt, their prognosis is bleak (footnote: others not returned to Sudan are still believed missing in Egypt). Israel is considered by Khartoum an enemy state and the punishment for visiting Israel is protracted imprisonment or execution. Deporting refugees into a situation of danger to their lives and liberty is a clear breach of the 1951 international convention on refugee rights, which Egypt and Israel have signed and which the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) is supposed to uphold.

Therein lies the rub. UNHCR, which has offices and staff in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv—including lawyers—apparently only sees and hears what it wants to. And, judging from its statements, it does not want to know about 91 hapless African asylum seekers whose lives are in danger. Or to have to do its job and remind Egypt and Israel of their obligations under international law. So for UNHCR, Brig-Gen.Strick’s deposition does not exist.

Here is the response I received Tuesday from UNHCR’s Cairo office to my query of whether the refugee agency had any information about the fate of the asylum seekers returned to Egypt. “UNHCR has no information or confirmation from the Egyptian or Israeli sides on the group. Our information is mainly from the local media reports, but we are unable to officially confirm or verify indeed that there has been a return movement from Israel.”

Annex: Ahmed Elzobier, spokesman of the Darfur Center for Human Rights and Development, London, assesses what awaits Sudanese nationals who entered Israel if they are forcibly returned to Sudan. Dated July 28, 2007

“I have asked my lawyers friends here in Khartoum and their reply as follows: Sudanese Refugees in Israel might have violated article (52) of Sudan’s criminal law, and article 6 of the security forces who have powers to arrest for indefinite period of time if they have been categorized under that article.

The risk is high for these Sudanese refugees if they were to return to Sudan, I am not sure if they will face the death penalty or life imprisonment. Unless they has been arbitrarily charged of committing offence against the state as stated in the criminal act 1991 article 50 and 51 because they applied for asylum in Israel.

However, according to my lawyers friends’ best judgment article 52 is the most likely scenario in the case of the refugees.

The criminal act 1991

Article (52)

Dealing with an enemy state

Whoever, without permission therefore, joins the service of any state, which is declared by Sudan as enemy state, or involves himself in any commercial, or other transaction with it, or with the agents thereof, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten yeas, or with fine, or with both.

Also the security forces act state in article 6

F) Combat the subversive activities of foreign states or organizations, groups, individuals or states
or Sudanese groups inside and outside the Sudan. “

Bookmark this article

•     
•     
•     
•     
•     
•     
•     
•     
•     
•     
•     
•     
•     
•     

E-mail this article to a friend

* Required Field

Your Name: *

Your E-Mail: *

Your Remark:

Friend's Name: *

Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.

Friend's E-Mail: *

Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.

Image Verification: *

 Loading ...

Close