26 September 2004
Introduction
Some 25 NGOs participated in a half-day consultation in Geneva, organized by the GCIM and the International Council of Voluntary Agencies (ICVA). The meeting was co-chaired by Jeff Crisp of GCIM and Ed Van Schenkenberg of ICVA. UNHCR assisted in making the practical arrangements for the meeting.
The purpose of the consultation was to enable the GCIM to hear the views and perspectives of the NGO community on a number of questions relating to international migration and asylum. The annotated agenda prepared for the meeting is attached.
The work of GCIM
The seminar was opened by Ed Van Schenkenberg, who welcomed the participants and spoke of the importance he attached to this meeting between GCIM and the NGO community. He went on to welcome Jeff Crisp, who thanked ICVA and UNHCR for their help in organizing the meeting.
Mr Crisp provided a briefing on the origins, mandate, activities and objectives of the Global Commission. He also described the Global Commission's policy analysis programme, giving special attention to a project on "irregular migration, state security and human security", which is being led by Khalid Koser, another GCIM Secretariat staff member. Mr Crisp explained that this project would include a specific focus on the situation and rights of asylum seekers. Another policy analysis project, he explained, would be examining the relationship between international migration and human rights. In addition, Mr Crisp pointed out that the Global Commission would not be examining large-scale refugee situations in developing countries.
In relation to the question of NGO involvement in the work of the Global Commission, Mr Crisp invited NGOs, both individually and collectively, to engage in regular consultations with the Secretariat. If they so desired, NGOs were also welcome to present written submissions to the Global Commission on issues that were of particular interest or concern to them. Mr Crisp pointed out that a %u2018Core Group of States' has been established to support the work of the Global Commission, and suggested that it was important for the Secretariat to ensure that the voice of the NGOs and other civil society institutions was also heard.
Mr Crisp went on to explained that the Global Commission's final report, which will be submitted to UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan in mid-2005, will be concise, written in an accessible style and include a set of actionable recommendations. The Global Commission will also publish a volume of "supporting evidence" to accompany the final report.
Migration and asylum
Introducing the issue of migration and asylum, Jeff Crisp identified a number of items for discussion: the terminology, state policy in relation to irregular migrants, and the potential of recent proposals in the area of asylum and migration, including the strategic use of resettlement, "protection in regions of origin", and the establishment of labour migration programmes as a means of averting irregular movements.
NGO participants expressed their concern about the current state of refugee protection and drew particular attention to the problems associated with protracted refugee situations, refugees in urban areas, the right of refugees to work and to enjoy freedom of movement. Despite the longstanding existence of the refugee protection regime, it was pointed out, certain groups of people continue to find themselves in very vulnerable situations: stateless people, internally displaced people, rejected asylum seekers, people with subsidiary needs for protection and the victims of human trafficking.
The meeting agreed upon the need to ensure that people with protection needs have access to the territory and asylum procedures of other states. In this respect, NGO participants voiced their opposition to state practices such as interception, detention and the deployment of security officers in foreign airports, assigned with the task of identifying people who are travelling in an irregular manner and passengers who may seek asylum in their country of destination. At the same time, participants questioned both the ethics and the practicality of recent proposals to establish offshore and extra-territorial asylum processing facilities.
According to some speakers, it was true to say that the asylum system was being misused by certain migrants who are moving for economic purposes. However, it had also become clear that some of the industrialized states tolerated the presence of irregular migrants and rejected asylum seekers because they were needed to fill gaps in the labour market and to do the difficult, dangerous and dirty jobs that citizens refuse to accept. In this context, the tough language used by governments in relation to irregular migration could legitimately be considered as hypocritical.
With regard to terminology, the meeting discussed the use of notions such as irregular, undocumented, illegal and clandestine migration. The first of these two concepts - irregular or undocumented migration - were preferred by most participants. It was also pointed out an individual might move between regularity and irregularity in the course of a single journey.
Participants agreed on the need to distinguish between means and motivation in relation to irregular migration. A person who moves in an irregular manner may well be a person who is in need of international protection. Indeed, refugees are often obliged to travel without valid documents and to use the services of human smugglers because they have no other means of entering a country where they can find protection.
The meeting called for further analysis of the notion of secondary irregular movement, pointing out that asylum seekers and refugees often move on from the first country they enter because they are unable to find effective protection there. In this context, onward movement should not be regarded as an irregular movement.
NGO participants drew the Global Commission's attention to the role of UNHCR in selecting refugees for resettlement and in undertaking refugee status determination decisions. With regard to resettlement, recent experience in several countries had shown that resettlement decisions could be influenced by corruption. With regard to refugee status determination, NGO participants questioned the fairness, accuracy and transparency of UNHCR's procedures, and called upon the organization to conduct an open dialogue on this issue with NGOs, refugees and asylum seekers.
Returning to the issue of protection in regions of origin, participants suggested that the industrialized states were primarily interested in this concept as a means of reducing the number of asylum seekers arriving on their territory. In many countries of first asylum, it was argued, levels of protection were inadequate and would not easily be improved. States that supported the notion of protection in regions of origin had an obligation to explain how they would achieve this objective in concrete operational terms.
In addition, participants pointed out that the consequence of the protection in regions of origin approach would be to place additional burdens on the world%u2019s poorest countries. This, it was suggested, would be incompatible with the principle of burden-sharing.
The governance of international migration
Jeff Crisp introduced the notion of "governance" and explained why the Global Commission had chosen to make use of this concept rather than that of "migration management". Governance, he explained, is a broader, less technical and less operational concept, encompassing the different international instruments, agreements, standards, policy understandings, fora and institutions that exist in relation to international migration. He also suggested that the notion of "migration management" was in some contexts used as a euphemism for migration control and restrictive asylum practices. NGO participants generally concurred with this explanation.
Participants were invited to discuss the following questions in relation to governance: the adequacy of the existing legal and normative framework; the impact of regional consultative processes; ways of promoting dialogue between countries of origin, transit and destination; gaps and overlaps in the activities and mandates of different international organizations; and the degree to which civil society is included in the discourse on international migration.
Many speakers pointed out that while a legal framework for the protection of migrants exists, most notably through the six core international conventions on human rights, implementation by states remains poor.
One reasons for this situation is to be found in the lack of internal cooperation within governments. Ministries of Foreign Affairs are usually in charge of the ratification of international instruments, but the content of those instruments is not always effectively communicated to other parts of government that are involved in migration matters. Many countries, especially those in the developing world, lacked capacity in relation to migration, and government officials required additional training and education in the area of migrant rights. .
Participants suggested that in terms of organizational mandates and activities, both overlaps and gaps existed. There was a particular need to identify and fill gaps in relation to migrant rights and protection, which had come under new threat as a result of the global effort to combat terrorism. The association now often made between migrants, ethnic minorities and state security, it was suggested, had undermined the rights and safety of many people living outside their country of origin.
It was asked whether the situation be improved if a single international organization was given a protection mandate for all migrants. NGOs were generally sceptical of such an approach to the governance issue and noted that IOM, which does not have a protection mandate and which is not in the UN system, could not be a candidate for this task.
AGENDA
14.30: Briefing and discussion of the mandate and activities of the Global Commission.
15.00 Session 1: Migration and asylum
This session of the consultation will provide the NGO community with an opportunity to express their views on a cluster of issues associated with the issues of migration and asylum. For example: is the notion of "irregular migration" an appropriate one, and what alternative concepts might be used in relation to this issue? How does the NGO community assess current state policy and practice in relation to the issues of irregular migration and the migration-asylum nexus? What is the potential of recent proposals that have made been in respect, for example, to the notions of protection in regions of origin, transit processing centres, and the use of resettlement programmes and labour migration programmes as a means of averting irregular migration? Can the NGO community propose alternative approaches to this issue that might be pursued in the future?
16.15 Coffee break
16.45 Session 2: The governance of international migration
This session of the consultation will provide the NGO community with an opportunity to express their views on a cluster of issues associated with the governance of international migration at the national, regional and global levels. For example: how adequate is the legal and normative framework of international migration and in what ways might it be reinforced? What has been the value and impact of the different regional migration processes that have been established in recent years? What can be done to promote a structured dialogue on international migration between countries in different regions and at different levels of economic development? To what extent do gaps or overlaps exist in relation to the mandates and activities of different international organizations that are active in the field of international migration? Is there adequate coordination between these different organizations? Is the voice of the NGO community and civil society being given adequate recognition in current discussions and consultative processes related to international migration?
18.00 Closure of the consultation
