Showing posts with label Sudan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sudan. Show all posts

Monday, 14 April 2014

Locked up abroad after the creation of an independent South Sudan


“Your identification, please”. I hand over my passport to the security guard of the former prison while I think of the irony of this place, as most of its residents have been detained because they lack identification papers. I am visiting Thomas Philip Guya (39) at the ‘Vluchthaven’ in Amsterdam, where over a hundred people with rejected asylum claims seek refuge until they find a durable solution.
  

Thomas was born in a small village in what is currently South Sudan, and lived there until civil war forcefully displaced him to the north of the country at age thirteen. He lived in relative peace until violence once more forced him to leave his home. Eleven years ago he fled to the Netherlands for protection. Yet, his asylum claims were rejected “because I failed to prove I was fleeing from Sudan”. As an illegal immigrant, Thomas lives on the margins of society where he is unable to work or build a future. Tired of being an outcast, he now wishes to return to his native place, despite the civil and political instability.

Yet, the creation of an independent South Sudanese state in 2011 complicates Thomas’ ability to return home. When new states are created, the newly drafted nationality laws are often limited in scope, incompatible, or may use tight deadlines. As a result, people may fall through the cracks and are at risk of becoming stateless. Indeed, an amendment to the nationality act of Sudan provides that those who “de jure or de facto” acquire South Sudanese nationality automatically lose their Sudanese nationality, irrespective of a person’s connection to either country. There are no explicit laws for individuals who wish to retain their Sudanese nationality. This poses a particular threat to those living outside the newly created state, as “southerners” had to regularise their nationality status within nine months after the independence of south Sudan.

At this point, Thomas went to see the Sudanese Ambassador in The Hague. “I wanted to go back to Sudan, but the Ambassador of the Republic of Sudan told me I was no longer Sudanese, because South Sudan became an independent country”. Recently, Sudan announced that a decision will soon be made to activate the pending four freedoms agreements, which provides freedom of residence, movement, work and ownership in South Sudan and Sudan. Yet, there remains a lack of political will to resolve the nationality of people who have a connection to both Sudan and South Sudan. A curious face peeks around the colourful sheet that hangs from Thomas’ small bedroom doorframe. “This one is from Sudan,” Thomas explains. “We are friends, but our countries refuse to work together. It’s all just politics”.

Ever since South Sudan set up an Embassy in Brussels, Thomas has been trying to acquire a document to travel back to his native place, of which he only holds vague childhood memories. Yet, the ambassador rejected him, because he didn’t have his identification documents anymore. Thus, neither Sudan nor South Sudan is willing to accept Thomas as its citizen. This suggests that Thomas has become a stateless person. And as a stateless person, you are denied one of the most fundamental rights associated with nationality: the right to return.

Thomas shows me around the Vluchthaven, where he cooks, washes and plays football with his friends. The city of Amsterdam gives him thirty-five Euros per week for food and medication. He explains that he needs medicines for his stomach. He picks up a little jar and shakes it: “There is only one pill left”. When I ask him about his condition, he explains how stress made him sick when he was detained. “They took me from the asylum centre, because I didn’t have any papers”. He was released after fourteen months, and joined the We Are Here movement, which pleads for better treatment of asylum seekers in the Netherlands. He explains that “illegals are not part of the Dutch system. We have no rights, no home, and no job. We have nothing”. He picks up a pile of papers with quotes from politicians and human rights lawyers advocating for better treatment of illegals in the Netherlands. I read the first: “The obligation to carry your ID card forces illegals to live their lives in invisibility to make sure they will not get detained”. Indeed, Thomas explains that inside the Vluchthaven he feels safe, but “when I am out on the streets I am scared. I fear the police because I am illegal. They may detain me again”.

Earlier this month Thomas received some hopeful news. The Embassy of South Sudan in Brussels is willing to provide him with a laisser passer travel document which he can use to return to South Sudan within three months of its issuance. Thomas explains that he doesn’t want to be in the Netherlands any longer. He picks up a recent newspaper article about the fighting in South Sudan, and continues: “…But the situation in South Sudan is also really difficult”. It is also questionable whether Thomas will actually be granted citizenship upon return. “Do you think I should go?” he finally asks me. I hesitate, but respond by asking him where he feels like he belongs in the world. He shakes his head. “There is no home for me in this world. There is only one home, an ideal home, and it is there in my head”.
Roselinde den Boer, Statelessness Programme Research Clinic participant 2013-2014

Friday, 29 June 2012

Statelessness in 2012: one step forward, two steps back?

The year 2011 ended on an unmistakable high in terms of momentum to address statelessness worldwide, with the issue somewhat stealing the show at UNHCR’s December Inter-ministerial meeting, as one state after another affirmed the importance of tackling the problem and pledged to take action. Entering the new year, things were still looking promising with a number of countries in Africa, Europe and the Americas already making good on their promises and acceding to one or other - or both - of the statelessness conventions, or taking steps to introduce a statelessness determination procedure in their legal system. 

Meanwhile, in early 2012, the newly elected Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Nils Muižnieks, indicated his intention to continue his predecessor's work in highlighting problems of statelessness across the continent and expressed a particular interest in raising the issue of stateless children. Europe also saw the launch of the European Network on Statelessness at the start of June 2012: the first significant regional initiative by civil society to collaborate closely in order to 'strengthen the often unheard voice of stateless persons and to advocate for full respect of their human rights'. And Slovenia's "erased" have just won a landmark victory before the European Court of Human Rights' Grand Chamber, which ruled that the government's deletion of some 18,000 names from the civil registry books in 1992 - which left people both stateless and classed as illegal residents - was a violation of the right to family life (article 8 ECHR) and the principle of non-discrimination (article 14 ECHR). This case, Kuric v. Slovenia, provides crucial confirmation of the European court's competence to rule on matters relating to the enjoyment of nationality - given the right circumstances of the case - and its interest in acting on statelessness.

Each of the developments noted above - and more besides - constitutes an important step forwards in addressing statelessness and demonstrates that the issue is now, at last, receiving significant international attention. Yet, if we flip the coin over, the other side exposes some extremely disquieting statelessness-related developments. From Sudan/South Sudan, UAE, Syria, Dominican Republic, Libya and elsewhere comes news of emerging cases of statelessness and/or further stagnation or deterioration of the situation of stateless people. 

Most worrying of all - and distressing enough to take the shine off any global efforts towards the resolution of statelessness - is the news from Myanmar (Burma). For several weeks now, reports pouring out of the country have brought word of an ever-worsening situation for the stateless Muslim minority in Myanmar's Rakhine state, the Rohingya. What was initially described as a flare of ethnic tension has since deteriorated into shocking reports of killings, the destruction of tens of thousands of homes and the displacement of tens of thousands of people. Those attempting to flee the violence by sea are meeting perhaps even greater risks on their perilous journey, with reports of helicopters firing on boats full of these stateless refugees (including children). And those that do make it to shore in neighbouring Bangladesh being turned back out to sea in their overloaded boats with only a small supply of fresh of water and rice or bread as this news footage shows. 

While the recent moves towards a more democratic state have cast a positive light on the future of Myanmar and Aung San Suu Kyi's recent international tour - a highlight of which was her acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize awarded to her in 1991 - has inspired hope in many, the situation of the stateless Rohingya does not look set to benefit from these developments any time soon. Indeed, Suu Kyi herself has declared that she "does not know" if the Rohingya should be regarded as Burmese and now a group of eight ethnic parties allied with Myanmar's opposition movement has rejected the idea that the Rohingya should be recognised as one of the country's ethnic minorities. There is no doubt that the current treatment of the Rohingya both inside Myanmar and as hundreds seek protection abroad is casting a deep and worrying shadow on international developments in the field of statelessness in 2012. 

Laura van Waas, Senior Researcher and Manager, Statelessness Programme