An exodus in perspective | Jon Hoisaeter

Following a long lull in immigration arrivals, the sudden arrival of 812 migrants from Libya in the space of two days has raised fears of the “biblical exodus” scenario originally conjured up by Italy’s right wing Interior Minister Roberto Maroni during the first days of the democratic uprising against the Libyan dictator. 

Jon Hoisaeter disagrees that we are dealing with anything of this sort.

“While Maroni was right to say that there would be many people leaving Libya, this does not mean that they are all refugees.”

In fact, nearly 400,000 people have crossed Libya’s borders in the past few weeks, mostly by land… but only a minority of these were refugees.

“Many were on the way home to Egypt, and around 80,000 were assisted to find their way back home.”

But the crisis in Libya has created a veritable confusion, with people failing to distinguish between economic migrants leaving Tunisia to Lampedusa, foreign workers stranded on Libya’s border wanting to go home and Sub-Saharan migrants who have nowhere to return to.

All of these are lumped together in the popular psyche under the ‘illegal immigrants’ misnomer.

Both l-orizzont and In-Nazzjon referred to the 812 asylum seekers who arrived in Malta on two boats this week as illegal immigrants. 

Hoisaeter disagrees with the use of this term for the Somalis and Eritreans, who constitute the vast majority of the 812 people crossing from Tripoli to Malta.

“It is quite clear that these persons are coming from a country (Libya) were their life and safety could be in danger. Added to this, they cannot return to Somalia and Eritrea –  their countries of origin – where the experience the same problem. On the face of it, they are people who are very much in need of protection.”

What seems to escape people who immediately refer to these people as ‘illegals’ is that seeking asylum is a fundamental human right.

“It has nothing to do with having a passport, visa or identification documents. This is secondary. It is true that most of these people do not have these documents. Probably, if they had a visa, they would not even be refugees.”

He also blames the ill-will of a section of the Maltese public on the constant labeling of migrants as illegals.

“What do you expect, if the Maltese are constantly told that these are illegal immigrants? Why is the ‘illegal’ label used with regards to people who qualify – by right – for protection?”

TV coverage of the mass exodus of Tunisian economic migrants in Lampedusa has also compounded matters. UNHCR makes a distinction between Sub-Saharans leaving Libya and these people.

“Tunisia has, in a way, already gone through the most traumatic part of the change. They are in a phase of consolidating these changes… generally, Tunisians are not leaving for the same reasons people are leaving Libya. Many of these Tunisians are looking for better life and work opportunities. We are not saying that we do not understand the urgency of their needs, but that they are a different category of people, whose movement is governed by different rules.”

In the past, UNHCR was very critical of the Italian government’s push backs policy, in which Gaddafi’s government played a crucial role. Through this policy, hundreds of potential migrants were intercepted at sea and sent to Libya, thus being denied the right to seek asylum. In Malta, both major political parties welcomed this measure, which had brought immigration to a halt. Yet with Italy actively participating in the military intervention against Libya – with the agreement ground to a halt – boats have started to arrive again.

For Hoisaeter, the push back agreement was an attempt to block people from accessing their right to seek asylum. 

“People sent back to Libya had no access to a functioning asylum procedure… that is why we could never accept a system which did not access the needs and claims of those who were intercepted at sea.”

He claims that Italy was disregarding all the reports coming out of Libya about squalid detention centres, and that people were even sent back to the desert as soon as they were sent back to Libya.

“We were not saying that everyone arriving on boats should be given refugee status. What we were saying that they should have a chance to get their claims accessed.”

He acknowledges that this system played a big role in the decrease in arrivals in both Italy and Malta.

“But we would also say that this meant an increase in the people in need of protection who denied of access to protection.”

Some politicians have justified this agreement on the grounds that it led to a decrease in the number of dangerous crossing and dealt a blow to smugglers.

Hoisaeter describes human trafficking as the “ultimate in exploitation” which exploits the most vulnerable categories of people for financial gain. “As we speak there are two boats missing and bodies have been found…I am very concerned about that.”

But he disagrees that this should be used as an excuse to deny people protection if they need it.

One of the solutions proposed by the Maltese government (long before the current crisis) was that of having asylum seekers apply for protection in the EU in African countries such as Libya. One of the reasons given was to avoid these dangerous crossings and to undermine human trafficking.

One possible long term solution UNHCR is willing to consider is that applications could be processed in embassies of countries like France and Germany, who would then take on a number of these migrants.

“If this could be organised, it would be a very good thing, but it should not come at a cost of removing the right of those seeking asylum when they are assessing Europe – it should not be an excuse to close down European borders to people seeking protection. It all boils to the fact that seeking asylum is a fundamental right.”

UNHCR also tried to run a resettlement programme through which it could send refugees from Libya directly to countries like the USA.

But even in this process, the Libyan authorities were creating difficulties. 

UNHCR was also expelled in Libya last year and even prior to this, the UNHCR was only “tolerated” to operate in Libya, but was never granted official recognition.

“This was a signal to us that Libya was not prepared to take its asylum responsibilities seriously… they did not want to accept people as refugees. Despite a few improvements, most of our attempts at dialogue were turned down.”

Even Gaddafi himself went on record saying that Libya does not have any refugees and that all foreigners in Libya were guest workers or economic migrants.

Neither has Libya signed the Geneva Convention, which lays down a framework for protecting refugees.

But Hoisaeter points out that unlike Libya, some Asian countries who have not signed the Geneva Convention still take their responsibilities on refugees seriously.

According to a number of reports, Sub-Saharan immigrants in Libya were mistaken for the African mercenaries used to brutally crush the rebellion. This resulted in a situation where Africans took the brunt of both the regime and the rebels.

The UNHCR does not have the people on the ground to confirm this, but it has received a number of reports of Africans being afraid of going out for fear of being mistaken for mercenaries.

“They felt so uncertain of their security because they had heard of people attacked at check points, house searches and being mistaken for mercenaries.”

The situation in the eastern part of Libya was worse in the early days of the rebellion.

“In the beginning they definitely felt targeted, as Africans, but in Benghazi the reports we are receiving is that the situation has now improved.”
One possible reason for the latest exodus is that the Gaddafi regime has opened the immigration flood gates to punish western nations like Italy for the current military intervention.

Hoisaeter has no proof that this is happening, although he does not exclude that some elements of the Libyan government could be turning a blind eye to smugglers and human traffickers.

He also recalls Gaddafi’s threat to Europe: that he will swamp the continent with African migrants if he was not given €5 billion, so he cannot exclude the possibility of Gaddafi using immigrants to send a political message.

What is certian is that people are leaving Libya because they are afraid. And while young adult males constituted the vast majority of arrivals in previous years, in the case of the two boats which arrived last week, the number of minors and women has increased dramatically.

While in previous years women and children represented only 12% of arrivals, this figure has now risen to 31%.

The greater number of women and children could be an indication that their communities are sending the most vulnerable categories first.

UNHCR has pronounced itself against keeping people escaping from Libya in detention.

“We consider that detention in these cases is neither appropriate nor necessary.”

While he accepts the need to screen them in a closed environment, he sees no need to keep them behind bars after their identity has been established.

“I do not exclude that if they are not kept in detention, some immigrants could disappear. But when one weighs the human cost of keeping 800 traumatised people in detention against the risk of some of them escaping, I would opt for the latter.”

Neither is the risk of these people ‘disappearing’ great because most of them qualify for humanitarian protection, and are not likely to be sent back.

“Unlike migrants from countries like Tunisia, it is not likely that these people are sent back. On the face of it, it seems that most qualify for protection.”

Hoisaeter also poses the question: “is detention a good way to start an integration process in Maltese society?”

That said, he welcomes various improvements made in the detention regime, which include a separation between men and women, and that minors are not kept in detention.

The fact that the EU appears to be unwilling to help Malta and Italy in what is perceived to be a mass exodus of migrants arriving to Europe’s southern borders is a major local concern.

Hoisaeter prefers the term “responsibility sharing” to the more negative connotations of “burden sharing” since immigration can also be asset, and not just a problem.

The problem is only partially addressed through re-settlement programmes by countries like the US, who accept refugees after they have been granted asylum in countries like Malta. But this does not apply to asylum seekers who have just arrived at Europe’s border, and individual countries – like Malta – are lumped with the responsibility of processing their applications. 

“This means that if your border is exposed to these flows, you end up taking much of the responsibilities. This constitutes a gap in European policy, and there isn’t a very effective mechanism to address it.”

So far all attempts to address this have been voluntary and through this mechanism, Germany and France have taken a total of 100 refugees of their own free will.

“We need to move from this to a more organised system. This is a European challenge, on which European countries have to work upon.”

But he warns against simplistic arguments.

“It is a bit easy to say: ‘look, Malta and Italy are receiving a lot of migrants and therefore it should all be about other countries swooping in to take them away’… we have to realise that many other countries receive migrants. Last year, Sweden accepted 30,000 people. It is a myth that immigration is only a problem of the south.”

But he acknowledges that Malta’s small size and higher density aggravates the problem.

“According to a calculation I made, 800 new migrants in Malta constitute the equivalent of 120,000 migrants in Italy.”

Another misconception is that immigrants only arrive by boat as we regularly see on the TV screens in Malta and Italy. In reality, many immigrants travel by plane.

“In some Northern countries there could be hundreds of immigrants arriving by plane in the space of a month but it does not make the headlines in the same way as an arrival of a boatful of migrants. Boat arrivals tend to be seen as more dramatic.”

Another problem which will make responsibility sharing mandatory is the increasing skepticism and negative feelings towards migration in other European countries.

“That does not help other countries to come forward and agree to take up more people. Most countries in the north are having big problems with their own populations and are concerned about how the media portrays these issues.”

Due to this climate, Hoisaeter is not “too optimistic” that Europe will come up with an immediate and effective mechanism to address this problem.

“But if Malta and Italy continue to receive boats, I am quite hopeful and certain that more support will be forthcoming.”

Hoisaeter is aware that many Maltese are afraid that the situation could get out of control if these arrivals are followed by thousands of others.

While understanding these concerns, he insists that we are far from reaching that stage, pointing out that the number of Sub-Saharan migrants living in Malta is less than 4,000, which amounts to less than 1% of the population. The major problem for these migrants is that since they are constantly labeled as illegals – irrespective of their status – they find it difficult to integrate in the labour market.

“They are perceived as a burden, rather than as potential contributors. Why not let them contribute to society? They want to pay tax, so that they can also receive benefits.”

Hoisaeter notes that Malta, like most other western countries, has an ageing population where by 2060 there will only be two workers for each pensioner.UNHCR

“Asylum is not the only answer to this problem but one cannot ignore that there certain long term benefits of immigration.” And immigrants are also taking jobs which many Maltese are no longer willing to carry out.

Hoisaeter would prefer it if the migration discussion also accommodated for more positive outlooks on the issue. The problem may well be that concern about migration tends to dominate the headlines only when Malta is faced with dramatic arrivals, but ebbs away from political debate as soon as arrivals drop. Perhaps we have missed an opportunity to discuss the issue calmly during last year’s lull in arrivals. Will we have another chance? Probably yes, says Hoisaeter, who makes a strong case for a more sober assessment of the immigration theme