Mifsud Bonnici in harsh criticism of Amnesty International's report on migrants' refoulement

“It is peppered with inaccuracies and inconsistencies, which are testimony to AI’s customary selective, subjective and warped evaluation of the challenges that Malta faces with illegal immigration,” minister Carm Mifsud Bonnici said in a harsh statement.

He took issue with AI for claiming that Malta’s mandatory detention regime for illegal immigrants is unlawful according to the European Convention on Human Rights.

READ Amnesty International's report: Libya and Malta failing asylum seekers

Mifsud Bonnici said the Convention’s right to liberty and security provides for “the lawful arrest or detention of a person to prevent his effecting an unauthorised entry into the country or of a person against whom action is being taken with a view to deportation or extradition.”

The minister said the European Court of Human Rights has always concluded that States have the right to limit the movement of those who enter their territory and this limitation does not in any manner imply any violation of fundamental human rights.

“Detention is also considered necessary in order to enable the authorities to make the necessary arrangements to effect removal and in fact the authorities pursue efforts to make the necessary arrangements to remove the person throughout the detention period,” Mifsud Bonnici said.

He also said that the ECHR’s judgement in the case of Louled Massoud v Malta case, which upheld his claim that his 18 month detention pending his deportation from Malta violated his fundamental human right to freedom from arbitrary detention, was “particular and specific”.

“Malta was found to be in violation of this Article because in the case in question the authorities did not continue to pursue the necessary preparations for deportation with enough swiftness.

“This judgement cannot therefore be applied to other cases in a general manner, where the authorities continue to make efforts to conclude the necessary arrangements to remove the person throughout the 18-month period of detention.”

Mifsud Bonnici also said the fact that only a small number of first instance negative decisions were overturned by the Refugee Appeals Board, should not lead to the inference that the process is not adequate.

“On the contrary, it reflects the fact that the asylum determination process at first instance is carried out in a thorough manner and is not restrictive in granting international protection where it is due.”

Mifsud Bonnici also denied that Malta returned asylum seekers back to Libya on 17 July 2010. “The persons in question were never on Maltese territory or under Maltese control. They were disembarked directly from their craft to a Libyan patrol craft back to Libya from where they had left.”

“AI’s allegation that Malta infringed the principle of non-refoulement is again therefore completely unfounded. The Maltese Authorities have always complied with their international obligations and fundamental rights have always been respected in the context of operations carried out by the Armed Forces of Malta (AFM).”