Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Press releases
Default title
07 November 2000
Share
Fifty-fifth General Assembly
Third Committee
7 November 2000
49th Meeting (AM)
Security of Humanitarian Personnel High on Committee Agenda
There were innovative ways of surmounting finite capacities to meet the burden-sharing responsibilities of protecting refugees, Australia's representative told the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) this morning as it met to take up issues related to refugees, including the High Commissioner's report.
All approaches involved international cooperation and coordination, she said, pointing to the UNHCR's global consultations as an excellent coordinating mechanism. Support could also be given to countries of origin, so that they could sustain people rather than see them forced to leave. Or resources could be given to the country of first asylum so that further asylum was not needed.
Most graphically, however, she said western States spent over $10 billion annually to determine refugee status for half a million asylum-seekers within their borders. By comparison, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) had an under-funded budget of $1 billion with which to address the needs of over 20 million refugees. Allocating just one-tenth of asylum determination costs to the UNHCR would double its budget. That could be used for support of sustainable repatriation or for first-asylum country economies.
A number of representatives, including those of Guinea, Belarus and Ukraine, talked of the burdens on refugee-receiving countries. Tanzania's representative said his country had hosted a large number of refugees for over 40 years without placing quotas on asylum seekers. That had imposed immense economic, social and security consequences on both the Government and the people. Local populations were now growing weary of the refugee phenomenon, which degraded the environment, spread disease and increased crime.
"The burden borne by the local population in refugee areas cannot be overemphasized", he said. The local people were the ones who felt the first impact when refugees entered a country. They shared their meagre resources until international assistance arrived and then put up with rising tensions when supplies to refugee camps were inadequate. It was a dangerous situation, encouraging reckless behaviour and lawlessness, in which security could not be maintained.
A number of speakers stressed the international responsibility for protecting rights of refugees. Egypt's representative said that asylum was a fundamental human right. Providing assistance to those left without homes was a collective responsibility, encompassing the guarantee of rights. Handling the refugee problem in Africa was critical. Those conflicts were not only an obstacle to development for the people themselves but a threat to the security of all States.
Speaking for the International Organization for Migration (IOM), its representative pointed out the factors that in the past decade had intensified migration. They included the opening of borders, the accessibility of transportation, the explosion of information about faraway places, and the implosion of States into conflict. "Managing migration flows while respecting humanitarian obligations is difficult", he said, adding that the experience of the past 10 years had shown that a holistic approach to international population flows was the only viable path.
The representative of the International Committee of the Red Cross made a distinction between protecting the rights of refugees and those of internally displaced persons. He said the latter had domestic law to protect them. Even so, both were first and foremost civilians to be protected by international humanitarian law, which was adequate for coping with most population movement problems induced by armed conflict. In addition, States must remember they were required by that law to respect and protect humanitarian personnel, who were civilians. Attacks on them amounted to war crimes.
Also addressing the Committee this morning were the representatives of Liechtenstein, Russian Federation, Mexico, Venezuela, Togo and The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.
The Committee will meet again at 3 p.m. to continue considering issues related to refugees, including the High Commissioner's report and humanitarian aspects, as well as returnees and displaced persons. The Committee is also expected to hear the introduction of a number of draft resolutions.
Committee Work Programme
The Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) met this morning to continue considering issues related to refugees, including the report of the High Commissioner for Refugees and questions related to refugees, returnees and displaced persons, as well as humanitarian questions. (For background, see Press Release GA/SHC/3616 of 6 November.)
Statements
NERMINE MITRY (Egypt) said the conflicts of recent years had complicated the situation of refugees. The international community's responsibility for them had increased with regard to ensuring their right of free movement and voluntary return. Many obstacles remained before their problems were resolved and their rights ensured, including their right to integrate and become part of their new communities.
States must meet their responsibilities to eradicate the violence that gave birth to refugees, she said. Justice was an important component in a lasting settlement of conflicts. The international community must find the political will for such solutions, because asylum was a fundamental human right and providing care to those left without homes was a collective responsibility requiring joint efforts. International protection encompassed the guarantee of rights. The issue of repatriation and the situation of refugees were both humanitarian concerns, to be addressed through cooperation between the States directly involved and the United Nations agencies, particularly the High Commissioner's Office, to prevent the refugees from becoming internally displaced persons.
Returning refugees to their homes was a priority, particularly those in Africa and Palestine, she said. In the latter case, it was a matter of Israelis respecting the rights of the Palestinian people. In Africa, the refugee problems must be handled at a level beyond that recommended in the High Commissioner's report, and in full consultation with all those involved. At this point, the conflicts there were not only an obstacle to development for the people themselves but a threat to the security of States, particularly those sheltering the refugees.
M.W. MANGACHI (Tanzania) said it was common knowledge that conflicts were the major producers of refugees and displaced persons. His country had been hosting a large number of refugees from neighbouring countries for over 40 years, out of humanitarian concern and in fulfilment of international obligations. It had discharged both those aims without placing quotas on asylum seekers. However, providing asylum and hospitality to such a large number of those needing it had affected the country over the years by imposing immense economic, social and security consequences on both the Government and the people. In addition, local populations were now growing weary as a result of the refugee phenomenon, which degraded the environment, spread disease and increased crime and other vices in refugee-hosting areas.
"The burden borne by the local population in refugee areas cannot be overemphasized", he stated. Those were the people who felt the first impact when refugees entered a country, sharing their meagre resources until international assistance arrived and then putting up with the rise of tensions when supplies to refugee camps were inadequate. It was a dangerous situation encouraging reckless behaviour and lawlessness. Security could not be maintained.
Voluntary repatriation was the best solution because integrating mass influxes was simply not feasible, he said. However, voluntary repatriation could not take place before the conflicts in the country of origin were resolved. A lasting solution was impossible without reconciliation. Therefore, resettlement in a third country was an encouraging avenue. For all those considerations, the global consultations begun by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) must be comprehensive.
ANZHELA KORNELIOUK (Belarus) said the phenomenon of migration had not only regional but international implications. In Belarus, located at the crossroads of Europe, the problem of refugees was one that had to be dealt with every day. The number of refugees in the region had recently been estimated to exceed 200,000 persons. That situation was having a negative effect on social and economic conditions within Belarus and had also caused an increase in drug trafficking and other criminal activity, as well as an explosion in the “black labour” market. For those and other reasons, Belarus paid special attention to solving the situation of refugees and displaced persons, while at the same time ensuring the rights and freedoms of its citizens.
In that context, she continued, Belarus had enacted laws on refugees which focused on such areas as foreign labour and migration policies. Refugee law had also been augmented and expanded, in accordance with relevant United Nations conventions. As of 1 July, Belarus had also begun procedures for granting refugee status. It was important to note that the overwhelming majority of refugees entering her country were citizens of Afghanistan. The priority in refugee policy was to identify a reliable system of regulatory processes for migration. A major focus would be assistance with repatriation, settlement and integration. As the fiftieth anniversary of UNHCR approached, she hoped that the Office would continue to provide unconditional assistance to people who had become refugees, as well as to the countries that received displaced persons. She drew the Committee’s attention to the fact that only through broad cooperative efforts could the problem be solved.
CLAUDIA FRITSCHE (Liechtenstein) said that at the beginning of this new century, the international community continued to witness a global crisis of displacement. Whether that displacement was of an internal nature or was caused by massive flows of refugees across borders, the United Nations system had often been ill-equipped to handle the crises. It was, therefore, the collective duty of Member States to address the obstacles to effective and rapid response to humanitarian disasters. To that end, the issue of security must remain high on the agenda. The proliferation of armed conflicts in recent years had put humanitarian operations around the world at risk and had even resulted in casualties. Determined action must be taken by the United Nations to guarantee the security of those offering assistance to victims of humanitarian crises.
“We must not fail those who risk their lives for us,” she said. The inclusion of attacks on humanitarian personnel in the statute of the International Criminal Court was a welcome step in that respect. The issue also required action by the Secretariat. Financial constraints must be overcome. Both the credibility and the effectiveness of the United Nations system would be severely affected if the problem of security could not be solved.
She supported the High Commissioner’s call for enhanced focus on post-conflict situations. The establishment of a post-conflict peace-building unit within the Department of Political Affairs was an important step, and it was hoped that discussions of the Brahimi Report on United Nations peace operations would produce in-depth consideration of the role of post-conflict peace efforts. Another area where political will was needed was prevention. While there certainly had been disagreement within the Organization over the merits of giving high priority to the issue of prevention, Liechtenstein strongly supported that approach with regard to refugee problems. Establishing effective early-warning mechanisms, as well as recognizing and addressing root causes of conflicts at earlier stages, could go a long way towards alleviating the plight of refugees. The United Nations also needed to better address situations where lingering claims based on the right to self-determination had the potential to erupt in violent conflicts. Prevention meant, first and foremost, a shift from reactive to proactive approaches. Numerous crises which could lead to massive population displacement could be avoided through early identification and consultation with all the parties involved.
DMITRY KNYAZHINSKIY (Russian Federation) said the plight of refugees remained a distinguishing feature of modern life. Coordinated efforts were required to find a solution. While he realized that the main duty of finding solutions to migration problems lay with governments, the scope of the problem was such that the international community must act in cooperation. The Russian Federation had done much to improve the situation of refugees and displaced persons within its region. Its policies and initiatives including a Programme of Action had been in conformity with relevant United Nations conventions and other international humanitarian instruments. Those initiatives had aimed, among other things, to provide opportunities for the provision of personnel trained to work with refugees, address issues of political asylum and assist in rehabilitation or integration. The Russian Federation believed that a successful solution to the problem would involve balancing the principle of solidarity and the responsibilities of States themselves.
He went on to note that while the problem of dealing with refugees and displaced persons was becoming no less burdensome for the Federation, the level of international support seemed to be decreasing. It was up to the international community to ensure that issues of refugees and displaced persons were interwoven with broad efforts to find solutions to conflict situations. Another focus should be on rehabilitation. To that end he supported global consultations on international protection policies. He also said that it was not appropriate to expand the mandate of UNHCR. Finally, he had been alarmed by the growing trend of attacks on United Nations humanitarian staff when carrying out their duties. He expressed sympathy for the tragic loss of life of UNHCR staff.
FRANCOIS FALL (Guinea) said his country had the largest ratio of refugees to domestic population of anywhere in the world. The long-range effects were devastating to the environment and to the country's social situation. Guinea had been subject to attacks by Sierra Leoneans, some of whom had taken refuge in Guinea. It was simply not permissible that refugees who had received Guinea's hospitality should join rebels intent on destabilizing the Government.
In March, he said, Guinea would be hosting a conference on refugees in conjunction with the Organization of African Unity (OAU). It would centre on four key stages of assistance to refugees and protection of their rights. The first would be at the point where refugees were given asylum. Second would be the identification of refugees to separate them from rebels. The next would come at the point where refugees could decide on freely repatriating. Finally came the stage of channeling the assistance of the international community to refugees at reception areas that were safely protected from attack.
MARIA ANTONIETA MONROY (Mexico) said her Government had pursued a programme of offering asylum to those forced to leave their own countries because of conflict. That had enriched Mexico's own culture. It had imbued the country with increased capacity for international cooperation, as well as an increased respect for human rights. Mexico had acceded to all three of the major human rights instruments. Its policy with regard to refugees encompassed the concepts of solidarity, asylum and refuge.
In the last two decades, she said, the most significant undertaking with regard to refugees in her country involved Guatemalans seeking refuge. Mexico had handled the situation in three phases, leading from the crisis point to migratory stabilization. With international aid, primarily from the European Union, camps had been built in various parts of the country. Ultimately, refugees had been given the option of either voluntary, elective return or assimilation. In the framework of UNHCR's fiftieth anniversary, a documentary had been made of Mexico's long tradition of hosting those needing asylum. Entitled, "Mexico, a tradition of asylum and refuge", it presented the anguish of those forced from their homes, as well as their solace at finding asylum.
LUISA PEREZ-CONTRERAS (Venezuela) said the increasing flow of refugees, with ever-increasing causes for leaving, had imposed on the UNHCR the fundamental role of finding lasting solutions to the problems that led to refugee flows. Both host States and refugee States were dependent on assistance and on international protection. All those now needed to be strengthened, including the institutions involved in such assistance. The aim of that strengthening was to increase fundamental respect for international principles and to broaden the application of those principles, so as to meet the challenge presented by refugees.
For example, the concept of asylum needed a broader definition. Also, financial institutions must be involved in solving refugee problems. Overall, a broad approach on the part of all players involved in achieving long-term aims was the end-goal. Peace and stability must become intrinsically associated with easing the problem of refugees, and social stability should not be divorced from the protection of refugees' rights.
The new Bolivarian constitution of Venezuela had enshrined the right to refuge and asylum, she said. Hopefully, an organic law on those rights would be put in place by the National Assembly. In the meantime, a technical committee had been set up with the involvement of the Ministry of the Interior. A binational protection and refuge programme had been established with Colombia to protect refugees and transit people within a humanitarian corridor. In closing, she applauded the establishment of 20 June as the International Day of the Refugee.
PENNY WENSLEY (Australia) said the international protection system was at a crossroads. It was jeopardized by global trends , such as mixed migration flows, mobility, differentials in economic and social opportunity, unmet demands for economic migration, the changing nature of conflicts, terrorism, people-smuggling and the abuse of asylum systems. Increasing numbers of asylum-seekers were adopting inappropriate approaches towards achieving migration outcomes or finding a country of protection, regardless of whether the destination country had legal migration avenues. That diverted State resources to the detriment of those in greater need of protection.
The solutions to those problems lay in developing comprehensive and integrated approaches, she said. Those would involve international cooperation and coordination, as in the UNHCR's global consultations. One aspect of such an approach was to provide support to countries of origin, so that they could take steps to sustain people in their home countries and preclude the need for them to leave. Australia, for example, had provided emergency drought relief to Afghanistan. Another aspect was to find resources for determining which refugees needed protection and which did not while they were still in the country of first asylum. Timely, durable solutions must also be generated, so that the incentive to find asylum in another country was minimized.
A cornerstone of the international protection system was burden-or responsibility-sharing, she continued. That term did not address the finite nature of States' capacities to provide resources. And if new resources were to be found, innovative ways of generating them would have to be invented. For example, western States spent over $10 billion annually to determine refugee status for half a million asylum-seekers within their borders. By comparison, UNHCR had an under-funded budget of $1 billion with which to address the needs of over 20 million refugees. Allocating just one tenth of asylum-determination costs to the UNHCR would double its budget for support of sustainable repatriation and the economies of first-asylum countries, which now bore the costs of hosting refugee populations despite their own often limited economic capacities.
ROLAND KPOTSRA (Togo), speaking on behalf of the Organization of OAU, said the enormity of the problem of refugees and displaced persons in many OAU Member States and throughout the African Continent was cause for great concern. It was important to address all the implications of massive population flows while the recent savage murders of United Nations humanitarian personnel in East Timor and Guinea were still fresh in the mind of the international community. Those cruel acts testified to the dangerous conditions faced by both humanitarian workers and refugees. The international community must condemn such violence against humanitarian workers as well as call for closer monitoring of refugee camps. He went on to say that by adopting the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, the international community had reaffirmed the dignity of the human person and vowed to promote social progress. It had also proclaimed the right to freedom of movement. He noted that the profound aspirations expressed in the Charter had been supplemented by other international humanitarian instruments. Unfortunately, millions of men, women and children were living outside their normal residences, forced to flee in the face of natural disasters, systematic violations of human rights or the failure of peace negotiations.
It was sad to see that Africa broke all the saddest records. The continent had the largest number of least developed countries, the heaviest debt, the lowest income, the highest number of HIV/AIDS victims, and the highest levels of poverty. To make matters worse, it was also the region must cruelly affected by refugee flows, whose social, economic and environmental implications were disastrous for the people and the States themselves. Development on the continent had been severely affected by the staggering number of refugees and internally displaced persons. Civil wars and clashes between States persisted, as well as incursions by armed factions, ethnic groups, rebel movements and government forces. All had combined to drive from their homes and cast out onto the roads millions of people seeking refuge and safety. Those persons had crossed borders or established themselves in more fertile regions within their own countries. More tragic still, was that many were women, children, elderly or disabled persons. The increasing scope of the problem must prompt the international community to strengthen assistance at all levels. While it was true that States had the responsibility to provide aid, Africa presented a unique situation. How could a continent of developing countries carry the burden alone? he asked. The international community must endeavour to supplement the work being undertaken by African countries.
In calling for international support, he drew the Committee’s attention to obvious differences in the manner in which the refugee situation had been approached on his continent, as opposed to Kosovo. In light of that sad reality, the OAU, at its recent Heads of State Conference, had expressed concern at what appeared to be discriminatory practices in the priority given to refugee situations by the world community. The OAU urged the international community to reverse that trend and allocate resources equitably based on need from region to region. The international community should also endeavour to ease the burden on host countries by providing assistance for rehabilitation of infrastructure and environment. Finally, he stressed that the thirty-sixth OAU Summit had launched an appeal to all African leaders to promote the safe return of refugees and displaced persons, and to facilitate their reintegration by supporting creative employment programmes and other income-generating activities. He also noted the disparity in the standards of protection between displaced persons and refugees. Displaced persons did not seem to draw the attention of the international community, but their situation was equally important. An international legal instrument on the protection of internally displaced persons was vital to ensure their protection.
OKSANA BOYKO (Ukraine) said that her country knew well the depth of the global migration crisis. Despite economic hardships, Ukraine’s internal political stability, liberal migration policies and inter-ethnic peace had made it attractive to many refugees from politically unstable countries. According to estimates, over 50 per-cent of those who had acquired refugee status in Ukraine were willing to remain there for longer periods, or perhaps even settle there permanently. Refugees in Ukraine from over 44 countries around the world had the right to education, medical assistance, social services, as well as employment and business opportunities. Since January 1999, a pension plan for refugees had been initiated. One of the priorities of migration policies in Ukraine was the return of Crimean Tartars and other nationalities to their native lands. More than 265,000 formerly deported persons had returned to the Crimea. Some specific actions aimed at sustained returns were socio-economic assistance programmes, humanitarian initiatives and international assistance. To ensure that those persons were reintegrated, the Council of Crimean Tartar Nation Representatives was established as the consultative authority.
She went on to say that Ukraine had given considerable attention to reducing and preventing statelessness. Amendments had been made to the relevant citizenship legislation, and agreements had been concluded on a simplified procedure for the changing of citizenship with Uzbekistan, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Owing to the concerted efforts of the Ukrainian Government, in conjunction with the active all-around support of UNHCR, more than 25,000 stateless persons among the formerly deported had acquired Ukrainian citizenship. She said that Ukraine viewed its efforts aimed at ensuring the controlled development of migration processes as a contribution to strengthening international stability in cooperation with its neighbours. Matters related to the reception and accommodation of deported persons and protection of refugees remained a high priority, however. Despite certain advances, completion of national legislation in those areas and ensured consistent implementation required further attention. Further coordination was also required in the field of cooperation between government agencies and the international community.
DONKA GLIGOROVA (The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) said that the beginning of the twenty-first century would be remembered for its flagrant disrespect for the fundamental postulates of democratic society in many parts of the world, including the Balkans. The grave consequences of the crisis in Kosovo, which had posed a serious threat to the security and stability of that region and beyond, had not yet been fully overcome. As a result of that crisis, Macedonia was now host to over 360,000 refugees. That was nearly 18 per-cent of its population. The international community had supported Macedonia in its efforts to deal with the humanitarian impact of such a huge influx. It was now time for Member States to assist Macedonia as it attempted to address the economic impact of the crisis. Due to the continuing strain of refugees, only a small portion of the financial burden had been compensated. Further effort on the part of the world community was needed to ensure the safe return of refugees where and when the appropriate conditions had been created.
She said all were aware of the links between conflicts and the plight of refugees. Her region had witnessed a number of conflicts that had spawned millions of refugees. The sad reality for countries within the region was that humanitarian assistance must be accompanied by political and confidence-building measures. But measures aimed at conflict prevention must also be addressed. In that regard, she was pleased to announce that an International Centre for Preventive Action and Conflict Resolution had recently been established in Skopje. The recovery and reconstruction of the region was of paramount importance, she continued. Obligations undertaken and promises made must be carried out. In that regard, she highlighted the role of the Stability Pact in achieving the long-desired goal of stable, democratic societies and economic prosperity in South-eastern Europe. She hoped that the recent democratic changes in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia would contribute to further stabilization and progress in the region.
UMESH PALWANKAR, representative of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), said large-scale population movements were usually a consequence of conflicts or internal disturbances affecting the entire civilian population. The problems relating to internal displacement could not be resolved without understanding the plight of the civilian population as a whole and taking steps to improve it, because those displaced were first and foremost civilians to be protected by international humanitarian law. That body of law was legally binding on both State and non-State actors, and was perfectly adequate for coping with most population movement problems induced by armed conflict. Furthermore, meeting the protection and assistance needs of those persons was the responsibility of the States concerned.
However, in the context of consultations on the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, he warned against the growing tendency to consider the situation of internally displaced persons as identical to those of refugees as far as protection was concerned. The causes and consequences might be the same, but the legal regimes applicable to the two categories were different. Displaced persons within a State were its nationals. As such, they benefited from the full range of their rights under domestic law, in addition to those under international human rights law and humanitarian law.
Certainty the question of security for humanitarian workers had been highly discussed over the past weeks, he concluded. Preserving an environment for humanitarian work to be carried out was essential, if humanitarian organizations were to have access to people affected by conflict. It was to be remembered that international humanitarian law required States to respect and protect humanitarian personnel and that attacks on humanitarian workers, who were civilians, amounted to war crimes.
ROBERT PAIVA, Observer of the International Organization for Migration (IOM), said tensions between migration concerns and refugee protection were inevitable during times of change, such as the present. The option of seeking a future abroad was realizable for many, and there was a complex mix of reasons for doing so. In the face of such factors as had occurred in the past decade -- the opening of borders, the accessibility of transportation, the explosion of information about faraway places, and the implosion of States into to conflict -- managing migration flows while respecting humanitarian obligations was difficult.
Neither one of those objectives would be achieved if either was considered in isolation from the other, he said. By now it sounded like a cliché, but the past 10 years had shown that a holistic approach to international population flows was the only viable path to success. Inadequate legal migration possibilities created conditions that threatened the international protection regime.
The IOM was supporting State efforts to forge holistic approaches to refugee and migration issues, he said. Beyond collaboration on capacity-building projects in individual countries, it supported a growing number of regional consultation mechanisms where multilateral discussion of regional trends and issues took place in an open, constructive and productive way, as had occurred in the Commonwealth of Independent States Conference. In the same way, the IOM was committed to cooperating with the UNHCR in developing a humanitarian regime that recognized the various categories of people on the move, while providing for the special circumstances of refugees.
* *** *
Third Committee
7 November 2000
49th Meeting (AM)
Security of Humanitarian Personnel High on Committee Agenda
There were innovative ways of surmounting finite capacities to meet the burden-sharing responsibilities of protecting refugees, Australia's representative told the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) this morning as it met to take up issues related to refugees, including the High Commissioner's report.
All approaches involved international cooperation and coordination, she said, pointing to the UNHCR's global consultations as an excellent coordinating mechanism. Support could also be given to countries of origin, so that they could sustain people rather than see them forced to leave. Or resources could be given to the country of first asylum so that further asylum was not needed.
Most graphically, however, she said western States spent over $10 billion annually to determine refugee status for half a million asylum-seekers within their borders. By comparison, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) had an under-funded budget of $1 billion with which to address the needs of over 20 million refugees. Allocating just one-tenth of asylum determination costs to the UNHCR would double its budget. That could be used for support of sustainable repatriation or for first-asylum country economies.
A number of representatives, including those of Guinea, Belarus and Ukraine, talked of the burdens on refugee-receiving countries. Tanzania's representative said his country had hosted a large number of refugees for over 40 years without placing quotas on asylum seekers. That had imposed immense economic, social and security consequences on both the Government and the people. Local populations were now growing weary of the refugee phenomenon, which degraded the environment, spread disease and increased crime.
"The burden borne by the local population in refugee areas cannot be overemphasized", he said. The local people were the ones who felt the first impact when refugees entered a country. They shared their meagre resources until international assistance arrived and then put up with rising tensions when supplies to refugee camps were inadequate. It was a dangerous situation, encouraging reckless behaviour and lawlessness, in which security could not be maintained.
A number of speakers stressed the international responsibility for protecting rights of refugees. Egypt's representative said that asylum was a fundamental human right. Providing assistance to those left without homes was a collective responsibility, encompassing the guarantee of rights. Handling the refugee problem in Africa was critical. Those conflicts were not only an obstacle to development for the people themselves but a threat to the security of all States.
Speaking for the International Organization for Migration (IOM), its representative pointed out the factors that in the past decade had intensified migration. They included the opening of borders, the accessibility of transportation, the explosion of information about faraway places, and the implosion of States into conflict. "Managing migration flows while respecting humanitarian obligations is difficult", he said, adding that the experience of the past 10 years had shown that a holistic approach to international population flows was the only viable path.
The representative of the International Committee of the Red Cross made a distinction between protecting the rights of refugees and those of internally displaced persons. He said the latter had domestic law to protect them. Even so, both were first and foremost civilians to be protected by international humanitarian law, which was adequate for coping with most population movement problems induced by armed conflict. In addition, States must remember they were required by that law to respect and protect humanitarian personnel, who were civilians. Attacks on them amounted to war crimes.
Also addressing the Committee this morning were the representatives of Liechtenstein, Russian Federation, Mexico, Venezuela, Togo and The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.
The Committee will meet again at 3 p.m. to continue considering issues related to refugees, including the High Commissioner's report and humanitarian aspects, as well as returnees and displaced persons. The Committee is also expected to hear the introduction of a number of draft resolutions.
Committee Work Programme
The Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) met this morning to continue considering issues related to refugees, including the report of the High Commissioner for Refugees and questions related to refugees, returnees and displaced persons, as well as humanitarian questions. (For background, see Press Release GA/SHC/3616 of 6 November.)
Statements
NERMINE MITRY (Egypt) said the conflicts of recent years had complicated the situation of refugees. The international community's responsibility for them had increased with regard to ensuring their right of free movement and voluntary return. Many obstacles remained before their problems were resolved and their rights ensured, including their right to integrate and become part of their new communities.
States must meet their responsibilities to eradicate the violence that gave birth to refugees, she said. Justice was an important component in a lasting settlement of conflicts. The international community must find the political will for such solutions, because asylum was a fundamental human right and providing care to those left without homes was a collective responsibility requiring joint efforts. International protection encompassed the guarantee of rights. The issue of repatriation and the situation of refugees were both humanitarian concerns, to be addressed through cooperation between the States directly involved and the United Nations agencies, particularly the High Commissioner's Office, to prevent the refugees from becoming internally displaced persons.
Returning refugees to their homes was a priority, particularly those in Africa and Palestine, she said. In the latter case, it was a matter of Israelis respecting the rights of the Palestinian people. In Africa, the refugee problems must be handled at a level beyond that recommended in the High Commissioner's report, and in full consultation with all those involved. At this point, the conflicts there were not only an obstacle to development for the people themselves but a threat to the security of States, particularly those sheltering the refugees.
M.W. MANGACHI (Tanzania) said it was common knowledge that conflicts were the major producers of refugees and displaced persons. His country had been hosting a large number of refugees from neighbouring countries for over 40 years, out of humanitarian concern and in fulfilment of international obligations. It had discharged both those aims without placing quotas on asylum seekers. However, providing asylum and hospitality to such a large number of those needing it had affected the country over the years by imposing immense economic, social and security consequences on both the Government and the people. In addition, local populations were now growing weary as a result of the refugee phenomenon, which degraded the environment, spread disease and increased crime and other vices in refugee-hosting areas.
"The burden borne by the local population in refugee areas cannot be overemphasized", he stated. Those were the people who felt the first impact when refugees entered a country, sharing their meagre resources until international assistance arrived and then putting up with the rise of tensions when supplies to refugee camps were inadequate. It was a dangerous situation encouraging reckless behaviour and lawlessness. Security could not be maintained.
Voluntary repatriation was the best solution because integrating mass influxes was simply not feasible, he said. However, voluntary repatriation could not take place before the conflicts in the country of origin were resolved. A lasting solution was impossible without reconciliation. Therefore, resettlement in a third country was an encouraging avenue. For all those considerations, the global consultations begun by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) must be comprehensive.
ANZHELA KORNELIOUK (Belarus) said the phenomenon of migration had not only regional but international implications. In Belarus, located at the crossroads of Europe, the problem of refugees was one that had to be dealt with every day. The number of refugees in the region had recently been estimated to exceed 200,000 persons. That situation was having a negative effect on social and economic conditions within Belarus and had also caused an increase in drug trafficking and other criminal activity, as well as an explosion in the “black labour” market. For those and other reasons, Belarus paid special attention to solving the situation of refugees and displaced persons, while at the same time ensuring the rights and freedoms of its citizens.
In that context, she continued, Belarus had enacted laws on refugees which focused on such areas as foreign labour and migration policies. Refugee law had also been augmented and expanded, in accordance with relevant United Nations conventions. As of 1 July, Belarus had also begun procedures for granting refugee status. It was important to note that the overwhelming majority of refugees entering her country were citizens of Afghanistan. The priority in refugee policy was to identify a reliable system of regulatory processes for migration. A major focus would be assistance with repatriation, settlement and integration. As the fiftieth anniversary of UNHCR approached, she hoped that the Office would continue to provide unconditional assistance to people who had become refugees, as well as to the countries that received displaced persons. She drew the Committee’s attention to the fact that only through broad cooperative efforts could the problem be solved.
CLAUDIA FRITSCHE (Liechtenstein) said that at the beginning of this new century, the international community continued to witness a global crisis of displacement. Whether that displacement was of an internal nature or was caused by massive flows of refugees across borders, the United Nations system had often been ill-equipped to handle the crises. It was, therefore, the collective duty of Member States to address the obstacles to effective and rapid response to humanitarian disasters. To that end, the issue of security must remain high on the agenda. The proliferation of armed conflicts in recent years had put humanitarian operations around the world at risk and had even resulted in casualties. Determined action must be taken by the United Nations to guarantee the security of those offering assistance to victims of humanitarian crises.
“We must not fail those who risk their lives for us,” she said. The inclusion of attacks on humanitarian personnel in the statute of the International Criminal Court was a welcome step in that respect. The issue also required action by the Secretariat. Financial constraints must be overcome. Both the credibility and the effectiveness of the United Nations system would be severely affected if the problem of security could not be solved.
She supported the High Commissioner’s call for enhanced focus on post-conflict situations. The establishment of a post-conflict peace-building unit within the Department of Political Affairs was an important step, and it was hoped that discussions of the Brahimi Report on United Nations peace operations would produce in-depth consideration of the role of post-conflict peace efforts. Another area where political will was needed was prevention. While there certainly had been disagreement within the Organization over the merits of giving high priority to the issue of prevention, Liechtenstein strongly supported that approach with regard to refugee problems. Establishing effective early-warning mechanisms, as well as recognizing and addressing root causes of conflicts at earlier stages, could go a long way towards alleviating the plight of refugees. The United Nations also needed to better address situations where lingering claims based on the right to self-determination had the potential to erupt in violent conflicts. Prevention meant, first and foremost, a shift from reactive to proactive approaches. Numerous crises which could lead to massive population displacement could be avoided through early identification and consultation with all the parties involved.
DMITRY KNYAZHINSKIY (Russian Federation) said the plight of refugees remained a distinguishing feature of modern life. Coordinated efforts were required to find a solution. While he realized that the main duty of finding solutions to migration problems lay with governments, the scope of the problem was such that the international community must act in cooperation. The Russian Federation had done much to improve the situation of refugees and displaced persons within its region. Its policies and initiatives including a Programme of Action had been in conformity with relevant United Nations conventions and other international humanitarian instruments. Those initiatives had aimed, among other things, to provide opportunities for the provision of personnel trained to work with refugees, address issues of political asylum and assist in rehabilitation or integration. The Russian Federation believed that a successful solution to the problem would involve balancing the principle of solidarity and the responsibilities of States themselves.
He went on to note that while the problem of dealing with refugees and displaced persons was becoming no less burdensome for the Federation, the level of international support seemed to be decreasing. It was up to the international community to ensure that issues of refugees and displaced persons were interwoven with broad efforts to find solutions to conflict situations. Another focus should be on rehabilitation. To that end he supported global consultations on international protection policies. He also said that it was not appropriate to expand the mandate of UNHCR. Finally, he had been alarmed by the growing trend of attacks on United Nations humanitarian staff when carrying out their duties. He expressed sympathy for the tragic loss of life of UNHCR staff.
FRANCOIS FALL (Guinea) said his country had the largest ratio of refugees to domestic population of anywhere in the world. The long-range effects were devastating to the environment and to the country's social situation. Guinea had been subject to attacks by Sierra Leoneans, some of whom had taken refuge in Guinea. It was simply not permissible that refugees who had received Guinea's hospitality should join rebels intent on destabilizing the Government.
In March, he said, Guinea would be hosting a conference on refugees in conjunction with the Organization of African Unity (OAU). It would centre on four key stages of assistance to refugees and protection of their rights. The first would be at the point where refugees were given asylum. Second would be the identification of refugees to separate them from rebels. The next would come at the point where refugees could decide on freely repatriating. Finally came the stage of channeling the assistance of the international community to refugees at reception areas that were safely protected from attack.
MARIA ANTONIETA MONROY (Mexico) said her Government had pursued a programme of offering asylum to those forced to leave their own countries because of conflict. That had enriched Mexico's own culture. It had imbued the country with increased capacity for international cooperation, as well as an increased respect for human rights. Mexico had acceded to all three of the major human rights instruments. Its policy with regard to refugees encompassed the concepts of solidarity, asylum and refuge.
In the last two decades, she said, the most significant undertaking with regard to refugees in her country involved Guatemalans seeking refuge. Mexico had handled the situation in three phases, leading from the crisis point to migratory stabilization. With international aid, primarily from the European Union, camps had been built in various parts of the country. Ultimately, refugees had been given the option of either voluntary, elective return or assimilation. In the framework of UNHCR's fiftieth anniversary, a documentary had been made of Mexico's long tradition of hosting those needing asylum. Entitled, "Mexico, a tradition of asylum and refuge", it presented the anguish of those forced from their homes, as well as their solace at finding asylum.
LUISA PEREZ-CONTRERAS (Venezuela) said the increasing flow of refugees, with ever-increasing causes for leaving, had imposed on the UNHCR the fundamental role of finding lasting solutions to the problems that led to refugee flows. Both host States and refugee States were dependent on assistance and on international protection. All those now needed to be strengthened, including the institutions involved in such assistance. The aim of that strengthening was to increase fundamental respect for international principles and to broaden the application of those principles, so as to meet the challenge presented by refugees.
For example, the concept of asylum needed a broader definition. Also, financial institutions must be involved in solving refugee problems. Overall, a broad approach on the part of all players involved in achieving long-term aims was the end-goal. Peace and stability must become intrinsically associated with easing the problem of refugees, and social stability should not be divorced from the protection of refugees' rights.
The new Bolivarian constitution of Venezuela had enshrined the right to refuge and asylum, she said. Hopefully, an organic law on those rights would be put in place by the National Assembly. In the meantime, a technical committee had been set up with the involvement of the Ministry of the Interior. A binational protection and refuge programme had been established with Colombia to protect refugees and transit people within a humanitarian corridor. In closing, she applauded the establishment of 20 June as the International Day of the Refugee.
PENNY WENSLEY (Australia) said the international protection system was at a crossroads. It was jeopardized by global trends , such as mixed migration flows, mobility, differentials in economic and social opportunity, unmet demands for economic migration, the changing nature of conflicts, terrorism, people-smuggling and the abuse of asylum systems. Increasing numbers of asylum-seekers were adopting inappropriate approaches towards achieving migration outcomes or finding a country of protection, regardless of whether the destination country had legal migration avenues. That diverted State resources to the detriment of those in greater need of protection.
The solutions to those problems lay in developing comprehensive and integrated approaches, she said. Those would involve international cooperation and coordination, as in the UNHCR's global consultations. One aspect of such an approach was to provide support to countries of origin, so that they could take steps to sustain people in their home countries and preclude the need for them to leave. Australia, for example, had provided emergency drought relief to Afghanistan. Another aspect was to find resources for determining which refugees needed protection and which did not while they were still in the country of first asylum. Timely, durable solutions must also be generated, so that the incentive to find asylum in another country was minimized.
A cornerstone of the international protection system was burden-or responsibility-sharing, she continued. That term did not address the finite nature of States' capacities to provide resources. And if new resources were to be found, innovative ways of generating them would have to be invented. For example, western States spent over $10 billion annually to determine refugee status for half a million asylum-seekers within their borders. By comparison, UNHCR had an under-funded budget of $1 billion with which to address the needs of over 20 million refugees. Allocating just one tenth of asylum-determination costs to the UNHCR would double its budget for support of sustainable repatriation and the economies of first-asylum countries, which now bore the costs of hosting refugee populations despite their own often limited economic capacities.
ROLAND KPOTSRA (Togo), speaking on behalf of the Organization of OAU, said the enormity of the problem of refugees and displaced persons in many OAU Member States and throughout the African Continent was cause for great concern. It was important to address all the implications of massive population flows while the recent savage murders of United Nations humanitarian personnel in East Timor and Guinea were still fresh in the mind of the international community. Those cruel acts testified to the dangerous conditions faced by both humanitarian workers and refugees. The international community must condemn such violence against humanitarian workers as well as call for closer monitoring of refugee camps. He went on to say that by adopting the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, the international community had reaffirmed the dignity of the human person and vowed to promote social progress. It had also proclaimed the right to freedom of movement. He noted that the profound aspirations expressed in the Charter had been supplemented by other international humanitarian instruments. Unfortunately, millions of men, women and children were living outside their normal residences, forced to flee in the face of natural disasters, systematic violations of human rights or the failure of peace negotiations.
It was sad to see that Africa broke all the saddest records. The continent had the largest number of least developed countries, the heaviest debt, the lowest income, the highest number of HIV/AIDS victims, and the highest levels of poverty. To make matters worse, it was also the region must cruelly affected by refugee flows, whose social, economic and environmental implications were disastrous for the people and the States themselves. Development on the continent had been severely affected by the staggering number of refugees and internally displaced persons. Civil wars and clashes between States persisted, as well as incursions by armed factions, ethnic groups, rebel movements and government forces. All had combined to drive from their homes and cast out onto the roads millions of people seeking refuge and safety. Those persons had crossed borders or established themselves in more fertile regions within their own countries. More tragic still, was that many were women, children, elderly or disabled persons. The increasing scope of the problem must prompt the international community to strengthen assistance at all levels. While it was true that States had the responsibility to provide aid, Africa presented a unique situation. How could a continent of developing countries carry the burden alone? he asked. The international community must endeavour to supplement the work being undertaken by African countries.
In calling for international support, he drew the Committee’s attention to obvious differences in the manner in which the refugee situation had been approached on his continent, as opposed to Kosovo. In light of that sad reality, the OAU, at its recent Heads of State Conference, had expressed concern at what appeared to be discriminatory practices in the priority given to refugee situations by the world community. The OAU urged the international community to reverse that trend and allocate resources equitably based on need from region to region. The international community should also endeavour to ease the burden on host countries by providing assistance for rehabilitation of infrastructure and environment. Finally, he stressed that the thirty-sixth OAU Summit had launched an appeal to all African leaders to promote the safe return of refugees and displaced persons, and to facilitate their reintegration by supporting creative employment programmes and other income-generating activities. He also noted the disparity in the standards of protection between displaced persons and refugees. Displaced persons did not seem to draw the attention of the international community, but their situation was equally important. An international legal instrument on the protection of internally displaced persons was vital to ensure their protection.
OKSANA BOYKO (Ukraine) said that her country knew well the depth of the global migration crisis. Despite economic hardships, Ukraine’s internal political stability, liberal migration policies and inter-ethnic peace had made it attractive to many refugees from politically unstable countries. According to estimates, over 50 per-cent of those who had acquired refugee status in Ukraine were willing to remain there for longer periods, or perhaps even settle there permanently. Refugees in Ukraine from over 44 countries around the world had the right to education, medical assistance, social services, as well as employment and business opportunities. Since January 1999, a pension plan for refugees had been initiated. One of the priorities of migration policies in Ukraine was the return of Crimean Tartars and other nationalities to their native lands. More than 265,000 formerly deported persons had returned to the Crimea. Some specific actions aimed at sustained returns were socio-economic assistance programmes, humanitarian initiatives and international assistance. To ensure that those persons were reintegrated, the Council of Crimean Tartar Nation Representatives was established as the consultative authority.
She went on to say that Ukraine had given considerable attention to reducing and preventing statelessness. Amendments had been made to the relevant citizenship legislation, and agreements had been concluded on a simplified procedure for the changing of citizenship with Uzbekistan, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Owing to the concerted efforts of the Ukrainian Government, in conjunction with the active all-around support of UNHCR, more than 25,000 stateless persons among the formerly deported had acquired Ukrainian citizenship. She said that Ukraine viewed its efforts aimed at ensuring the controlled development of migration processes as a contribution to strengthening international stability in cooperation with its neighbours. Matters related to the reception and accommodation of deported persons and protection of refugees remained a high priority, however. Despite certain advances, completion of national legislation in those areas and ensured consistent implementation required further attention. Further coordination was also required in the field of cooperation between government agencies and the international community.
DONKA GLIGOROVA (The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) said that the beginning of the twenty-first century would be remembered for its flagrant disrespect for the fundamental postulates of democratic society in many parts of the world, including the Balkans. The grave consequences of the crisis in Kosovo, which had posed a serious threat to the security and stability of that region and beyond, had not yet been fully overcome. As a result of that crisis, Macedonia was now host to over 360,000 refugees. That was nearly 18 per-cent of its population. The international community had supported Macedonia in its efforts to deal with the humanitarian impact of such a huge influx. It was now time for Member States to assist Macedonia as it attempted to address the economic impact of the crisis. Due to the continuing strain of refugees, only a small portion of the financial burden had been compensated. Further effort on the part of the world community was needed to ensure the safe return of refugees where and when the appropriate conditions had been created.
She said all were aware of the links between conflicts and the plight of refugees. Her region had witnessed a number of conflicts that had spawned millions of refugees. The sad reality for countries within the region was that humanitarian assistance must be accompanied by political and confidence-building measures. But measures aimed at conflict prevention must also be addressed. In that regard, she was pleased to announce that an International Centre for Preventive Action and Conflict Resolution had recently been established in Skopje. The recovery and reconstruction of the region was of paramount importance, she continued. Obligations undertaken and promises made must be carried out. In that regard, she highlighted the role of the Stability Pact in achieving the long-desired goal of stable, democratic societies and economic prosperity in South-eastern Europe. She hoped that the recent democratic changes in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia would contribute to further stabilization and progress in the region.
UMESH PALWANKAR, representative of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), said large-scale population movements were usually a consequence of conflicts or internal disturbances affecting the entire civilian population. The problems relating to internal displacement could not be resolved without understanding the plight of the civilian population as a whole and taking steps to improve it, because those displaced were first and foremost civilians to be protected by international humanitarian law. That body of law was legally binding on both State and non-State actors, and was perfectly adequate for coping with most population movement problems induced by armed conflict. Furthermore, meeting the protection and assistance needs of those persons was the responsibility of the States concerned.
However, in the context of consultations on the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, he warned against the growing tendency to consider the situation of internally displaced persons as identical to those of refugees as far as protection was concerned. The causes and consequences might be the same, but the legal regimes applicable to the two categories were different. Displaced persons within a State were its nationals. As such, they benefited from the full range of their rights under domestic law, in addition to those under international human rights law and humanitarian law.
Certainty the question of security for humanitarian workers had been highly discussed over the past weeks, he concluded. Preserving an environment for humanitarian work to be carried out was essential, if humanitarian organizations were to have access to people affected by conflict. It was to be remembered that international humanitarian law required States to respect and protect humanitarian personnel and that attacks on humanitarian workers, who were civilians, amounted to war crimes.
ROBERT PAIVA, Observer of the International Organization for Migration (IOM), said tensions between migration concerns and refugee protection were inevitable during times of change, such as the present. The option of seeking a future abroad was realizable for many, and there was a complex mix of reasons for doing so. In the face of such factors as had occurred in the past decade -- the opening of borders, the accessibility of transportation, the explosion of information about faraway places, and the implosion of States into to conflict -- managing migration flows while respecting humanitarian obligations was difficult.
Neither one of those objectives would be achieved if either was considered in isolation from the other, he said. By now it sounded like a cliché, but the past 10 years had shown that a holistic approach to international population flows was the only viable path to success. Inadequate legal migration possibilities created conditions that threatened the international protection regime.
The IOM was supporting State efforts to forge holistic approaches to refugee and migration issues, he said. Beyond collaboration on capacity-building projects in individual countries, it supported a growing number of regional consultation mechanisms where multilateral discussion of regional trends and issues took place in an open, constructive and productive way, as had occurred in the Commonwealth of Independent States Conference. In the same way, the IOM was committed to cooperating with the UNHCR in developing a humanitarian regime that recognized the various categories of people on the move, while providing for the special circumstances of refugees.
* *** *