The Blind Eye of UNHCR – writes in detail an asylum seeker from IndonesiaSeptember 08, 2013
When a person under persecution flees his country, he automatically becomes orphan. There is a good saying that country is mother and a person without country becomes orphan. Life becomes miserable as an undocumented stranger in other countries where a human’s basic rights and needs are not given to him. An asylum seeker’s life is a miserable life in real.
Asylum seeking is an old issue which was focussed upon for the first time by the international coordinated efforts through League of Nations in early 20th century. The purpose was inter alia to protect human rights and render humanitarian assistance and resettlement solutions to the persecuted people fleeing their countries – whom I call the orphans. After establishment of United Nations Organization under its popular Charter in 1945, other refugee rights promoting organizations were founded and reinforced. UNHCR is one of such entities which is mandated to promote and run programs for protection of asylum seekers and refugees.
Indonesia is a transit area for thousands of asylum seekers annually whose final destination is predominantly Australia. But among them are the asylum seekers that prefer to stay in Indonesia and approach UNHCR with a hope to get assistance to return to a safe normal life.
As the only main UN entity for refugees, UNHCR is the first and the last hope of the asylum seekers that avoid joining the dangerous boat journey. Most of them had to flee their countries, to join the world of orphanhood, because of persecution, violence and life threats. They lost many things like peace, family members, honour, career and country. Has the UNHCR in Indonesia played a good role as their first and the last hope? As one of the asylum seekers my answer to this question is negative unfortunately. Not only this but also because of poor management, low performance capacity of some staffs and inadequate human and material resources, in several cases, UNHCR has exacerbated the already vulnerable mental and physical conditions of detained asylum seekers particularly.
One of the biggest problems is UNHCR’s unbalanced and disorganised attention towards different Immigration Detention Centres. It has contributed to creation of a big difference, in terms of interviews and case processing, among IDCs in several locations. For example asylum seekers in Tanjun Pinang and Medan IDCs are interviewed within 1-3 months after registration, but those in Jakarta and Surabaya IDCs are usually interviewed within 6-12 months after registration. Similarly the time period taken to process cases and issue results after interview considerably depends on the manner and even nationality of the UNHCR Case Officers. In this way many unlucky asylum seekers have to wait for years in detention until they get refugee status from UNHCR. The Luck-UNHCR inter-relation clarifies that UNHCR has two eyes. One is blind and the other is sighted. Those in front of the sighted eye are lucky and those in front of the blind eye are misfortunate. But why should they suffer when their bad luck has roots in the incapability and incompetency of UNHCR? Actually their bad luck can be turned into good luck by curing the blind eye of UNHCR through better management of the resources, fair allocation of staff, capacity building and more accountability of Case Officers.
UNHCR’s inaccessibility and selfish policies towards detained asylum seekers make their lives more miserable. While the life is already very troublesome for them because of poor behaviour and bad treatment of the Indonesian Immigration staffs. The fact that Indonesia has not signed the Refugee Convention is always enough reason for the Immigration Officers to ignore asylum seekers’ basic needs and treat them as criminals or undignified people. They do not want to understand that the asylum seekers are honoured personalities back in their countries and being an asylum seeker is not a choice for them. In this situation in detention, UNHCR’s inaccessibility and incapability exacerbates their anguish.
For asylum seekers in detention, contact to UNHCR has become an impossible job. Weekly, on Fridays, two hours contact time is allocated to the total asylum seekers and refugees. There are around 10,000 asylum seekers and refugees in Indonesia. If half of this amount try to contact UNHCR on a Friday and if each successful person talks for 12 minutes, out of 5,000 only 10 can get the contact. In percentage there is only 0.2% chance of making the contact which is equivalent to no chance. I have tried several Fridays, but even by saying prayers and using certain magical words I have not been able to make a single contact. I am sure even the best magician in the world cannot make the contact for you! As far as the general email inbox of UNHCR (email@example.com) is concerned, I doubt if any one is assigned to check it properly and respond to the incoming correspondence. As far as I remember, none of the emails that my friends and I have sent to this inbox have received any response nor have there been any outcomes resulting from them. On the other hand, the Case Officers deny to give their contact number and email address to their interviewees, claiming that they are not allowed to do so. So the detained asylum seekers cannot receive information regarding their case nor can they provide any new vital information and concern for the case. I would like to ask UNHCR and concerned entities if this is fair. Should a detained anguished asylum seeker have the right to contact the office mandated to listen to his concerns and process his case? After interview if his family members have been recently killed in a bomb explosion or suicide attack or targeted killing, how can he add this to his case? How should he inform the Case Officer or UNHCR that he is going crazy in the ambiguous world of asylum seekers because his dearest ones have been killed recently? Does this type of new condition created after interview have importance for UNHCR? Principally this type of information should be added to the case which definitely helps to make a correct decision. If the information is important then how the contact should be made?
It is a weird situation. Instead of having access to lawyers and facilities for consulting and organizing cases, asylum seekers are even further deprived of contacts with their case processing organization.
If there is a will, the problems can be solved by UNHCR. They should increase the days and hours of contact and assign more Case Officers to listen to the issues and concerns. In this way the contacts to UNHCR will be made easily which can lead to a better condition for the Case Officers to give their contact numbers to their interviewees unhesitatingly. Because there will not be a flood of irrelevant phone calls to them. There will be other accessible relevant contact points available in UNHCR. Thus a proper communication between Case Officers and their interviewees will be insured.
In response to such queries I have been usually told that UNHCR does not have adequate human resources. But this point cannot be a satisfactory justification anymore. It is a decade that UNHCR Indonesia operates with high number of asylum seekers. So the administrative needs and matters should have been solved by now. Its a long period. UNHCR Indonesia should get approval of enough funds through effective and efficient reasoning and proper justification of the need. Asylum seekers in Indonesia has a long history and has turned into a permanent phenomenon. Unfortunately the issue of inadequate resources is being used as a mere justification instead of seeking solution for it. Is it fair to let the asylum seekers suffer because of poor capacity of UNHCR? Why is not this capacity developed?
It is one year that I am hearing about policies of UNHCR Indonesia repeatedly. These policies sound very rigid and non-humanitarian which show incompatibility with UNHCR’s mandated roles. The asylum seekers suffer from post-incident trauma and are worried about their families remained in crisis. On the other hand, they are treated inhumanely by Immigration Officers. In this bad situation, instead of helping them urgently, UNHCR’s shortcomings and oversight cause them to remain in detention for longer ambiguous periods. Remained with no other option they conduct hunger-strike to communicate and receive attention and to say that they are forgotten and the blind eye can not see them. But their final attempt for communication is suppressed by UNHCR’s policy. According to this policy UNHCR does not visit those on hunger-strike. So they are further abandoned in the dire situation. I understand that this policy is designed to prevent other potential hunger-strikes. But it would be fair only if the asylum seekers had other possible ways of contact and they were not compelled to conduct hunger strikes merely to communicate their concerns and cry out that they are victims in the unbalanced attention of UNHCR towards the detention centres.
While Australia has increased its refugee quota for Indonesia to 700 per year, UNHCR’s working manner still remains slow to the extent that some asylum seekers have to wait for a year to be interviewed. Those being interviewed within 1-2 months are the lucky ones because they are in front of the sighted eye. Why is one eye of UNHCR blind? This can also be part of a policy. One month ago a credible person told me that UNHCR might not be able to provide 700 refugees to Australia this year because its process is very slow. I thought it was totally unfair if UNHCR might not manage to meet the quota while thousands of deservers are crazily waiting to get a pass through the refugee process. This maybe a wrong forecast and very pessimistic view, but one thing is sure that UNHCR in Indonesia tries to keep the number of refugees under a limit. In this process the victimized asylum seekers should be deliberately ignored for long periods. Therefore the slow working manner and lack of will to improve the system might have connections to this policy. The reason to this policy can be financial, operational and political. Maybe UNHCR thinks that if the asylum seekers were given refugee status in a fairly quick process, other asylum seekers around the world would be encouraged to migrate to Indonesia. This means more refugees, more asylum seekers and more load of works on the poorly organized weak structure of UNHCR. This policy makes a lesson of the asylum seekers in Indonesia to send a discouraging message to others. This is totally inhumane and victimizes the genuine asylum seekers and refugees in Indonesia.
The problem is that UNHCR does not want to solve the problems by confronting them but instead turns a blind eye to them. The current working approach and continuation of unjust policies is not the solution to the issues. They do not suit the humanitarian nature of its works. I know that UNHCR’s work is not easy. It is full of problems and challenges. But they should not be used as excuse to do improper things. There is always a proper way of doing things. UNHCR should change and promote its approaches according to the need.
___________________________________________________________________________________________March 07, 2013 Lone survivor of asylum-seeker boat tragedy recalls his horrific memories and cries for Asylum Seekers’ plight in Indonesia Here is what Habib – the lone survivor of boat tragedy that resulted in 33 horrible deaths – has written to Hazara Asylum Seekers. Habib is despaired like thousands of other fellow asylum seekers stranded in Inodonesia living upon ‘hope of resettlement’ to any other country. He talks in depth about his ever unforgettable journey and cries for help. Full Transcript of his letter to Hazara Asylum Seekers; It was on 25th October 2012 at noon when we were about to have our lunch the smuggler’s agent came to us and told us immediately to get ready for the journey. We quickly got ready and left the house, leaving our food behind. He didn’t tell us the exact time of embarkation, he kept it secret every time. When we were about to be moved, he sent his agent to body-search us and he didn’t let us carry our own bags. He was suspicious that we might give him away so when his agent frisked us, our mobile phones were taken away-but as I had two; I managed to hide one of them and succeeded in keeping it.We continuously travelled till dark; passed cities, travelled on mountainous roads, saw a thick forest. On the way, everyone was praying and seeking help from Allah. Anyhow, we travelled a long distance and reached our destination. There was just darkness and thick forest. At last we got to the exact point of departure. There was the smooth sound of a quiet ocean surf, and a slight wind.We boarded the boat on 26th October at 2 AM. We were all very happy at that time, but were very frightened. The boat was not big enough and we all had to sit side by side close to one another. The boat quickly set course for Christmas Island. On the way I called my father to tell him that I was on the boat and had left for Christmas Island.
The smuggler provided one satellite mobile phone, but unfortunately it fell down in the morning due to the chaotic situation. It was not possible to check the condition of the boat at night and we were not allowed to use torches. In the morning, when we checked, we found that the boat had one engine, two water pumps and one old generator. The boat was old and decrepit. On board, there were some packets of Maggi and some cartons of water.
I was terribly frightened, and so were my friends. All were vomiting and no one could take in or hold down anything. The water incessantly lapped the boat. Sometimes water was coming inside. At daybreak, we were finally able to have a good look at the boat and our hearts sank
At one o’clock in the afternoon, the engine suddenly stopped but was fixed quickly. But after travelling for two hours, the engine broke down once more, and that time it did not start again. Neither of the crew members knew anything about the engine or the boat. The situation got worse and we were all looking around to see whether we could spot any ships or islands. At that time the sun was very strong.
There was no island, and no big ship passed us. We remained inside the boat till night and only one of the two water pumps was still working, and the boat was gradually filling with water, so we had to bail; but there was only one water jug and one cauldron and nothing else. We bailed the boat out as much as we could; yet, the water level in the boat gradually rose. By now it was dark; there were strong winds increasing to gale force. The waves were constantly hitting the boat.
On 27th October at around 2 a.m., we prepared ourselves, ready for the terrible moments to follow. We lined up inside the boat in two groups, a group of eight people and a group of 26 people. It was a very chaotic situation. Finally, the boat went down; and all of us inside suddenly floated in lifejackets and inner tubes on the surface of the water. The water was very cold.
We waited until morning, looking for islands or ships. In the daytime, the weather was cloudy, sometimes sunny, but the water was cold. The day passed with no sign of hope. In the evening, we saw a big vessel passing by. We all became very happy. M. Asif was the first person who went ahead alone towards the ship, Azeem was the second and I was the third one to hurry to reach the ship. We struggled to swim to the ship, but unfortunately we could not reach it, instead drifting apart from each other and the group. And then, I didn’t see M. Asif and Azeem again. They were shouting until late into the night. I remained alone till morning. In the morning, when the waves woke me up, I at first thought that I had been washed ashore. Suddenly I heard a voice calling out at me over the waves whilst I was frantically trying to find and re-join the group. Luckily, it was one of the group members, so the remaining 24 of us were re-united. What happened to the M. Asif, Azeem and the other group of eight, we never found out.
At around mid-day on 28th October, we again spotted a ship, very far away. We made frantic efforts to reach it, but unfortunately we did not succeed as it was too far away. That evening, one of our friends could no longer bear the situation; he started shouting and begging for help, and moments later he drowned. After a few hours I saw one of my roommates (Ammanullah) lost his life. Then the situation became very tense. On top of that, there was a fear of sharks, and all of us were totally exhausted. Then another person (Rajab) let his grip go and floated away. He was crying, remembering his past and begging for help until late at night. In the morning I saw his dead body floating in the water.
By daytime on 29th October, we didn’t see any ships or islands. The day passed without offering even a glimmer of hope. As there was a strong wind whipping up high waves, we were all extremely tired. At night, my elderly friend (Haji Jawad) complained about his condition. He said he had stomach pains and kidney trouble. When I reached him, he was in a dire state. Later, I missed him: he must have lost his grip on the rope. Other people, too, were gradually losing their grip.
On 30th October, we were all extremely thirsty, hungry and desperate. At about 1 o’clock in the afternoon, another person couldn’t endure the tough situation, he (Sharif) lost his life, and an hour later another person (Kabir) also became the victim of the waves. The same fate befell yet another member of the group, Hamid, who desperately looked around. He was at the end of his tether, totally tired out, and overcome with sorrow, calling for his wife and his parents until he drowned. But the rest of us didn’t give up and we didn’t lose our minds. In the evening, we saw another vessel far way. Salim, M. Sharif and Karim went towards that vessel, leaving the group behind. They remained within sight for awhile, and I could hear the sound of the whistles that were attached to their life jackets. But they were not heard and could not possibly have reached the ship; nor were they able to re-join the group. Some seven or eight of us remained together till night. The night was clouded, and we were all laden with grief. I stayed awake till late at night to finally see out that tragic day, bringing that dramatic three day episode to an end.
Next morning, out of seven or eight people there were only three left. I hadn’t noticed what had happened to the others. Ibrahim, Rahim and I were together until I saw Rahim could not cope anymore, and he too lost his life. Ibrahim was about to expire, his face totally burnt. I called him, touched his shoulder several times, but he was just breathing his last. I understood that he would be no more with me; I moved away and had to leave him there.
After I left him, it dawned on me that I, too would not have long to live. I just floated in the water, desperately looking around. So I drifted until the afternoon. I didn’t lose my spirit and struggled till my last moments. It was sunny; the water was cold but calm. My face was totally burnt, I could barely open my eyes, and my body was freezing. Fear of sharks occupied much of my mind. I was extremely thirsty. I had a severe pains in my stomach and kidneys. I remembered my past, surrounded by my parents, and I realized they were with me. I felt like I was breathing my last moment. At around 3 o’clock in the afternoon I saw a small boat far away. As I kept looking at it, the boat got bigger and bigger and finally I saw that it was coming towards me. As the boat got nearer, I shouted and blew my whistle. At last, the boat hove to and rescued me. I had not imagined that I would have even the slightest chance of survival.
The boat was a fishing boat on the way to its fishing grounds. It was a fairly big boat with a crew of about a dozen. I was relieved and they were happy for me, too. They gave me water and a bunk to lie down. Then I lost consciousness and woke up the next morning, weak and with wounds at the back of my knees. I stayed on the fishing boat for four days. They gave me first aid, food and drink. Afterwards, I was transferred to another boat to take me to Jakarta. That journey took twenty-two hours. When we approached Jakarta, I was too weak to go back into the water, so I had to come ashore with the crew.
The captain took me to a pharmacy, where I bought some medicine for my injuries and my burnt face, after which we returned to the boat. But as the captain had already called the police to let them know he had a “passenger” on board, he could not do anything but hand me over to the police, who arrested me and transferred me to the police headquarters. The next morning, 5th November, an immigration official came and interrogated me. It did not quite register with him what had happened to me, even though I gave him the full story. Finally, in the evening they moved me to the Directorate of Immigration in Kuningan, Jakarta.
At the Department of Immigration, I received no further help, but was instantly locked up in the detention centre, where I could reflect on my and my companions’ tragic misfortune. During the first month there, I was physically in a very poor condition as well as going through a state of deep depression. I had nothing left except US$ 50 to buy the necessary medicines.
Those persons who lost their lives are in this tragedy
Those people who went away and I don’t know that what had happened to them are:
- M. Sharif Akhlaqi
- Brakat Ali
- M. Asif
- Ali Sina
- M. Nabi
A rebuttal to Douglas Spencer’s misleading letter about Refugee Convention | Correcting Mr. Douglas Spence
This rebuttal letter has been written by Miss Frederika E. Steen against Douglas Spencers’ letter published on Herald Sun on September 08, 2012.
Frederika Steen has served as a delegate for Ministry of Immigration, Australia during 1984-2001. She is a passionate advocate and Refugee/Human rights activist.
We are publishing this letter for our readers in its actual form as we received it.
Correcting Mr. Douglas Spence
Frederika Steen (Image Courtesy: Google)
The Minister for Immigration should correct Douglas Spence ( letters 8/9 ) and confirm that under the Migration Act 1958 and amendments, Australia is obligated to comply with the 1951 UN Refugee Convention signed by RG Menzies. The international law is drawn down into domestic law through Section 36 of the Act , which says that “ a criterion for a Protection visa is that the applicant for a visa is a non-citizen in Australia to whom the Minister is satisfied Australia has protection obligations under the Refugees Convention as amended by the Protocol”.
Why does Mr Spence think Australian governments have not, and will not, turn back Sri Lankan and other asylum seekers arriving by boat or by plane without first granting protection in response to their claims of persecution? Howard’s clandestine and illegal return in 2001 of six boats and their passengers to Indonesia remained unchallenged then, but never again. To push off , pull up the draw bridge or repel asylum seekers in any way is “refoulement” and a specific breach of the Convention.
Australia is legally required to assess all claims of persecution. Manifestly unfounded claims can be done quickly. That we keep potential refugees in indefinite detention and deny their personal liberties and their right to work is an appalling denial of decency and universal human rights. Mandatory indefinite detention is overreaction to minimal security risk. The Government’s positive move to community detention and Bridging Visas for asylum seekers is welcome.
Frederika E.Steen (Former Immigration Officer )
15 Accrington Place
Here is part of the letter of Douglas Spencer which had been published on Herald Sun,
Frederika Steen (Letters, Sep 6) is equally incorrect in stating that turning Sri Lankan asylum seekers back is in clear breach of the UN Refugee Convention.
Like many impassioned advocates, she has obviously not read the Convention and its 1967 Protocol. There is no relevant Article identifying where Australia may assess the status of claimed refugees.
– Douglas Spence, Annerley
This letter was published was here: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/letters-protecting-children-is-everyones-duty/story-fndo45r1-1226467596725
There is still hope despite the uncertainty of the politics | An open message by Carolyn Dominish
By Carolyn Dominish
Photo credit : http://www.perthnow.com.au
I have posted my opinion about the present argument the Government and the Opposition about the “solution” regarding the boats. I would value your opinion on my comments.
“Tonight my heart is heavy with grief. Grief for my wonderful friends and grief for Australian politicians who refuse to see what is so obvious and continue to make political mileage over the death of innocents. Personally, it is so frustrating to not be able to find my own solution to the problem of the deaths at sea of people who have every right to seek refuge in my land. Have they not suffered enough – my beautiful Hazara friends. JG thinks the solution is to send them to Malaysia for “processing”. That word “processing” reminds me of the Nazis and John Howard. These people are humans who have the same feelings, emotions and love of their families as we have. Senators were crying in the Senate today, but the PM and Opposition Leader refuse to be moved, just in case they lose their precious votes. The terrible thing for me and my conscience is that I have no solution either. I am totally opposed to mandatory detention and always have been. I am also totally opposed to people smugglers sucking the lifeblood of innocents, promising the vulnerable a better life according to how many dollars they are prepared to spend for the voyage. Not for the first time I am ashamed to be a so-called Australian. It is indeed a complex problem. Firstly, mandatory detention should be abolished altogether. What makes us think we have the right to imprison people who should be regarded as genuine asylum seekers? But that will not solve the dangers of a treacherous sea voyage. Australia has alienated itself from Indonesia. No way is it possible that they/we can parley with the Indonesians for a safer and more moral solution regarding these asylum seekers and the weeding out of the unscrupulous who are willing to make blood money from desperate people. But somehow I think that there has to be some kind of agreement that can be reached with the Indonesian authorities in order to rid those in such desperate need, of possible death at sea. Whatever I say or feel provides no solution to my friends. But believe me when I say that I have been a refugee advocate, supporter and crusader for the human rights of refugees for ten years. I am not congratulating myself, far from it. To me, who has no religion, it is just a matter of putting myself in their position. That will never change. I want my Hazara friends to know of the outrage of many in Australian society who condemn what the present government and opposition are guilty of. It is their guilt, nothing else. I have mentioned in some of my earlier posts how a Liberal government under the leadership of Malcolm Fraser, a most unlikely supporter of human rights, who allowed the last “boat people, the Vietnamese “carte blanche” in Australia. Not for the first time I ask myself, and so should you my fellow Australians, how are these asylum seekers any different to those Vietnamese? Is it a merely a matter of religion and fear of the unknown by Australians? This is certainly part of it. This is the frustrating part of it for me. If the present government and the Opposition had the guts to see these unfortunate people as just that, people, humans, and not fodder for the political mill we may actually get somewhere with integration. What to do? Suggestions always appreciated..”
Note: This article is published after the written concept of the writer. We advise our readers to share this where the need be.
وضعیت پناهجویان افغان در ترکیه|| Condition of Afghan Refugees in Turkey by our contributor from Turkey
Date: May 04, 2012.
This is an open letter from our contributor from Turkey who belongs to Hazara ethnic group of Afghanistan. He has sought asylum in Turkey and now faces bitter life conditions.
This has been written in Dari language. Since we aren’t good at translating Dari literature into English, we have used Google Translate. We are sorry for the inconvinient. Yet, we request every one who is willing for translating this article into English. Thanks.
وضعیت پناهجویان افغان در ترکیه
مهاجرت پدیدهای نیست كه به تازگی وارد زندگی انسانها شده و حیات بشر را در كام فراز و نشیبهای گوناگون قرار داده باشد. این پدیده از دیر زمانی در میان ملتها رواج داشته و اهداف متفاوتی مردم را به مهاجرت از یک سرزمین به سرزمین مورد نظر دیگر، مجبور نموده است. اما این پدیده در حیات افغانها مفهوم دیگری دارد و حلقهٔ آن در زندگی مردم ما از سه دهه به این سو دایرهٔ وسیع تری یافته است. مردم افغانستان در سه دهه اخیر در آوارگی تولد شده و در آواره می میرند. هنوز پایانی برای این سرنوشت رقم نخورده است.
سهل انگاری کمیساریا عالی پناهندگان سازمان ملل متحد در خصوص پرونده پناهندگان وعدم ایجاد شرایط مناسب برای پناهجویان بارها و بارها فجایع غیرقابل جبرانی را به وجود آورده است چرا که هزاران پناهنده افغان از سوی کمیساریا در ترکیه رها شده و هیچگونه کمک هزینه ای بابت زندگی و مسکن در اختیار آنان قرار داده نمی شود. از این رو آنان از سر ناچاری به کارهای شاق با دستمزد بسیار ناچیز و بمراتب کمتر از کارگران “بومی” تن می دهند و با حوادث ناگوار این چنینی مواجه می شوند و از آنجا که مشمول قوانین کار نمی شوند، کسی در قبال جان آنان نیز مسئولیتی ندارد.
کمیساریا، دولت ترکیه و مجریان قانون، پناهجویان را به شهرهای کم توسعه یافته فرستاده از یک طرف در آن شهرها حقوق انسانی پناهجویان مدنظر گرفته نمی شود و از طرف دیگر کار مناسبی برای پناهجویان پیدا نمی شود.
رئیس یک موسسه غیر دولتی که از نزدیک با پناهجویان کار می نماید از یک حقیقت دیگر پرده برداشت ” بررسی طولانی پرونده های پناهجویان افغان، سیاست کمیساریای عالی پناهندگان سازمان ملل متحد در ترکیه می باشد. زیرا از یک طرف شرایط داخلی افغانستان هر روز بدتر شده و از طرف دیگر کشورهای همسایه افغانستان در تلاش اند تا مهاجران افغان را به کشور شان برگردانند. اگر سازمان پرونده های پناهجویان افغان را تسریع بخشند، در انصورت سیل از پناهجویان افغان در ترکیه سرازیر شده که هم دولت ترکیه و هم سازمان نمی توانند آنرا تحمل کنند. به این دلیل پرونده های پناهجویان افغان را عمدا طولانی تر می سازند.
آشکار است که مسئولان امنیتی شهرها اجازه دسته جمعی پناهجویان را به خارج از شهر نمی دهند و بدین اساس پناهجویان افغان که حمایت گر بیرونی مثل پناهجویان کشورهای دیگر ندارند اکثرا به مدت های طولانی در ترکیه می مانند. اکثرا صدای آنها از طریق شبکه های خبری داخلی و بین المللی انعکاس داده نشده و اکثرا پناهجویان افغان از ظاهر شدن در جلو دوربین ها امتناع می کنند.
مسئولان کمیساریا همیشه ادعا دارند که کشورهای مهاجرپذیر سیاسی عمل می کنند و از پذیریش پناهجویان افغان در ترکیه سرباز می زنند. اما در تماس با سفارت کشورهای مهاجرپذیر، آنها ادعا می کنند که آنها مطابق با لیست ارسالی کمیساریا عمل کرده و ما شخصا تبعیض میان پناهجویان ایجاد نمی کنیم.
چاره ای نداریم جز اینکه یک مکتوب دسته جمعی نوشته و آنرا به همه شهرهای که پناهجویان افغان مقیم شهرهای مختلف فرستاده و امضا جمع آوری کنیم. بعدا این مکتوب را به سفارت های کشورهای پناهجوپذیر، دفتر مرکزی کمیساریای عالی پناهندگان سازمان ملل متح در جنوا و آنکارا فرستاده تا صدق گفتار کمیساریای عالی پناهندگان سازمان ملل متحد در آنکارا مشخص گردد، که آیا واقعا کشورها سیاسی عمل کرده پناهجویان از ملیت های مشخص می پذیرند یا اینکه دفتر کمیساریای پناهندگان در آنکارا نسبت به پناهجویان افغان عملکرد تبعیض آمیز دارند و آنها را به کشورهای پناهجوپذیر معرفی نمی کنند؟
بناء از همه پناهجویان افغان در ترکیه خواهشمندیم که درین امر خیر مارا یاری فرمایید و با تمام توان در جمع آوری امضاء تلاش نمایید.
خدا یاریگر تان باد!
Following is the Translation into English via Google Translate
Status of Afghan Refugees in Turkey Migration is a phenomenon that has recently entered human life and human life is placed in the palate various ups and downs. This phenomenon has long prevailed among nations and different goals people to migrate from one country to land on the other, has been forced.In the past three decades in the displacement of the Afghan people are dying and homeless. The final figure for this fate is still intact. They should not be placed at the disposal. It had to resume their drudgery and low-wage workers are far less than the “native” people they encountered and the unfortunate events such as labor laws are not eligible, the person responsible for their lives not responsible. said. to Afghan refugees because the records are longer than intentionally. It is obvious that the security authorities of cities do not allow collective seekers out of the city and the support of the Afghan asylum seekers as refugees in other countries do not have an exterior mostly long stay in Turkey. They sound mostly through domestic and international news channels and been reflected mostly Afghan asylum seekers who refuse to appearing in front of cameras. UNHCR officials have always claimed that the act permits immigration policy and refuse to accept Afghan Refugees in Turkey. Contact the embassy permits immigration countries, they claim that they acted in accordance with the UNHCR submitted a list and we personally do not create discrimination among refugees. We have no choice except that it is a collective letter to all the cities of Afghan refugees living in various cities and sent to collect signatures. Later in this letter to the embassy Pnahjvpzyr countries, UNHCR, United Nations Office at Geneva and Ankara Mth sent to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in Ankara speech applies to determine which countries are really political acts of the nationalities of asylum seekers are Commissioner for Refugees office in Ankara to accept or practice of discrimination are Afghan refugees, and they do not introduce Pnahjvpzyr countries? So of all Afghan refugees in Turkey Please please help us with all that this would not be collecting signatures in your efforts.
May God help you!
Contributor: Muhammad Hekmat