Archive


Trapped in misery by the lure of false dreams

Jul 17th, 2011 | Advocacy | Comment

Christy Choi of Sunday Morning Post, on Jul 17, 2011

To many Africans, China has become the new America, with its boom towns and flourishing economy. The promise of a good life away from poverty and violence is appealing, and, like generations before who sought greener pastures, there are some who fall prey to peddlers of false dreams. Precious flew for more than 24 hours, passing through Addis Ababa and Guangzhou, to reach Hong Kong, where she thought she would work as a supermarket clerk. But she, like others in her situation, had been tricked by an acquaintance from her village. When she landed, all that awaited her was a HK$6,000 debt her trafficker demanded she pay. Without a work visa, and anyone willing to hire her, Precious turned to prostitution. “If I could work at a restaurant, or a laundry, things would be better,” she says.

Given her age and figure, she says, business has been slow. Over the past two years, Precious has only been able to repay about HK$3,000 to her trafficker. “I cannot get money to pay for my room or to send to my [three] children,” she says. Her friend Glamour, a volunteer at Vision First, an NGO providing services for refugees, says Precious and other trafficked women are constantly harassed by their traffickers, and made to give up what meagre earnings they have. “You’re already miserable, so you give them the little you have and you get space to breathe,” she says. While some of the younger women are able to make money by marketing themselves on the internet and contracting themselves out for three-month long “marriages”, older women like Precious often only make as little as HK$50 for sexual services.

At times the trafficked women even become traffickers themselves, going back to their home countries, picking up young, beautiful and hopeful girls and conning them the same way they were conned. “They claim to be businesspeople, they go to universities and they sell them a fake dream,” Glamour says. “They pick girls around 20 to 25 years old, girls who are fair because now they know what will sell. “And the girls drop out, because when someone tells you can go abroad, you get excited. They need to be sensitised and told there are no jobs for them here.”

A fair hearing for torture claimants

Jul 17th, 2011 | Advocacy | Comment

SCMP Opinion – July 17, 2011

Version Française: Une audience équitable pour les demandeurs d’asile pour torture

Nearly 20 years after adopting the United Nations Convention against Torture, Hong Kong still lacks a legal framework for screening asylum seekers who invoke its protection. Meanwhile, an administrative system for assessing their claims has accumulated a backlog of 6,700 appeals; about 170 new cases are added a month. That invites abuse by bogus claimants and is unfair to genuine ones. It is therefore a blot on the city’s reputation for upholding human rights and the rule of law. Thankfully the government has finally addressed this problem by tabling legislation to regulate the assessment of torture claims. The bill should become law next year. It includes a review panel that will hear appeals against refusals by the Immigation Department to recognise asylum seekers’ claims that they face a real risk of torture or other ill-treatment if repatriated.

The government’s hand was forced by a court judgment in 2009 that found the administrative screening system to be unfair, opaque and stacked against claimants. It made the belated but welcome acknowledgment of a duty to give asylum seekers a fair chance to prove that they risk torture in their home nations. The initial response – a pilot scheme involving lawyers to process applications for recognition – was a significant improvement, but questions remain about applicants’ legal status. Either claimants are genuine and cannot be deported to their country of origin, or they are economic migrants who should be screened out as quickly as possible with due process under the law.

Security Secretary Ambrose Lee Siu-kwong rightly says we should ensure every torture claimant gets a fair hearing but that caution needs exercising so that the screening mechanism is not abused. Hong Kong’s way of life and transport links make it an attractive destination for the persecuted, and people who have nothing to lose. The new system should strike a balance between compassion and the integrity of our borders.

Seeking tutors for GED program

Jul 15th, 2011 | Advocacy | Comment

What is the GED?
The GED is the Graduate Equivalency Program and is recognized in Canada and the United States as the equivalent of a high school/secondary school diploma. Most often teens who drop out of school for some reason (pregnancy, drugs, etc) will take this so they are able to get a job or apply for university down the road. It tests in 5 areas: English language, English grammer, Social Studies (American history), Math and Science.

Why the GED?
Most of the refugees resettled from Hong Kong will be resettled to either the US or Canada making this certificate the best choice for those individuals needing to show proof of education. It is currently assumed that for those looking to obtain an online degree that the GED will also be sufficient.

Target Group:
The initial group are those individuals who are between the ages of 18-25 who either received some education back in their home country or graduated but left without their certificate to show ‘proof’. The group will be no larger than 6 people

The need:
Volunteer tutors well versed in the subject areas to be tested in and who can effectively educate the students. Study and prep materials will be provided. If the tutor has other ideas as to what will help the students they are welcome to introduce that into the group study sessions. If the tutor(s) feel other material is needed they will present the idea to the Coordinator (Tiffany, me) to find the best options available. Tutoring can take place at any time, but preferabley not too late in the evening as the students have to travel very far to get back home.

The Goal:
For these students to take the GED exam 6mo from start of their studies. There is a testing center in Hong Kong that they will test at. AND PASS THE TEST!!!!

If you know of anyone who is can serve as a volutneer tutor please have them contact me: tiffany@visionfirstnow.org or 6686-0275 so that we can start the process!

Graduate Equivalency Program
Graduate Equivalency Program

New Immigration (Amendment) bill

Jul 14th, 2011 | Advocacy | Comment

Bill tabled to assess asylum-seekers’ torture claims

Martin Wong writes for SCMP – on Jul 14, 2011

The government has finally tabled a proposed law to assess asylum-seekers’ claims of torture, but is reluctant to include other types of refugee-seekers in the procedure. Hong Kong has long been criticised for its lack of a coherent law regulating refugees and torture claimants. After years of foot-dragging, the administration presented the Immigration (Amendment) bill in the Legislative Council yesterday.

Security Secretary Ambrose Lee Siu-kwong said it aimed to set up a screening framework that complied with the relevant United Nations convention.

“We have to ensure every torture claimant is dealt with in a fair and cautious manner through this legislation. We also have to ensure that the screening mechanism will not be abused,” he said.

At present, the immigration department is responsible for screening torture claimants under an administrative guideline. There is no formal legislation to dictate the process. The government has a backlog of 6,700 appeals for asylum after a landmark Court of Final Appeal ruling in June 2004 that states people landing here claiming to be victims of torture must be individually assessed before the government can repatriate them.

As the number of claimants keeps rising, Hong Kong needs comprehensive legislation to ensure the cases were handled fairly and in accordance with international conventions, Lee said. Under the new proposal – which will be debated in Legco next year – a Torture Claim Appeal Board will be set up to hear appeals from claimants against the immigration department’s decision. A claimant rejected by the immigration service must appeal within 14 days.

Human rights lawyer Mark Daly described the legislation as long overdue.

“For the torture claimants, they have been waiting for a long time over such a legal framework. The government should have started the legislation almost 10 years ago,” he said.

Annie Lin, of the Society for Community Organisation, agreed but was disappointed that, under the proposed law, claimants would not be allowed to work while waiting for the government to process their applications. In fact, even a qualified torture claimant will not be granted residency and will be allowed to work only at the discretion of the immigration director.

Immigration Tower
Click the image to connect to the Immigration Dept website

Does ISS meet your basic needs?

Jul 12th, 2011 | Advocacy | Comment

We are often asked by Hong Kong citizens exactly what services ISS (International Social Services) offers, whether refugees receive what they need and, above all, what they are entitled to. Since HK tax-payers contribute over 200,000,000 HKD a year to enable ISS to offer this program to CAT (Convention against Torture) and UNHCR claimants, the community is very interested to know what procedures ensure a fair and equitable provision of services, as well as supervision of dozens of case-workers who interface with thousands of “service recipients” in ISS care. This ISS’s project – called “Assistance in kind to Asylum Seekers and Torture Claimants” -has run since April 2006 and has evolved into a well-streamed and efficient operation that, on a whole, delivers an invaluable services to its beneficiaries.

However, given the *enormous budget*, the community is asking for more accountability and transparency, which should start with by-annual reports on all service expenditures posted online and distributed to the very people it serves. Here is a link to the program’s website (reproduced below): http://www.isshk.org/e/customize/migrants_assistance.asp

Refugees collect groceries at ISS appointed shops every 10 days
Refugees collect groceries at ISS appointed shops every 10 days

Service Objective

Through the provision of assistance in kind, the ASTC programme, a humanitarian project, aims to prevent destitution for the most vulnerable within the asylum seeking and torture claimants population.

Service Content
ISS-HK only receives referrals from Social Welfare Department. The needs of service users are individually assessed and the provision of food, toiletries, allowances for accommodation and transportation will correspond to the needs of the individual. Following the completion of the initial interview with the service user a contract is formulated which will specify the category and level of assistance in-kind to be provided.  A contract will reflect the individual needs of the service user and will be signed by service user and caseworker. The contract is renewed on a monthly basis so that the client’s situation and corresponding needs can be reviewed and monitored.

Food
Religious and cultural predispositions are respected and accommodated when selecting a food supplier.  Meat, vegetables, rice/wheat flour/pasta, bread, fruits, eggs, drinks, seasoning and cooking oil are distributed to each service recipient every 10 days.  Each service recipient is given a food order list to select the types and quantity of the food every month.  Changes in request can be made by filling a amendment form.  Infants have a separate food list for their request and doctors’ recommendations are taken into consideration for pregnant women.

Accommodation
Rented flats are provided for asylum seekers and torture claimants with a capacity of 11 roommates for one flat. An allowance is provided for each asylum seeker or torture claimant who prefers to look for his/her own accommodation.  The ISS-HK staff will meet the tenants’ landlords, negotiate with landlords the inclusion of electricity, cooking equipments and gas, refrigerators, and water in the rent, and make arrangements for the deposit and rent payment.  The allowance is paid directly to the landlord.

Transportation
Allowance for the public transportation for interviews related to asylum seekers’ or torture claimants’ application for refuge is provided upon presentation of appointment evidence.  Allowance of transportation for medical appointment is also available.

Toiletries
Toiletries can be provided on a monthly basis when the service user presents him/herself to their allocated ISS office for contract renewal.  Toiletries provided this  include one bar of soap, a bag of washing powder, one shaver, one bottle of shampoo, one tube of toothpaste, one tooth brush plus sanitary napkins for ladies.

Clothing
Clothing, when available, is given to clients upon their request.  Please note that clothing is made available to ISS clients only when clothes are donated to the project, there is no budget to buy clothing for adult clients.

Medical Waiver
The ISS caseworker will explain to the client that the “medical waiver” can only be distributed by the Social Welfare Department.  The medical waiver entitles the client to free medical care and it is the clients responsibility to request the waiver from the Social Welfare Department. Funds and placement of education for children are not included in the project but will be sought and negotiated with relevant parties if the ISS-HK believes it is beneficial for the asylum seeker and/or torture claimant concern.

Service Nature
The nature of the humanitarian assistance is in kind not in cash.  This was the decision of the government and was agreed by ISS-HK when we were commissioned to run the project since April 2006.  Any alternation to the nature of assistance will be made by the government and is beyond the jurisdiction of the ISS-HK. ISS-HK is acutely aware of its responsibility to ensure that the administration of the taxpayer’s monies is appropriately utilized within the remit of the ASTC Project.  In doing so we strive to ensure that the dignity of the service user is maintained.

ISS-HK is a reflective organization which is proud of its ability to adapt to the needs of its service users.  Consequently, we welcome the opportunity to engage with our colleagues working in other social service agencies and where appropriate will take up the opportunity to work collaboratively in meeting with the needs of the asylum seeker and torture claimant population living in Hong Kong.

Sheltering the most vulnerable

Jul 10th, 2011 | Advocacy | Comment

Hello, I’m Anamika from Sri Lanka and I was recognized UNHCR refugee last year. I was 17 years old when I came to Hong Kong. I was in the detention for 15 days, then I was brought to the ISS shelter for minors in Yuen Long. At that time there were 4 Somalian girls,1 Somalian boy, 2 Sri Lankan boys, 1 Kashmiri boy and 1 disabled old man from Taiwan. The flat consist of 4 rooms: 1 room for the staff , 1 for the girls & remaining 2 for boys. 4person  can sleep in each room. One of those rooms was occupied by those 4 boys who were living there for almost a year, in the last room there was only one person, it was that Taiwanese old man. The ISS staff told me to share the bed with the other Somalian boy for some days until others would leave the shelter soon; because they said that Taiwan man don’t want to share the room with Blacks. The bed was big enough for only one person to sleep… so I managed to sleep on the sofa for almost a month.

During that time I came to know that I could apply for school. I asked ISS to help me for apply but they just gave me the address of the education bureau (EDB) and asked me to go myself. I applied there & after some days I received a letter from the EDB that they granted permission for me to study in HK. Then I asked ISS to help me to find a school but they didn’t helped me for a long time then somehow with the help of others I got a placement in 1 school in Tsuen wan. After a long struggle I got a chance to go school, the first term examination got over & the teacher gave me the progress report & asked me to get signature from parent or guardian. I said I don’t have anyone but they didn’t listen to me at all. I came to the shelter & asked the ISS staff. She said she can’t sign for me. She told me to ask my case worker in ISS. Then the next day I asked my case worker but she also refused to sign for me. I went back to school & I met my school Headmistress & told her my situation then she accepted my reasons.

As months passed I turned 18. The ISS asked me to leave the shelter as I became a major so I can’t stay there anymore. They gave me 3 month deadline. I told them I don’t know anyone here to help me to find a house, then they said they’ll let me know if they find any & they asked me try by myself as well. One day my case worker called me and told me that there is a room available near Long Ping. She asked me come with her to see it. I went with her to visit that place, but that room was not as good as I expected but I thought something is better than nothing so I said that I like it. Then the land lord asked me to pay $2000 as a deposit so I could move in. I asked my case worker, she said she can’t do anything with it, the same day she brought me to visit three more rooms. For all those rooms the landlords were demanding deposit. the response from the ISS is always “NO!!!” Still now I’m looking for a room to move from the ISS shelter. Now Vision First told me that they could help me in solving this issue. So for now I don’t have anymore strength to walk around to find a room, just I’m waiting with the hope in my heart that I can find a place for me soon…

Note: In July 2011, Vision First secured a clean and safe home for two more families with small children – taking our mini-shelter list to 24!

VF run 24 homes for its most vulnerable members
VF runs 24 homes for its most vulnerable members


Annerley’s Lucky Draw

Jul 8th, 2011 | Advocacy | Comment

Annerley is a well established company offering a wide range of services for pregnant women and young families in Hong Kong. They offer a comprehensive range of courses, individual consultations and specialized services for antenatal care, the postnatal period and the early years of parenting.
Annerley have just joined hands with Vision First to help our growing number of expecting mothers and new parents. They have started a collection of donated clothes, nappies and formula powder from families who a surplus, have grown out of their stock or wish to purchase items to help struggling refugee families. To learn more please visit their website www.annerley.com.hk or call them at 2983 1558. Donations can be brought to their office anytime during working hours to be included in their lucky draw where you could receive a gift voucher from Annerley worth over 1000 HKD.

If you are a Vision First member expecting a baby or with babies, email danielle@visionfirstnow.org to arrange an appointment at Annerley for pre-natal or post-natal care and advice. With community support, we are committed to the well-being of refugee families and we are always happy to hear what we can do to serve you better.

Annerley

Are you satisfied with your UNHCR rejection?

Jul 6th, 2011 | Advocacy | Comment

by RSDWatch, published 17 Feb 2011 as “Vagueness and credibility in UNHCR rejection letters

One of the most important reforms UNHCR has undertaken in its refugee status determination procedures is the expansion of providing reasons for rejection to asylum-seekers. Yet ensuring that the rejection letters are clear and adequately informative is likely to be a continuing struggle. RSDWatch has seen a number of rejection letters issued by UNHCR offices in recent years. We have not seen enough of the new UNHCR rejection letters to constitute a representative survey, but we can describe some recurring issues. Some letters that we have seen are relatively specific and individualized, while others are quite general or contain circular reasoning. We must obscure key details about the letters that we have seen for the sake of anonymity.

What UNHCR offices have begun to provide to rejected asylum-seekers is not the ‘real’ decision, but rather a summary prepared after the decision to reject an application has been made. UNHCR offices prepare longer internal assessments of RSD claims but do not usually provide these to rejected applicants. We do not know how much useful information might end up withheld through this process. Doubts about credibility feature prominently in many UNHCR RSD rejections, as is common in many RSD system. But in letters we reviewed UNHCR was not always clear about the reason for deciding not to believe an applicant. RSDWatch has seen letters from UNHCR offices stating without explanation that key elements of a refugee claim are “not credible,” without saying why. This is essentially circular reasoning, declaring an application to be invalid because it lacks validity.

Some letters do provide clearer explanations, but typically still leave questions about the decision. In the most specific UNHCR rejection letters that we have seen, UNHCR offices make reference to specific subject matters about which an applicant was allegedly vague or contradictory. But in the letters we have seen UNHCR did not actually illustrate or show the vagueness or contradictions by quoting from the RSD interview transcript, so it is difficult to know if UNHCR’s conclusion was reasonable.

In one case, UNHCR asserted that the applicant had contradicted him/herself about a key fact. In this case, and against normal UNHCR policy, legal advisors were able to obtain a copy of the interview transcript and could not find an actual contradiction. In another case, UNHCR said that it could find no independent confirmation that an act of violence occurred at the time and place the asylum-seeker claimed. The rejection letter asserted that the applicant had failed to describe the event in detail. It also said the applicant had not given very much detail about an arrest and detention. But the rejection letter did not provide quotations from the interview transcript setting out exactly what the applicant was asked about these subjects, nor how s/he replied. Some rejections appeared to be based on assumptions made by decision-makers. In one letter, UNHCR asserted that it is implausible that security forces would be interested in the applicant after releasing him/her from prison. The letter gave no evidence showing how UNHCR can be sure of this.

In another case, UNHCR said that it rejected the applicant because his/her claims to have come from a particular place of origin were not credible. The only explanation given was that the applicant did not know the geography of the area and did not know certain information about his/her ethnicity. UNHCR did not specify the information that the applicant should have known, nor how UNHCR could be sure that a credible applicant would know the information.

The examples that RSDWatch has been able to review indicate several pitfalls in UNHCR’s current procedures.

First, when an applicant receives a rejection letter that is too general, it is impossible to know whether the reasoning of the decision was inadequate, or whether it is merely an inadequate summary. In some of these cases, there may be a more cogent explanation for the decision that is kept in UNHCR’s files and unavailable to the person concerned. It may be necessary for UNHCR to allow applicant to object to vagueness in rejection letters, and to obtain more specific information before deciding whether to appeal the decision.

Second, in credibility-based rejections even the best and most specific of the letters that we have seen would fail to give an applicant a clear understanding of the decision because they do not actually show that the applicant’s testimony was flawed. The letters might be specific enough if UNHCR also disclosed the interview transcript or at least quoted from it at length. Unfortunately, UNHCR policy prohibits disclosure of interview transcripts to applicants. This leaves asylum-seekers in a quandary. If the applicant believes that s/he has given a direct answer to the questions that were asked, and UNHCR says, “you gave insufficient detail,” it is not clear what the applicant could say to effectively appeal. It is also not clear how an outsider reading the letters can have confidence that UNHCR’s decision is reliable.

Third, we have seen multiple letters where UNHCR asserts that publicly available country of origin information (COI) fails to support a refugee claim. But we have not seen UNHCR give citations or quotations from the COI on which it relies. This again leaves an applicant who wants to appeal facing a challenge. S/he can submit COI that supports his or her claim, but has no idea if UNHCR has already seen the same document and decided to interpret it differently, or if UNHCR relied on a different source for some unknown reason.

Providing reasoned rejection letters is still optional for UNHCR field offices, a gap between what UNHCR asks of governments and the standards it sets for itself.

One mouth too many

Jul 5th, 2011 | Advocacy | Comment

By Sara Corbett for the New York Times, 1 July 2011

One day each month in Eastleigh, a run-down suburb of Nairobi with dirt roads and rivering sewers, a young Kenyan woman named Dorothy Gakii starts calling out numbers. “Numbaa one!” she shouts, using slow and deliberate English. “Numbaa two!” Gathered before her on long wooden benches in a church meeting hall are several dozen refugees holding scraps of paper that mark their place in line. They are waiting for food — for the sacks of dried beans and rice and maize flour piled against one wall. For the seriously malnourished, there is a nutritional porridge mix labeled, “Pure Wimbi.”

Seven, eight, nine. Gakii calls numbers, and they approach. She has 74 families on her list today. The Congolese sit together by the windows. The Somalis have clustered on the left. The Ethiopians mostly occupy the middle. The women wear floor-length abayas and frayed sandals. Sometimes they hold out their arms and show scars from their hometown wars, telling stories about roving militias and lost children. “What we hear about a lot,” Gakii says, “is rape. Mothers raped in front of their daughters, daughters in front of their mothers. . . .” Her voice trails off. You might think the hungriest of refugees would be found in the United Nations-run camps in Kenya’s dustier north. But mirroring a more global phenomenon, they are increasingly turning up in urban areas like Nairobi, figuring both rightly and wrongly that the city holds more promise.

A worker brings food to refugees in the suburb of Nairobi known as Little Mogadishu.
A worker brings food to refugees in the suburb of Nairobi known as Little Mogadishu.

(more…)

HKRAC looking for interpreters

Jul 5th, 2011 | Advocacy | Comment

Dear all,

HKRAC is now inviting applications for the Community Interpretation Training for the Refugee Legal Aid Context, which will be held twice in August 2011. Thanks to the generous support of the Marden Foundation and the Centre for Comparative and Public Law at the University of Hong Kong, the training course will be provided free of charge to participants.

This 40-hour course is designed specifically for interpreters who will work with refugee service organizations and will cover the fundamentals of professional community interpretation. We are excited to have Alice Johnson from the Cairo Community Interpreter Project at the American University in Cairo facilitate the courses. Please help circulate this flyer to your network and mailing lists, and encourage anyone who may be interested to apply for this training. More information on the training and application procedures can be found at: http://www.hkrac.org/interpretertraining.

If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you for your assistance.

Kind regards,
Christal Chan
Hong Kong Refugee Advice Centre Limited

HKRAC flyer