Pakistani asylum seeker to be compensated for ‘inhumane treatment’ in Hong Kong
Jan 31st, 2015 | Crime, Legal, Media | Comment
Asylum seeker dies in village blaze
Jan 30th, 2015 | Crime, Housing, Media, Welfare | Comment
VF is amused by the factious reporting of a tragic event in words that seems to exculpate those responsible for authorizing the disbursement of government funds for the renting of unauthorized and deadly dangerous structures. Further VF questions the knowledge of purported experts asserting refugees choose to live in converted pig farms because rooms are bigger and anyway they see Hong Kong as a temporary stopover. Undoubtedly Hong Kong is a stopover. Who would want to live an entire life in squalid slums?
The reporter seems tainted by the same government propaganda that once proudly resonated from ISS-HK spokespersons, who interestingly were neither at the accident site to explain their role, nor later explained to the public their questionable relationship with the purported landlord who settled dozens of refugees into death traps.
Who is responsible for Lucky’s death?
Jan 30th, 2015 | Crime, Housing, Legal, VF Opinion, Welfare | Comment
Vision First exposed ‘The Slum On Two Storeys’ in August 2013 when we reported that an unscrupulous owner constructed a dangerous dormitory on two levels, where ISS-HK colluded to settle over 25 refugees. Evidence revealed that the Lands Department once authorized the construction of three pigsty and two chicken sheds on the lot, though licenses had been revoked.
A year and a half later only the names of some of the refugee tenants had changed as new-arrivals moved in. No government department seemed interested to address the problem of illegal structures that, in our view, constituted veritable ‘death traps’ owing to overcrowding, substandard construction, illegal electrical wiring, gas cooking in confined spaces and alarmingly a lack of firefighting equipment.
In a 28 January 2015 meeting, we brought to the attention of Lands Department officers that the slums generally constituted a fire hazard and it was only a matter of time before one would go up in flame, possibly with loss of human life. We remarked that the Fire Services Department had seen the photos of the slums and were keen to take coordinate action with SWD and Lands.
One day later we received an SMS from a Bangladeshi member, “Kam Sheung Road have refugee house burning. One man die just before”. The Refugee Union swung into action and photos spread on social media a few minutes later. A violent fire was raged out of control. Firemen from 18 trucks with two breathing apparatus team took 40 minutes to douse the inferno. Too late for Lucky!
He was known by the nickname “Lucky”, which didn’t protect him as he burnt to death in a tin shed. Lucky often complained about faulty electrical wire that gave shocks. It is reported that his ISS case worker visited his shack and looked into the problem a few days earlier. A friend explained that refugees often wire the slums with two-face system that can short-circuit and catch fire.
Vision First was familiar with Lucky’s hut and the others lining the path to the ‘Slum on Two Levels’. There was nothing legal there. Every part and material raised alarming concerns. In the slums there is imminent danger of collapse, flooding, gas explosion, lightning strikes and – most frightening – FIRE! Had it been nighttime with most residents at home sleeping, the death toll would have been high.
We can only hope that Lucky’s tragic death will not have been in vein. It was disappointing to witness the sudden media frenzy drawn by the excitement of a raging fire and a gruesome death. Why were the refugee slums not newsworthy yesterday? Why did it take a death to draw media and public interest? Lucky’s death was entirely avoidable if the authorities had taken action in August 2013.
Refugee dies in a slum fire
Jan 30th, 2015 | Crime, Housing, Media | Comment
Vision First is encouraged that most news reports mentioned the UNAUTHORIZED STRUCTURES that contributed to this tragic fire. Several reporters interviewed the Lands Department who confirmed that the registered owner of this slum had been served with written notices that went ignored. Lands Dept. then registered encumbrances with the Lands Registry and planned enforcement action.
The authorities’ slow pace tragically cost the life of a refugee!
http://hk.on.cc/hk/bkn/cnt/news/20150129/bkn-20150129164034341-0129_00822_001.html
http://news.now.com/home/local/player?newsId=124517
http://news.now.com/home/local/player?newsId=124554
http://news.now.com/home/local/player?newsId=124569
http://news.now.com/home/local/player?newsId=124571
http://cablenews.i-cable.com/webapps/news_video/index.php?news_id=450960
http://cablenews.i-cable.com/webapps/news_video/index.php?news_id=450983
http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/realtime/breaking/20150129/53383206
http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/realtime/breaking/20150129/53386060
http://paper.wenweipo.com/2015/01/30/HK1501300017.htm
http://std.stheadline.com/breakingnews/20150129a164518.asp
http://www.singpao.com/xw/gat/201501/t20150130_546887.html
http://topick.hket.com/article/531972
http://www.881903.com/page/zh-tw/newsdetail.aspx?ItemId=776430&csid=261_341
http://www.881903.com/page/zh-tw/newsdetail.aspx?ItemId=776414&csid=261_341
http://news.tvb.com/local/54c9fda16db28c416a000000
http://news.tvb.com/local/54ca18d96db28ca42f000002
http://news.tvb.com/local/54c9c0096db28c536a000001
http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/realtime/breaking/20150129/53386060
http://news.takungpao.com.hk/paper/q/2015/0130/2906203.html
http://news.sina.com.hk/news/20150129/-32-3589881/1.html
http://inews.stheadline.com/inews-content.php?cat=a&nid=932258
http://www.orangenews.hk/news/system/2015/01/29/010006043.shtml
http://www.metrohk.com.hk/index.php?cmd=detail&id=265487
VF Report: lease enforcement action to be stepped up
Jan 29th, 2015 | Crime, Housing, Legal, VF Report, Welfare | Comment
On 28 January 2014 senior executives from the Lands Department held a meeting with Vision First and Refugee Union representatives, one of whom has continuously resided in a slums paid for with government funds since he arrived in 2006.
The refugees presented three voluminous bundles of photographic evidence to formally lodge complaints on 69 questionable compounds erected on lots that Lands officers agreed were “mostly for agricultural use, including chicken and pig licenses no longer in use, because the government doesn’t allow [such business] having imposed many restrictions on farmers.”
The delegation was assured that registered owners were in breach of lease covenants for any structures that were not exclusively for agricultural or gardening use. It was brought to attention that the issue is not whether housing was properly constructed, but that no housing whatsoever is permitted on farmland and as such would be targeted for demolition.
It was noted that irrespective of collusion (by way of documentary inspections and site visits), registered owners were ultimately responsible for the existence of structures that third parties allegedly exploited to profit from the welfare program for refugees. The Lands Department did not consider acceptable justifications that ‘primary tenants’ had rented land for purposes landlords were unaware of.
Acting on the above mentioned complaints, warning letters demanding the removal or demolition of unauthorized structures are likely to be sent out copiously, failing which encumbrances will be registered with the Lands Registry and the government will take steps to ‘re-enter the land’.
A promise was made for zero tolerance of lease breaches. An officer explained, “Any conversions that are not designated for agricultural or gardening use are prohibited. Any structures that are not described in the land schedule must be removed”. It was categorically emphasized that settling refugees in these compounds constituted an offense under the law.
The delegation was told: “The government is very concerned. Everyone is concerned with the health of the occupants. We will step up enforcement action, including with estate agents … the Social Welfare Department is concerned with the management and supervision of ISS.”
A refugees who spearheaded the anti-slum campaign remarked, “The government accepts there is a huge problem. Last week my officer said ISS only approves the houses after getting approval from the Lands Department.” Vision First is hopeful that the tide is turning on the reckless practice of settling destitute refugees in dangerous and unhygienic slums away from the public eye. At what price?
Hong Kong police arrest 6 African asylum seekers, seize illegal drugs and US$730,000 cash
Jan 29th, 2015 | Crime, Media | Comment
Are dependent visas reasonably denied?
Jan 27th, 2015 | Crime, Immigration, Legal, VF Opinion | Comment
After seeking asylum in Hong Kong, one of the first things refugees learn from peers is that they will never be allowed to integrate and earn a living (including successful non-refoulement claimants) unless they marry a resident and successfully obtain a dependent visa – which requires withdrawing protection claims before the sticker is affixed to a passport.
Immigration guidelines indicate that dependent visas generally take three months to process, although refugees experience a different treatment that, when successful, is likely to take two years and otherwise drags on for many years with litigation (which doesn’t come free) rising as the only option to break the stalemate, if official obduracy can be described as such.
A refugee blogger recently described immigration strategies as perceived by his community, “They know that certain people will find a way that is convenient for the government – though unfair for refugees – like marriage, moving to another country, smuggling out and closing asylum claims through so-called ‘voluntary departures’.”
The stigmatization of individuals who sought sanctuary in Asia’s World City is so profound that even years of love with local citizens cannot wash it away. Not even when beautiful children are living proof that marriages are real and a genuine family exists behind the paperwork that, in the mind of immigration officers, might have thrown a monkey wrench into removal proceedings.
A pattern emerges when scores of dependent visas are denied or delayed for applicants who were so unfortunate as to seek asylum before falling in love. It is unrealistic to expect that authorities publish statistics on failed application, which in our view should include applications stalled by ‘non decisions’ for over one year. The data would speak volumes about the bias treatment of refugee spouses.
It is regrettable that Immigration consistently fails applicants who committed mild offenses such as working, despite work being absolutely necessary for refugees to make ends meet since they do not receive adequate welfare assistance and belong to ethnic groups that are largely shunned by charities as being less deserving of their limited resources.
Working illegally is a matter of survival for most refugees, but a criminal conviction will jeopardize the fate of a family – including the future of resident children – even if a struggling refugee was arrested years before for selling bootlegged software or fake leather bags to keep a roof over his head or supplement meager food rations. Where is the fairness of laws that constrain pathways of survival only to mercilessly penalize those with no alternative but to stray?
A few examples illustrate the predicament faced by dozens of refugees:
Case one: a refugee since 2005, married in 2013 and was denied a dependent visa for reason of a life-time deportation order triggered by a 2007 offense “to export goods to which a forged trademark was applied” [NB: copy goods] at a time before he knew about refugee welfare assistance.
Case two: a refugee since 2005, married in 2011 and has a son. He was convicted of working, though he pleaded not guilty as he was visiting a friend at his place of employment. He was nonetheless convicted to four months and marked as ‘persona non grata’.
Case three: a long time refugee since 2002 married in 2008 and has a son. This family has been waiting for a dependent visa for 6 years. Arrested for false representation to an immigration officers after arriving in Hong Kong with a dodgy passport, he was served a deportation order that he gets suspended every year by the office of the Chief Executive. He has no chance of being granted a visa until said order is quashed.
Vision First takes the view that refugees must not be punished for struggling to survive in a hostile environment arguably designed to push them into criminality. On Sunday a refugee was arrested for being in possession of 5 mobile phone chargers (worth 300$) which he is accused of intending to trade, presumably to support his wife and child. Wouldn’t police resources be better allocated pursuing more substantial criminal activity?
It is further a travesty of justice that resident spouses and children are denied a legitimate future. There is a need for a moratorium on immigration rules the stringent application of which will never persuade fathers to abandon their loved ones.
Letter to Security Bureau on slum crisis
Jan 19th, 2015 | Crime, Housing, VF Opinion, Welfare | Comment
