THE Maltese government was never in possession of any information whatsoever that the Eritreans repatriated in September 2002 were in any danger, Home Affairs Minister Tonio Borg insisted in a statement yesterday.
The minister was unrepentant about the government's decision to deport 220 Eritreans in 2002, even if a number of them are now claiming that they faced torture and punishment on their return.
Dr Borg's statement came a day after the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees said it feared that the deportation of Eritreans in September 2002 could have been "premature".
It is the first time he has commented directly on the issue since The Times published Amnesty International's report in which the illegal immigrants claimed to have been tortured. The report had quoted a number of Eritreans recounting their harrowing experiences.
Dr Borg said the 220 Eritreans were deported because they had no right to protection under Malta's laws. The majority never asked for refugee status, even if this right was clearly relayed to them.
Others had their request for refugee status twice refused, after lengthy interviews with the Commissioner for Refugees, and secondly by the Appeals Tribunal.
Dr Borg pointed out that the illegal immigrants returned to Eritrea only after the UNHCR had declared that Eritrean refugees could return home. Those who wanted to apply for refugee status because of any particular circumstances were free to do so.
The UNHCR was informed in 2002 that the Eritreans were going to be deported and at no point did the government receive any objection.
"The fact that the allegations were coming from a small number - four out of 220 - confirmed that the government was right to take such a decision at the time."
Dr Borg said that Air Malta pilots who were on the flight to Asmara in Eritrea had confirmed that the deportees were allowed to go through the normal channels. Some even had family members waiting for them.
Amnesty is alleging that the Eritrean authorities sought some of the deportees because they evaded military conscription, a criminal offence even in some democratic countries.
"The government does not interfere in criminal laws of other countries," Dr Borg said.
He said any eventuality of torture - "even if these were still allegations" - would have been impossible to predict. It was therefore unfair for anybody to point fingers at the Home Affairs Ministry, Dr Borg said.
The minister went on to note that it was only the Commissioner for Refugees - a person in whom the government had full trust - that decided on the fate of Eritreans in Malta.
"The government had nothing to be ashamed of where refugees were concerned. It was this government that drew up the law for refugees, gave them rights that they didn't have before, and set up local bodies to analyse their applications, with a right of appeal."
As a result of this, Malta boasted one of the highest approval rates where refugee status and humanitarian protection was concerned.
The illegal immigrants detained at Ta' Kandja and the Hal Far immigration centre at the time said they feared for their safety and would rather die in Malta than return to their homeland.
When such fears were aired, it was important for the authorities to give such individuals the benefit of the doubt, a UNHCR official told The Times on Friday.