Concentrating on detention camps

The recent events at Safi have elicited very different reactions. Some of my compatriots seem to think Malta is being generous in receiving asylum seekers, voicing their indignation at the sheer ingratitude of any form of protest. Few people have any idea of the conditions in which asylum seekers at Safi are kept. The general notion assumes they are in prison with conditions on a par with Corradino Correctional Facility. As the press has never relayed any photos relating to detainees' accommodation, this is hardly surprising.

Safi detention shelters the largest number of detainees under canvas. Nothing can prepare a visitor for the sight of tent city with various shelters constructed over rough ground where rain turns the ground to sludge. Mattresses are crowded under the tents, some on wooden pallets to dodge the rain and wind that rip through the canvas. Privacy is forgotten and any spare clothing or washing is hung on the barbed wire surrounding the area. Meals are delivered in polystyrene containers, take-away style, and eaten sitting on the bed or ground, in the complete absence of tables or chairs. Sanitary conditions are miserable with four showers and eight outdoor wash basins as the only washing facilities for almost 300 men and women of all ages, numerous nationalities, and varying physical and mental capacities (such as pregnancy, depression, asthma).

Days merge into weeks into months with no activity to take their mind off their single objective: Freedom.

The spotlight is currently on Safi but other detention centres occupy various areas of Malta. How many people know that a number are discreetly kept in Floriana, just behind the police headquarters, for example? Wherever they are sheltered, all detainees have a common characteristic. They are confused that they have arrived in Malta rather than Italy and they cannot understand why they should be treated as criminals and locked up, in conditions often worse than those they fled. They have no idea how long their detention will last. If they are from a country which automatically merits protection, their chance of release is currently about three months. For most, an interminable wait lies ahead.

If rejected by the Refugee Commissioner, they are entitled to lodge an appeal. Complications in assuring the right to legal aid and the appeal procedures mean that long months must pass awaiting a reply. During this time, the asylum seeker remains detained. Where the appeal is rejected, the immigrant should be returned but it is often difficult to establish the sending country so rejected immigrants are detained alongside pending cases with obvious effects on morale.

A number of detainees illustrate physical and/or mental conditions as a result. There have been cases of Mount Carmel Hospital refusing to discharge asylum seekers back to detention because of the adverse effects on their health and the asylum seekers agreeing that seclusion in a mental hospital is preferable to detention!

The protest at Safi was not a sporadic incident. It is a reaction to the culmination of months of detention by disgruntled people, both detainees and detainers. NGOs and international organisations have repeatedly expressed their concern at conditions. The last protest at Safi in October 2004 was a clear warning which again went unheeded.

Unless something is done to address the situation, matters may deteriorate further. Detainees have a right to know where they stand at the very outset of their detention and the right to be accorded basic minimum standards of accommodation. Detaining personnel need training and screening and should not be expected to provide the service uninterruptedly without support.

The national conference on immigration policy has been postponed to February. A decision as to detention conditions cannot wait that long. It is true that accommodating asylum seekers puts a strain on our finances but NGOs have been generous in providing shelter, health care, legal and general support to huge numbers of immigrants and EU funds are now backing a number of measures identified by the state. With a population so proud of its propensity to put hand in pocket and help those in need, it is hard to understand why generosity for those so close to home is anathema.

However, the situation has long ceased to relate solely to charity; this is about rights. Malta is a party to a number of international conventions identifying such obligations. EU Directive 2003/9 on the minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers is days away. Persons who apply for asylum have the right to be presumed asylum seekers until they are proved otherwise. They have the right to be received and treated with all respect and humanity - what if we had to flee Malta in similar circumstances?

The clock is ticking - in more ways than one.

Dr Farrugia is a senior lecturer at the Faculty of Laws, the University of Malta. The views expressed here are the author's and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of any organisation with which she is or has been engaged.