Detention is no cure

Katrine Camilleri, whose championing of refugees has lately been recognised by the UNHCR, argues that Malta's detention policy on asylum seekers should be more respectful of their dignity and human rights.

Affixed to a wall at the cafeteria of St Aloysius Sports Complex, which houses the Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS), is the front page of a newspaper carrying the news that Katrine Camilleri has just won the prestigious Nansen Refugee Award, presented annually by the United Nations High Commission for Refugees.

As she calls in to work as head of the JRS Malta legal team, she is greeted joyfully by well-wishers and colleagues and urged to have a look at the newspaper cutting.

Dr Camilleri's dedication to asylum seekers and their well-being is evident in the way she speaks about the refugee situation, as well as in her views on detention.

"We should question whether detention, and detention as we implement it, is necessary and justifiable in terms of human rights law.

"Most of the immigrants come in search of protection. Asylum seekers often have had no choice but to travel illegally to seek protection. The Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees acknowledges this reality and provides that refugees should not be punished for illegal entry into national territory.

"Yet in Malta, immigrants arriving in an irregular manner are detained on arrival and are not released if they apply for protection after they are placed in custody," she said.

Asylum seekers could stay in detention for up to 12 months and rejected asylum seekers or immigrants who do not apply for asylum for up to 18 months.

Twelve months in detention were very long and difficult to justify in terms of human rights law, insisted Dr Camilleri.

"This year, a large number of asylum seekers were released from detention after 12 months and they had not yet been interviewed. They spent 12 months deprived of their liberty. Human liberty, which for us is so precious, seems to be so much cheaper for these people."

The Office of the Refugee Commission examined every application for refugee status thoroughly and as efficiently as possible within its limited resources. However, the issue was not just about the length of time it took for a decision to be taken but about a clear policy choice to keep people in detention.

"Detention is a policy of exclusion. People in detention are locked up and treated like criminals. They have to wear handcuffs if they need to go to hospital. This is most humiliating."

Detention, Dr Camilleri said, was not just one of the most expensive ways of keeping people. It also carried with it a high cost in human terms. It left devastating effects on individuals, on some more than on others, and a physical and psychological deterioration could be noticed on people in detention. There was also a high prevalence of psychosomatic complaints.

This was something found whenever people lived in very stressful situations. Detention centres were crowded, often lacking basic necessities, and immigrants had nothing to do all day. In some cases, there was also limited access to open air.

After a maximum of 18 months detention, most immigrants were released to live in the community anyway, regardless of their status, she said.

She noted that although not all people arriving here illegally were refugees or deserved humanitarian protection, all believed they needed help. One had to remember that these people left everything behind them and took big risks to move because they had to.

The situation was in fact harder for people who did not get refugee status or humanitarian protection. Sometimes it was difficult for these people's papers, which were necessary for travel, to be issued and they would have to remain here without the right to work or any right to assistance.

The situation was even harder for those who were here with their families. In addition to the daily hardships, these people had to live with the knowledge that they had no security at all.

Asked what, in her opinion, would be a good alternative to detention, Dr Camilleri said there were alternatives which were already being used. An example was open centres.

"If immigrants can live in open centres after 12 months in detention, why not before? This is an alternative to detention which is working."

However, not all open centres were equal. Conditions were tougher in the larger ones but a good quality of life was provided in the smaller ones where there was a much higher staff to residents ratio.

Admitting that she did not have an ideal solution, Dr Camilleri said one should look at current policies and the people that were being detained - people who had already been through a lot - and come up with alternatives that were more respectful of human dignity.

One could not forget, she said, that resources were limited. However, there was a dire need to evaluate the situation holistically, assess what was being done - and a lot was being done - and work to improve the quality of life of people in detention and at the large open centres.

Asked whether, as was claimed by many, there was a danger that giving immigrants better conditions would result in a greater influx, Dr Camilleri insisted that human rights were basic and universal and there was a standard below which one could not go.

Malta had an obligation to ensure that the basic rights of these people were met. This was what the JRS wanted, she said.

Asked about the impact the phenomenon of illegal migration has had so far, Dr Camilleri said this was very difficult to assess as there was very little research in this area.

A large part of Malta's experience, she said, was partly due to how the country dealt with the situation.

"There is a need for proper research. We have to look at reality and how our policies are shaping the situation with a view to coming up with more holistic solutions."

And how did Malta's situation compare to other countries?

It was very difficult to compare because laws and policies as well as the situation on the ground were different in each country. It was also unfair to make blanket statements.

Malta's policy of long-term detention of asylum seekers was certainly harsher than that applied in most other EU countries and the conditions in which asylum seekers were detained were very poor.

However, it had certain good practices that other countries lacked. One example was the policy on release of vulnerable immigrants.

Dr Camilleri pointed out that the immigration situation here had changed since 2002, when the island started receiving relatively large numbers of people.

Although there had always been immigrants here, the vast majority had lived in the community. The fact that boat arrivals were detained resulted in a large number of people in detention, including women and children.

It was most unlikely that migration would cease in the near future.

The UNHCR Nansen Refugee Award

Previous recipients of the award given to Dr Camilleri include Eleonor Roosevelt, Médecins Sans Frontières and Queen Juliana of the Netherlands.

It includes a $100,000 grant from Norway and Switzerland for a refugee-related project of the winner's choice.

Dr Camilleri wants to use this money to expand the legal services given by JRS, make information more accessible and facilitate asylum seekers' access to court.