Migrants’ rights groups have welcomed Italy’s decision to take in the 102 Africans who had been caught in a standoff between Malta and the oil tanker that rescued them, but called for stakeholders to ensure the incident is not repeated.
“We welcome the solution agreed between Malta and Italy which led to the safe disembarkation of a group of 102 immigrants... However, we remain concerned at the length of time it took for a decision to be taken...” the coalition of NGOs said.
The Italian Government decided to take the irregular immigrants late on Tuesday after the oil tanker MT Salamis was blocked just outside Maltese territorial waters by the Armed Forces of Malta in the early hours of Monday.
The message being sent is that if there is another group of migrants in distress, a vessel like this should avoid them
The Maltese Government insisted the tanker should have taken the migrants to Libya as instructed by the Italian authorities, which received their first distress call when they were some 42 miles off the coast of Tripoli.
The NGOs complained that it took too long to reach a decision on the case and urged member states on the southern borders to engage with the EU, the Council of Europe and the International Maritime Organisation to find concrete initiatives to avoid similar situations.
The Government insisted, in the face of pleas from the European Commission, that it was within its legal rights to refuse the ship entry given that maritime law dictated that the captain should have taken the migrants to the nearest port of call, Libya.
But Libya’s definition as a safe port is not straightforward.
Human rights lawyer Neil Falzon, who runs the NGO Aditus, insisted that under no circumstances could Libya be considered a safe harbour.
The Government has consistently – even under the previous administration – taken the term “safe harbour” in these situations to mean the place that would ensure the immediate safety of the rescued people.
But Dr Falzon said international laws governing these situations were changing to include human rights considerations.
“Several resolutions have been passed over the past years to this effect, introducing human rights concerns to the way shipmasters should act in these sorts of situations.”
For instance, guidelines issued by the International Maritime Organisation to shipmasters in connection with the treatment of people rescued at sea urges them and countries coordinating search and rescue to “avoid disembarkation in territories where the lives and freedoms of those alleging a well-founded fear of persecution would be threatened... in the case of asylum seekers and refugees recovered at sea”.
Libya is not a signatory of the Geneva Convention and therefore cannot guarantee the rights of migrants. Beyond that, the country is still struggling with its internal security following the overthrow of the Gaddafi regime in 2011. Several reports by international agencies say sub-Saharan migrants in particular have been at the receiving end of systematic abuse by militias that fall outside the control of the Libyan government.
The Government highlighted the fact that the ship failed to take the immigrants to Libya for commercial considerations – it was en route to Syracuse – and not because of human rights.
However, Dr Falzon insisted this was no consideration to dismiss. “The shipmaster and ship owners should be lauded for saving these people. A deviation in their course could cost hundreds of thousands of euro a day. The message being sent is that if there is another group of migrants in distress, a vessel like this should avoid them.”