Transcript Document

Local Integration of Refugees
in Belarus, Moldova and Ukraine
Strategy for Action
Gaspar Bergman
Head of Secretariat, Söderköping Process*
*The Cross-Border Co-operation/Söderköping Process is a project funded by the European Union. The views
expressed in this presentation do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Commission.
1
Objectives / Why this analysis?
 Government request
 Integration is key & foreseen by Art. 34 of 51 Convention
 Need to review achievements
 Integration complex/no single recipe
 Signals indicative of problems
 Many partial initiatives - never holistic effort to assess all aspects
 Identify gaps / good practices / analyze options
 Think in terms of sub-region
Formulate recommendations to Gvts and relevant actors
2
Methodology
Independence & candid observations
Based on empirical findings – triangulation
Parallel work in 3 countries/levels
Close coordination with relevant
centr.authority
 Actively seek-out issues/stakeholders
 Corroborate/cross reference
 Voluntary & confidential interviews




3
Final results
 3 countries /number of localities capitals &
Gomel, Svetlogorsk, Vitebsk, Odessa, Vinitsa,
central and local authorities
 Over 130 interviews with Gvt, NGOs, RCOs, Ios
 210 interviews with refugees, hum. status,
naturalized & stateless > standard questionnaire
 Review of basic documentation/legislation
 Final report consisting over 200 recommendations
 26 recommendations generic and applicable to all
 App. 60 country-specific recommendations each
Final report/ headings









Institution-building, national integration policy
International cooperation & resettlement needs
Respect of refugee rights & access to information
Documents and translation of documents
Language skills, education, employment
Housing, social and health issues
Legal counseling and capacity of NGOs
Naturalization procedures/citizenship
Local community relations
5
Final report / Annexes
 Consists analysis of questionnaires per country
presenting series charts, which illustrate the
socio-economic and legal situation of refugees
 Respondents’ evaluation of quality of assistance
provided by the local authorities, UNHCR and
its’ implementation partners (NGOs)
 Comparative Statistical Analysis of 3 countries
 Selected quotations from individual interviews
 Final report in English and in Russian available:
www.soderkoping.org.ua & www.refworld.org
6
Generic common findings










Integration - no concept/plan, no dedicated staff, no budgets
Many macro economic factors of influence
Asylum systems developed partially (legal area/structures)
 Legislation /by-laws not harmonized
Except primary responsible Gvt officials most unaware
Absence of Gvt responsibility/authority – NGOs plugging holes
 Structures in-transparent do not engender trust
 UNHCR keeps subsidizing ad hoc most urgent
Commitment - nominal – no evidence of action except local
Gvts keep/reduce expenditures below thresholds / re-organize
Expectation that any expenditures should be externally funded
UNHCR attention/resources minimal & pulling out
 No other international agency engaged
Refugee communities weak / not sufficiently anchored
7
GENERIC / COMMON FINDINGS 1
Main issues: Housing / income / documentation
Housing very poor; still it absorbs most of income
Status in labor market is weak
Most employed work at markets, legally or illegally
Women isolated, the young without perspectives
Poverty affects not only individuals, families but
sometimes also entire ethnic communities (Africans)
 Relations with locals (levels of tolerance, racism)
range considerably from country to country
 Many refugees exhausted => dependency syndrome







Many wish to leave – legally, illegally, volrep
8
GENERIC / COMMON FINDINGS 2
 Vulnerable would not survive very well without UNHCR
 No equal access to many foreseen rights
 Trying to navigate confusing/contradictory/corrupt
systems
 Remain more vulnerable than locals
 Little attention to past trauma / cultural differences
 Overtly complex registration / documentation procedures
(many rights connected to “propiska” mentality)
 Integration crucial – but stagnating / reverses
 Refugees have little assistance to exercise their rights
 Rights violated / problem compounded
 Spontaneous departures / lower numbers applying
9
GENERIC / COMMON FINDINGS 3
 Consensus that measures necessary BUT except
education little done in housing, medical, guidance,
language training, job assistance etc.
 Presumption that refugees already equal (legally)
 Social systems for citizens weak / exclude refugees
 Either by ignorance or rule
 Current efforts do not empower but keep most
dependent
 Perception of reality differs in eyes of Gvt & refugee
 Officials skeptical / do not know / have no funds / lack
the authority/skills to promote change
10
JOINT RECOMMENDATIONS 1
 Develop a comprehensive national integration policy
 Identify a central specialized unit
 Entrust it with primary responsibility for all matters
pertaining to integration:


To manage and define the implementation of a strategy
To draw up budgets and to coordinate responses at central and
local levels
 Establish an integration specific budgetary line
 Undertake an inventory of existing relevant legislation,
identify legal/procedural gaps/deficiencies and take
corrective measures
11
JOINT RECOMMENDATIONS 2
 Seek co-financing from international sources for
major projects (housing, employment, education
and re-qualification programmes for refugees)
 Secure the necessary trainings/study trips to
examine best practices from integration policies
adopted elsewhere
 Establish cross-regional partnerships with similar
agencies that have developed refugee integration
programmes in comparable circumstances
 Int. org. should provide assistance to Gvts to
enhance their capacity to define and implement
relevant integration projects
12
JOINT RECOMMENDATIONS 3
 Establish a budget for interpretation and written
translations required for official purposes
 Train interpreters
 Provide refugees with relevant guidance in the
form of brochures in appropriate languages
 Train authorities to recognize refugee documents
and the rights they are entitled to
 Increase authorities’ awareness of their obligation
to provide administrative assistance to refugees
 Budget funds to implement language 1 - 3 courses
per person
13
JOINT RECOMMENDATIONS 4
 RAISE AWARENESS: Inform employers that
recognized refugees have equal rights to work
 PROVIDE TRAINING: Ensure that e.g. employment
offices fulfill their duties to assist refugees
 AMEND PRACTICES: Eliminate dispensable
administrative requirements which hinder
refugees’ access to employment, housing,
training, education, credits, pensions…
 SEARCH EXPERTISE: Look for international
assistance how to design new affordable social
housing programmes and to attract appropriate
bi- and multilateral donor funding
.
14