COMMENTS BY
UNHCR
This paper summarizes some typical concerns and suggestions
received by UNHCR-Ankara from several non-governmental organizations and offers
UNHCR's responses and clarifications. Included are only concerns relating to
the procedures or policies of UNHCR in
The system of the paper is as follows: the concerns
and suggestions are grouped according to the aspect of UNHCR's- policy or
procedure involved. Immediately following the concern or suggestion is the
response or explanation of the Office.
_____________________________________________________________________
1. Arrival of Asylum Seekers in
Some advocacy groups have expressed concern that
"asylum seekers receive misinformation upon entering
UNHCR-Ankara's policy is to provide asylum seekers on the occasion of this first contact with the Office with information regarding Turkish asylum regulations and their possible implications as regards, their registration, or failure to register, with the Turkish authorities. It is undertood, however, that, despite these efforts, asylum seekers are not always aware of these regulations, due mainly to inaccurate information received from other sources.
UNHCR has had a continuous presence in Silopi (on the border with
UNHCR staff on mission in
the border areas not only inform asylum seekers about the Turkish asylum
regulations and interview them there, but also accompany them when they
approach the Turkish authorities.
It has been alleged that UNHCR-Ankara delays the
examination of or rejects claims of asylum seekers who fail to report to the
Turkish authorities. This is certainly not the case: each asylum claim,
regardless of whether the asylum-seeker reports his/her presence in
2. Pre-interview Contact with UNHCR-Ankara
One NGO has suggested that UNHCR-Ankara should
ensure that appropriate counselling and advice be
provided on a systematic basis to all asylum seekers prior to their interview
by UNHCR carried out in connection with the examination of their claim for
refugee status. The same NGO further suggested that the pre-interview counselling should be provided in person on an individual
basis.
Basic counselling on the
asylum procedure is provided at the registration interview by officers on an
individual basis, as soon as the asylum seeker arrives at UNHCR. The
applicant's understanding of the procedure is then checked during the
eligibility interview by UNHCR's legal officers.
Due to financial and administrative constraints,
more comprehensive pre-interview counselling can not
be provided by UNHCR in
In some countries, such pre-interview counselling is funded by NGOs. To our knowledge, no NGO has
been able to organize or fund such a program. UNHCR-Ankara welcomes the
initiative of any NGOs interested in offering this service in
An NGO asserted that other UNHCR branch offices
provide pre-interview counselling.
It is not a policy of UNHCR Headquarters to provide
pre-interview counselling in any countries where
refugee status determination under the UNHCR Mandate is conducted. It is
correct that some UNHCR branch offices have provided such counselling.
Most of these offices are in
Asylum seekers are registered by trained officers
immediately upon arrival at UNHCR-Ankara. During this registration, they are
provided with several information papers in Arabic, Farsi, Turkish or English.
The papers provide detailed information regarding the Turkish Government's
asylum procedure and the social, medical, legal and
subsistence services available to asylum seekers through UNHCR.
Since early 1993, UNHCR-Ankara has provided asylum
seekers with written information describing the eligibility procedures applied
and the criteria used to determine eligibility. For a few months in 1995 UNHCR
suspended this written advice. UNHCR resumed the distribution of written
information in order to give asylum seekers a complete picture of the whole
asylum process, while urging them to respect government requirements.
3. Procedures of UNHCR
Advocacy groups have raised several concerns about
UNHCR procedures, which are discussed below:
"There is a lack of standardized selection criteria
used by the UNHCR office in
The refugee determination procedure applied by UNHCR
has and continues to adhere to the standards set out in the UNHCR Handbook on
Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status, relevant Conclusions
adopted by the UNHCR Executive Committee, and in a number of internal
instructions on specific subjects issued by UNHCR Headquarters.
"The interpreters used in
During the past three years UNHCR Ankara has moved
away from the ad-hoc use of interpreters including, for example, refugees
awaiting resettlement. The interpreter staff are all
full-time employees. The Office has full confidence in their professionalism.
They are tested for their spoken and written language abilities prior to being
recruited. They are properly trained to interpret in eligibility interviews.
New interpreters undergo an apprenticeship period prior to interpreting on
their own. The quality of their work is monitored by both an experienced
interpreter and a legal officer; and, like all other staff, they are assessed
on a regular basis.
"Interview notes are not read back for
acknowledgement of accuracy and completeness during the interview."
It is correct that it is not an established policy
of UNHCR-Ankara to read interview notes back to asylum seekers during
eligibility interviews. Legal officers who conduct the interviews are, however,
free to do so or to take other measures to confirm the accuracy of their notes,
whenever they feel that they may not have a complete recording of the responses
of asylum seekers. It should be noted that reading back interview notes,
although desirable, may not be necessary to ensure or promote a fair procedure.
"Asylum seekers' representatives have been
barred from accompanying them to interviews with UNHCR."
.
The purpose of the interview by UNHCR legal staff is
not to discuss the legal issues relating to the cases, but rather to collect
information on the specific circumstances which led the applicant to leave
his/her country of origin. Only the applicant can provide that information. The
presence during the interview of representatives who have not personally
directly experienced the events leading to the flight of the applicant, cannot usefully
add to his/her statements.
It has also been alleged that interviews are highly
controlled by the interviewers and a personal presentation by an applicant free
of the strict question and answer format is not allowed.
This complaint is based upon an incomplete
understanding of the UNHCR-Ankara eligibility determination procedure. At the
beginning of each eligibility interview, the legal officer advises the
applicant that he or she will first be asked a series of questions and then
will have an opportunity to add anything that he or she wants in a narrative
format.
It is a UNHCR worldwide practice to use a
questionnaire outline to interview asylum seekers. The questionnaire ensures
that all relevant information is collected. The question and answer portion of
the interview is controlled by the interviewer because, during this part of the
interview, a systematic approach is necessary in order for the legal officer to
assess the credibility of the applicant. During the final part of the
interview, each applicant has ample opportunity to add anything that he or she
wants in any format that he or she chooses. The questions which have been asked
serve to remind and guide the applicant as to what is relevant to his or her
refugee claim.
In some correspondence from NGO and advocacy groups
it has been argued that "children's claims are not included in their
parents' cases by the UNHCR office in
UNHCR does take children's claims into
consideration. It is extremely rare, however, that a claim for refugee status
will result from the activities of a child, especially when that child is
accompanied by parents who are also seeking asylum. When it does become known
to a legal officer that the basis for a claim also stems directly from the
child, that child is interviewed.
It should also be noted that there are paramount
reasons not to require that accompanying children be routinely interviewed as
it can be traumatic for a child to recount his or her experiences in the
country of origin..
4. UNHCR
One NGO has argued that after a first interview each
asylum seeker should be given written reasons explaining in sufficient detail
the grounds on which a claim was rejected. This would provide an opportunity to
appeal the decision more effectively. "Oral notification at the beginning
of the second interview is not sufficient."
More than a question of the written or oral nature
of the procedure, the issue at stake is that asylum-seekers are entitled to
know the reasons for the decision. That purpose may be achieved also through an
oral procedure which, indeed, has been accepted in many legal areas in a number
of countries as providing sufficient legal safeguards. UNHCR, for a number of
reasons, including resources constraints, would prefer to provide such reasons
orally.
On the same issue, it has been said that asylum
seekers' cases are disadvantaged because UNHCR Ankara does not provide reasons
for its decisions.
In fact, asylum seekers who have been rejected are
given, verbally, the reasons for their rejection at the time of their appeal
interviews. They are invited to explain any major contradictions or
inconsistencies that might have led to the rejection of their claim.
5. Post-interview Procedures and the Appeals Process
of UNHCR
An NGO further asserted that, "all asylum
seekers whose cases are rejected by UNHCR after a first interview, including
those whose cases are determined to be `manifestly unfounded', should receive
an automatic review of the decision, including a second interview conducted by
a different legal officer."
All asylum seekers whose cases are rejected after
their first interview have an automatic right to appeal. Even
those whose claims are determined to be "manifestly unfounded" after
a full eligibility interview by one of our legal officers, have that possibility
whenever new elements to the claim are presented.
Asylum seekers who have been rejected as
"manifestly unfounded" are given the right to submit a re-opening
request in writing, should they wish to have their cases reviewed again. All
re-opening requests are reviewed by a legal officer, who, in turn, recommends
whether a case should be re-opened or not. Based on this recommendation,
another decision is later made by a senior legal officer
Other statements made by concerned groups claim that
"the failure of the system in providing an effective appeal process is
also shown in the fact that applicants are asked to produce new information and
documents in support of their claims. In this manner the review is limited to
considering errors or deficiencies in applicant's presentation case and
disregards entirely the possibility of mistakes in a decision-maker's
conclusion."
It should first be noted that all cases are reviewed
by at least two legal officers before the first decision is finalized. Asylum
seekers are not required to submit new reasons to have their cases reviewed on
appeal. During the appeal review, the possibility of mistakes in a decision
maker's conclusion is taken into consideration and assessments are reviewed for
the existence of such mistakes. On a number occasions,
the senior legal officers have reversed negative decisions after finding an
error of law. New information is only requested from cases rejected after two
reviews or from cases found to be abusive or manifestly unfounded.
One advocacy group stated that "asylum seekers
are denied access to their files because of UNHCR's confidentiality
rules."
Confidentiality rules provide protection to asylum
seekers by ensuring that information given by them is not divulged to third
parties. However, the files not only contain the information provided by and
concerning the individual applicant but also other information which may be of
a confidential nature.
6. UNHCR-Ankara's Interaction with the Turkish
Government
In one statement an advocacy group urged UNHCR
"to act with vigor and outside closed doors to condemn and obligate the
Turkish authorities to observe the UN Convention and other relevant instruments
concerning protection of refugees."
UNHCR-Ankara regularly intervenes with the Turkish
authorities in favour of asylum seekers who are of
concern to UNHCR. In 1995 and 1996 dozens of deportations of asylum seekers and
refugees were prevented through intervention by the Office.
UNHCR does not hesitate to advocate reform when
international standards are not being met.
It has also been said that UNHCR Ankara has refused
to prevent the Turkish Government's deportation of asylum seekers whom UNHCR
did not consider to be refugees although they had already been granted entry
visas by third countries on humanitarian or refugee grounds.
Although UNHCR is sympathetic to the plight of all
people the legal mandate of the Office obliges it to intervene with the Turkish
authorities only on behalf of persons who are of concern to UNHCR, i.e.
asylum-seekers whose status has not as yet been determined as well as
recognized refugees.
7. Emergency resettlement for persons with security
problems
One NGO suggested that BO Ankara has failed to
provide emergency resettlement procedures to refugees who have expressed fear
for their safety in
Emergency resettlement procedures have always been
available to refugees whose safety is threatened. In 1995 and 1996, for
instance, emergency resettlement procedures were used by UNHCR-Ankara for some
140 cases (360 persons).
UNHCR -