Repatriation of Somali Refugees. Recently a tripartite agreement to repatriate refugees to Somalia over a protracted period of 3 years was signed. Despite the optimism, of the many charity and humanitarian organisations that the Tripartite Agreement signed by the Kenya and Somalia governments on November 10 with the support of United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR), will end the suffering of the refugees, who have lived in Dadaab camp for over 20 years there is a cause to worry about. The word refugee is frequently used by the media, politicians and the general public to describe anyone who has been obliged to abandon his or her usual place of residence. Normally, when the word is used in the general manner, little effort is made to distinguish between people who have had to leave their own country and those who have been displace within their homeland. Nor is much attention paid to the causes of flight. Whether people are escaping from persecution, political violence, communal conflict, ecological disaster or poverty, they are all assumed to qualify for the little refugee. Under international law, however, the refugee concept has as much as more specific meaning. As established in the 1951 UN convention relating to the status of refugees, the word refugees, the word refugee refers to a person who, “owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, or membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, is outside, the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country” (Article, 1951, UN convention, UNHCR, 1997) For the Kenya-Somalia case the conceptual framework adopted is the African Union (AU) definition which gives an inclusive approach to refugee definition. The AU 1969 refugee convention was established in response to the growing scale of African refugee problem during the period of decolonization and national liberation. The term ‘refugee ‘it states; ‘shall apply to every person who owing to external aggression, occupation, foreign domination or events seriously disturbing public order in wither part or the whole of his country of origin or nationality, is compelled to leave his place of habitual residence in order to seek refuge in another place outside his country of origin or nationality (Article 1, 1969 OAU convention) Rikke Johannesen, deputy regional director in charge of the Horn of Africa and Yemen for the Danish Refugee Council, noted that while the agreement is an important step towards finding durable solutions for Somali refugees in the region, is important that governments talk about lasting solutions to the problems that forced them out of their countries. There are 610,000 registered refugees at Dadaab camp and over 500,000 who are not documented. The Kenya government insists it will only repatriate those who have homes in Somalia and are willing to return. Kenya’s main reason for pushing for the repatriation is that the presence of Somali refugees has contributed to terrorism, proliferation of small arms, forging of Kenyan travel documents and general insecurity. This should be done in a very careful and cautious way to avoid what befell the 1972 repatriation of Sudanese. According to the UNHCR, many refugees remained uncertain about the government intentions of signing the comprehensive peace agreement (CPA) and as a result adopted an attitude of ‘wait and see’ (Akol, 81) they therefore were adamant to go back. The repatriation & resentment exercise on both phases was executed under very difficult conditions, one of which was the staffing of repatriation and resentment commissions. No specific clear out criteria was adopted in recruiting employees, departments, and from the general southern Sudanese population where few skills and qualifications existed. Moreover, because the life of the commission was to be short, little or on training was given and insufficient time existed for them to be gained experience on the job. This was now mostly left to humanitarian organizations. The questions that arise are: does Kenya and Somalia have the capacity to do so hot on the heels of the recent revelations of deep seated corruption in the Ministry of Immigration? Have conditions in Somalia improved to warrant repatriation? Is the law being followed or it’s the gut principle? S.Ogata in the 47th session of the UNHCR for refugees identified the three principles ways in which refugee protection standards are currently being undermined, by denial of asylum by potential countries of refuge; by threats to the physical safety & human security of exiled population; and by a weakening commitment to the principle of voluntary repatriation. The conditions in southern Sudan prior to 1972 and 2005 did not favor repatriation. The policies pursued by the governments at the time were too repressive to induce refugees to return to their homes as large numbers. Data show that prior to the Addis Ababa agreement, only about 1000 persons had voluntarily returned to their home from the bush where had voluntarily returned to their homes form the bush where they had been hiding (government of southern Sudan, 1974) In Somalia despite AMISONS success the Al shabaab still pose a severe threat to peace. This can be informed by withdrawal of humanitarian groups like Medecins san frontiers that had withstood conflict shocks for years. Poor infrastructural development in the south –Shabelle Region due the Scorch earth policy deployed by Sayyid Barre government destroyed the infrastructure and reconstruction after the war and the reign of Islamic courts has been slow and this will hamper the speed at which provisions would be delivered to outlying areas and this in turn would to friction between resettlement commissions staff and refugees It should be noted that the biggest challenge confronting the Horn of Africa and Africa at large, from a conflict perspective, is managing its social diversity. Identities, both religious and ethnic, are often at the root of conflict as they interact with other variables, such as economic opportunities or political grievances. Africa with Somalia as an example has been unable to manage ethnic and cultural diversities in a manner which fosters national unity. This unity will foster peace and at least reduce the problems of refugee exodus.
Posted on: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 09:02:19 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015