ERITEAN and ETHIOPIAN REFUGEES in KHARTOUM Gaim Kibreab, University of Uppsala, Sweden

Stranded 'Birds of Passage'? ERITEAN AND ETHIOPIAN REFUGEES IN KHARTOUM Gaim Kibreab, University of Uppsala, Sweden INTRODUCTION recent census of the refugee population It is not clear how the government The government of Sudan has in Khartoum, however, found that the intended to distinguish war victims from consistently accepted refugees on a total number of refugees in the capital drought victims. In the refugees' coun- humanitarian basis since the mid 1960s. was about 35,000 instead of 45,000. Even tries of origin, war and environmental The refugees in the country are in: (i) though the census was based on a total degradation are interwoven. Similarly reception centres; (ii) organized wage- enumeration, it is reasonable to expect unclear is how the government's new earning and semi-urban settlements; and some refugees may have evaded the policy has affected the inflow of new (iii)urban and rural areas where refugees census. asylum seekers. According to the Gen- have self-settled among the local GOVERNMENT POLICY ON URBAN eral Project Manager, Syd H. M. Osman, population. The main concern here is the REFUGEES the new restrictive policy had resulted in self-settled urban refugees, with more a considerable decrease in the number of emphasis on those in the capital, Generally the Sudanese new arrivals. Khartoum. Government has one of the most Some evidence suggests that the generous refugee policies in the world. government was determined to In the beginning of 1989 there were Despite economic difficulties caused by implement its restrictive refugee policy. a total of 770,000 refugees throughout a range of factors such as civil war in the For example, on January 15, 1988 the the country. Among them, 60,000 were South, drought, unfavourable terms of newspaper, Ayam, reported that from Uganda and 5,000 from Zaire trade, declining productivity in all "concerned authorities in the Eastern residing in Southern Sudan. Another region have refused to grant asylum to 30 75,000 Chadianrefugees were in Western Ethiopians". According to COR Sudan. The majority, about 630,000, It is not clear how the authorities, the decision was based on were in the Eastern and Central regions, government intended to the country's new policy towards and were all from Eritrea and Ethiopia; distinguish war victims refugees (Ayam, Issue6230, Jan. 15,1988). there is no breakdown of the proportion, from drought victims. In However, there is no concrete evidence but themajorityare Eritreans. Of 770,000 showing that the country's refugee refugees, only 38% were assisted by the the refugees1countries of policy has become more restrictive than UNHCR as of 31 July 1988. The others migin, war and it was in the past. managed their own affairs by sharing environmental degradation Even though it has accepted whatever services were available to are interwoven. refugees from neighbouring countries in Sudanese nationals. Among the 630,000 the past three decades, Sudan has always Ethiopian and Eritrean refugees in the attempted to place all refugees in Eastern and Central regions of the organized camps and settlements. One country, about 25% are in organized sectors of the economy, debt burden etc., concern has been national security. The wage-earning and semi-urban its doors still remain open. Until 1988 most important reason seems to be the settlements. Another 17% are in transit even environmental refugees (those minimization of the strain such a large centres living on international aid and whose flight was prompted by severe influx of refugees may cause on the about 60% are spontaneously settled. environmental degradation) were country's economy, social services and These data are, however, indicative provided with succour. After 1988, common property resources such as rather than conclusive. however, there has been an intention, at water, grazing and woodlands. By Self-settled or spontaneously least at a policy level, to refuse entry to placing refugees in spatially segregated settled refugees are not provided with those who flee their countries of origin sites, the government wants to achieve any kind of assistance. They are due to environmental degradation two things. First, it wants to discourage scattered both in the rural and urban which poses a threat to their lives. For the refugees from competing with areas. According to government sources, instance, the Minister of Refugees, nationals for scarce natural resources, there are about 210,000 refugees in urban during his visit to the Eastern region, employment opportunities, consumer centres (Khartoum: 45,000; Gedaref: instructed the authorities in the area and goods and physical and social services. 35,000; Kassala: 50,000; Port Sudan: in the Central region not to admit Second, it wants the international donor 50,000 and another 30,000 in the small additional refugees. He stated that community to meet their needs until they towns of Es Showak, Wad Madeni and "refugee status is to be granted only to voluntarily return to their countries of Damazin with about 10,000 in each). A war victims." origin. 6 Refuge, Vol. 10, No. 4 (April 1991) The Asylum Act of 1974, which refugees because their status is not bureaucrats, police officers and regulates refugee status in the country determined by the authorities municipal authorities. Despite its embodies the basic principles of the 1951 concerned. determination, the government has not United Nations and the 1969 OAU Sudan's settlement policy appears been able to phase out spontaneous Conventions. Not only is it seen as extremely unrealistic because it does not settlement. generous, but it is also viewed asa model take into account the huge amount of The effects of this unrealistic policy legislation for emulation by other Third capital and natural resources required to have been detrimental to both the World countries. However, there are implement such a policy. It seems that country and the refugees. If refugees certain serious restrictions which, on the the government is aware of its inability to were allowed to participate freely in the one hand, influence the future implement its own policy. The economic life, they would have anticipation of refugees, and, on the awareness of this may have led to its contributed to Sudan's social progress other, constrain the ability of refugees to tolerance of spontaneous settlement by and economic growth. One constraint engage in meaningful economic the refugees in the urban areas without facedby the industrial sector is high tum- activitiescommensurate with their skills formally sanctioning it. However, as over of Sudanese skilled labour to the and previous work experiences. long as Sudandoesnot officially sanction Gulf States (Bank of Sudan: 1980;1987). Section 10(2) of the Asylum Act spontaneous settlement of refugees in The uninhibited participation of forbids a refugee to leave a place of the urban centres, such tolerance only refugees in the labour market may residence specified for him/her by the partially overcome the skilled authorities concerned. This constitutes a manpower bottleneck in Sudan. Sudan serious deprivation of freedom of Whenever aggrieved, they has not invested in education or training movement. Formally, the government of refugee labour. Refugees would have can legally restrict the freedom of cannot seek redress from represented an asset if the government movement of refugees within its formal government had a policy that favoured tapping such territories by making reference to Art. 26 structures because they are a resource. of the 1951 Convention as stipulated in not legally entitled to reside Many refugees have never lived in Art. 42 of the same Convention. The in the urban centres. rural areas, but government policy does deprivation of the right of freedom of not take this into account. All refugees, movement imposed by section 10(2) of regardless of their social or professional the Asylum Act is, however, inconsistent backgrounds, are expected to stay in with the recommendations of the 1979 paves the road to abuse by municipal camps or settlements in rural areas. As Arusha Conference and with the spirit of and police authorities. long as the government does not address the OAU Charter of Human and People's Technically, unregistered refugees the question of urban settlement, its Rights (see Recommendation 5 of the haveno legal rights. They arenot entitled policy will not only remain ineffective, Arusha Conf. and Art.12.1 of the to protection or work. They are not but it will exacerbate the plight of the Charter). allowed to engage in income-generating self-settled refugees. As indicated, most refugees in activities, nor do they have access to The government says it does not Eastern and Central Sudan are self- public amenities. Yet, not only is thereno want refugees in urban centres, but it has settled. Formally, residence outside single case of refoulement, but a no place for them elsewhere. It is not organized centres is illegal and refugees considerable proportion do engage in willing to provide assistance to refugees who reside outside the camps or income-generating activities (wage- and it also does not allow aid agencies to settlements without authorization are labour, trade, etc.), send their children to fulfil this function for fear of attracting subject to harassment, detention, fine school, enjoy access to the available more influx from the rural areas. and deportation to remote rural areas. health services, etc. without being Refugees can only survive by engaging According to the Regulation of the formally entitled to such rights. in income-generating activities to which Asylum Act, refugeesmust register upon However, since such entitlements they are not formally entitled. entry, but the overwhelming majority do cannot be claimed by the refugee Their weak legal status has, not, mainly for fear of being sent to the communities by right, access can be therefore, made their position extremely reception centres in the unfamiliar rural denied arbitrarily by municipal vulnerable.

Load more