Perico Pastor FORCED BACK Report by M. Lynch, Ph.D., Director of Research May 2004 661 FORCED BACK International Refugee Protection in Theory and Practice www.refugeesinternational.org 1705 N Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 202-828-0110 (phone) 202-828-0819 (fax)
[email protected] (email) May 2004 661 2 Table of Contents Introduction . 5 Survivor Stories: Findings from RI’s Forced Back Project . 7 Human Rights: International Protection and Non-Refoulement . 13 State Responsibility and Practice . 17 UNHCR’s Mandate and Response . 19 Reviving the International Refugee Protection System . 21 Conclusion and Recommendations . 23 Table 1: Involuntary Returns . 26 Appendix A: Forced Back Project Questionnaire . 27 Endnotes . 28 Acknowledgements . 32 3 4 Introduction “I should have stayed in Liberia to die.” - refugee turned back from Togo Access to asylum can mean the difference between life and death. Yet asylum policies around the world have become increasingly restrictive. Every day individuals are refused admission into and expelled from countries without having access to fair and effective status determination processes. Some are returned to countries where their human rights cannot be guaranteed. Despite existence of international agreements, states often fail to protect refugees, fearing threats to national security, domestic destabilization, infiltration by armed groups or traffickers, depletion of scarce resources, and the influx of more refugees. Sometimes xenophobia or racism determines the states’ response. International agencies also fall short in their protection operations. Since the September 11 attacks, the U.S. has used national security concerns to tighten asylum restrictions. Previously, Haitian asylum seekers intercepted at sea Article 14 of were forced back to Haiti without adequate screening.