THIS DOCUMENT SHOULD BE USED AS A TOOL FOR IDENTIFYING RELEVANT COUNTRY OF ORIGIN INFORMATION. IT SHOULD NOT BE SUBMITTED AS EVIDENCE TO THE UK BORDER AGENCY, THE TRIBUNAL OR OTHER DECISION MAKERS IN ASYLUM APPLICATIONS OR APPEALS. November 2011 A commentary on the September 2011 Eritrea Operational Guidance Note This commentary identifies what the ‘Still Human Still Here’ coalition considers to be the main inconsistencies and omissions between the currently available country of origin information (COI) and case law on Eritrea and the conclusions reached in the September 2011 Eritrea Operational Guidance Note (OGN), issued by the UK Border Agency. Where we believe inconsistencies have been identified, the relevant section of the OGN is highlighted in blue. An index of full sources of the COI referred to in this commentary is also provided at the end of the document. This commentary is a guide for legal practitioners and decision-makers in respect of the relevant COI, by reference to the sections of the Operational Guidance Note on Eritrea issued in September 2011. To access the complete OGN on Eritrea go to: http://www.bia.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/policyandlaw/countryspecificasylum policyogns/ The document should be used as a tool to help to identify relevant COI and the COI referred to can be considered by decision makers in assessing asylum applications and appeals. This document should not be submitted as evidence to the UK Border Agency, the Tribunal or other decision makers in asylum applications or appeals. However, legal representatives are welcome to submit the COI referred to in this document to decision makers (including judges) to help in the accurate determination of an asylum claim or appeal. The COI referred to in this document is not exhaustive and should always be complemented by case-specific COI research. Contents 3.6 Pentecostals and Jehovah’s Witnesses p. 3 o Treatment of other unregistered and registered religious p. 3 groups 3.7 Military Service p. 13 o Treatment of female conscripts p. 21 o Treatment of family members of deserters/draft evaders p. 23 3.8 Members of Opposition Political Groups p. 25 o Treatment of family members of perceived or real political p. 32 opponents or government critics o Treatment of journalists, media professionals, academics, p. 33 civil society activists, trade unionists, labour rights activists 1 THIS DOCUMENT SHOULD BE USED AS A TOOL FOR IDENTIFYING RELEVANT COUNTRY OF ORIGIN INFORMATION. IT SHOULD NOT BE SUBMITTED AS EVIDENCE TO THE UK BORDER AGENCY, THE TRIBUNAL OR OTHER DECISION MAKERS IN ASYLUM APPLICATIONS OR APPEALS. and certain minority ethnic groups 3.9 Persons of mixed Ethiopian/Eritrean Origin p. 44 3.10 Claimed Illegal Exit from Eritrea p. 46 3.11 Prison conditions p. 50 2.3 Actors of Protection p. 57 2.4 Internal relocation p. 57 4.3 Minors p. 61 5. Returns p. 71 Index of sources p. 75 It should be noted that only limited publicly available sources report on Eritrea since freedom of expression and association is strictly curtailed and no real opposition movement, NGOs or free media exists. Eritrea has been referred to by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom in April 2011 as the “North Korea of Africa” and the “most repressive state on the continent”.1 In addition, in both its Quarterly Update and its 2010 annual report, the FCO classified Eritrea as a country “where we have particular concerns about human rights”, and noted that due to extended restrictions on diplomats, international agencies, NGOs and journalists represented in Eritrea travelling outside of Asmara it was “even more difficult to gather accurate data on the human rights situation outside of the capital”.2 That only limited information emerges out of Eritrea was also confirmed in July 2011 by the UN Report of the Monitoring Group on Somalia and Eritrea, which stated that “Eritrea poses a particular challenge with respect to information gathering. Due to restrictions on the movement of foreigners, including United Nations personnel and diplomats within the country, as well as the total absence of independent media or non-governmental organizations, the Monitoring Group has relied primarily on diaspora sources in order to obtain necessary information”.3 1 US Commission on International Religious Freedom, United States Commission on International Religious Freedom Annual Report 2011: Eritrea, 28/04/2011. 2 See both UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), Human rights in Countries of Concern: Quarterly Update on Eritrea, March 2011, 31/03/2011 and UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), Human Rights and Democracy: The 2010 Foreign & Commonwealth Office Report (Eritrea excerpt), 31/03/2011, section VII: Human Rights in Countries of Concern. 3 UN Security Council, Report of the Monitoring Group on Somalia and Eritrea pursuant to Security Council resolution 1916 (2010), 18/07/2011, Introduction, B. Methodology, para. 10. 2 THIS DOCUMENT SHOULD BE USED AS A TOOL FOR IDENTIFYING RELEVANT COUNTRY OF ORIGIN INFORMATION. IT SHOULD NOT BE SUBMITTED AS EVIDENCE TO THE UK BORDER AGENCY, THE TRIBUNAL OR OTHER DECISION MAKERS IN ASYLUM APPLICATIONS OR APPEALS. 3. Main categories of claims 3.6 Pentecostals and Jehovah’s Witnesses Treatment of other unregistered and registered religious groups Excerpt from the September 2011 Eritrea OGN 3.6.8 State persecution of non-sanctioned religions such as Pentecostalism, and also of the Jehovah‟s Witness‟ community is systematic and widespread throughout Eritrea. If it is accepted that the claimant is a practising Pentecostal or a Jehovah‟s Witness, and they have demonstrated that they will have a well-founded fear of persecution, their claim is likely to engage the UK‟s obligation under the 1951 Convention. The grant of asylum in such cases us [sic] therefore likely to be appropriate except where in particular individual cases there are reasons not to do so. The guidance provided in the OGN is limited to those claimants who are either practising Pentecostals or Jehovah’s Witnesses. Yet, COI included in a previous paragraph within the OGN and COI available in the public domain and presented below suggest that other religious groups, both registered and unregistered, also face ill-treatment amounting to persecution at the hands of the Eritrean authorities. Very limited information is provided on the treatment of other religious groups within the OGN in paragraph 3.6.4 from only one source, the U.S. Department of State’s latest annual International Religious Freedom Report 2010. However, the original source provides much more information on the treatment of both registered and unregistered religious groups as follows: U.S. Department of State, International Religious Freedom Report 2010: Eritrea, 17/11/2010 [...] The government's record on religious freedom remained poor. The government continued to harass and detain thousands of members of unregistered religious groups and retained substantial control over the four registered religious groups. The government failed to approve religious groups that fulfilled the registration requirements and arrested persons during religious gatherings. The government subjected religious prisoners to harsher conditions and held them for long periods of time, without due process. There continued to be reports of forced recantations of faith, torture of religious prisoners, and deaths while in custody. [...] Section II. Status of Government Respect for Religious Freedom Legal/Policy Framework [...]The government has officially registered four religious groups: the Eritrean Orthodox Church, the Evangelical (Lutheran) Church of Eritrea, Islam, and the Roman Catholic Church. The government has not approved the registrations of the Meherte Yesus Evangelical Presbyterian Church, Seventh-day Adventist Church, Faith Mission Church, and Baha'i Faith, despite their being fully compliant with the registration requirements since 2002. Those registrations required only the president's signature for full approval. [...] Restrictions on Religious Freedom The government's record on religious freedom remained poor. The government continued to harass and detain members of registered and unregistered religious groups and retained significant control over the four registered religious groups. [...] Following a 2002 government decree that all religious groups must register or cease all religious activities, religious facilities that did not belong to the four officially recognized religious groups were forced to close. Some local authorities allowed unregistered groups to worship in homes or rented spaces, whereas others did not allow such groups to meet. During the reporting period, the government continued to disrupt home-based worship and arrested those who hosted home prayer meetings. In December 2009 the UN imposed sanctions on the country for arming, training, and equipping armed groups and their members including al-Shabaab (designated as a foreign terrorist organization), that 3 THIS DOCUMENT SHOULD BE USED AS A TOOL FOR IDENTIFYING RELEVANT COUNTRY OF ORIGIN INFORMATION. IT SHOULD NOT BE SUBMITTED AS EVIDENCE TO THE UK BORDER AGENCY, THE TRIBUNAL OR OTHER DECISION MAKERS IN ASYLUM APPLICATIONS OR APPEALS. aimed to destabilize the region, and for occupying disputed territory on its border with Djibouti. Following the sanctions government-controlled media branded the UN and Western governments as imperialist entities. In this context unrecognized religious groups, which have long been characterized as imperialist