Article 14: (1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution. (2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Click here to watch video on Article 14, The Right to Seek a Safe Place to Live
This article deals overlaps with yesterday’s post on Article 13, the Freedom to Move. As stated previously, according to Amnesty International, 300,000 people [Tamils] were detained in camps following the May massacres. Tamil detainees were confined to these camps, which were supervised by the Sri-Lankan military. This was a direct violation of their right to seek a safe place to live; by being confined to these camps, and having their access to movement restricted, Tamils could not seek a safe home. Amnesty International has gone further to say that these camps do not provide the basic necessities for Tamils, and are unsafe because of their poor medical availability, lack of food, sexual violence, enforced disappearances and abductions, and arbitrary arrests.
The camps are unsafe places for two reasons:
1) Physically unsafe – lack of proper housing, food, medical care, sexual violance, dissapearances, arrests
2) Mentally unsafe – rape, confinement, isolation, depression, consistent military supervision, continually living infear, lack of mental health facilities, lack of family support
Because of these conditions, living in the camps are not safe, yet as long Tamils are confined to the camps, and forced to stay by the Sri-Lankan military, they cannot seek a safe place to live. This, is a violation of their right to seek a safe place to live by the Sri-Lankan Government.
Anther instance where the Tamils right to seek a safe place to live, this time by the Australian and Indonesian government was the instance of the 250 refugees who made their way to Australia. The Tamils who fled Sri-Lanka on an overcrowded boat, even risking their life in the process doing so did so for one reason: because, regardless of what happened, it was safer than being in Sri-Lanka. Yet, for over 150 days they continue to live on a boat. Everyone has a right to seek a safe place to live, which is why these 250 Tamils that embarked on the risky journey to Australia did so.
They faced persecution in Sri-Lanka because of their ethnicity; over 50,000 were brutally massacred, and 300,000 others were detained in camps. Convention relating to the Status of Refugees defines persecution as fears “ for reasons of “race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group (added at the 1951 Conference), or political opinion”. The Tamils, who have fled Sri-Lanka on the boat, fit every criteria of persecution, yet, they are not being granted refugee status, or being assured that they will be handled in a safe and fair manner.
A boat meant for 50 people was housing 250 people, with one washroom. Just imagine the conditions of that. When people are in such close proximity, the rapid spread of disease becomes inevitable; especially when the boat is ill-equipped and unsanitary. They were on the boat from October 2009, until April 2010. They have now been sent to detention camps through Indonesia. The Indonesian government did not assure that they all would be granted refugee status, but stated they would go through immigration to determine which ones of the refugees would be accepted.
These 250 migrants were originally on their way to Australia, before their boat was intercepted by Indonesian officials and taken to Merak, Indonesia. This interception is said to be “at the personal request of Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.” Australian officials have said that asylum-seekers are growing in Australia, and neighboring Asian countries are not interceding to stop the migrants when they are in their waters, far before they can reach Australia. According to UPI, Australia has been paying the Indonesian Government to intercede because of their ill-action otherwise.
In addition to paying another country to intervene, last month, Australia made a unilateral decision to halt processing of Tamil and Afghan asylum-seekers. Australia is a signatory to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, why is Australia transferring and failing their commitment and responsibility to assist those fleeing persecution, when it has signed on to this convention?
The Right to Seek a Safe Place to Live, another right that has been denied to Tamils, if Tamils are denied the right to seek a safe place to live, both within Sri-Lanka, and out of Sri-Lanka, where are they to go? Are they supposed to continuously face discrimination, and persecution in Sri-Lanka by the State? And, are they suppose to continue to have each of their rights stripped away, and live in unsafe environments where basic needs – food, water, medicine are not attended to?
Credits:
http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/news/unlock-camps-sri-lanka-20090807
http://www.excal.on.ca/cms2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7924&Itemid=2
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia-pacific/2010/04/201041981317450618.html
http://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/agency-agence/stca-etps-eng.html
Tags: Speak Out
