Village Planet ’s Post

On March 27, 2024, I had the opportunity to join as a participant in the academic seminar "Life Without Future: 10 Years of Uyghurs Refugees in Thailand" held by the Muslim Studies Centre of Chulalongkorn University. In this seminar, four panelists including Mr. Kannavee Suebsang (Party-list MP), Assoc. Prof. Suchart Setthamalinee (NHRC), Mr. Somchai Homlaor (Human Rights lawyer), and Ms. Puttanee Kangkun (The Fort). Over the course of two hours, the panelists shared their experiences, ideas of advocacy, and plead to the Thai government for the better future of not only the Uyghurs refugees but also refugees in general. To conclude the discussions in the seminar, it can be said that Thailand is lacking in two areas, regulations and concrete diplomatic stance, resulting in the treatments of refugees that contradict the international humanitarian principles. In Thailand, refugee status is non-existential legally. Therefore, people who are practically refugees will not be considered as a refugee in Thailand but they will be considered rather as illegal immigrants. According to Thai laws on illegal immigrants, the procedures following the rounding up of these people are detention and repatriation or resettlement. However, in the case of Uyghurs, the Thai government possessed the knowledge that these people came from a region of China in which they were mortally mistreated and discriminated. Therefore, to repatriate these people would be equivalent to sending them back to die or receiveing worse experiences, and it will also be contradictory to the international principle of law called "Non-refoulement". So, the options that Thai government had for the Uyghurs "illegal immigrants" were to detain them in the Immigration Detention Center (IDC) or resettle them to a third country. Many perspectives, including those of the panelists, view that the Thai government should resettle these people. However, the Thai government chose to indefinitely detain the Uyghur people in an IDC. There are many downsides to this decision of indefinite detention. Firstly, there are over 1,400 Uyghur refugees detained in the IDC. This led to health and welfare concerns for these people. Many have criticizes that this action of the government are non-humanitarian and do not consider the principles of human rights. Moreover, the detainees are deprived of the rights to contact their families, leading to mental health concerns. In conclusion, the panelists urged the Thai government to make a stance as a country advocating for humanitarian actions. Moreover, it should consider refugees as a human being who do not really desire to become refugees (no one wants to become a refugee) rather than consider them as criminals that need to be locked up.

⚡ Germany has begun developing new policies in response to increasing refugee demands. This article examines the reasons and effects of closing the borders to refugees. Asylum processes and the European…

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees As per the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), over 4,500 Rohingya refugees set off across the Bay of Bengal and the Andaman Sea in 2023. About United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees: It protects refugees worldwide and facilitates their return home or resettlement. Headquarters: Geneva, Switzerland It was established by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1950 in the aftermath of the Second World War to help the millions of people who had lost their homes. It is a global organization dedicated to saving lives, protecting rights and building a better future for people forced to flee their homes because of conflict and persecution. It was awarded Nobel Peace Prizes in 1954 and 1981. It started Nansen Refugee Award in 1954 for recognition of outstanding service to the cause of refugees, displaced or stateless people. Who are the Rohingya refugees? The Rohingya are a Muslim minority ethnic group with their roots in the Arakan kingdom in Myanmar. According to the Council on Foreign Relations notes that Rohang derives from the word ‘Arakan’ in the Rohingya dialect and ga or gya means from. They are culturally and religiously distinct from the majority Buddhist population in Myanmar and speak a Bengali dialect which is different from the common Burmese language. Myanmar has refused to recognise them as an ethnic group, denying them citizenship since 1982. According to Myanmar’s 1982 citizenship law, members of the Rohingya community, along with other ethnic minorities, can only attain citizenship if they prove their ancestors resided in Myanmar before 1823. Otherwise, even if one of their parents is a Myanmar citizen, they are deemed to be “resident foreigners” or “associate citizens.”

The Rwanda policy - What is it and what does it mean for the rights of Asylum Seekers?  This week the UK government has passed the Rwanda (asylum and immigration) bill. Home Secretary James Cleverly has called this a ‘land mark moment’ in the governments efforts to stop people smuggling. But it remain a controversial bill. It has taken months of back and forth with the House of Lords. After judges of the Supreme Court initially ruled that the scheme was unlawful, and unsafe for refugees.  In a press release on Monday, Sunak boldly promised ‘no ifs, no buts. These flights are going to Rwanda’ ‘…so that we finally break the business model of the criminal gangs and save lives.’ This is referring to the 14 people that have died already attempting to cross the channel this year - including a 7 year old girl just this week.  However, on Tuesday, Filippo Grandi, the UN refugee agency commissioner, said the law sought to “shift responsibility for refugee protection, undermining international cooperation and setting a worrying global precedent.”  Whilst the overall cost of the scheme stands at more than half a billion pounds, according to the figures released to the NAO. Many questions arise from this decision: Namely, will sending asylum seekers to a potentially unsafe country be an effective deterrent, and lessen the number of life threatening crossings? And what does this mean for Britain's obligations to refugees and the upholding of human rights?

Activists Call for a Halt to the Forced Expulsion of Afghan Refugees from Iran and Guarantees of Their Rights Zan News: A group of Afghan cultural and social activists residing in Iran have sent an open letter to the UN Secretary-General and international organizations supporting the rights of migrants, calling for an immediate halt to the forced expulsion of Afghan refugees from Iran and for their basic rights to be guaranteed. In this open letter, published today, Thursday (September 26) by the Art and Culture Committee of the "Purple Saturdays Movement," it is stated that following the Taliban's takeover, Afghanistan has faced widespread security and human rights crises, forcing millions, especially women and children, to flee the country. Many of these refugees who have sought refuge in Iran are now facing the threat of forced expulsion, which is a clear violation of human rights and international law. The activists in this letter also referred to the difficult living conditions of refugees in Iran and emphasized: "Afghan refugees who have lived in Iran for years in an atmosphere filled with fear and without legal protection have not only been deprived of their basic rights but have also faced injustice, racial discrimination, and insulting and humiliating treatment." They stated that the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), as the agency responsible for protecting refugees in Iran, has "unacceptably failed" to fulfill its duties and has not been able to effectively defend the rights of refugees. The letter includes demands such as an immediate halt to the forced expulsion of refugees, a reform of the performance of UN agencies in Iran, the issuance of work visas for professional Afghan migrants, and improved health, educational, and social support for refugees. Emphasizing the need for urgent measures, the activists have called on the international community to pay more attention to the crisis of Afghan refugees in Iran and to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe.

🏠Number of refugees in Brazil more than doubles in 2023 Brazil’s National Committee for Refugees (Conare) granted a record 77,193 people refugee status last year, elevating the total number of refugees in Brazil to 143,033 — 117 percent more than in 2022. Citizens from Venezuela, Cuba, and Angola formed the majority of people seeking asylum in Brazil in 2023, according to a report presented on Thursday at the Justice Ministry. Out of more than 58,000 asylum seekers in 2023, about half (29,467) were from Venezuela, while more than 11,000 were from Cuba and more than 3,900 from Angola. 🔗Read more in our full article by Cedê Silva here 👇 https://lnkd.in/dBsEjGgM #Immigration #Brazil #Refugees #LatinAmerica

Could Rwanda save Europe? (Trails of #Migration Series #003) …. The unanimous decision by the UK Supreme Court in November 2023 made the Rwandan scheme unlawful. One ground for this decision was the possible risk that genuine refugees could be subject to forced return to their home countries which would be equated with breaching the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to which the UK is a signatory. Such concerns are not without foundation considering Rwanda's poor human-rights record. The 2018 incident involving Rwandan police opening fire against protesting refugees, and the UK government’s criticism of Rwanda in 2021 over "extrajudicial killings, deaths in custody, enforced disappearances and torture" reflect the government’s poor treatment of refugees over the past years. …. Against this backdrop, the latest legislation dubbed the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill the UK government is pushing in the Parliaments is an attempt to establish the legal ground that Rwanda should be considered a safe country. To achieve this, the new legislation requires the courts to disregard key sections of the Human Rights Act and other British laws or international rules - such as the International Refugee Convention which would hamper the deportation of illegal immigrants to Rwanda. …. Read more below:

Commentary | The ongoing situation with #Myanmar refugees has reignited discussions surrounding the ethical considerations of hospitality, revealing a historical pattern of the Indian government’s limited engagement since gaining independence. Although the conflict between the union government and the state Government of Mizoram regarding the admission of Myanmar refugees seems ostensibly resolved as the union government seems willing to collaborate with the state Government of Mizoram in accommodating refugees, the refugee status cannot be attached to these displaced groups as India is neither a signatory of International Refugee Convention nor does it have any National Refugee Law. https://lnkd.in/gMYHmz4r

Pakistan: One-year extension of UN-registered Afghan refugees a welcome first step, lifeline must extend to all

There is a misconception that India’s stand on refugees is not clear but just because this country doesn't have any laws regarding refugees does not mean that it is not relevant to this country. This article explores India’s de facto refugee policy, the role of its judiciary, and the urgent call for a standardized legal framework. https://lnkd.in/gUzEjzbH #leaglesamiksha #Humanrights #RefugeeRights #InternationalLaw #India #Policy Samiksha Gupta Abhayjeet Singh Walia Parvesh M.