refugees" "
Is it possible to define a European legislation that may guarantee ” “the right of asylum also for” “economic reasons?” “” “
“We need to ensure that asylum-seekers do not become the victims of prejudices” linked to the dangers “of terrorism or ‘clandestinity'”. That’s the concern of Ana Liria-Franch, delegate in Italy of the UN High Commission for Refugees, who addressed a conference held in Rome in recent days on the theme: “European Union: towards a common asylum policy?”. Promoted in view of the summit of the European Council scheduled to be held in Laeken (Belgium) on 14 and 15 December, the seminar drew up a provisional balance-sheet of the results so far achieved in the process of harmonizing the asylum policies in the EU, “which does not concern only the current 15 member States – as Liria-Franch pointed out -. In the near future, in an enlarged Union, a common asylum regime will be applicable in 21 or more countries”. Moreover, “the standards of protection and quality of the asylum adopted by the Union represent an important point of reference for States outside Europe”. According to Italy’s Minister for Community Policies, Rocco Buttiglione, “a clear frontier between asylum and immigration needs to be defined”. The problem of “economic refugees due to drought, famine, epidemics, floods, i.e. to situations comparable to war”, also needs to be examined. However, the minister stressed that the status of refugee, i.e. of someone who is fleeing “from death and from the violation of basic human rights, is by its very nature transitory, and that the conditions need to be created to allow anyone to return to his homeland if he chooses to do so”. Buttiglione also reaffirmed the “right to be joined by family members, a right that needs to be protected both in the case of refugees and of immigrants”. Refugees arrive in their hundreds in Italian holding centres, but “95% disappear into thin air when called by the competent authorities to complete the procedures to check their asylum application”, pointed out Carlo Taormina, former Under-Secretary of State of the Interior, on discussing the chapter of Italy’s new bill on immigration concerning refugees. Some perplexities on this score have been expressed by the representatives of the Italian Council for refugees, Amnesty International and Medecins sans frontières, who are of the view that a law on the right of asylum that precedes the EU regulation currently under discussion is urgently needed. “Over the last year the phenomenon of immigration has sharply declined Taormina pointed out and Italy is often only a place of transit” for immigrants and refugees. “After the terrorist attacks of 11 September it has become indispensable to define international terrorism, declared Buttiglione, who is concerned by the situation in the Middle East where “an unjustified form of State terrorism” is taking place. At the same time, in Europe the “sensation that the tragedies of the world are being heaped on the Union, perceived as a closed fortress in its selfish interests”, is growing. Both these perceptions are wrong, according to Jean-François Durieux, assistant director of the regional Bureau for Europe at the UN High Commission for Refugees in Geneva, who expressed the hope that suitable provision for appealing against the rejection of asylum applications and “the suspension of expulsion” be made in asylum procedures. Governments are however encouraged to aim at “a common system of asylum”. The obstacles are not lacking, noted Stefano Vincenzi, who deals with the harmonization of immigration and asylum policy in the European Commission. A common legislation, he explained, would ensure “the free circulation of all citizens resident in the Union” but so far “a strong attachment to national legislations” has impeded this. Vincenzi also noted the lack of any European coordination of migration policy, with the result that “the asylum-seeking procedure risks getting clogged up if it the only way of legally entering the EU”. That’s why “civil society is called to intervene to promote other alternative ways, for example entries on work permits, because harmonization of legislation is in everyone’s interest”. Laura Badaracchi
