Need for dignified return” “

There are some positive elements, but also “concerns” about the measures of “detention while awaiting expulsion, including the detention of children, and the fact that an appeal against forced expulsion does not suspend its effect”: that is the comment of PETER VERHAEGHE, immigration expert of Caritas Europe, on the recent adoption (11 May 2005) by the 46 member countries of the Council of Europe of a document containing 20 guidelines on the forced repatriation of irregular immigrants. These guidelines are a response to the numerous fatal incidents that have occurred in Europe in recent years during forced repatriation, including the case of the young Semira Adamu, who died of suffocation during her expulsion by the Belgian authorities. The Council of Europe’s intention was to reconcile the repatriation policy with full respect for human rights. The European Commission – Caritas Europe points out – will soon propose a draft Directive on the “minimum criteria for the return of persons irregularly resident in the EU”. The measure will be discussed during the British Presidency of the EU Council. The shortcomings and strong points of the guidelines, according to Caritas Europe, are as follows: SHORTCOMINGS. Detention, especially of children. Caritas Europe “takes note of the initiative with interest and recognizes positive elements in the document”, but expresses its concerns about “the detention measures prior to expulsion, including the detention of children, the fact that an appeal against a forced expulsion does not suspend its effect, and the principle of expulsion to a third country”. Verhaeghe adds: “even if the document of the Council of Europe prescribes that a person’s detention while awaiting expulsion can only be decided after a rigorous and individual examination”, the means of detention itself “does not contribute to a dignified return”. Caritas Europe contests “the effectiveness of detention as a measure to guarantee an effective repatriation. Some statistics show that the number of people detained and effectively repatriated does not on average exceed 35%”. Caritas Europe especially contests the detention of children, “whether they are accompanied by their parents or not”: “Children ought never to be detained. This provision is a traumatic experience for them”. It is feared, in particular, that the precautions indicated in the text do not sufficiently guarantee the rights of children and that, in practice, this lack of clarity may lead to violations of their rights”. Appeals that do not suspend expulsions. Verhaeghe also contests, “with apprehension”, the fact that the principle of effective appeal “does not guarantee suspension of an expulsion order in the adopted text”: “An effective appeal against a forced expulsion – he says – is not really effective unless expulsion from the territory is suspended during the examination of the appeal”. STRONG POINTS. Ban on collective expulsions. Caritas Europe, however, welcomes as positive the fact that the Council of Europe “gives priority to the options of voluntary return and encourages States to promote programmes to this end”. The document’s more positive aspects also include the fact that it “prohibits the collective expulsion of foreigners. This ought to guarantee the individual examination of each dossier”. In this regard it is pointed out that on 13 May this year the European Court of Human Rights requested Italy to suspend the expulsion of immigrants, after the appeals lodged by a group of Italian lawyers on behalf of 79 foreigners who contested the legality of the measures of collective expulsion from Lampedusa to Libya. Caritas Europe also welcomes “the principle that a person cannot be sent to a country in which he/she runs the risk of inhumane or degrading treatment by non-state agents”. Ban on coercive techniques. Caritas Europe also notes “with satisfaction the ban on the use of coercive techniques during the expulsion procedure; these techniques risk obstructing the respiratory tracts either partially or totally, causing the risk of suffocation”. The Caritas Europe expert Peter Verhaeghe recalls in this connection “the sad fate of the young Semira Adamu, who suffocated to death during her expulsion by the Belgian authorities”. Communications in an unfamiliar language. Verhaeghe also approves the recommendation of the Council of Europe that “the person who receives an expulsion order be informed of the matter in a language he/she is able to understand”. According to Verhaeghe, this provision is “more favourable that what is provided in an EU draft directive prescribing that information be provided in a language which can be ‘reasonably supposed to be known by the person’ in question”.