Asylum seekers and refugees in Egypt face a threat of deportation to countries where they risk persecution. This violates the cornerstone of international refugee law that prohibits such deportations—the principle of non-refoulement.

Refugees in Sinai have attracted media attention because Egyptian authorities have caught, arrested, shot, or even killed an increased number of those attempting to illegally cross the border from Egypt into Israel.

Others in Sinai have been kidnapped or held hostage by smugglers or traffickers who may have deceived these mainly-Eritrean individuals into believing that they can assist them with entering Israel for a high enough price. There are reports that they have led them as far as Sinai and then held them hostage until they can provide more money; in the meanwhile, they are subjected to torture, rape and other sexual abuses.

Legally speaking, it is important to differentiate between migrants whom the Egyptian authorities have detained—whether refugees, asylum seekers or other categories of migrants.

Some refugees in Egypt have been in detention from as far back as February 2008. A group of several Eritreans and Ethiopians, as well as a few Somalis, are currently being held in Qanater prison; some of them have been detained for entering Egypt illegally, mainly through the Sudanese border. Many of them are held with criminals who have life sentences for crimes like drug trafficking.

This is a particularly vulnerable group for a few reasons. Firstly, their detention violates the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, which Egypt has ratified. The law says that illegal entry of refugees fleeing persecution should not be penalized granted that they present themselves to the authorities within a reasonable amount of time and can explain their illegal entry or presence. Secondly, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the agency responsible for conducting refugee status determination in Egypt, has not been able to access all such detained asylum seekers due to lack of response from the government authorities. While the UNHCR is the mainactor involved in upholding the legal status and welfare of refugees in Egypt, the Egyptian government is the only authority.

The UNHCR may not have the most accurate record of asylum seekers and refugees in detention if the government has failed to coordinate with them about certain detainees. This may leave a number of asylum seekers and refugees unaccounted for in the event of a deportation like we saw in the summer of 2008.

On the other hand, the detention of those who were caught attempting to cross the border with Israel illegally is lawful.

One such group of over 85 Eritreans and Ethiopians are currently detained in Al-Mustaqbal police station in Ismailia. They are at risk of being deported to countries where they may face incommunicado detention, torture, sexual assault or rape and other abuses of human rights.

It is more likely that if these detainees have been in Cairo, they have previously had a chance to approach the UNHCR, and many might already be recognized refugees. This differentiates them from those whose right to seek asylum has not been upheld. However, if those who attempted to enter Israel are bona fide refugees, their deportation is still illegal.

Since the Egyptian government authorities may be excluding the UNHCR from playing its delegated role in offering international protection to these detainees, it remains uncertain whether these crucial distinctions will be made. It is imperative that the authorities are aware of the danger that deporting refugees to countries where there is a high risk of persecution poses to these detainees, as well as Egypt’s legal obligation not to deport.

Written by:
Dalia Malek
PhD Candidate at King’s College London, Department of Law

“The volatile political situation in Egypt marred by massive rallies staged by thousands of discontented Egyptian protesters demands a closer look and serious concerns on the part of the Aquino administration as there are about 20,000 OFWs working there,” thus urged today by John Leonard Monterona, Migrante-Middle East regional coordinator.

Citing international media reports, thousands of Egyptian protesters demanding the ouster of Egypt President Husni Mubarak clashed with local police Friday, which resulted to several casualties on the part of the protesters.

It was reported that the Egyptian government has shut down major communication facilities such as internet and other social major website in its vain attempt to contain the political turmoil in the country.

Monterona said the Presidential Middle East preparedness team headed by former General Roy Cimatu must be tasked to assess the political situation in Egypt and secure the safety of the 20,000 OFWs working in Egypt.

“We are urging the Aquino administration to bare its contingency plan for OFWs in Egypt, if there is any, as the political situation in Egypt had already escalated,” Monterona added.

Solidarity with the Egyptian people

Monterona said his group could very well understand the grounds and motivating factors that led the Egyptian people to protest against its government, specifically demanding the ouster of its president.

“Chapters of Migrante in the Middle East support the Egyptian people in their present struggle against unemployment, economic hardships caused by massive corruption in the government and anti-people economic policies, repression of their political and socio-economic rights, and their struggle for national and social liberation from imperialism and local reactionary regime, as the Filipino people shares the same adverse situation with the Egyptians and other oppressed people around the world,” Monterona averred.

“People’s resistance in Tunisia, and now in Egypt, and maybe in other countries as well is inevitable as their respective governments are becoming repressive causing havoc to the economic and socio-political life of its own people,” Monterona ended. # # #

Written by:

John Leonard Monterona

Migrante-Middle East regional coordinator

In Kuwait, the report focused on the Sponsorship system and lack of protection for domestic workers under Kuwaiti law. The law does not allow workers to leave their sponsor without his consent, even in cases of abuse. There is also the absence of a clear mechanism by which workers can claim unpaid wages, and they are thus forced to settle for deals brokered by their embassies.

In Saudi Arabia, migrant workers continue to be exposed to labor rights violations and persecution on spurious charges such as sorcery, adultery and theft. The need of migrant workers to secure an exit permit from the kingdom results in many cases of forced labor, according to HRW. The reforms in Saudi Arabia’s labor laws in July 2009 offer insufficient protection for migrant workers and leave them vulnerable to abuse.

In Lebanon, 2009 ended with a wave of suicides of domestic workers. The Sponsorship system under which migrant workers are employed in Lebanon limits their ability to turn to the courts in Lebanon in search of compensation and justice. In January 2009 the Lebanese government introduced the standard employment contract, which is supposed to guarantee certain rights to domestic workers. While this is a welcomed development, the lack of an enforcement mechanism makes this step insufficient to guarantee the rights of domestic workers.

In Jordan, the Ministry of Labor issued a regulation in September 2009 that included migrant workers under the protection of Jordan’s labor laws. However, HRW notes that this regulation still allows employers to prevent domestic workers from leaving the residence, even after working hours.

In the UAE, workers continue to be vulnerable to exploitation and abuse under the Sponsorship system. Migrant workers pay recruitment fees and forced to sign contracts with conditions much worse than the ones promised to them, against UAE laws, which are not enforced. Employers usually confiscate passports of their workers, thus limiting their ability to seek help from UAE authorities against sponsors and recruitment agencies that exploit them.

Egyptian border guards have killed at least 17 migrants since May 2009 who have attempted to cross to Israel. The killing of unarmed migrants that posed no threat to the guards is a clear violation of international law. In Egypt, migrants, asylum seekers and recognized refugees face mistreatment, jail terms and forced refoulement, despite the danger those migrants often face in their countries of origin.

Israel, in forcibly returning those migrants to Egypt, is complicit to Egyptian violations of international law. Israeli policy doesn’t allow migrants to present asylum claims or meet representatives of the UNHCR.

Overall, this report paints a bleak picture about the state of migrant workers’ rights in the region. The sponsorship system which governs most worker-employer relations in the region is preventing foreign workers from realizing their rights. Several countries have reformed their labor laws this year, but enforcement is still lacking. Let us hope that in 2010 we will be able to report about further and more far-reaching improvements in migrant workers’ rights in the region.

In the first eight months of 2009, Israel forcibly returned 217 migrants to Egypt. Those migrants are not given an opportunity to present asylum claims or contact the UN refugee agency (UNHCR) while on the Israeli side of the border. In the “hot returns” policy soldiers basically interrogate the migrants who cross the border to determine if any of them is from Darfur. If they are not, they are sent back to Egypt. Egypt has sent back several migrants who were granted a refugee status by the UNHCR to Sudan, and 1,200 Eritreans that Israel had forcibly returned, despite the torture and maltreatment they face back home.

According to the testimony of a soldier who participated in the forced return of Eritrean migrants, commander on the ground are supposed to consider whether there would be a “concrete and imminent danger to the life of the infiltrator in Egypt upon his return to Egypt”. This is a much higher threshold than the international law standard, stipulated in the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, which prohibits forcible returns where there is a risk of “persecution”. Israel is a signatory of that treaty, and based on Egypt’s poor track record, the forcible return of the migrants to Egypt clearly exposes them to the risk of persecution.

During 2008, according to Amnesty International, there have 28 killings on the border and 30 more cases of injury to migrants or refugees. In a recent report by the UN’s IRIN News, an Israeli migrant rights activist said that based on interviews with asylum seekers and IDF soldiers, she “strongly believes there are hundreds of unreported dead and wounded [at the border]“.

Migrants who suffer from racism, discrimination and poverty in Egypt attempt to cross to Israel, even at the risk of losing their lives, in the hope of having better living standards there. They pay smugglers up to $500 to get them across the 200km border between Israel and Sinai.

These shootings are a clear violation of international law, since law enforcement officials may use lethal force only as a proportional and necessary response to a threat to life. Those migrants and refugees, who are shot without carrying any weapons, do not pose any threat to the Egyptian guards.