Auckland Refugee Council inc.

Since the previous chapter of "Experiencing Asylum" was written in 2000, asylum seekers are still seen by many as either "opportunists" or "potential enemies of the state". September 11th it seems has changed, for the foreseeable future, the way in which asylum seekers are regarded. Indeed there seems to be within the New Zealand Immigration Service (NZIS), an entrenched and negative view of all asylum seekers.

While many who apply for refugee status are indeed opportunists - escaping from countries with little or no human rights or from poverty or economic depression -others are genuinely in peril of their lives. It is fair to say that those genuine asylum seekers who have endured the trials and hardships of flight from their country possess the necessary characteristics and qualities to become admirable New Zealand citizens

Those experiencing asylum not only contend with the complexities of refugee legislation but also may suffer from mental health disorders due to past trauma, including torture and the present uncertainty of their status and the loss of family and homeland. Many also find themselves in a "no mans land" where they are, or have been detained in prisons or camps without a permit. A lack of any temporary legitimate permit means they can be removed at the end of their refugee claim process if not successful. The detention of asylum seekers has become the main source of contention for NGOs over recent years.

There are still however a number of other issues facing approved asylum seekers - ie Convention Refugees - needing resolution, for when compared to the resettlement resources offered to Quota Refugees they make a poor comparison.

Update from Previous Chapter:

The Chapter on Asylum Seekers written in 2000 made recommendations on the following issues:

Consult with the Auckland Refugee Council (ARCI), with regard to funding and operation of accommodation for asylum seekers.

A case was raised for a special taskforce to eliminate the backlog and for priority to be given to residence claims for successful refugee claimants.

That Convention Refugees be able to access all the benefits and services which were available to Quota refugees, immediately their status is confirmed.

Elimination of abusive claims by faster process of refugee claims and registration of immigration consultants.

Regulation of Immigration Consultants

Research into the resettlement problems of Convention Refugees.

Nearly five years on, while some of the problems have been solved others have taken their place. Most notably the impact of 11 Sept 2001 made itself particularly significant to asylum seekers arriving after that date.

Claim Statistics:

The backlog at the Refugee Status Branch (RSB) has now been replaced with a backlog at the Refugee Status Appeals Authority (RSAA).

Abusive claims still clog up the system but are now dealt with more swiftly. Statistics still show that only 20% of refugee claimants are approved. This figure is a nonsense when the blatantly abusive cases are eliminated from the calculation - the real figure being more like a 40% success rate. RSB statistics show that in the top 10 nationalities claiming refugee status for 2003/4, the traditional refugee country claims had between 34 - 42% success rate , whereas the success rate from other countries where there was likely to be abusive claims, the success rate here was 0.0% . Thus the overall RSB statistics of 14.1% success is demonstratively false. The approval rate at RSB level for detained asylum seekers was 20.8%.

Statistics at the ARCI hostel in Glendene show a general trend for conditionally released residents to gain refugee status at the appeal stage. This raises some questions as to why so many are who are declined by RSB are subsequently granted refugee status by the RSAA? While statistics are available of the Refugee Status Branch decisions, there are no statistics which compare the decisions of RSB and RSAA.

Regulation of Immigration Consultants

Immigration Consultants have still not been regulated, although it has been indicated that it is government policy. Implementation would be welcomed in 2005.

Settlement Services

Some progress has been made in the area of access to services by Convention Refugees, particularly in the area of the Resettlement Grant which is now eligible to all successful refugee claimants. Residence however must be gained before it can be uplifted and this is true for a number of areas including education and housing.

Research

NZIS has recently published the long awaited but welcome "Refugee Voices: - A Journey towards Resettlement". It is a useful addition to the relatively poorly researched area of refugee resettlement in New Zealand.

The extensive volume notes that Convention refugees reported feeling the least settled and were most likely to have experienced emotional problems. This was mainly due to lack of family as most asylum seekers usually arrive alone. However, it was interesting to note that a greater number of Convention refugees were in either full time or part time employment.

Current General Situation:

Detention:

As commented upon already, the impact of Sept 11th was felt more acutely by asylum seekers than any other group. In 2002 the Government began the detention of all asylum seekers applying at the airport on security and ID concerns. Some were sent to penal institutions while others were either held at the Mangere Camp with Quota Refugees or conditionally released into the community or hostels such as that run by ARCI.

Detention and its resultant problems continues as the main source of contention for NGOs. The issue has been debated at length with humanitarian agencies calling for the government to release those held at Auckland Central Remand Prison (ACRP), Mt. Eden Prison and at Mangere. The Refugee Council of New Zealand (RCNZ) took the government to court on this issue and won the case before the Court of Appeal upheld the government's position.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has acknowledged that the incarceration of asylum seekers with common criminals contravenes the regulations of UNHCR. Bullying and intimidation from criminal inmates has not been uncommon, especially for those detained within Mt. Eden Prison (due to lack of space at the ACRP), and lawyers have sometimes had difficulty in accessing their client to undertake an initial interview. UNHCR has advised NZIS on the need for its regulations to be strictly adhered to. More recently it has undertaken training of prison guards at ACRP. It was however, disappointing to note the NZIS response that; as those criminals held at ACRP have not yet been convicted, technically UNHCR regulations are not being flouted. While this statement might honour the letter of the letter of the regulations, it does not honour their intent, nor does it solve any of the issues arising from the detention of asylum seekers in penal institutes.

Detainees appear at the weekly court session before the District Court Judge (DCJ), often waiting a number of hours in cramped conditions. The Judge has no power to transfer people from penal institutions and simply "rubber stamps" the asylum seekers' continued detention on the recommendation of the NZIS. No legal aid is available to challenge the detention and detainees therefore suffer many months of prison detention.

However, more recently it has been observed that the conditions of those held in penal institutions has improved and this is welcome. Some needs of asylum seekers are being met and, for instance, where possible they are able to share a room or cell with another asylum seeker. The number of detainees has also fallen but this is mainly due to the fact there are less asylum seekers actually making it through border control to New Zealand.

In earlier papers by NGOs it was recommended that independent Social Workers be given the opportunity to visit detainees to offer support and assistance. This work is done at present by a handful of volunteers. Because of the enormity and emotional nature of the task they often become burnt out very quickly.

The Mangere Centre, as mentioned above, is used to accommodate asylum seekers as well as the Quota Refugees. This situation was deemed untenable by NGOs as it was considered "counter to the purpose of the on-arrival programme for Quota Refugees". 1 To accommodate those who arrive with hope for the future with those whose lives are still on hold will negatively impacts on both groups. However, some improvements have been made for asylum seekers at Mangere Centre. They are now able to receive visitors (as long as the visitor first informs the NZIS office there). They receive the same medical treatment - both physical and mental - as the Quota Refugees and are also offered English Language classes at AUT.

They are not able to access the six week orientation course introducing them to the New Zealand way of life. Essentially, despite improved access to amenities, asylum seekers are still held in custody at the Mangere Camp under Section 28 of the Immigration Act and are not allowed to leave without permission of an authorised staff member.

In the meantime NGOs have endeavoured to protect the rights of asylum seekers and care for their needs. Those resident at the Auckland Refugee Council hostel are able to attend English classes, take part in sporting, social and educational events, and receive counselling - all this through the funding initiatives of the ARCI.

There are currently two refugee organisations accommodating asylum seekers in Auckland: ARCI, who operate the Refugee Centre in James Laurie St. at Glendene and the Auckland Latin American Corp (ALAC) who host the "House of Friends" in Buckland Road, Mangere. While Asylum Seekers at ACRP, Mt. Eden or Mangere Camp are detained under Section 28 of the Immigration Act, those who reside at the ARCI Refugee Centre and at the House of Friends are bailed by the court under certain conditions - one of which is they must register at the local police station each week.

Those asylum seekers who are bailed to either ARCI or House of Friends are given a weekly living allowance by NZIS. The allowance is administrated by the staff of each hostel and NZIS is invoiced at a later date. There is however an anomaly here as those bailed into the community with friends or relatives do not receive an allowance.

NZIS has indicated the problem has been its difficulty in administering this payment - currently the NGO hostels have to bear the administrative compliance costs. We understand however, that the NZIS is hoping to amend this anomaly and is hopeful that arrangement will be made for this to be effective in January 2005, another welcome move.

While it appears that NZIS do make efforts for children with families to receive Work Permits as soon as possible and to be accommodated in the community, there have been times when persons under the age of 18 have remained at the Mangere Refugee Centre longer than six days (the maximum allowed in Sweden). We believe NZIS are making arrangements for all children to be accommodated elsewhere and this will be welcomed.

In 2004 The Human Rights Commission (HRC) published a report on "Human Rights and Places of Detention in New Zealand", which included the detention of asylum seekers. Recommendations included: 2

Publicly accessible annual reports on establishments and numbers of detained should be available.

Annual external monitoring and inspection of establishments with respect to human rights issues should be immediately established.

Establishments should arrange separate regimes and policies detained as asylum seekers or refugees and consideration given to access to family and friends, legal personnel and interpreters. Separation from criminal detainees, low security conditions and measures to accommodate cultural and religious needs should also be considered.

Specialist mental health and general health services.

Officers and staff of detention institutions should receive relevant training on mental health and legal issues.

Detention should be diligently scrutinised, especially that of under 18 year olds and pregnant women.

Asylum seekers should be accommodated in community based open hostels.

On Arrival Process:

The length of the claim form to be completed at the airport is a problem for those applicants arriving weary, distrustful and apprehensive. UNHCR has advised a shorter refugee claim form to be used - at least initially.

There has also been anecdotal evidence for the need of a system that ensures newly arrived asylum seekers are treated humanely at the airport. Their treatment seems to depend upon the time of arrival and whether there are Immigration staff on hand to help. It is suggested that all new arrivals claiming refugee status be given refreshments and adequate sleeping arrangements. They should not be asked to fill in the claim form while tired and disorientated. Children especially should be treated with compassionate consideration.

There is a concern that quite a number of claims declined at RSB have been approved by RSAA. It has been noted that RSB often put a higher priority on the profile of a claimant. It seems there is also a reliance on old case law. NZIS argue that additional information and documentation is available at RSAA level which was not accessible at RSB level.

There are times when new arrivals are sent to the Papakura Police Station to await a warrant for either the ACRP or Mangere Camp. While the length of time spent at the cells is kept to the minimum - usually 48 hours at the most, there is anecdotal evidence that some detainees have felt they have been treated badly. They cite not being able to access necessities from their bags and are left in a cell without a mattress. None of the Police staff at Papakura are trained to deal with asylum seekers and they have no separate facilities to accommodate them.

UNHCR endeavoured to make arrangements to meet with Papakura Police to undertake training of personnel during their latest visit to New Zealand (October 2004). However, this was declined due to pressure of work. The Red Cross has indicated it is happy to supply any necessities to alleviate discomforts felt by detainees.

Accounts of lack of competence, corruption and intimidation have been given by asylum seekers and must be taken seriously. Unfortunately most asylum seekers are afraid to speak out as they believe the interpreter can make a difference to the success of their claim.

Removal Process:

Those asylum seekers who are given work permits have them rescinded at the close of the refugee process - if unsuccessful. However, they do have the right to appeal their removal warrant on a humanitarian basis, which can take an additional 6 - 12 months. This can be a difficult time, especially for those with young families to support. Any savings are quickly used up, and they become a burden on NGOs and communities who themselves are financially challenged. The removal of some asylum seekers is delayed at times through no fault of their own - e.g. some countries will only accept a passport - not travel documents.

It is suggested that those with an appeal to the Removal Authority be given a temporary work permit and an emergency benefit made available to prevent human suffering - e.g. a mother with young children or a person with severely impaired health.

Those asylum seekers arriving with false documentation are not given a work permit. They are therefore not given the opportunity to file an appeal of their removal. Detainees and conditionally released persons await travel documents and, being under the Civil Aviation Convention, must wait for a plane from the airline which carried them to New Zealand. Those asylum seekers at penal institutions, Mangere or hostels continue to be given food and shelter.

There is grave concern that no complementary forms of protection are in place for those deported under the Civil Aviation Convention. Under this Convention detainees are obliged to leave the country on the airline on which they arrived. This poses problems as many board the plane at such countries as Malaysia and Thailand where prison is mandatory for those without a passport. Money for bribes is needed to get out of the prison and most detainees do not have any kind of funds.

Border Control

New technology in the detection of false passports as well as the Advanced Passenger Screening, now prevents a number of genuine asylum seekers from gaining access to New Zealand soil to claim refugee status. The UNHCR is also concerned and has suggested that provision be made for someone with a meritorious claim to be given access to the local UNHCR officer where they could be mandated a refugee. However, this will not be easy to put into practical application and will need the support and good will of the Customs and Immigration Officers. It will need an airport to be equipped with a public phone and it will of course require a UNHCR officer to be available. If there is no local UNHCR officer, the nearest UNHCR office is in Canberra, which exacerbates access problems. It is also unclear what constitutes a "meritorious" claim.

Visa free status is usually limited to non-refugee countries. Therefore people from countries such as Zimbabwe find it difficult to access New Zealand except through the means of false passports, often obtained in South Africa. There are 52 visa free countries and the passports of these countries are targeted by unscrupulous agents and criminals.

Residence Applications:

While there has been considerable delay in the past in processing residence applications, this has been approved upon recently. However, a number of approved refugees from countries such as Algeria or Middle East are subject to further scrutiny
y and security checks which delays their residence approved for several months.

Re-Establishment Grant:

Progress has been made in making this available to all asylum seekers - previously it was only available if a claim had been approved within 12 months. However, Convention Refugees must still wait until Residence has been approved before gaining access to this grant - having waited over 12 months to gain refugee status they have to wait another 6 months to gain residence. The amount received should also be reviewed as should the type of goods that can be purchased with the grant ie 2nd hand goods can often be bought at half the price and also come with a guarantee.

Education:

An approved asylum seeker must also wait, in most cases, for a residence stamp before being able to access tertiary education. This can complicate matters when the University year begins in February/March. While approved asylum seekers can access English lessons, they cannot apply for tertiary education until they have Permanent Residence, unless they are willing to pay the full international fee. Approval for a Conditionally Released asylum seeker means a temporary Work Permit - the right to work and acknowledgment of being legally in New Zealand.

The question of children's education is in need clarification. Currently New Zealand adheres to the UNHCR guidelines with the provision of primary school education and in fact this country more than fulfils its obligation by also providing secondary school education. However, there is concern regarding those families with children held in detention - ie Mangere Refugee Centre. There have been occasions where children have not received their education entitlement and on closer enquiry it appears that while NZIS maintain that efforts are made to provide such entitlements, they also assert that it is dependent upon individual circumstances. This situation needs to be investigated thoroughly. During detention children have the right to an education, preferably outside the detention premises. 3

Health:

The research of Refugee Voices 4 finds that Convention Refugees suffer a higher proportion of emotional problems "perhaps because of the stress associated with having their claims determined". Convention refugees suffer a number of anxieties and these do not always magically disappear on receiving refugee status.

In a Report for the Auckland Refugee Council on Health Interventions to Asylum Applicants 5 the following requirements were highlighted:

Provision of a comprehensive healthcare system for asylum seekers

Cultural representative involvement

Financial resources for professional interpreters

Healthcare system initiated at point of entry

Health education programmes

The Refugees as Survivors Centre at Mangere is no longer able financially to care for those asylum seekers who are outside the Mangere Centre. This means that there is virtually no specialised mental health care for asylum seekers. Mental health clinics are presently under resourced and therefore the addition of asylum seekers to their case work serves only to increase their burden.

A child's ability to obtain adequate health resources is also a concern. While most families are given a Work Permit it is still possible that some may be overlooked. It would be advisable for policy to assert that all families with children should receive a permit which entitles them to receive adequate health care at their local PHO. Currently PHOs can only provide care to those with legal permits.

Housing:

Asylum Seekers gaining refugee status often find it difficult to access reasonably priced accommodation. This is especially so for single young men. The loan process at WINZ depends on obtaining a Tenancy Agreement. This can be difficult as a landlord will be reluctant to hand over such an agreement without the payment of the bond and two weeks rent. Accommodation through Housing New Zealand can only be accessed after gaining residence forcing an initial reliance on the private sector.

Services Outside Auckland

In Christchurch Social Work for both convention and quota refugees is provided by Refugee Resettlement Support. Many of the problems highlighted in this report are also of concern to this and other smaller NGOs around New Zealand. Indeed concerns are exacerbated due to factors such as:

Too few lawyers familiar with refugee case work
Insufficient trained interpreters
Difficulty in accessing funding

Identity Bill

This proposed legislation will have a negative impact on all approved asylum seekers. After waiting so long to gain refugee status, they will now be expected to wait an additional two years before gaining citizenship. Security checks have already been put in place for asylum seekers and thus the rationale that more research into background history is needed is not relevant for this group. Australia confers Citizenship after only two years residence believing that on gaining citizenship the new refugee/immigrant will give full loyalty to their new country - with all the unspoken implications. However, many New Zealand politicians believe perhaps that once citizenship is gained people will 'hop' across the Tasman to Australia. Extending the time before conferring citizenship will not stop this flight from New Zealand. Only increased incentives by our Government to assist in making all New Zealanders economically secure, will combat this desire to search for a more desirable destination.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

That complementary forms of protection must be put in place for failed asylum seekers.

That training be implemented for all detention institution personnel, including those from Papakura Police Station.

That all conditionally released asylum seekers receive an allowance from NZIS or be given a Work Permit.

That a monitoring system be put in place in order to ensure the professionalism of interpreters and a Code of Ethics established and

That New Zealand Immigration only employ qualified interpreters. The integrity of that interpreter should also be scrutinised.

That refugee status claim approvals statistics should differentiate between the patently false claims and those from countries where there are gross human rights abuse.

That humanitarian consideration should be given to detainees and conditionally released asylum seekers to stay in New Zealand

That Work Permits be extended to those vulnerable people awaiting Removal Review decisions

That measures are put in place to ensure interdiction does not bar a person with a valid refugee claim from entering New Zealand

That children in detention (Mangere) receive the best possible education outside the camp.

That conditions be improved for those awaiting a hearing at the weekly court sessions.

That asylum seekers be accommodated away from criminals and continue to be given the opportunity to share rooms or cells.

Conditions for temporary accommodation of asylum seekers are police cells be improved.

That all approved asylum seekers should be treated as residents in order to access education, housing, to more easily obtain employment and to receive the resettlement grant.

That the mental and physical health recommendations set out under Health be implemented.

CONCLUSION:

While the list of recommendations seems lengthy, this is due mainly to the number of policy changes Government deemed essential after September 11th. The consequences of their implementation have dramatically changed the asylum seeker process, involving to a greater degree the Border and Investigation Dept. (B&I). The NZIS has also turned to NGOs to help with administrative and practical support in accommodating some of those seeking asylum.

There are still a number of gaps in services to Convention Refugees - especially in the area of initial settlement and orientation and this needs to be addressed.

It is acknowledged that NZIS is now seeking ways to ameliorate the situation of Convention Refugees and to improve the conditions of asylum seekers during the claim process. However, those who have concern for the welfare of asylum seekers would like to be given the opportunity to be involved in the policy making process. A number of NGOs have a real understanding of the issues facing asylum seekers at a personal and "grass-roots" level and believe they have a vital role to play in advising Government not only of asylum seeker needs but also on the successful integration of asylum seekers into the community.

EXPERIENCING ASYLUM

Introduction: