Minds of my Generation

What’s so special about Yashika? Nothing. And that’s the whole point.

03.04.2014 Yesterday, Wednesday 2 April at 9PM, 19-year-old ‘A’ level student Yashika Bageerathi was deported from the UK despite a massive campaign for her to stay, led by the students and staff of her school.

I am disgusted, like so many others, as I always am when I hear of another person helpless against the cold bureaucracy of the state, removed without consideration from the place that they call home. I am heartened, like so many others, to see the vast numbers of people who tried to stand up for the right of this one girl to live in peace in our country. But I have also heard people on both sides of the issue ask, ‘what’s so special about this girl?’ and they have a point. Because hundreds of people face deportation every year, and they don’t all get such a fuss made over them. Does this re-entrench the harmful dichotomy of the ‘worthy’ and exceptional migrant versus ‘unworthy’ or ‘unwanted’ migrants?

By all accounts, Yashika seems like a lovely girl, a bright girl with offers from good universities, likely to go on to do very well in life, but not an exceptional girl. The dribs and drabs of her family’s story has emerged bit by bit in the media, and the story is not a pretty one – attempted rape and violence on the part of a family member is an ordeal to be taken seriously. However, and I am talking purely on the basis of what the media has reported here and I appreciate that I have no legal authority to say this, but it seems that she is not a refugee. In order to qualify as a refugee in this country you have to be able to prove a well-founded fear of persecution in your home country on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, political views or membership of a particular social group. It is a narrow set of criteria and deliberately so. Being threatened or attacked by a drug-dealing uncle simply doesn’t fit into those grounds. The argument I have heard many too many times on this issue is that if we start accepting women who have been abused into the country as refugees, too many would qualify. It’s a sick logic, but it remains the law. And so despite all the support for Yashika, despite all we have tried to do, the fact remains that the Home Office has acted lawfully in removing her. Disgustingly and perversely, maybe, but lawfully. And that’s important. It’s important because it emphasises how very unexceptional she is, how very normal her case is, perhaps even, that despite the support she has, she is more like all the other ‘undesirable’ migrants that our government has sworn to remove than it would be too comfortable to admit.

What is interesting, is that the majority of Yashika’s legion supporters that I have heard tweeting and writing articles over the past weeks do not seriously base their arguments for her being allowed to stay on the fact that she is a refugee who would not be safe in Mauritius. Nor do they claim she is anything more than a bright student and a valued member of her school. Yashika is not presented as either a refugee or a ‘Tier 1’ highly skilled migrant, she is just a girl. A normal girl, or, let’s take it further, a human being. With her school friends and her ‘A’ levels to take and a good number of people in this country have recognised her humanity and simply do not understand why it is so important to chase her out.

I am sure that many of those same people have not yet recognised the humanity of each individual asylum seeker and immigrant in this country and have not yet come to the same conclusion that each of them should stay. The shock and outrage at the government’s failure to step in and ‘save’ Yashika speaks for itself here – when people recognise an immigrant’s humanity, they find it outrageous that they should be so ill-treated. When the same thing happens to a faceless group of ‘illegal immigrants’ they do not feel the same. They haven’t noticed that they, too, are human.

Yashika’s is not an exceptional case where high-ranking government ministers should intervene because it’s so unbearable. The people who are asking themselves how Theresa May and James Brokenshire can stand idly by while such a horrible case plays out are forgetting that they DO IT EVERY DAY. They watch cases of ordinary law-abiding people being up-rooted from their families, their communities, the lives they have made and dreamed of and sent off elsewhere to danger, to poverty, to isolation as a matter of routine. The Home Office spends its time actively implementing these operations where removing someone like Yashika is not an outrageous aberration: it is the whole point. Removing people like Yashika is the aim of government policy to ‘bring down net migration’ and create a ‘hostile environment’ for ‘illegal immigrants’ and to them, Yashika is as fair game as anybody else.

The great thing is that so many people don’t agree. That’s the real lesson to be learned from this campaign: not that the Home Office is heartless, but that people can be convinced of an immigrant’s humanity, even if they don’t fit within our narrow definition of the ‘brightest and best’ that are the only ones we are supposed to want.

Now, once a lot of people have realised that one of these ‘illegals’, just one of these ‘undesirables’ is actually a human person, who may not need a million pounds or anything else at all exceptional about her in order to have a decent claim to stay where she is, among her friends and community, and continue her education. Once people have seen it once, the challenge is to make them see it again. To use Yashika shamelessly to challenge the dominant narrative of the migrant as the benefits cheat, as the terrorist, as the undesirable. If we could get more people to view many many more migrants living in the UK and in fear of removal as fully human, fully ordinary, fully valuable, fully like Yashika, then we’d be getting somewhere. Then perhaps the logic of exclusion, of division and of deportation can be questioned.

And question is what people have been doing: Why do we have to chase down a young girl before she completes her education? Why book three flights for her one after the other, before the rest of her family are able to make a plan for what to do and how best to protect her? Why hold an innocent young girl in a notorious detention centre for weeks? And, come to that, at what cost? The Migration Observatory has estimated that in 2010, keeping somebody in detention cost an average of £120 per night. And that doesn’t count the number of seats booked for Yashika’s benefit on three separate planes heading off across the world. I think that a lot of people are thinking, not that Yashika is somehow special and deserving of extra attention, but that she is just a normal nice girl and that spending so much money and heartbreak and energy on her deportation is a complete failure to adequately prioritise. It is a dedication to being ‘tough on immigration’ at the expense of any basic humanity or even logic.

It needs to be questioned, again and again, by those of us who have never worried that we may be arbitrarily removed from the UK or have our children removed from us. By those of us who have never had to justify to a seething mass of Tories and UKIPers our continued existence in the country. The accident of being born to the ‘right’ family in the ‘right’ place frees many of us from such concerns. Shame on those who continue to act as though they had personally built Big Ben and founded the NHS and that’s why immigrants aren’t entitled to them. Shame on those who would pursue every last school girl who doesn’t fit within their narrow definition of who is acceptable. Power to the people who saw Yashika as another human being and who spoke up for her. Power to all the immigrants fighting to stay and to build their lives here alongside us. We must not give up and we must remember that every one of them is another Yashika: they are all human, they all deserve the same certainties from life that some of us take for granted, and to forcibly deport any one of them is a humiliation and degradation of our common humanity.



Rights groups reaffirm opposition to the use of list of ‘Safe Countries of Origin’ in Belgium

24.05.13. On 15 May, the Belgian government published a Royal Decree establishing its unchanged list of ‘Safe Countries of Origin’ of asylum seekers, which includes Kosovo, Albania, Montenegro, Serbia, Bosnia & Herzegovina, FYROM and India. Asylum seekers originating from these countries will continue to have their applications examined in accelerated procedures, as it is assumed that they are unlikely to have suffered persecution.
ECRE member organisations in Belgium, Ciré and the Flemish Refugee Council, along with the Human Rights’ League and the Association for the Rights of Foreigners have spoken out to reaffirm their strong opposition to the use of lists of safe countries of origin for asylum seekers in Belgium. According to these groups, accelerated asylum procedures do not respect the fundamental rights of asylum seekers. Asylum seekers from such countries face a higher burden of proof of persecution or mistreatment, a reduced amount of time for the decision-making process, with decisions usually returned within two weeks, reduced opportunity to appeal against negative decisions, and deportations are not suspended in order to allow applicants to stay in the territory while appealing a negative decision. Furthermore, asylum seekers from these ‘Safe Countries’ face additional restrictions on access to reception facilities.
The organisations point out that among the populations of supposed ‘safe countries’ are minority groups,
ECRE Weekly Bulletin – 24 May 2013
such as the Roma, against whom discrimination is well-documented and widespread.
France removed Kosovo and Albania from its list of safe countries in 2012, but Belgium keeps them, illustrating the unequal chances faced by asylum seekers in different EU countries. For further information:
 Flemish Refugee Council, Government confirms list of ‘Safe Countries of Origin’: asylum seekers are still the losers (in Flemish), 22 May 2013
 Ciré, The government confirms the list of safe countries: bad practice and hypocritical policy (in French), 22 May 2013
 ECRE weekly Bulletin, Safe countries of origin: an inconvenient truth, 30 March 2012

UK and Denmark announce protection schemes for Afghan interpreters

24.05.13. About 600 Afghan interpreters who worked with British forces in Afghanistan (about half of the total) will be eligible for asylum in the UK, the government announced this week. The government proposes to grant interpreters a five year residence permit -the standard duration for recognised refugees-, with the possibility of applying for permanent residence thereafter. According to the BBC, whether close family members will be allowed to accompany the interpreters will be decided on a case by case basis by immigration officials.
The British Refugee Council has noted that the proposal has received support from across the political spectrum, but voices concerns that the eligibility criteria for the scheme are set quite high and may well exclude many people in need of protection. Maurice Wren, Chief Executive of the British Refugee Council stated that he welcomes the government’s recognition of the dangers faced by many in Afghanistan, adding that, “Given this level of instability and danger, we urge the Government to rethink its practice of returning young people, many barely out of childhood, to the situation that exists in Afghanistan right now.”
The organisation Avaaz, which had presented a petition to the government signed by 82,000 people in support of offering protection to Afghan interpreters, has welcomed the news, but agrees that the scheme may well exclude many deserving cases, simply because their contract with UK forces ended before 1 January 2013.
Under the scheme, interpreters fulfilling certain conditions, who have worked on the front line with UK troops for over a year, may come to the UK, or chose to remain in Afghanistan and sign-up to five years of fully-funded training and education, or continue to receive their current salary for a further 18 months.
The Danish government has also announced a plan to provide visas to interpreters who have worked with Danish troops in order for them to be able to come to Denmark to then apply for asylum. Danish Defence Minister, Nick Haekkerup, has said that Denmark has a “moral obligation” to help. The Danish Refugee Council has welcomed the initiative: “Although we do not yet know the practical details of the screening process we see this as a positive and responsible initiative aiming at ensuring the safety of a vulnerable group of people”, says Head of Asylum in the Danish Refugee Council, Eva Singer.
The pledges from the British and Danish governments are in contrast to an announcement from the Dutch government this week that there is not sufficient support in parliament for an equivalent protection scheme in the Netherlands.
For further information:
 ECRE Weekly Bulletin, Afghans working with European troops face uncertain fate, 22 March 2013
 The Guardian, Afghan interpreters’ resettlement scheme ‘does not go far enough’, 22 May 2013
 BBC, Climbdown over Afghan interpreters’ right to come to UK, 22 May 2013
 BBC, Afghan interpreters: ‘No life for us here’, 22 May 2013
 Bloomberg Business News, UK, Denmark eye visas for Afghan interpreters, 22 May 2013
 You can follow updates on the subject on #AfghanInterpreters on Twitter

Non-punishment principle for victims of trafficking must be upheld

17.05.13. European law enforcement bodies and members of the judiciary must uphold the principle of non-punishment for victims of human trafficking who have committed crimes as a consequence of their trafficked situation, says a report by the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). Crimes typically related to trafficking, such as the use of false documents, work in cannabis factories, or pickpocketing are often committed under coercion by victims of trafficking for the profit of traffickers, argues the report, and their perpetrators should not be detained, prosecuted or punished.
Maria Grazia Giammarinaro, OSCE Special Representative and Coordinator for Combatting Trafficking, delineates 29 recommendations on how to handle instances where there are indications that crimes have been committed because of exploitation. The principle of non-punishment will allow victims to testify in court without fear of reprisal, improving the chances of prosecuting the traffickers themselves, argues Giammarinaro. The report highlights that it is often traffickers’ deliberate strategy to expose their victims to criminality, in order maintain control and prevent them from seeking help from law enforcement officials.
The report recommends that specific provisions be introduced into national legislation to ensure the protection of victims of trafficking. It also highlights that, as per the judgment in the case Adimi R v. Uxbridge Magistrate’s Court, immigration related offences or detention must not hinder victims’ ability to make an asylum application or be used to exclude them from refugee status.
Giammarinaro presented the report at the 22nd session of the UNODC’s Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice at the end of April. For further information:
 UN News Centre, UN Member States appraise Global Action Plan to combat human trafficking, 13 May 2013
 Council of Europe, Convention on Action Against Trafficking in Human Beings, 2005

Over 70,000 European citizens demand the protection of migrants at the EU’s external borders

26.04.2013.  Amnesty International presented this week a petition signed by 70,141 European citizens to the chair of the Civil Liberties Committee, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, who accepted it on behalf of the European Parliament. The petition calls on the European Parliament to fulfil its watchdog role, holding governments to account on their treatment of migrants, refugees and asylum seekers at Europe’s borders.

The presentation of the petition is part of the ‘When you don’t exist’ campaign, to draw attention to the plight of migrants forced to attempt illegal crossings into the EU. Nicolas Beger, Director of Amnesty Europe said, “Borders are one of the few areas where EU countries can largely escape scrutiny. Migrants suffer the impact of being ‘out of sight, out of mind’.” Speaking at the event in front of the European Parliament in Brussels, Ahmed, from Somalia, described  his dangerous journey through Yemen, Syria, Turkey and Greece, to Sweden.

18,000 men, women and children are known to have died along European borders since 1988. In 2011 alone, 1,500 people drowned or went missing in the Mediterranean, fleeing the conflicts of the Arab Spring.

For further information:

–         ECRE, Interview with Carmen Dupont, Coordinator of Amnesty International’s ‘When you don’t exist’ campaign, 02.11.2012

Russia steps up clamp-down on NGOs

26.04.2013. ECRE’s Russian Member, Memorial Centre for Human Rights, along with its sister organisation, the Committee for Civic Assistance, have come under increased pressure this week from government authorities following the draconian legislation on NGOs adopted last year.

The offices of both organisations have been raided by officials from the Prosecutor General’s office and other agencies, including the police and tax authorities. The Federal Migration Service attended the latest check at the Civic Assistance Committee, upon request by a member of the state institution Russian Civic Chambers, Georgy Fedorov, who has accused the Civic Assistance Committee of “organising illegal migration and the legalisation of illegals” and in particular of bringing Muslim extremists to Russia, passing them off as Coptic Christians from Egypt. Svetlana Gannushkina, Chair of the Committee for Civic Assistance, has called this accusation libellous. The Civic Assistance Committee has decided to stop cooperating with investigations until their legality has been ascertained.

Furthermore, the election watchdog NGO Golos has become this week the first NGO to be fined  under the same legislation. Golos has been fined the sum of 300,000 Roubles (6,300 Euros) for failing to declare itself a ‘Foreign Agent’, despite not having accepted any foreign funding since the passing of the controversial new law.

Last February, Russian NGOs lodged an application to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) to contest the law that establishes that any NGO engaging in ‘political activity’ and receiving foreign funding can be asked to register on a database of “foreign agents”. Moreover, any materials distributed by such NGOs, including in the media and on the internet, have to be accompanied by a reference to their foreign agent status.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) has published a report this week analysing a series of changes that have been introduced since Vladmir Putin’s return to Presidency. The developments include the nationwide campaign of invasive inspections of NGOs, the harassment and in some cases imprisonment of political activists, the “foreign agents” law, the treason law, and the assembly law. Hugh Williamson, HRW’s Europe and Central Asia Director, said, “the campaign is unprecedented in its scope and scale, and seems clearly aimed at intimidating and marginalizing civil society groups. This inspection campaign can potentially be used to force some groups to end advocacy work, or to close them down.”

For further information:

–         ECRE, We are all foreign agents!, November 2012

–         ECRE Weekly Bulletin, Russian authorities raid NGO Offices, 29 March 2013

Nils Muižnieks: Greece must curb violence against migrants and combat impunity

19.04.2013. In a new report on Greece, the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe, Nils Muižnieks, has urged the Greek government to use the full force of the national and international legislation available to combat racism and hate crime, which continue to represent an urgent and serious concern for the protection of human rights in the country. Legal provisions exist, the report states, to address racism and hate crime, including potentially banning the neo-Nazi party, Golden Dawn. According to Muižnieks, a “sustained and concerted effort” is required, especially of the police and the courts, to protect rule of law in the country.

The Commissioner calls on the Greek state to facilitate the process of reporting hate crimes by exempting such complaints from the fees imposed for filing a police complaint and providing adequate legal aid to victims if necessary. According to the Commissioner, the threat of racist violence against foreigners must be tackled through immediately establishing an independent police complaints mechanism, accelerating the implementation of reforms to national anti-racism legislation, and adopting a programme of systematic and comprehensive training in anti-discrimination law and practice for all police officers, border guards and members of the judiciary.

Reforms to the Greek asylum system, including filling the large gap in assuring adequate reception facilities for asylum seekers, in particular to ensure the protection of unaccompanied migrant children, should also be accelerated. The Commissioner calls on the Greek authorities to review their policy of systematic detention of migrant and the construction of more detention facilities and to consider possible alternative measures.

In its response to the report, the Greek government states that it shares concern over the considerable increase in racist attacks, but argues that “racist attitudes remain a marginal phenomenon in the Greek society”. According to the Greek government, support for Golden Dawn does not indicate a rise of racism in society but rather is motivated by opposition to austerity measures and increasing unemployment.

For further information:

–         The Washington Post, Council of Europe: Greece “within its rights” to ban extreme-right group golden Dawn, 16 April 2013

–         Greek Reporter, EU Official says Greece could ban Golden Dawn, 16 April 2013

–         To Vima, Hate Crimes (in Greek), 14 April 2013

Greece urged to improve its treatment of Syrian refugees

19.04.2013. On Wednesday, UNHCR presented its protection considerations and recommendations regarding Syrians in Greece. UNHCR calls on the Greek authorities to facilitate access to the territory for Syrians as well as unhindered access to asylum procedures. Furthermore, UNHCR’s Head of Office in Greece, Giorgos Tsarbopoulos, emphasised that until the security and human rights situation in the region has sufficiently improved, no Syrians should be deported back to Syria or neighbouring countries. UNHCR emphasized that Syrian refugees should not be detained and that their expulsion orders or return decisions should be suspended.

Major General Emmanuel Katriadakis of the Greek Ministry for Public Order and Citizen’s Protection said that an order has been in effect since 9 April, according to which Syrians may only be detained for ‘a few days’ in order to identify their origin. There will also be a six-month suspension on all return orders of Syrians, with the possibility of renewal every six months until the situation is back to normal.

Reacting to the announcement, the Greek Council for Refugees (GCR), Member of ECRE, said: “We welcome the Greek government’s announcement to provide protection to Syrian asylum seekers and refugees and we look forward to seeing that this is actually enforced by the relevant national authorities. We will continue monitoring the situation through our visits to detention centres across Greece”

Although according to official statements, no Syrian national has been deported by Greece in 2012, some testimonies received by UNHCR and other human rights organisations from Syrians refer to having experienced ‘push-backs’ or informal returns from the Greek border.

Of the 152 Syrian nationals who received a decision in first instance on their asylum application during 2012 in Greece, 150 were rejected and two were granted international protection.

According to the Ministry of Public Order and Citizen Protection, 7,927 Syrians were arrested for irregular entry in Greece in 2012. 1,276 Syrians were arrested in the first quarter of 2013.

Detention discourages Syrians from applying from asylum, GCR says: “Whether they hold papers or not, Syrians are kept in detention centres for six months. In cases where they apply for asylum, they are held in detention for 12 months following the submission of their claim for asylum. Together with their distrust of the Greek asylum system, this is the main reason for which they do not want to apply for protection”.

Asylum seekers in Greece may be detained for up to 18 months, while conditions in detention and  reports of ill-treatment and police brutality continue to receive intense criticism from human rights groups and have resulted in hunger strikes, suicide attempts and riots.

Aitima, another of ECRE’s Greek member organisations has underlined that unaccompanied children, families, victims of torture and the sick are all systematically detained in Greece, as well as migrants who have no possibility of being deported. The NGO emphasizes that this is not only contrary to national and international law, but an unnecessary additional cost to the already over-stretched Greek state. Aitima urges the authorities to put an end to the detention of asylum seekers, to investigate the allegations of detainees’ ill-treatment, and issue six-month stay permits for individuals whose deportation is not feasible.

For further information:

–         Aitima, Detention of irregular migrants and asylum seekers, 10 April 2013

–         Ekathimerini, Pressed by human rights activists, Greece pledges to stop deportations of Syrian refugees, 17 April 2013

–         Le Nouvel Observateur, Syrian Refugees: Greece must prepare to receive them (in French), 17 April 2013

–         Reuters, Number of Syrians trying to reach EU jumped in 2012, 18 April 2013

–         Infomobile, The plight of Syrian refugees in Greece (Video), 10 April 2013

–         International Commission of Jurists, ECRE, Second Joint Submission of the to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe in the case of M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece and related cases, February 2013

Médecins du Monde: Patients in Portugal and Greece have to choose between eating and buying medicines

12.04.2013. The most vulnerable persons in European societies are becoming even more so in terms of access to healthcare, social exclusion, living conditions and being at risk of violence according to the findings of a new report by Médicins du Monde (MdM) published this week. The report shows the dramatic effects that the economic crisis, rising unemployment and cuts to social protection, is having in access to healthcare.

MdM highlights that patients in clinics in Portugal and Greece have had to choose between feeding themselves and buying their medicines, and clinics across Europe have been forced to expand the services they provide, running soup kitchens alongside health centres, due to the illogicality of providing healthcare to people if they cannot afford to feed themselves. The report is highly critical of measures such as the Spanish Royal Decree 16/2012 of April 2012, which limits foreigners’ access to healthcare, prompting health workers in several regions to reject it on the basis that it is counter to the ethical principles of the Hippocratic oath. Measures such as this are also, according to MdM, economically unsound, as they force more people to rely only on emergency services, which are more expensive to provide.

81% of the patients surveyed had no way of accessing healthcare without paying the full costs. 20% of the MdM service users reported having been denied access to care by a healthcare provider in the last 12 months (especially in Spain, 62%). 40% of the patients surveyed had fled war or experienced violence in their home countries or on their journey to Europe, while 26% reported experiencing violence once in Europe. Xenophobic violence is a particular problem in Greece, where MdM clinics have been targeted by right wing extremists.

The report is also particularly critical of the fact that children, especially those from marginalised groups such as Roma, or those in an irregular migration situation are not being systematically immunised. The practitioners warn that this is detrimental to health in the larger population and could lead to epidemics.

The findings of the report are based on 19,302 consultations and 11,921 diagnoses with 8,412 patients at MdM clinics in 14 cities across seven European countries: Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the UK.

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) is currently working on a report about inequalities in access to health care in Greece, with a particular focus on the situation of vulnerable groups, such as the poor, the elderly, migrants and minorities.

For further information:

–         Médecins du Monde, Press Release, April 2013

–         Médecins du Monde, Update on health legislation in ten European Countries, April 2013

NGOs, UNHCR and European Commission welcome Turkey’s new asylum law

12.04.2013. The new Turkish Law on Foreigners and International Protection has been welcomed by NGOs, UNHCR and the European Commission. Oktay Durukan of ECRE member organisation in Turkey, the Helsinki Citizen’s Assembly (HCA), told the ECRE Weekly Bulletin that the new law represents a “hugely important step forward in the right direction for Turkey”.

Turkey has not lifted its ‘geographical limitation’ and therefore non-European refugees will still not have the right to long-term protection in the country.  However, in other areas, according to HCA, the law brings Turkish asylum legislation almost entirely in line with EU standards for reception, procedures for the recognition of refugees, and, for the first time, other beneficiaries of international protection. The law provides basic procedural safeguards including appeals against negative asylum decisions and deportation orders with automatic suspensive effect. Furthermore, lawyers and UNHCR are guaranteed access to pre removal detention centres.

The law also provides for accommodation for asylum seekers; seven reception centres are currently under construction, largely funded by the EU. All beneficiaries of international protection in Turkey will be entitled to free healthcare, although restrictions will still apply to access to the labour market.

HCA expressed concerns that shortcomings in EU legislation have been transferred into this law too, including provisions for accelerated procedures and the introduction of the Safe Third Country concept. HCA is also concerned that the time limit of 15 days to file an appeal, and the short supply of legal assistance providers in the country could make the process extremely difficult in practice.

HCA welcomed the transparency with which the negotiations were conducted, with opportunities for civil society stakeholders to contribute to the process.

The new law establishes a new civilian asylum and migration authority, under the Ministry of the Interior, which will also prepare the implementing legislation.

According to UNHCR, Turkey is hosting 34,576 asylum seekers and refugees originating from Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran and Somalia, as well as 293,000 Syrian refugees.

For further information:

–          EU Business, Eyeing EU, Turkey adopts asylum and migration law, 5 April 2013

–          European Commission, Joint Statement by Commissioners Stefan Füle and Cecilia Malmström on the adoption by the Turkish Parliament of the Law on Foreigners and International Protection, 5 April 2013

–          World Bulletin, EU welcomes new Turkish law on foreigners, 6 April 2013

–          Turkish Press, Turkish president approves law on rights of foreigners, 10 April 2013