|
The
UK government has agreed to establish a resettlement scheme which
will allow a specific number of refugees, up to 500 in 2003-4, to
enter and settle in the UK. This program is an extension of the
many existing resettlement schemes operated by countries throughout
the world, in conjunction with UNHCR, which provide durable solutions
for refugees in particularly vulnerable situations, and where resettlement
in a third country is the preferable solution for their circumstances.
Candidates
for resettlement will be have been classified by UNHCR Field Offices
as refugees, and using UNHCR resettlement criteria are identified
as:
- not able to integrate locally;
- nor able to return to their countries of origin;
- and who have pressing humanitarian or security needs.
Candidates
so identified by UNHCR Field Offices, are referred to countries
of resettlement, including the UK, for consideration for inclusion
in their national resettlement scheme.
It
is important to note the following points:
- Refugees
cannot “apply” for resettlement, either from within
the UK nor in other countries.
- Candidates
are identified by local UNHCR Field Offices on a humanitarian basis
from existing refugee caseloads outside the UK.
- UNHCR
Branch Office London has no role in “selecting” those
eligible for the scheme.
- The
UK Home Office makes the decision on who to accept under the program,
not UNHCR.
- Refugees
in the UK interested in having family members reunified in the UK
are advised to contact the British Red Cross.
More
information is available from:
www.homeoffice.gov.uk
www.unhcr.org
www.redcross.org.uk
Further
Background Information
What
is resettlement?
History
of resettlement
The
history of resettlement in the United Kingdom
Countries
of resettlement
What
is resettlement?
Despite
the best efforts of countries of asylum to help people who have
fled their homes and country, the trauma and suffering of refugees
doesn’t simply disappear. They are rarely able to simply pick
up everyday activities in a new setting and live and work as they
did before. Sometimes the threats that caused refugees to leave
their homes in the first place are present also in the country of
refuge. There may be a risk that refugees be forced to repatriate
before they’re willing to, or new sources of danger for individuals
with special needs or parts of the refugee community.
When
individual refugees are at risk, or when there are other reasons
to help them leave the region, UNHCR attempts to resettle them in
safe third countries. With voluntary repatriation and local integration,
resettlement is one of the three long-term solutions UNHCR works
for on behalf of refugees.
Through
resettlement, refugees gain legal protection - residency and often
eventually citizenship - from governments who agree, on a case-by-case
basis, to open up their communities to new members. The task of
receiving and settling refugees requires that UNHCR works closely
with central and local authorities, non-governmental organisations
(NGOs) and religious and social welfare groups.
The
UNHCR Resettlement Handbook, available at www.unhcr.org , sets clear
standards for referring individuals to prospective countries. States
may accept or reject cases referred by UNHCR, and may also decide
to admit refugees under resettlement programs who have not been
referred by UNHCR. Once a refugee arrives in a resettlement country,
it is that government which takes him or her in hand.
Following
World War II, hundreds of thousands of Hungarian, Chilean, Ugandan,
Vietnamese and Bosnian refugees have been resettled in a succession
of large operations. Today, ten t countries have significant annual
resettlement programmes or quotas: Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland,
the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the
United States of America. In addition to these traditional countries,
eight emerging resettlement countries have started to implement
resettlement programmes in co-operation with UNHCR. These countries
are: Benin, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Chile, Iceland, Ireland, Spain,
Argentina and the UK. Other countries accept cases on an ad hoc
basis. UNHCR has encouraged more governments to extend resettlement
opportunities to refugees in need.
While
the criteria which States use to determine eligibility for resettlement
vary, like the numbers of refugees they accept, all programs recognise
the range of compelling circumstances, including protection cases,
family reunification, refugees with special needs such as women
at-risk, handicapped refugees or serious medical cases.
UNHCR
promotes resettlement within the context of broader policies which
strive to address the causes of flight at the outset, and strengthen
the principal of asylum. The ability to resettle refugees in need
remains an effective way of offering refugees both protection and
a lasting solution to their dilemma.
History
of resettlement
Although
the concept of resettlement was not clearly articulated until the
mid-1960s, it had been undertaken in one form or another from the
outset of the system of international protection for refugees. Between
the two World Wars, resettlement was used as the principal or partial
solution for a number of refugee situations. During the early 1920’s,
for example, some 45,000 White Russians who had fled to China after
the Russian Revolution were subsequently resettled elsewhere. In
the 1930’s, successions of international refugee organisations
were charged with resettling Jews and others who were fleeing Nazi
persecution.
Resettlement
evolved in the context of the Cold War. The historical effort to
help displaced people in the aftermath of World War II matched the
desire of Governments to facilitate the movement of certain people
for foreign and domestic policy reasons. When the United Nations
replaced the League of Nations in 1947, it established a new body,
the International Refugee Organisation (IRO). The IRO’s mandate
was to protect existing refugee groups and one new category - the
21 million or so refugees scattered throughout Europe in the aftermath
of World War II. Initially, the IRO’s main objective was repatriation,
but the political build-up to the Cold War tilted the balance instead
towards resettlement of those who had “valid objections”
to returning home. Such “valid objections” included
“persecution, or fear of persecution, because of race, religion,
nationality or political opinions”. Over a period of five
years, from 1947 to 1951, the IRO resettled well over a million
people (four-fifths of them outside Europe), while repatriating
a mere 73,000.
The
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)
replaced the IRO in 1951. By that time, international protection
was firmly enshrined as the new organisation’s principal raison
d’être. The Statute of UNHCR, adopted by a General Assembly
resolution in December 1950, outlines the responsibilities of the
Office. The most important of these responsibilities are to provide
international protection and to seek permanent solutions for the
problem of refugees.
Similar
to IRO, UNHCR, during its early years, made extensive use of resettlement
as a means of clearing the European refugee camps after World War
II. Over the next three decades, voluntary repatriation, local integration
and resettlement enjoyed equal status as durable solutions, depending
on the circumstances. The Soviet invasion of Hungary in 1956 resulted
in 200,000 refugees fleeing to Yugoslavia and Austria, many of whom
were later resettled in other countries.
In
1972, President Idi Amin of Uganda expelled most of the country’s
Asian minority, many of whom had lived there for decades and had
no other country to go to. With the help of UNHCR, the International
Organisation for Migration (IOM), the International Committee of
the Red Cross (ICRC), and the United Nations Development Programme
(UNDP), some 40,000 Ugandan Asians were resettled in a matter of
a few months in a total of 25 countries.
Following
a coup d’état in Chile in September 1973, another resettlement
programme was launched. Refugees from neighbouring countries were
faced with a hostile regime in their country of asylum and, fearing
refoulement, sought sanctuary in churches and embassies. The High
Commissioner addressed an appeal to the Chilean Government that
refugees in that country be adequately protected and on no account
expelled to their country of origin. Assurances were subsequently
received from the Government to the effect that the provisions of
the 1951 Convention and of the 1967 Protocol, to which Chile is
a party, would be fully respected.
Given
the human rights record in the region, resettlement was the only
option. Once again, the international community responded, first
by extending diplomatic asylum in their embassies and subsequently
by offering resettlement places. The authorities agreed to the establishment
of “safe havens”, run by a National Committee which
included representatives of the churches, where refugees who wished
to leave the country could receive the necessary assistance and
protection pending their departure. From there they could emigrate
to a number of countries of second asylum which had generously responded
to the High Commissioner’s appeal for help. By March 1974,
nearly 5,000 people had been resettled to a total of 19 countries.
Resettlement, mainly to other countries in the region, continued
to play a prominent role in Latin America throughout the 1970’s
and in Central America in the 1980’s.
The
idea of a sanctuary where persons seek asylum is of course not new
in history, but the establishment of “safe-havens” which
was also applied to non-citizen Asians under expulsion order in
Uganda before their departure from that country is an entirely novel
device in the practice and experience of international protection
as distinct from diplomatic asylum which is based on the inviolability
of the diplomatic premises or rests on the basis of reciprocity
and the consent of the host State.
The
largest and most dramatic example of resettlement in modern times
occurred in South East Asia. A massive exodus from Viet Nam followed
the collapse of the Saigon regime in 1975. The many that crossed
the perilous seas of South East Asia became known as the “boat
people”. By 1979, a major protection crisis had developed
as certain asylum countries refused to accept more refugees, prevented
boats from landing and in some cases towed them out onto the high
seas. At the same time, over 200,000 refugees were languishing in
camps in the region. Confronted with this political and humanitarian
crisis, the international community decided at the first conference
on refugees from Indo-China, held in 1979, that Vietnamese boat
people arriving in first asylum countries in South East Asia would
be allowed to land in the region but would then be resettled in
other countries. In the years that followed, nearly 700,000 Vietnamese
were resettled.
When
resettlement countries grew reluctant to continue open-ended resettlement
of all boat people, a backlog of those who did not meet increasingly
restrictive resettlement criteria started to accumulate in camps.
Nevertheless, the overall number of refugees in first asylum camps
gradually declined.
In
1986, the situation changed dramatically as a result of a sudden
and massive increase in clandestine departures from Viet Nam. The
number of boat people in camps leapt from 31,694 at the beginning
of 1986 to 65,349 by early 1989. Since there had not been a significant
deterioration in the human rights situation in Viet Nam, it was
clear that the exodus, while retaining a refugee dimension, was
increasingly driven by economic factors.
In
1989, when blanket resettlement for Indo-Chinese refugees had ceased
following the introduction of the Comprehensive Plan of Action,
the major focus of resettlement activity shifted to the Middle East.
In 1992, UNHCR sought to resettle some 30,000 Iraqis from Saudi
Arabia after efforts to explore possibilities for voluntary repatriation
and local integration had failed. Between April 1992 and June 1997,
approximately 21,800 Iraqis had been accepted for resettlement.
This effort is now drawing to a close as almost all the refugees
have found new homes.
Resettlement
efforts in Africa in the first half of the 1990’s continued
to focus on countries of the Horn. With civil strife and ethnic
warfare widespread, resettlement for especially vulnerable refugees
in Africa - including women-at-risk, survivors of torture and disabled
refugees - remains a serious concern for UNHCR.
Another
major challenge arose in 1992 with the need for resettlement of
inmates from places of detention in Bosnia and Herzegovina. An emergency
operation started on 1 October 1992 with the help of the International
Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) who transferred detainees to a
UNHCR centre at Karlovac in Croatia. By early July 1993, 22 countries
had offered temporary protection or resettlement to the ex-detainees
and their families and over 11,000 people had left for third countries.
By June 1997, UNHCR had been directly involved in the resettlement
of some 47,000 refugees from former Yugoslavia. History has shown
that when the needs are compelling, and the political will exists,
resettlement can be arranged quickly and efficiently.
As
in the case of the million and more Indo-Chinese who have been resettled
in Australia, Canada, France and the United States of America, third
country resettlement often entails taking refugees from their country
of first refuge, transporting them thousands of miles across the
world, and helping them to adapt to societies where the culture,
climate, language and social structure are unfamiliar. In spite
of all efforts, refugees may face problems adapting to such different
circumstances. Nevertheless, it is the experience of many Governments
and non-governmental organisations that the overwhelming number
of refugees successfully overcome such challenges in order to establish
themselves in their new country and community. Many resettled refugees,
particularly younger family members, have made an astonishing success
of their new lives.
There
is a growing recognition of the need for a more comprehensive approach
to refugee problems that involves helping different groups of refugees
to find appropriate solutions to their plight, according to their
individual circumstances, aspirations and the opportunities available.
Resettlement is an essential element in a comprehensive strategy
of refugee protection.
The
history of resettlement in the United Kingdom
The
UK has a long history of resettling refugees, if only on an ad hoc
basis. The following is a chronological listing of the groups and
the number of arrivals that have been formally resettled since the
end of the Second World War.
•
Polish Second World War exiles and dependants, 1940-50: 210,000
Polish refugees fleeing the war included those directly fleeing
the Nazi invasion as well as Soviet-occupation, the escape of Polish
servicemen from Nazis controlled France, and refugees resettled
from camps in the British zone of post-war Germany. The Polish refugees
integrated into the United Kingdom successfully, finding both employment
and housing with relative ease, in part due to the entitlements
they received as part of the 1947 Polish Resettlement Act. It was
during this flow that dispersal mechanisms and basic reception centres
were used for the first time.
•
Hungarians fleeing popular uprising, 1957: 20,000
This refugee group precipitated from the Soviet occupation of Hungary,
and Imre Nagy’s removal from government. Two agencies oversaw
the refugees’ resettlement from camps in Austria into the
United Kingdom – the British Council for Aid to Refugees (now
the Refugee Council) and the National Coal Board.
•
Ugandan Asians expelled from Uganda, 1972-4: 42,000
The Ugandan Asians, forcibly removed by the government of Idi Amin,
travelled to the United Kingdom initially not as refugees but on
British travel documents. Local charities were informally responsible
for a significant amount and range of service provision and the
Ugandan Asians were dispersed to many parts of the UK and have achieved
great success in their new communities.
• Chileans escaping a military coup, 1973-9: 3,000
Chileans selected for resettlement in the United Kingdom were assisted
by a conglomerate of small voluntary organisations organised under
the title of the ‘Joint Working Group for Refugees from Chile’.
These local organisations were central to the reception process,
organising accommodation and language training and employment placements.
•
Vietnamese displaced persons, 1979-92: 22,500
The Vietnamese population resettled in the United Kingdom was equally
drawn from North and South Vietnam, and nearly one-fifth of the
group was ethnic Chinese. Many ethnic Chinese initially fled to
camps in Hong Kong, only to be later resettled in the United Kingdom.
•
Kosovan Evacuation Programme, 1999: 4,000+
The Kosovan programme was offered as a form of temporary protection
to those fleeing ethnic violence in the former Yugoslavia. Indeed,
many of those accepted by the UK government in 2000 under the terms
of this programme have left the United Kingdom after the expiration
of their status. Evacuees were dispersed to 33 reception centres
in Northwest England, Yorkshire, the East Midlands, and Scotland.
This
information is from the navigation guide to resettlement programmes
by
George Wright, produced by the Information Centre about Asylum and
Refugees
in the UK - ICAR. The full version of the guide is available at
http://www.icar.org.uk/?lid=2002
Countries
of resettlement
See
also the 'Easy
Guide' to resettlement programmes.
USA
The
United States has a long tradition of granting refuge to those fleeing
persecution. Since the Second World War, more refugees have found
permanent homes in the United States than in any other country.
Admission of refugees of special humanitarian concern to the United
States as well as admission of those for the purpose of family reunification
are important tenets of the U.S. refugee resettlement programme.
In recent years the U.S. Government has modified its resettlement
focus to give priority to cases identified by UNHCR, for example,
in Africa and the Middle East.
Resettlement
remains one of the three durable solutions available to refugees.
Resettlement to the US accounts for 50% of UNHCR’s resettlement
efforts. In the US resettlement enjoys a long history, and continues
to be a prominent part of its overall response to refugees. Most
national voluntary agencies dealing with resettlement predate UNHCR,
and they remain active partners in supporting refugee matters, and
issues of concern to UNHCR. In the past quarter century, more than
2.5 million refugees have arrived in the US, the vast majority through
resettlement.
Australia
Australia
is a long standing resettlement country, making available each year
a quota of resettlement opportunities for refugees who have not
found a viable asylum elsewhere. Applicants seeking resettlement
in Australia are considered on a case by case basis by Migration
Officers located in Australian overseas missions. Senior Immigration
Officers determine emergency cases in the central office in Canberra.
Canada
Canada’s
resettlement program is administered by the Department of Citizenship
and Immigration Canada (CIC). Canada has a long history of providing
humanitarian assistance to people fleeing persecution in their homeland
or displaced by conflicts. Since World War II Canada has resettled
over 700,000 Convention refugees and persons in refugee-like situations.
Printable
version
|
