Yael Branovsky reported on 04/27/10 in Ynetnews,
“Interior Minister Eli Yihsai has drawn up a plan according to which the Foreign Ministry would approach Eritrea in a bid to return some 13,000 of its citizens who have infiltrated into Israel.
“Yishai presented the plan in a letter to Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman. "According to professional elements in my office one can hold talks with Eritrea in order to find solutions for the problem of infiltrators, since Israel maintains diplomatic relations with the country," Yishai noted.” Yishai wants to send infiltrators back to Eritrea
Two things need to be noted here for their importance, First, the magnitude of the proposed deportation is breathtaking: 13,000! That is about every Eritrean that has entered Israel. Second, notice the deliberate labeling: they are no more refugees; they are “infiltrators”. Of course, the labeling is done in very deliberate, cold-blooded manner. Once you call them infiltrators, you are not morally or legally bound to give refuge to them. What is more, for the sake of Israel’s security, you are then obliged to deport them back to their country.
In light of the above, it is very important for us Eritreans to understand what Israel’s proposed “Infiltration Prevention Bill” is meant to accomplish when it comes to the refugees from Africa, in general, and refugees from Eritrea, in particular.
Below is a commentary/memorandum written by Stephen Lendman in “Dissident Voice” that throws light on the nature and intent of this bill.
This memorandum has been adopted by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, Amnesty International, ASSAF, Aid to Refugees and Asylum Seekers, Hotline For Migrant Workers, African Refugee Development Center, Israel Religious Action Center – Israel Movement for Progressive Judaism, Kav LaOved (Worker's Hotline) and Physicians for Human Rights.
Israel’s Infiltration Prevention Bill
by Stephen Lendman / April 16th, 2010
International law protects refugees and asylum seekers, Article I of the 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees calling them:
“A person who owning to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of their nationality, and is unable to or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail him/herself of the protection of that country.”
Post-WW II, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) was established to help them.
To gain legal protection, they must be outside their country of origin; fear persecution; be harmed or fear harm by their government or others; fear persecution for at least one of the above cited reasons; and pose no danger to others.
The Knesset’s 1950 Law of Return grants every Jew worldwide the right to live in Israel as a citizen. Yet no refugee law exists, despite Israel being a signatory to the 1951 UN Convention. Instead, unpublished Ministry of Interior procedures and secret inter-ministerial determinations are made on a case-by-case basis.
As a result, Israel has the lowest percent of requests granted (for temporary, not permanent status) compared to western states – 1% in 2005, under 0.5% in 2006, and in 2007, 350 refugees got temporary protection, 805 others were denied, and 863 were under review, after which most were rejected.
Legitimate refugees aren’t granted permanent status. At best, they get temporary limited stay permits, bi-annually renewed if it’s determined that country of origin dangers remain. Most often, however, they’re summarily denied (including for women and children) or imprisoned for extended periods under very harsh conditions.
Yet according to international law, Israel is legally and morally bound to help them, although it may establish laws and procedures to do it. Consistently, however, its record is shameless as the least hospitable nation compared to western ones.
Israel’s 1954 Prevention of Infiltration Law was enacted to criminalize fedayeen freedom fighters, deny Palestinians their right of return, and deport them if they came. Now there’s a new proposal to replace the old law, the Infiltration Prevention Law, one the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) calls “one of the most dangerous bills ever presented in the Knesset.” If passed, Israel’s international law obligations will end under proposed provisions to imprison refugees for up to 20 years, even if they committed no crime, or summarily deport them to potential death in home countries. In addition, human rights organizations and activists helping them may also be criminally prosecuted.
Besides mocking democratic freedoms (including for Jews) and international laws, this bill takes Israel one step closer to fascist rule, an accelerating track fast with each new policy.
In its February 2010 report, titled “The Infiltration Prevention Bill: Lies and Reality,” ACRI separates truth from fiction, explaining the bill’s dangers.
Background
Advanced by the Defense Ministry, Deputy Minister MK Matan Vilnai presented it to the Knesset plenum in May 2008, after which it passed its first reading by a 21 – 1 majority. In June 2009, under a new government, a continuity rule was applied to consider it. On February 3, 2010, the MK-headed David Azoulay Internal Affairs Committee began deliberations.
Its main provisions include:
- “infiltrators” (including legitimate asylum seekers) may be imprisoned for up to five years;
– those from adversary states (including Darfur, Sudan), may be imprisoned for up to seven years;
– ones with weapons, including an ordinary pocket knife, may be jailed for up to 20 years;
– organizations or individuals providing medical care, food or water, legal help, and/or shelter are subject to the same penalties;
– border crossing officers may summarily deport infiltrators to Egypt, giving them no chance to apply for asylum;
– if not immediately deported, they’ll be detained indefinitely; even if their home country is a war zone, they won’t be released;
– they may be held up to two weeks or longer before judicial review if they even get one; and
– women and children will be treated like men.
If the bill passes, Israel’s notoriously shaky safe haven status will end for non-Jews.
According to estimates, up to 20,000 asylum seekers are currently in Israel, 85% from Sudan and Eritrea – the latter country Israel’s Justice Ministry calls a dictatorship with widespread violations of human and political rights, including imprisonments without trial, religious persecution, and disappearances.
Sudanese refugees come mainly from two conflict zones – Darfur and South Sudan.
“Lies and Reality:” Fiction and Facts
Fiction:
“They aren’t refugees. They are labor infiltrators.”
According to former Immigration Authority head, Yaakov Ganot, “In our examinations, I would say that 99.9% of them are here for work. They’re not asylum seekers. They are not at any risk.”
The prime minister and various other officials repeat the lie. Israel’s media report it, and people believe it. In contrast, the UN gets a different story – like keeping two sets of books, one real, the other fake.
Fact Check:
Israel tells the UNHCR that 90% of asylum seekers are legitimate refugees, the world body then publishing what it calls “accurate, relevant and up-to-date statistics.” In contrast to Israeli policy, it says Islamic Shari’ah affirms the right to asylum. It represents ”the deep-rooted Arab traditions and customs which have served as a solid foundation for the protection of those in need, and stresses that Shari’ah embraces a number of humanitarian principles which are at the heart of international refugee protection (UNHCR 2010 Regional Operations Profile – Middle East).”
Fiction:
“Based on our examinations, they are not refugees.” Israel claims it follows accepted asylum review procedures and makes honest determinations.
Fact Check:
Israel lies. In fact, 90% or more of applicants aren’t checked, mostly from Sudan and Eritrea. In contrast, according to a UN report, 96% of Eritrean requests were granted worldwide, and many western states routinely admit Sudanese refugees.
Israel grants collective “temporary protection,” what ACRI calls “an unstable status without any real rights – that protects them from deportation, and refuses to conduct individual examinations of asylum requests, which would allow it to recognize asylum seekers as refugees.”
Previously, Israel followed the same procedure for legitimate Democratic Republic of Congo, Liberia, and Ivory Coast refugees, and by so doing, claims “there are no refugees in Israel” – by excluding them from the asylum system.
Currently, only a small number of requests are reviewed, most rejected. In fact, since 1948, Israel accepted only 190 asylum seekers as legitimate refugees.
In 2008, according to UNHCR figures, France accepted 9,648, Canada 7,554, Germany 5,902, and Israel 4.
Fiction:
Israel protects refugees. On January 21, 2010, Ynet quoted Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu saying, “Israel will remain open to war refugees,” at the same time claiming the state rejects illegal migration, not legitimate asylum seekers it won’t abandon.
Fact Check:
Following its “Hot Return” policy, Israel summarily deports refugees, including ones legitimately fearing grave harm or death. The Infiltration Prevention Bill formalizes this practice, without review, at the discretion of untrained soldiers – in violation of international law.
Fiction:
Israel bogusly claims the Infiltration Prevention Bill won’t alter its Refugee Convention obligations.
Fact Check:
Israel never observed them. The proposed bill makes it policy with provisions in fundamental violation, including prohibitions against:
- deporting refugees to home countries where their lives or freedoms could be threatened – the principle of non-refoulement;
– discriminating against asylum seekers based on nationality;
– denying them free access to judicial review and legal help;
– denial of review requests;
– restricting free refugee movements;
– their access to employment; and
– imprisoning them.
Fiction:
The bill is the only way to detain criminals or security threats.
Fact Check:
The 1952 Entrance to Israel Law addresses these issues fully. Suspects may be detained if they threaten Israeli security or its citizens, ACRI noting: “….the proposal to formalize the ‘Hot Return’ policy indicates that the (proposed) law’s objectives do not relate to security. The State of Israel detains individuals that threaten (it) and is not quick to deport them.”
Fiction:
Refugees pose a security threat. On January 21, 2010, Ynet reported that:
“IDF officers told Netanyahu that Al Qaida and its offshoots may attempt to send Sudanese refugees across the Egyptian border and into Israel with the aim of setting up terror cells in the Jewish state.”
Fact Check:
No Israeli asylum seeker was ever charged with terrorism or an attempt to commit it. Claiming it is a lie. In 2006, when Darfur refugees began arriving, Israel detained them as security threats, later lifted, as unjust and unwarranted, by court order in August 2007. Making false claims now is an attempt to gain public support for the oppressive new bill.
Fiction:
Illegal migrant workers enter Israel from Egypt and must be stopped, Netanyahu quoted by Ynet on January 21, 2010 saying: “Israel will not let its borders be used to flood the country with illegal migrant workers.”
Fact Check:
In 2009, Israel gave work permits to 25 times more migrants than refugees requesting asylum. In fact, numbers seeking work are rising while those wanting refuge status are declining.
Fiction:
Refugee arrivals deteriorated employment conditions in cities like Arad and Eilat, again Netanyahu quoted by Ynet on January 21, 2010 saying: “They are causing socio-economic and cultural damage and threaten to take us back down to the level of the Third World. Anyone walking around Arad, Eilat, or even south Tel Aviv today, can see this wave, and the change it is creating, with their own eyes.”
Israel claims they work for low wages, displace Israelis, force down pay scales, and cause social unrest.
Fact Check:
The Olmert and Netanyahu governments, in fact, sent refugees to Arad and Eilat. In 2007, the “Gedera-Hadera” restriction was introduced, was binding for 18 months, and prohibited refugees from living north of Gedera or south of Hadera. Violators were arrested, the idea being to force them to less desirable peripheral areas against their will and keep them there.
They’re not given formal work permits or rights so employers can freely exploit them with below minimum wages, no benefits, and poor working conditions.
On October 22, 2008, a Jerusalem Post.com report headlined “Israel has the highest poverty in the West,” saying: “OECD report(s that) 1 in 4 Israelis (live) below the poverty line – 2.5 times the average in the developed world…. The report also stated that Israel’s socioeconomic divide was the third highest, below Turkey and Mexico, and Israel was criticized by OECD for the failure of its fiscal policies to bridge the gap between rich and poor. (In recent decades) economic growth… benefitted the rich more than the poor,” what’s been happening in America since the 1970s at an alarming rate, Israel mirroring its closest ally.
Fiction:
OECD demands a tough infiltration policy. Again Ynet, January 21, 2010 quoting Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz saying: ”Even OECD representatives who visited last week noted that the large number of foreigners here hurts Israeli society.”
He and Netanyahu also claim cracking down on infiltrators will make it a stronger candidate for OECD membership.
Fact Check:
OECD criticizes Israel’s asylum policy and recommends it be elevated to international standards. Mentioned is the low number of recognized refugees, no “public integration or support program,” and other serious flaws need correcting.
Fiction:
All refugees want permanent Israeli residency.
Fact Check:
Of the 190 refugees Israel accepted since 1948, over 100 left according to UNHCR figures. In 2007, the Olmert government granted temporary status to the first 500 Darfur arrivals. Since then, many left and others plan to as well. The reason according to ACRI:
“Many western countries have refugee and migrant quotas. Unlike Israel, they understand their international obligation and invest resources in absorbing refugees. A main condition for filing an emigration request is legal residence in the country (where) filed. By refusing to review asylum requests by Eritrean and Sudanese refugees, Israel is withholding their chance to emigrate to another country, where many of their relatives have already settled.”
Most asylum seekers trapped in Israel “can not return to their home countries and can not emigrate to other countries that absorb immigrants.”
In sum, ACRI calls the proposed Infiltration Prevention Bill “a form of abuse, not a policy.” It bogusly says legitimate refugees are security threats.
During the Olmert administration, an inter-ministerial team was established to formulate clear asylum policy, including status, health, employment, welfare, education, and other issues. In August 2009, it was disbanded with no conclusions after its head, Yaakov Ganot (also in charge of the Immigration Authority) was appointed Transportation Ministry director general.
With no clear policy, the Netanyahu government now promotes the Infiltration Prevention Bill as a “magical solution,” one that will harm refugees and for many returned home cause their deaths.
The following human rights organizations call on Israel “to withdraw this bill and formulate a proper asylum policy:”
ACRI, Amnesty International, Aid to Refugees and Asylum Seekers (ASSAF), Hotline for Migrant Workers, African Refugee Refugee Development Center, Israel Religious Action Center – Israel Movement for Progressive Judaism, Kav LaOved (Worker’s Hotline), and Physicians for Human Rights.
Israel mocks fundamental international law principles, and won’t consider them unless nations with enough clout apply strong pressure, something very much absent in giving its government a free pass.
Comments
It is exaggeration or misinformation to define national service by connotation as slavery. A slave is a person held in servitude as the chattel [property like cattle] of another person. Warsai are not anyone's property but responsible ER citizens, are not in servitude but serving the people mobilized and paid by GOE.I was told that two EDF officials before 2004 misused some Warsai to build their own houses, but GOE made them pay back the labor value they used to GOE and the incident was reported on ER media. If you know some, name names, and report them to GOE. The 1997 Constitution is suspended and Agelglot was extended both because of the border war and related emergency situations. Focus on the solution: withdrawal of ET troops and ER-ET dialogue for peaceful relations.
Yay,
How can you compare paying a tax with forced labor in the name of national service that last decades?
Some of our youngsters are forced to build houses for PFDJ officials while others are being used to dig out gold for foreign companies without any payment. If you don’t call that slavery, you must consider yourself a slave master. You said Agelglot originated from the 1994 PFDJ charter; it is funny how you PFDJ cadres forget to mention the implementation of the constitution yet love to talk about the charters that allow you to hold our people hostage.
You said "a national interest is something you do willingly". That is not necessarily so. If that was the case taxes may not be paid, traffic lights not respected, police orders not obeyed, commands of government not done, nation not defended or anarchy may reign. National interest is something good for the nation, but may not be good for every individual. Agelglot originated from the 1994 PFDJ charter; it has been extended because the situation of the nation demanded it. There is no slavery in ER and Agelglot is not slavery. You described bad conditions of ER refugees in ET, tell that to Warsai before they escape. If there is any national interest gained by their escape, teach me please.
Welet/Yay,
I can’t believe you have the audacity to say these people chose their personal interest over the country’s national interest. Who are you to decide the fate of others when you live a comfortable life in the west? As far as I am concerned, a national interest is something you do willingly, when you are forced to service for decades it is called slavery. So these people showed courage to escape the slavery, the next step is to free the remaining slaves in Eritrea.
Welet/Yay:
Since when are you two wolves in the side of the Eritrean immigrants? We know how GOE try to capitalize on the tragedies, to warn others from attempting the same route. So PFDJ gangs are always happy at the misfortune of Eritreans immigrants.
Now, are you trying to convince us Eritreans chose to go to Weyane‘s refugee camps to live on a hand out? Do you know a lot of Eritreans are dying in those camps from lack of nutrition and starvation? Do you know Eritreans are denied of ID so they don’t venture out to Addis Ababa to find work and live a normal life? Do you know there are over 1000 Eritreans in Egypt prisons alone for a crime of illegal entry to Egypt? Do you know hundreds of Eritreans are being killed by Egyptians? Do you know thousands of Eritreans drown in ocean as they attempts to cross to Europe in overcrowded boats?
Hmmm, I would appreciate if u deeply know the cause for the running away from Eritrea.Plus r u sure the majority of these people like ur so called "opposition?" and r ready to be part if them and fight?.And if they wanted to fight the government, do u think they r waiting for ur "ADVICE"?.Lets be realistic.
I am glad you admitted you made a mistake; and that would make you a better person by that much. But you still asked, "why not try a different route, to stand up and fight the PFDJ so that they don’t have to run away forever[?]. As many do, you seem to assume that if they are leaving ER, they must have wanted to destroy PFDJ and/or the GOE. I think that that is a wrong assumption. Most of those few I interviewed think that Agelglot and the Warsai-Yikaalo Develovement Program is good for the nation, but they dislike to sacrifice their personal interests indefinitly to the success of national interests. That is how much they want to give. Could you please ask some of them the same question and find out how they answer it? It will be educational to all of us.
I have no idea what you just wrote. Next time, gather your thought, think about what you want to say, type slowly, read it one more time to make sure what you wrote make sense. That is when you should post in this forum.
You said you are an American tax payer, I suggest you should look for adult education center in your area, they teach old farts like yourself some Basic reading and writing English.
I know that was a rude comment, just venting my frustration. Our youngsters are risking their life boarding a small boat to go to Europe or getting killed by Egyptians police guard as they attempt to enter Israel. Even after they made it to Israel or Malta, they face deportation. If these kids are brave enough to attempt such a courageous journey risking their life, why not try a different route, to stand up and fight the PFDJ so that they don’t have to run away forever.
Are you in ER and planning to stand up for you rights? Or are you abroad and planning to go back to ER and do what you want these "coward immigrants" to do? I look forward to hear from you.
They know well, the Jews people are the most "immigrants" in the world. Almost every country in the world is a refuge to the Jewish people. Have they forgotten where they came from?
of 5- 10% of their population may be more, weather you call them refugee or inflitretors they
exist forigners. In my andesstanding this developped nation they give this people guranty to
live inside their nation not only because they are suffering or getting persecution in their
home land but they imperatively need them for fillthy job too. So the Eritrean case in Isreal
also not different. If they send them back to home country who will work then the garbage job
in Israel ? Don´t be fullish they imperativly need them for their interest.
1) Why does Isreal still have a deplomatic relationship with a regime that is being sanctioned because of it's ties to terrorist ? For a country like Israel that is familiar with Terrorist , should't they be at the for front to denounce the Asmara Regime?
2)History will tell you that the Jews had suffered around the world especially for the first half of the 20th century , and obviousely the Nazi's extermination plan under which millions of jews died , which is one one of the saddest times in man kind history . Having said all that , however you would think that they will be very sensitive to people who are subjected to similar human rights abuses and sympathetitc to those who are trying to hold on to the only thing they have left in this world , which is thier lives. I see the doulble standard here ,and i think the international comunity should press hard Isreal from making this deadly mistake .
RSS feed for comments to this post.