UNHCR participates in conference on Belgium’s ongoing reception crisis

The conference, “Taking the crisis out of the reception crisis: Thinking about durable solutions after one year of crisis in reception conditions”, took place on December 12 in Brussels. This is the keynote speech as delivered by Maria Ferrante, Protection Officer for UNHCR’s Regional Representation for EU Affairs, Belgium, Ireland, Luxembourg and The Netherlands.

Thank you, Madam Chair,

UN Special Rapporteur, Distinguished Panelists, Ladies and Gentlemen,

I wish to start by thanking Vluchtelingenwerk Vlaanderen, Caritas, Ciré, Amnesty International and Orbit, for organizing this conference today and for inviting UNHCR to take part, and for affording me the opportunity to give this opening statement.

This conference indeed provides a unique and timely opportunity for a wide range of actors—from policymakers and lawmakers to practitioners, academics and civil society—to come together and identify possible ways out of the reception situation that has been unfolding in Belgium, as we have all witnessed.

This year we reached a dramatic milestone. More than 100 million people are displaced worldwide as a result of serious human rights violations, conflict, persecution and violence. But it is also important to deconstruct this figure: 50 per cent of those displaced—over 50 million people—are internally displaced. These people chose to stay in their country or were not able to leave their country. And about 74 per cent of the world’s refugees are hosted in the most destitute and impoverished parts of the world. They are not in Europe.

The institution of asylum and the extension of protection to these people in need is one of the great achievements of humanity. Providing sanctuary is not just an ethical but also a legal responsibility. The 1951 Refugee Convention embodies this tradition and has saved millions of lives over the years.

With this context as a backdrop, I would like to share with you some reflections on the subject of today’s conference.

Let me start by clarifying that UNHCR considers access to appropriate reception conditions for asylum-seekers—from the presentation of their claim to the final decision—to be fundamental to fair and effective asylum procedures.

Indeed, we have always been of the position that adequate reception conditions are a prerequisite to ensure effective access to international protection¹ for those in need thereof.

In addition to meeting subsistence needs, reception conditions should allow asylum-seekers to benefit from adequate social, psycho-social and legal support, as well as interpretation services throughout the procedure. Depriving the asylum-seeker of appropriate reception, including the above-mentioned support, is likely to undermine the fair and effective nature of their asylum procedure.

The importance of reception conditions is enshrined in national as well as European Union legislation.

In this regard, the situation currently unfolding in Belgium is a source of serious concern.

The figures speak for themselves: 7,000 asylum-seekers are expected to be homeless during the winter months, 6,000 convictions for the lack of reception places for asylum-seekers and a three-month waiting period for asylum-seekers after a court hands down such a conviction.

Since October, even the reception of groups considered vulnerable and deserving of priority treatment is no longer guaranteed, including the reception of unaccompanied and separated children, as well as families with children. Notably due to the interruption of age determination, many children are currently left unprotected. Those children who are not identified, not assigned a guardian and not provided with adequate reception conditions are extremely vulnerable, as they are exposed to higher risks of abuse, exploitation or even trafficking. Reports of the children’s rapidly deteriorating health conditions and the inability to trace these children are a source of great concern.

It is also essential to remain vigilant and to undertake action to address the vulnerable situation of other asylum-seekers. Sleeping outside for weeks or even months has serious consequences for the mental and physical health of applicants for international protection and we note an increasing number of cases of scabies, diphtheria and tuberculosis, as well as a lack of access to vaccines and HIV treatment. These applicants are also more vulnerable to abuse, as sadly exemplified by the situation of a young woman who was sexually abused while spending the night on a Brussels’ street in the absence of a reception place.

In addition, several reports suggest that the consequence of these inadequate reception conditions on the asylum procedure is that an increasing number of asylum-seekers are not in a fit state to undergo their asylum interview.

A panel discussion during the conference. © UNHCR/Frederik Bordon

The situation is enormously complex—and we must recognize this. The increase of asylum-seekers, the unexpected arrival of 60,000 refugees fleeing Ukraine, the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, the backlog in the asylum procedure, the challenges of mobilizing resources and staff, the secondary movements of asylum-seekers from country to country within the EU, the resistance that may exist at the local level to welcome refugees, are among the many complex and intertwined factors that increase the pressure on the reception network.

Efforts undertaken by many to address the situation have been tremendous. I am thinking of, for instance, the creation of 3,500 additional reception places compared to 2021, as well as the recent decision to create an additional 1,500 new emergency places; the allocation of additional personnel to asylum instances aimed at increasing asylum decision-making as well as the mobilization of 150 federal Government employees. I am also thinking of the ongoing collaboration with the European Union Agency for Asylum and the support by some mayors to open reception facilities in their municipalities or to provide personnel, which did not go unnoticed.

Let us also not forget the long working hours that staff put in as they tried their utmost to offer reception to as many applicants as possible, while faced with the dilemma of having to set priorities among human beings who all need reception. And we have all witnessed the mobilization of civil society, including of lawyers who provide pro bono information and assistance to asylum-seekers in their ordeal. These great efforts should also be acknowledged.

Yet, in spite of all this, asylum-seekers are still sleeping on the streets in the heart of Europe, a few days before Christmas, when freezing temperatures are looming.

Without wishing to go into the details of your forthcoming discussions, let me highlight a few aspects that I think should be taken into account in developing solutions.

First, at the national level, I would like to reiterate the importance of collaboration. All stakeholders at federal, regional, community and local levels must continue to work together to ensure sustainable solutions that can offer dignified living conditions to all applicants. This reception crisis requires an “all-hands-on-deck” approach and I appeal to those with the expertise and resources to redouble their efforts.

It is also essential that the reception network evolves toward greater flexibility, so it can respond to the natural fluctuations of the influx of asylum-seekers. The establishment of a regularly updated contingency plan, including mitigation measures and adequate funding mechanisms, are key elements of this approach.

Second, and this is also a lesson learned from the response to the COVID-19 pandemic and the Ukraine situation, Belgium cannot provide solutions in isolation. We have indeed observed mounting pressure on the reception networks across several EU Member States. Asylum is, by definition, a cross-border issue that requires joint solutions at the European level. This is further proof that we do need the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum², which represents a real opportunity to define a common ground on asylum matters in the EU. UNHCR welcomes the recent progress on the Pact, including on the Solidarity Declaration³ and the Screening and Eurodac Regulation⁴, and we urge for an agreement that protects unhindered access to EU territory for all who seek asylum, as well as dignified reception conditions and fair and fast procedures. In this context, the Belgian Presidency of the Council of the EU will come at a crucial time for this EU asylum reform and UNHCR will stand ready to provide technical support in reaching an agreement on the Pact.

Third, this year we have seen that Europe, and Belgium in particular, can show great solidarity by offering asylum to unprecedented numbers of persons fleeing Ukraine. In the EU, we have seen an open, well-managed and above all shared refugee response that has proven wrong many of the statements frequently repeated by some politicians: that Europe is full; that free movement and relocation are impossible; that there is no public support for refugees. We are thus hopeful that the unprecedented solidarity and good practices in this context can lead the way to reconsider certain aspects of the reception system.

Let me now come to an end of this opening statement by looking back on history and on the 1951 Refugee Convention. Belgium took an active part in the drafting of the Convention and was one of the first countries to host a UNHCR office. Over the years, Belgium has endeavored to implement the Convention in various ways, from ensuring access to the asylum-procedure and reception conditions to fostering the integration of refugees into the host community and ensuring effective access to rights such as family reunification. Belgium has always displayed constructiveness in negotiations at the EU level and has also shown support—financial and political—for UNHCR and the people we aim to help and protect. We can now only encourage the country to continue on this path.

I would like to conclude by stressing that addressing and resolving forced displacement has rightly emerged as an urgent priority intertwined with other 21st-century global challenges. It is our shared responsibility to protect the rights and dignity of those fleeing war, persecution and violence. It is our shared responsibility to translate the commitments taken at international, regional and national levels into action but also into a tangible reality for those forcibly displaced.

The present challenges should not deter us from seeking solutions, on the contrary, the vulnerabilities of asylum-seekers, highlighted and generated by the present reception crisis, must constitute an incentive to pursue solutions even in a complex environment. The search for solutions undertaken today is not only aimed at safeguarding the right to reception but also at safeguarding the effective access to international protection for those in need thereof.

May we all have a fruitful and constructive day.

I thank you for your attention.

Notes

¹ States are the actors primarily responsible for guaranteeing the safety and rights of their own citizens. Refugees flee their own country because they can no longer count on that protection, either because the State is unable to give it (for instance due to an ongoing war) or because the State is unwilling to give it (for instance when the State itself persecutes the person in question). When this happens, and people are forced to flee their own country, another country has to step in to ensure that the refugees’ basic rights are respected. This is known as “international protection.” Someone seeking international protection, is called an asylum-seeker.

² The New EU Pact on Migration and Asylum of 2020 contained a number of proposals by the European Commission to overhaul the EU’s Common European Asylum System.

³ The 2022 Solidarity Declaration is a declaration on the sharing of responsibility of EU Member States regarding influxes of asylum-seekers, including relocation arrangements aimed at more equal burden sharing.

⁴ The Eurodac regulation refers to the Eurodac database that, according to the EU, is “intended to help the member states to better monitor the paths of asylum seekers and persons in an irregular situation within the European Union.” The screening regulation “contributes to strengthening controls on persons at the external borders and also to rapidly directing persons subject to screening towards the appropriate procedure.”