The conditions in centres for third country national

306 Pages·2007·3.57 MB·English

STUDY
Policy Department C
Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs
The conditions in centres for third country national (detention
camps, open centres as well as transit centres and transit zones)
with a particular focus on provisions and facilities for persons with
special needs
in the 25 EU member states
Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs
December 2007
PE 393.275 EN
JANUARY 2004
i
Directorate-General Internal Policies
Policy Department C
Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs
The conditions in centres for third country
national (detention camps, open centres as well
as transit centres and transit zones) with a
particular focus on provisions and facilities for
persons with special needs
in the 25 EU member states
STUDY
ii
This note was requested by: the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home
Affairs
This paper is published in the following languages: EN, FR.
Authors: STEPS
Manuscript completed in December 2007
Copies can be obtained through: Ms Joanna Apap
[email protected]
Informations on DG Ipol publications:
http://www.ipolnet.ep.parl.union.eu/ipolnet/cms
Brussels, European Parliament
The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author and
do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament.
iii
PREAMBLE
This study was commissioned by the European Parliament Committee on Civil
Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs.
This document is available in English and French.
This work follows a number of visits by delegations from the LIBE committee to
several European Union Member States. These missions resulted in the publishing of
reports or resolutions.
This study looks at conditions for migrants and asylum seekers in reception, detention
or transit centres, and is based on field studies carried out in twenty-five European
Union countries. It is the first study on the subject based on field studies throughout
all European Union countries, i.e. twenty-five countries at the time the study was
commissioned in December 2006.
The unique feature of this work is that it focuses on the situation of vulnerable
persons and seeks to assess whether the specific needs of these people are sufficiently
taken into account, and whether the standards set out in the Reception Conditions
Directive concerning provisions for vulnerable persons are integrated into national
legislation. It also aimed to assess to what extent the conditions in which migrants
and asylum seekers are detained or accommodated in European countries may
aggravate or reduce their vulnerability.
Field studies were carried out in nearly 130 centres (open and closed), throughout the
twenty-five countries, and over 250 “vulnerable” persons agreed to be interviewed.
The sources of information used outside of the centres were extremely diverse:
specialised or non-specialised healthcare personnel, social workers, elected officials,
representatives from the centre management, state mediators, civil society
representatives (national and international), international organisations etc. In each
country a team consisting of a national partner and an international investigator was
formed. It is the work carried out by the teams, their immersion in the issues in the
various countries, and the meetings held with a large number of people in the field
which made the production of this report possible.
The opinions expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not reflect
the official position of the European Parliament.
This study has been realised by STEPS Consulting Social
The coordination has been carry out by : Marie Chuberre and Claude Simonnot,
STEPS Consulting Social
The redaction team: Sophie Beylac, Jean Blocquaux, Olivier Clochard, Caroline
Intrand, Geneviève Jacques, Irmtraud Lechner, Gianni Rufini
iv
The coordination of the missions on the field and relations with the partners
were carry out by: Caroline Intrand, Cimade
Technical coordination, and secretary : Marie-Christine Colotto and Marie-Eve
Richardier, STEPS Consulting Social
Translations have been done by: «Version originale » et «Tradutec»
v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to thank the international investigators and our partners for their
contribution
The study team:
(cid:159) Sophie Baylac, for Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic
(cid:159) Philippe Chabasse, for France
(cid:159) Caroline Inrtrand, for Greece and Malta
(cid:159) Marie Chuberre, for Portugal, Belgium, Luxemburg and Slovakia.
(cid:159) Olivier Clochard, for Cyprus, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.
(cid:159) Geneviève Jacques, for Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden and Finland
(cid:159) Irmtraud Lechner, for Germany
(cid:159) Sara Prestianni, for Slovenia, Spain and Italy.
(cid:159) Laurence Tavernier, for Austria, Great Britain and Ireland.
National organisations:
(cid:159) In Germany, ProAsyl
(cid:159) In Austria, Diakonie,
(cid:159) In Belgium, Coordination, Initiative avec les Demandeurs d’asile et Etrangers
(CIRE),
(cid:159) In Cyprus, Kisa
(cid:159) In Denmark, Danish Institute for Human Rights
(cid:159) In Spain, the Asylum Seekers Assistance Centre
(cid:159) In Finland, the Refugee Advice Centre
(cid:159) In France, CIMADE
(cid:159) In Greece, Antigone
(cid:159) In Great Britain,1 Association of Visitors of Immigration Detainees
(cid:159) In Hungary, Helsinki Committee,
(cid:159) In Ireland, Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS)
(cid:159) In Italy, ARCI
(cid:159) In Latvia, Latvian Foreigners Association
(cid:159) In Lithuania, the Lithuania Human Rights League
(cid:159) In Luxemburg, ASTI
(cid:159) In Netherland,, the Protestant Church
(cid:159) In Poland, the Halina Niec Human Rights Association,
(cid:159) In Portugal, Jesuit Refugee Service,
(cid:159) In the Czech Republic, OPU
(cid:159) In Slovakia, the Humanitarian Council
(cid:159) In Slovenia, PIC
(cid:159) In Sweden, the Jaan Tonissoni Institute
(cid:159) In Estonia, the Christian Council
(cid:159) In Malta, Solène Guerinot

1 As the field survey did not cover North Ireland, Great Britain will be regularly mentionned instead of United
Kindown, in the parts of the report related to the survey findings.
vi
And to all those in the field, anonymous or known, who agreed to contribute to this
work.
Table of contents
PREAMBLE............................................................................................. IV
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.......................................................................... VI
ACRONYMS............................................................................................11
SUMMARY..............................................................................................14
INTRODUCTION......................................................................................34
CHAPTER1–FRAME AND METHODOLOGY...........................................40
1.1VULNERABLE GROUPS,DEFINITION AND CONCEPTS....................................................40
1.1.1-Definition.........................................................................................................40
1.1.2-The concept of a situation of vulnerability........................................................40
1.1.3-Migration and vulnerability..............................................................................43
1.2GENERAL METHODOLOGY...........................................................................................47
1.2.1 -The organisation of the missions......................................................................47
1.2.3 -The study teams...............................................................................................48
1.2.4 -Institutional collaboration and local partners.....................................................49
1.2.5 -A three phased approach:.................................................................................50
1.2.6 -Selecting the centres to visit.............................................................................51
1.2.7 -Data collection.................................................................................................52
1.2.8 -Difficulties met................................................................................................52
1.3LAWS APPLICABLE TO EUROPEAN UNION MEMBER STATES......................................54
1.3.1-Entry, movement and residence in the European area........................................57
1.3.2 -Measures applicable to the reception of asylum seekers and migrants...............59
1.3.3 -Measures applicable to the detentionof asylum seekers and migrants...............62
1.3.4 -The legislation of Member States.....................................................................69
CHAPTER 2–COUNTRY REVIEW FILES.................................................71
2.1AUSTRIA.......................................................................................................................71
2.2BELGIUM......................................................................................................................75
2.3CYPRUS.........................................................................................................................80
2.4CZECH REPUBLIC.........................................................................................................85
2.5DENMARK.....................................................................................................................89
2.6ESTONIA.......................................................................................................................93
vii
2.7FINLAND.......................................................................................................................97
2.8FRANCE......................................................................................................................102
2.9GERMANY...................................................................................................................108
2.10GREAT BRITAIN........................................................................................................113
2.11GREECE....................................................................................................................118
2.12HUNGARY.................................................................................................................124
2.13IRELAND...................................................................................................................129
2.14ITALY........................................................................................................................136
2.15LATVIA.....................................................................................................................143
2.16LITHUANIA...............................................................................................................147
2.17LUXEMBOURG..........................................................................................................152
2.18MALTA......................................................................................................................158
2.19THE NETHERLANDS..................................................................................................165
2.20POLAND....................................................................................................................170
2.21PORTUGAL................................................................................................................176
2.22SLOVAKIA.................................................................................................................181
2.23SLOVENIA.................................................................................................................186
2.24SPAIN........................................................................................................................191
2.25SWEDEN....................................................................................................................196
CHAPTER 3-OBSERVATIONS...............................................................200
3.1–DATA COLLECTED DURINGTHE STUDY...................................................................200
3.1.1 -The characteristics of situations of vulnerability.............................................202
3.1.2 -The legal situation of persons in detention......................................................205
3.1.3 -Length of stay in countries and centres...........................................................205
3.1.4 -Countries of origin of vulnerable persons interviewed....................................206
3.1.5 -Reception conditions for migrants..................................................................208
3.1.6 -Replies to open questions...............................................................................215
3.1.7 -Subjective data...............................................................................................218
3.1.8 -Scale of vulnerability characteristics...............................................................223
3.2-SUMMARY OF THE MAIN FINDINGS FROM THE DATA...............................................225
3.3-SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS BASED ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE STUDY REPORTS....226
3.3.1 -Typology of centres and the choice of criteria.................................................228
3.3.2 -Closed centres................................................................................................232
3.3.3 -Findings for vulnerable populations in closed centres.....................................245
3.3.4 -Open centres..................................................................................................253
3.3.5 -Findings on vulnerable populations in open centres:.......................................264
CHAPTER4ANALYSISAND RECOMMENDATIONS..............................269
4.1-ANALYSIS OD THE VULNERABILITY CREATION PROCESS.........................................269
4.1.1 -The need for a new approach to the concept of vulnerability...........................269
4.1.2 -Risk factors not taken into account.................................................................271
viii
4.1.3 -Special needs not taken into account...............................................................271
4.1.4 -Environmental factors not taken into account.................................................271
4.1.5 -Conclusion.....................................................................................................272
ix