International

At the moment we are debating in the European Parliament the European Commission proposal to establish an EU list of safe countries of origin. According to this proposal an asylum seeker whose request is refused following an accelerated procedure will then be sent back. If he or she comes from a ‘safe country’. Even the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights is protesting at this: how can you say that a country is safe for everyone? Turkey is listed as safe by the European Commission, but this isn’t the case for Kurds, or for someone who is simply an oppositionist. The Balkan countries are supposedly safe, but the Roma who live there are always under pressure. In my view isn’t going to work, because safety is a relative concept: a country that’s safe for one isn’t automatically safe for another.

Foto: Eelco van Loo

On 17th May IDAHOT comes round again, the International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia. This is the day when the world turns its thoughts to violence against – amongst others – lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender people (LGBTs). It’s good that attention is paid to this issue every year, but rather hypocritical of Věra Jourová, the European Commissioner responsible for gender equality, to underline the importance of IDAHOT when she is partly responsible for the proposal for a list of safe countries. It’s precisely LGBTs who, during an asylum procedure, need time to recount their experiences and describe the persecution they have suffered as a result of their sexual orientation.

Some years ago, during the legislative process leading to the European Directive on Asylum Procedures, my amendment that time be given to LGBTs to relate the experiences which led to their seeking asylum was accepted. In addition, it must not be held against them if their story omits some of the facts. If even your immediate family rejects you, and the authorities persecute you instead of protecting you, then you’ll need time to relate your real story to an asylum official. The same goes, it has to be said, for many other traumatised asylum seekers: women, for example, who have been victims of rape or other sexual violence. Speaking to an official who is a complete stranger, you might well not feel able to recount all of the details of your experience.

How different is the atmosphere now. All of a sudden the Commission defines countries as safe, and minorities who aren’t safe in those countries are forced themselves to prove why they form an exception to the rule. The burden of proof has not been reduced, but made heavier. We’ll be voting shortly in the European Parliament on this Commission proposal. Given the lack of guarantees, I’ll be voting against. When the Commission includes even a country such as Turkey in what it calls ‘safe’, and when negotiations have even been opened now with Sudan on halting the flow of refugees, I’ll be extremely concerned should this proposal be accepted. Soon there won’t be any unsafe lands left, simply because the member states can’t agree on an orderly European asylum system under which everyone accepts their responsibilities. This has become repugnant.