Norwegian authorities receive strong criticism from Chechnya's foremost human rights organization. The Nobel Prize nominee believes the Immigration Board is abusing her name to send Chechens back to life.
(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
Controversially. The 20. July this year, an 24 year old Chechen man is finally denied his asylum application. The statement by the Immigration Board (UNE) makes reference to Chechnya's leading human rights organization, as an argument for the man to be expelled from Norway and back to this dangerous part of Russia:
"UNE notes that in Russia there are organizations that provide assistance to internal migrants. One of the most well-known is 'Migration Right'… The network provides legal assistance in relation to, among other things. provision of legal documents, assistance in migrants' meetings with administrative bodies and judicial bodies, and integration into society. "
But now the leader of what the UN calls the "Migration Right", Svetlana Gannushkina, is backing the argument from Norwegian immigration authorities. Gannushkina is the leader
Civic Assistance Committee and manages the Memorial program
«Migration and Rights» in Grosny, Chechnya.
In 2007, Gannushkina was awarded Sakharov's Freedom Award by the Norwegian Helsinki Committee. In January, among others, Erna Solberg (h) nominated her for the Nobel Peace Prize for 2010. Last week she visited Oslo.
"Dishonest speculation"
Before leaving for Norway on 9 September, she sent a letter condemning in strong words that her organization was being used as a justification for Norwegian refusals of asylum applications from Chechens. In the letter, which Ny Tid has had access to, she states that in Chechnya there is not a single voluntary organization that can afford to give people a place to live, including temporary residence, register people in the hospital, secure payment of pensions or others. benefits.
The Nobel Prize nominee concludes the letter by pointing out that "any reference to our organization in terms of its great opportunities for assistance in return is nothing but dishonest speculation".
At a meeting organized by the Norwegian Helsinki Committee on September 22, she reiterated the strong criticism: "Norwegian immigration authorities are abusing our organization's work by claiming that returned refugees can visit our offices for help."
"Any reference to our organization in the form of return assistance is dishonest speculation."
UNE responds
Marianne Jakobsen, department director at UNE, believes the criticism from Chechnya is "unjustified". In an email to Ny Tid, she replies:
“UNE has not claimed that this organization contributes with everything from housing and food to health services and work. The most important thing is that they provide precisely the kind of help they now highlight themselves, that is, they help former asylum seekers to safeguard their legal rights in their home country, ”Jakobsen writes.
However, UNE does not respond to Gannushkina's criticism that any reference to the organization, as part of a reversal, is "dishonest speculation".
Inna Sangadzhieva, project staff at the Helsinki Committee, believes it is striking how UNE uses general information about such an organization in an alleged individual processing of applications.
- This is not the first time an organization has been used by the Norwegian authorities. It refers to organizations without going into depth and actually considering whether this particular organization can help this particular applicant, says Sangadzhieva.
428 asylum seekers from Russia, almost all of whom are believed to have backgrounds from the conflict zone in Chechnya and neighboring states, were dealt with by UDI in the first half of 2010. Of these, only 14 were granted asylum and 8 were on humanitarian grounds.
Even when you have deducted, among other things, about a hundred Dublin cases, you are left with a statistic that shows that the practice in the Chechen cases is rejected in just over 90 per cent of the cases.
Russia no alternative
However, it is not just misuse of their own organization Gannushkina is responding to UNE's rejection grounds. She is also frustrated that UNE sees internal flight in Russia as a real alternative.
"Our organizations are very critical of claims of the possibility of alternative internal relocation of Chechens in Russia," she writes in the letter also intended for the Norwegian authorities.
In addition, the Council of Europe has also advised against such an internal refugee alternative. But UNE does not see the recommendations of the Council of Europe as necessary. They write directly in the same refusal that "such recommendations are not binding on UNE", however.
Sangadzhieva in the Helsinki Committee thinks it is strange that Norwegian authorities do not follow the recommendations of the Council of Europe.
- Why are these recommendations not binding on us when we believe other countries must follow them? If not a country like Norway follows the recommendations, why should we have them in the first place?
