Summary rejections of Kosovo refugee applications

We appeal to you because it is our strong impression that the Directorate of Immigration's treatment of residence and asylum applications for around 4500 refugees from Kosovo in many of the individual cases violates UN recommendations and ignores strong human concerns. In Sweden, 56 per cent of Kosovo refugees are denied their applications in the first instance, in Norway the figure is 90 per cent.

The Norwegian Helsinki Committee has been involved in human rights issues in Kosovo since 1989. We have interviewed many of the refugees who came to Norway in 1999 and organized human rights education for several groups of refugees from Kosovo. We have a large contact network among independent communities in Kosovo and staff of the Helsinki Committee have been on several trips in the province in the last year and a half.

By contributing a large K-FOR contingent, with humanitarian and other assistance to Kosovo and by providing temporary protection to around 8 refugees from Kosovo, Norway has taken on a major responsibility in improving the human rights situation in the province. Since 000, the situation has also improved significantly in Kosovo, the danger of genocide is no longer present, most of the millions of people displaced from their homes have now returned and the reconstruction of institutions and infrastructure has begun. Almost half of the 1999 refugees who received temporary protection in Norway have already returned home. Thus, the return to Kosovo has been far greater in scope than the return to, for example, Bosnia and Herzegovina.

some groups (such as ethnic minorities) are more at risk than others, while some areas are particularly affected by violence and crime.

In addition, the local apparatus that addresses the needs of the returnees and the internally displaced (of which there are still over 300) does not have the resources to accommodate large numbers of returnees at once. The ministry took this into account when it decided last year to postpone the return of refugees to the spring of 000, according to the recommendations of the UN administration in Kosovo (UNMIK).

Regarding the return of refugees from Kosovo who were granted temporary protection, the Helsinki Committee has been concerned that Norway fulfills international obligations and adheres to UN recommendations. Norway must follow the guidelines that the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and UNMIK have agreed to provide the refugees with fair treatment and to avoid contributing to further aggravation of the tense situation in Kosovo.

In a March 2000 background note, which still expresses the position of the High Commissioner, the UNHCR recommends that the host countries grant asylum to persons who:

• belongs to ethnic minorities (including Albanians from Serbian enclaves such as northern Mitrovica),
• belong to families of mixed ethnic origin,
• has been affiliated with the Serbian regime since 1990,
• has been or is in conflict with UCK and its political offenders,
• have been subjected to such traumatic experiences that they cannot be expected to return (a reasonable definition would, in our view, include rape victims, torture victims, witnesses to the killing of relatives and persons subjected to custody),
• has witnessed serious violations of humanitarian law (and thus risks persecution by the perpetrators).

In a position document from June 2000, the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) recommends that host countries provide humanitarian stays to people who:

• are disabled or have diseases that cannot be treated in Kosovo,
• single elderly, who do not have relatives who can take care of them,
• single minors whose relatives in Kosovo cannot be traced,
• single mothers and their families (“female-headed households”).

Unfortunately, in many of the individual cases, the UDI's treatment of residence and asylum applications for Kosovo refugees overlook both the recommendations of UNHCR and ECRE, as well as strong human concerns. The Helsinki Committee has direct knowledge of nine examples / cases, involving a total of 35 people, that the UDI's refusal contravenes the recommendations described above.

• 1st husband, b. 1963, and family (wife and three children). The man was one of three Albanian men in the village who were held captive and tortured for three days by Serbian forces in April 1999, as the Helsinki Committee has documented in a report from October 1999, "Killings, Beatings and Detention of Civilians in Bernica e Perme , 18 – 21 April 1999 », which was passed on to the Hague Tribunal. The UDI's case officer has not emphasized this information as he concludes that "however, no information emerges that indicates that the applicant has been in a particularly vulnerable situation compared with other ethnic Albanians in the area";
• 2nd husband, b. 1963, and family (wife and three children). The family is from the Serbian-controlled Mitrovica and the man worked for the Serbs until March 31, 1999 (ie over a week after the great ethnic cleansing of Kosovo began). When it comes to Albanian refugees from the Serbian enclave of northern Mitrovica, the UDI's position is that they should be sent home because they are safe in the "applicant's area", ie the Albanian-dominated southern part of the city of Mitrovica. About these, UNHCR writes that:

«At present, such returns are neither safe nor sustainable. Persons whose homes are in an area where they would constitute an ethnic minority are unlikely to be able to return to their places of origin and more likely to face return to conditions of internal displacement and / or a well-founded fear of persecution. On this basis, they should under no circumstances be advised or pressured to return home at this time ».

• 3. single woman, approx. 60 years. Her house is destroyed and she is without relatives to take care of her.
• persons belonging to ethnic minorities (including Albanians from Serbian enclaves such as northern Mitrovica),
• people who have been affiliated with the Serbian regime since 1990,
• persons who have been subjected to very traumatic experiences, such as rape, torture, killing of relatives and deprivation of liberty,
• persons who have witnessed serious violations of humanitarian law (and thus risk persecution by the perpetrators).

In addition, the UDI violates ECRE's recommendations regarding:

• single elderly, who do not have relatives who can take care of them,
• single mothers and their families ("female-headed households").

In these cases, the UDI's case handling therefore deviates from the UN recommendations on four of six central points, and from two of ECRE's four recommendations. It may be mentioned that while Norway has initially granted asylum to two per cent of Kosovo applicants, the corresponding figure in Sweden is nine per cent. While eight per cent have been granted a humanitarian basis in Norway, the corresponding figure in Sweden is 35 per cent.

In the Helsinki Committee's opinion, the UDI's case management in these cases has been summary and overlooked strong human considerations in many individual cases.

We urge the Minister to ensure that the Immigration Committee, in its handling of the appeal cases, complies with the recommendations of the UN and ECRE, and follows a different line from the UDI. Norway's policy towards Kosovo must be viewed from a holistic perspective. If the UDI's handling of Kosovo refugee cases remains, Norway will lose credibility in its efforts to ensure human dignity and stability in Kosovo.