Michael de Laine

By Michael de Laine, The Copenhagen Voice, 24 June 2009

Measures to encourage rejected asylum-seekers to return home had no motivational effect on those who could not be returned by force, a new report by the Danish Institute for Human Rights shows. The measures are disproportionate to their goal, they had an adverse effect on the private lives and educational opportunities of asylum-seekers, and exposed them to significant psychological pressure.

Measures introduced by the government to encourage rejected asylum-seekers and other foreigners to return to their native country had no motivational effect on those who could not be returned by force, the Danish Institute for Human Rights (DIHR) says a new report, ‘Afviste asylansøgere og andre udlændinge i udsendelsposition i Danmark (Rejected asylum-seekers and other foreigners in Denmark awaiting deportation)’.

As a result, these measures are disproportionate to the goal which they were designed to achieve, the institute adds. However, the measures had an adverse effect on the private lives and educational opportunities of asylum-seekers, as well as exposing them to significant psychological pressure.

DIHR says there has been an increasing focus on asylum-seekers in Denmark in recent years, and especially on topics such as the length of their stay in asylum centres and their mental and physical health. There has also been a great deal of public debate about the situation of rejected asylum-seekers and policies which aim to encourage them to return to their home countries.

The purpose of the DIHR study was to clarify the situation of rejected asylum-seekers and other foreigners facing deportation from Denmark and to create a databank to alleviate some of the possible adverse consequences the law has on asylum-seekers today.

The study was based on 60 qualitative interviews with rejected asylum-seekers which took place between October 2007 and February 2008, as well as interviews with staff from the Danish Red Cross, the Danish National Police, voluntary organizations and others.

In addition, DIHR reviewed selected files, logbooks from asylum centres, statistics and other relevant studies.

The study’s conclusions are based on a combination of data sources. The study focused on matters relating to housing, private and family life, economic, educational and working conditions and health.

The report also contained an analysis of the applicable international standards and principles in relation to the selected areas.

The report resulted in a number of proposals for legislative change and a number of other initiatives.

According to DIHR, there were 653 asylum-seekers facing deportation from Denmark

on 30 August 2008. The largest groups consisted of Iraqis, Iranians, Somalis, stateless Palestinians and Kosovans and the vast majority were fearful of being sent back to their homeland and did not wish to voluntarily return there. Many rejected asylum-seekers cannot be returned by force, or there are other reasons that complicate repatriation. The data also revealed that not all rejected asylum-seekers who reside in Denmark can go home, even if they so wished.

This situation helps to explain the relatively long period of residence which many asylum-seekers experience. At the end of 2006, for example, an average stay was three years and two months.

In order to accelerate the repatriation of rejected asylum-seekers and other foreigners, the Danish authorities implemented a series of measures aimed at encouraging these people to return to their native country. The measures included reducing social welfare payments, insisting that rejected asylum-seekers stay at special departure centres, and requiring them to report regularly to the police, and risk of being taken into custody.

DIHR says the study shows that these measures, which had an adverse effect on the private lives and educational opportunities of asylum-seekers, as well as exposing them to significant psychological pressure, had no motivational effect on those who could not be returned by force. As a result they are disproportionate to the goal which they were designed to achieve. This is especially true with regard to asylum-seekers who cannot be sent home because they would risk persecution, torture or other inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

The study also showed that detention in particular places a great strain on the psychological health of the detainees. Detention causes a number of significant negative consequences including mental breakdowns, suicide attempts and reduced well-being among children.

The atmosphere in asylum centres is often plagued by frustration and conflict between residents and between residents and staff. Living quarters are cramped and there is a general lack of privacy, especially for single people.

The study showed that the obligation to reside at departure centres is particularly burdensome for rejected asylum-seekers with ties outside the asylum centre especially for those with family members on the outside. In reality, some asylum-seekers spend longer or shorter periods living outside the asylum centre.

The study analysed the welfare payments which asylum seekers received.

Rejected asylum-seekers consider it difficult to live on the amounts offered, and many choose to supplement this income by working in the underground economy, often in poor conditions for very low wages.

With regard to education, the study showed that the internal courses offered by the Red Cross are limited with regard to choice, quality and the learning facilities available. Besides the Red Cross’ internal courses, rejected asylum-seekers have the opportunity to obtain training which offers recognized qualifications. Although there is a legal framework which allows asylum-seekers to gain vocational skills in this way, there are a number of barriers of an administrative, organizational and budgetary nature that mean only a small minority actually takes advantage of such training opportunities.

Over half of the rejected asylum-seekers interviewed by DIHR suffer from mental and psychosomatic illnesses, and many feel that their health has deteriorated.

The fact that detainees experience a gradual deterioration of their health and that there is an accumulation of health problems over time is also confirmed by assessments carried out by the Red Cross as well as national and international studies.

In addition, figures released by the Danish Immigration Service reveal that spending on health care for individual asylum-seekers increases exponentially the longer they remain in asylum centres.

Statistics show that the number of suicides does not significantly diverge from the rest of the population, but that the number of asylum-seekers who attempt suicide is significantly higher than average.

The study also showed that a number of rejected asylum-seekers are doing relatively well. This figure includes asylum-seekers who are engaged in work or training.

Although it is not allowed in most cases, the opportunity to live outside the asylum centre in a private residence is also a factor that contributes to asylum-seekers’ well-being and quality of life.

The data indicates that the rejected asylum-seekers who manage best from a health and well-being perspective tend to be those that are most active. They do not simply react passively to their situation but find ways and means to circumvent the measures they are subject to. However, some of the solutions they adopt are not quite legal.

Click here to download the report.