“The best information for refugees is no information” (Ivana Unluova, UNHCR Information Officer, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, June 2001 – Quoted in Left to Their Own Devices…, Article 19, December 2003)

A Story from Malaysia

In 1996 the Malaysian government charged the human rights activist Irene Fernandez under Section 8A(2) of the Printing Presses and Publications Act (1984) for a memorandum she wrote entitled “Abuse, Torture and Dehumanised Treatment of Migrant Workers at Detention Camps”. This memorandum was based on an investigation by the Sun newspaper into conditions of detainees at the Semenyih Camp and corroborated by 300 interviews of migrant workers who had been released from detention. On October 16, 2003 she was found guilty of ‘maliciously publishing false news’ and sentenced to a year’s imprisonment. Such accounts of detention are not unique to Malaysia but are in a real sense the hidden stories of globalisation, a reflection of the veil of silence that accompanies the movement, the lives and deaths of economic migrants and refugees as they move from country to country in search of stability, security, employment and a living wage. The stance adopted by the Malaysian government is self-revelatory. It reveals that it does not guarantee 1) the freedom of expression – the basis for personal and press freedom, 2) the right to information – essential to transparency of governance and a basic citizens right, and 3) the rights of migrant workers.

While I do recognise the fact that signing an international convention is no guarantee of its implementation, it is still worth pointing out that, for whatever it is worth, Malaysia, unlike Guatemala, Mexico, El Salvador, Bolivia, Ecuador and Colombia is not a signatory to the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and Members of their Families (MWC) that came into force on 1 July 2003. It is also not a signatory to the 1951 Convention on Refugees along with most other countries in South-East and South Asia. Nevertheless the fact that there are journalists like Irene Fernandez in Malaysia is a sign of hope. Mainstream journalists in Malaysia who have habitually ignored or mis-represented migrants cannot disregard the fact that there are 1) journalists within their midst who do try to a difference, 2) human beings in their midst who are treated as outsiders, 3) other ways of representing migrants in the media, 4) other understandings that can be conveyed.

The WACC Programme on Refugees and their Information/Communication Rights

The right of migrants and refugees to tell their story, to record and document, to be heard, to have access to information and the means of communication, and to a fair representation, to raise awareness of these issues, to engage with journalists and to try and get the issue of communication rights on the agenda of organisations like the UN High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) – these are the core objectives of WACC’s programme. We have been involved in the organisation of a number of workshops – 3 in Africa, 1 in the Pacific, 2 in Asia, 2 scheduled for the Middle East, 1 in the Caribbean, 1 in Europe and this one, along with a year-long programme on displacement and the media in India. While the majority of workshops have focussed on the communication rights of refugees, we do recognise that in spite of the real differences that exist, the line between migrants and refugees is often blurred, that they do share problems that are of a similar nature, at the least an uncertain future. Migrants, however, are in some ways in a far worse-off situation than refugees precisely because they are perceived as victims of their own volition, often described as voluntary trespassers into a land not of their own, therefore not deserving of world media attention unlike refugees who are victims of political, ethnic, religious, civil conflicts. And yet, the struggle of migrants is often a long, unrecognised struggle from beginning to sometimes bitter end. Migrants are typically classified as individuals and not in terms of a community as refugees often are – for instance as Hutu Refugees, Bosnian Muslim refugees, Afghan refugees and so on. Low intensity conflicts, especially the economic kind, are hardly reported in the media and the victims of low intensity conflicts – migrants, hardly merit any attention because their exodus is not dramatic enough for the media – unless of course, it becomes an electoral issue or if the mortality rate just cannot be ignored.

The Role of Journalists

We have just about completed a one year programme on displacement and the media in India. It involved a media audit of displacement in the Kashmir region, in North-East India and in the state of West Bengal, followed by a week long creative writers workshop for journalists. Why journalists? Because they are – for better or for worse, whether we like it or not, the story-tellers of our times – and as such a privileged lot. We are aware that the grand stories of our times are only ephemerally connected to reality out there, to the real lives that people lead. Today journalists residing in and reporting from metropolitan centres in the South, cities that are often home to large conglomerations of migrants, hardly if ever acknowledge the presence of migrants or cover their stories. When they do, it often falls far short of the canons of good reporting. In the UK there are only a handful of journalists who treat issues related to migration, asylum seekers and refugees with sympathy. The majority follow the 3D rule – foreigners are portrayed as dirty, demanding, dangerous, to be avoided, to be repatriated at all costs. The popular tabloid press in the UK particularly the Daily Mail and the Daily Express routinely adopt a hysterical tone when the issue is about asylum seekers, migrants or refugees. Often, xenophobic reporting leads to violence against migrants, to their further marginalisation and to the tightening of government policy on asylum seekers.

The Indian journalist, P. Sainath has often criticised the tendency of journalists to describe poverty as a series of unrelated events instead of representing it as a process. And the same can be said of the coverage of issues related to refugees and migration. The story of migrants from the rest of Central America or for that matter Sudan and Pakistan in Tecu Uman – is a story of civil conflict, the negative impact of economic globalisation, rising costs, the death of agriculture, religious strife, environmental degradation, unemployment, the break down of community - and of middlemen and trafficking, of uncertainties, abuse, border crossings, officials on the take, of low-paid employment in maquilas, construction and plantations, and of days on the road hopefully to somewhere where they can find decent employment.

175 million people, about as many people in Brazil, representing three percent of the world’s population are considered migrants, a majority of whom are migrant workers. If this many people have moved and millions more are either considering a move or are on the road – surely there are many stories to be told of people passing through, of those who have made it and of the many who have not.

It is often the case that journalists are not aware of migrants in their midst – and that their attitude towards migrants undergoes a change when they meet them in person and listen to their stories. Therefore journalists can play an important role in creating public sympathy for migrants and refugees. There are many risks involved given the fact that the illegal trade in migrants is a lucrative business and is part of organised racketeering in this part of the world. Often it is a story of impunity, of organised criminals in cohorts with security forces getting away with murder and extortion.

Observations on the UNHCR

One of the interesting observations that emerged from the series of workshops that we organized on refugees, was that officials representing the key nodal UN body responsible for refugees, UNHCR, are often ignorant of the need for refugees to have information/communication rights. They existed to protect refugees, grant them security – but were not mandated to enhance the quality of life of refugees in any way. The only ‘information’ service that another international agency, the Red Cross, provides is ‘tracing’ – undoubtedly an important service – but rather limited in the circumstances. It would almost seem that there is a tacit acknowledgement between the UNHCR and governments that temporary residents, those passing through should be given at best limited, restricted rights not including the freedom of expression. This official stance has been observed at WACC meetings on refugees and reinforced in the reports published by Article 19. This attitude is diametrically opposed to contemporary human rights standards and expectations. Moreover, it fails to recognize the absolutely central role that information and communication plays in our daily lives today. The WACC booklet ‘Refugees Right to Communicate – A Call for Action’ (2003), makes the following observations, “…refugees are reluctant to approach the UNHCR for information because the system appears unfriendly and bureaucracy hinders access. Due to xenophobia in the host community towards refugees, the latter are scared to seek information from locals. But even the relevant government departments charged with looking after refugees do not have the information. Thus when asked about the problems and concerns they face, the key thing they lack is basic information about what is available to them in terms of humanitarian assistance, the activities of NGO’s and UN agencies and the procedures. Yet, without adequate knowledge about all this, they have no chance of making informed decisions about their future”. This lack of information, of not knowing whom to contact – is probably a greater problem with migrants who often do not have the necessary documentation to prove their nationality and identity.

Clarifying The Communication Rights of Migrants

How does one begin the process of understanding the information and communication needs of migrants – by listening to them speak, and by using their stories as the basis for exploring practical ways in which their rights to information and communication can be upheld. I think it is important that we address the issue of ‘information’ and the issue of ‘communication’ for while both are important, there are differences that we must acknowledge. I am not planning to delve into the arguments around the right to communicate – as I have earned enough grey hairs for my sins. Still it is important that we distinguish between these two types of rights. Samir Das, in a paper on displaced people as victims and their right to communication, presented at a creative writer’s workshop held in Darjeeling, India, in November 2003 made the following observations: “ Although claimed in the same breath, right to information will have to be distinguished from the right to communication. For one thing, the victim’s right to information is taken to mean merely her right to be informed of her imminent displacement reasonably well before the actual displacement takes places – presumably by being served with a legal notice and most importantly, of her entitlements and compensations if there are any, in the event of any such displacement. She is the passive recipient of this information and it is now up to her to take appropriate steps in order to make the process less painful. Right to communication on the other hand is her right to act on the information. This for example, gives her the right to organize the victims, create a common political platform for them and protest against the policies that lead to displacement and if possible, to stall it whether by seeking legal remedies or through peaceful agitation and struggle….”.While acknowledging the specific meanings attributed to both terms, such nuances, nevertheless, need to be considered.

I would think that some church-based and secular agencies involved in human rights related work, in short-term relief and the long term rehabilitation of migrants also have an extremely important role to play in advancing the information and communication rights of migrants.

Practical Initiatives

So how can one practically contribute to the strengthening of the information/communication rights of migrants? Firstly the need to create a register of the many informal channels used by migrants for communication purposes and wherever possible, to strengthen these sources of ‘legitimate, credible, information’ and channels of communication. Secondly, to strengthen the communication capacities of organizations involved in migrant support work along migrant trails. Thirdly, to identify and support community radio efforts and local information services on migrants issues. Fourthly, to bring together journalists who cover migrant issues and the many who do not for an informal sharing of experiences – that could, for instance lead to the production of a style guide on the reporting of migrants’ issues. Amnesty International and the National Union of Journalists in Scotland, have, for example, produced a guide (2003) for journalists who cover issues related to refugees and asylum seekers in Scotland. The Press Complaints Commission in the UK has also published a guide (2003) to reporting of asylum and refugee issues. The quality of reporting does make a huge difference. Fifthly, to some extent, agencies located in countries that have signed up to the 1996 Convention and not implemented the relevant provisions, can fall back on this Convention to state their case. While Articles 12-13 guarantees migrant’s freedom of thought, expression and religion, Articles 33 and 37 guarantees migrant’s access to information on their rights. These provisos are a major improvement on previous Conventions – such as the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol that do not recognise the information rights of refugees. While we are all aware that accidence does not guarantee implementation – the presence of such Articles – point towards policy guidelines. These and the binding nature of the Convention, can be used by groups to lobby governments to fulfil their obligations as signatories. However, we are also aware that conventions, being human constructs, reflect the politics of consensus building, and that as such signatory countries have the right to withhold, rescind or temporarily withdraw rights for national security reasons. The devil, as they say, is in the detail.

Article 33
1. Migrant workers and members of their families shall have the right to hold opinions without interference.
2. Migrant workers and members of their families shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art or through any other media of their choice.
3. The exercise of the right provided for in paragraph 2 of the present article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary:
a. For respect of the rights or reputation of others;
b. For the protection of the national security of the States concerned or of public order (ordre public) or of public health or morals;
c. For the purpose of preventing any propaganda for war;
d. For the purpose of preventing any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.

Pradip Thomas, WACC
March 2004

References:

Kweyu, D & Havyarimana, S., (2003), Refugees Right to Communicate: A Call for Action, WACC
Left to Their Own Devices: The Impact of Informal Information and Communication Networks on Security in the Tanzanian Refugee Camps, December 2003, Article XIX, London
Keep Irene Free, Defend the Defenders (p.35), Aliran Monthly, Vol.23, No.10, 2003
Thomas, P.N. (Ed.) (2001), Refugees and their Right to Communicate: Perspectives from South-East Asia, CCA/WACC,
Raja, J. (Ed.) (2003) Refugees and their Right to Communicate: South Asian Perspectives, UTC/WACC
Das, S.K. Victim’s Right to Communicate (pp.37-40), from the Report on the Creative Writer’s Workshop on Forced Displacement of Population, Mahajan, D. and Das, S.K. (Eds.) (2003), Calcutta Research Group, Kolkata