Dear all,
better late than never here is the report about the workshop on Dublin
III during No Border Lasts Forever conference in Frankfurt. Attached you
find the report in english and german.
Here in Frankfurt and Hanau we are in the moment very active against
Dublin III, on Tuesday we will have the next big protest in Frankfurt -
and we would be very happy to know if there are similar activities in
other places.
All the best,
marion
Against Dublin III and inner-European deportation regimes
Increasingly, struggles against Dublin III and for inner-European freedom of movement and settlement become publicly known. At the same time there are juridical contestations of deportations occurring in Italy, Hungary, Bulgaria, Poland and Malta and in more and more individual cases deportations have been successfully halted. Publicity and reports concerning the situation of refugees in different countries have contributed to that success. We would like to: – Exchange strategies concerning the struggle against Dublin III and more concretely concerning the Dublin-deportations in the different countries (cue: Italy, Malta, Hungary, Poland, Bulgaria) – Exchange assessments of what possibilities for intervention may be utilised even more. Included herein are experiences of prevented deportations and church sanctuaries, as well as collective actions such as those of a group of 72 Afghan refugees from Hungary who collectively claimed asylum in Karlsruhe.
The Dublin II/III workshop was very well attended, more than 100 people participated, many of whom were those directly affected. Self-organisation, therefore, played a big part in the discussion. Two Afghans, who collectively fled from Hungary to Karlsruhe, reported about the situation of their group. They had, even prior to their continued escape to Karlsruhe, already protested in Hungary for better social conditions and against the imprisonment of asylum-seekers, and had already appealed to EU institutions. With their step to file a new collective asylum-claim they sought to elevate their struggle that had no chances in Hungary, to another level.1 Pakistani friends from Bavaria, referring to the Non-
Citizen protest march to Munich and later also to Berlin, emphasised how important the demands for solutions to the fingerprint-problem were. In their experience especially in Dublin-cases resistance can be really successful. Many members of their group are not threatened by deportation to Hungary or Italy anymore due to their enduring resistance. Other refugees recounted their personal experiences.
Additionally, diverse proposals concerning how to continue were suggested. It was repeatedly stressed how important the attestations/testimonies of the persons affected were. On the one hand, to convince courts, now in then, to suspend deportation in individual cases, and, on the other hand, to publicly question the Dublin-system as a whole, as it, in the end, only enables a vicious circle of continued escape and deportation. It was suggested to increase every form of publicity and to collect testimonies. The difficult role of the UNHCR was discussed, especially concerning Italy where the criticism voiced by UNHCR in view of a situation marked by mass homelessness and impoverishment remains shamefully weak. In that light it was discussed how it would be possible to push refugee-support-organisations into accepting more responsibility and position themselves against Dublin-deportations. Similar discussions revolved around churches, although very diverse experiences were recounted. Many reported of positive experiences with church asylum, that luckily can be ended often successful because of the timelimit for deportations in the Dublin-procedure. Others, however, also reported of how difficult it is to get the church congregation to consider church asylum, and how important it is to collect and publicise more best-practice examples. Another proposal concerned an example of the ‘imprisonment problem’ in Hungary, arguing that protests in these transit-countries could be used and picked up internationally, to collect arguments against deportations to these countries. In that respect, as in the first two No Border Lasts Forever conferences, it was pondered whether it would be possible to scandalise the situation in the individual countries such as Bulgaria, Italy, Hungary or Poland in order to stop the deportation machine.2 It was clear that the abolition of the Dublin-Convention would also be a central demand during the protest march to Brussels3 in May/June 2014.
Due to diverging interests and concerns and the time limit of two hours with breaks for interpretations being far too short, many ideas could unfortunately only be touched upon and not elaborated on. A few days after the conference, however, a group of Eritrean refugees from Frankfurt got in touch because they had seen the poster and heard of the conference. They sought to gain support for the organisation of a demonstration against fingerprints and deportations to Italy. And in this way the
1 Reportage von Mathias Becker in der Zeitschrift Cicero: http://zeitenspiegel.de/de/projekte/reportagen/zug-nach-nirgendwo/article/ und siehe auch der Blog der Gruppe MigSzol, die die afghanischen FreundInnen in Budapest mit aufgebaut haben und die auch heute als gemischte Gruppe weiterexistieren: http://migszol.com/. 2 Zu Ungarn werden auf der Seite von bordermonitoring.eu Berichte und Gerichtsentscheidungen gesammelt:
http://bordermonitoring.eu/2012/03/zur-situation-der-fluchtlinge-in-ungarn/. Zu anderen Ländern wäre mehr Austausch und eine Sammlung von nützlichen Berichten und Dokumenten ebenfalls wünschenswert. 3 Siehe auch: http://freedomnotfrontex.noblogs.org/.conference had, concerning Dublin, a very encouraging effect: on the 17th of March 300 people, mostly those directly affected, protested in Frankfurt in front the Italian consulate and at the Römer, and for the 8th of April another demonstration is planned.4
What did not work out in the short time of the workshop was a collective analysis of the struggles around Dublin: up-to-date statistics show an insane rise of so-called “take-back-request” especially to Italy and Hungary in the transition from Dublin II to Dublin III – at the same time the actual deportations have by far decreased.5 Furthermore, one can look back to several years of attempted different strategies. By and large with little success, since with the introduction of Dublin III, the same inner-European deportation regime persists. This debate needs to take place – in order to set in motion, besides all the debates, another wave of protests against the impending mass deportations to Italy and Hungary. In doing so, one can revert to experiences already made, for example the successful halting of deportations.6 In the face of massively increasing numbers a bigger campaign that focuses on the abolition of the Dublin-convention is needed – at least in that point everyone seemed to agree.
Gegen Dublin III und innereuropäisches Abschieberegime
Vermehrt treten Kämpfe gegen Dublin III und für innereuropäische Bewegungs- und
Niederlassungsfreiheit kollektiv an die Öffentlichkeit. Zugleich findet eine juristische Auseinandersetzung gegen Abschiebungen vor allem nach Italien, Ungarn, Bulgarien, Polen und Malta statt und in mehr und mehr Einzelfällen gelingt es per Klagenverfahren
Überstellungen zu stoppen. Dazu haben Öffentlichkeit und Berichte bezüglich der
Flüchtlingssituation in einzelnen Ländern beigetragen. Wir wollen: – Strategien austauschen, was das Vorgehen gegen Dublin III und konkret gegen Dublin-Überstellungen in einzelne Länder angeht (Stichwort: Italien, Malta, Ungarn, Polen, Bulgarien) – Einschätzungen austauschen, welche Interventionsmöglichkeiten vielleicht noch besser ausgeschöpft werden könnten. Hierzu gehören die Erfahrungen mit Abschiebeverhinderungen und Kirchenasylen, aber auch kollektive Aktionen, wie von einer Gruppe von 72 afghanischen Flüchtlingen aus Ungarn, die in Karlsruhe gemeinsam Asyl beantragten.
Der Workshop zu Dublin II/III war überaus gut besucht, über 100 Menschen haben daran teilgenommen und davon war ein großer Teil selbst Betroffene. Selbstorganisierung spielte demzufolge auch in der Diskussion eine große Rolle. So schilderten zwei Afghanen, die kollektiv aus Ungarn nach Karlsruhe weitergeflohen waren die Situation ihrer Gruppe. Sie hatten vor ihrer kollektiven Weiterflucht nach Karlsruhe bereits in Ungarn für bessere soziale Bedingungen und gegen die Inhaftierung von Asylsuchenden protestiert und sich dabei bereits auch an EU-Institutionen gewandt. Mit ihrem Schritt des gemeinsamen neuen Asylantrags hatten sie die Auseinandersetzung in der sie in Ungarn chancenlos geblieben waren auf eine neue Ebene tragen wollen.1 Pakistanische Freunde aus Bayern betonten, wie wichtig vielen bei dem Non Citizens-Protestmarsch nach München und auch später nach Berlin die Forderung nach der Löschung der Fingerabdrücke gewesen war. Ihre Erfahrung sei, dass gerade bei Dublin Protest zum Erfolg führen könne. Vielen aus ihrer Gruppe drohe mittlerweile keine Abschiebung nach Ungarn oder Italien mehr, weil sie sich lange genug gewehrt hätten. Verschiedene weitere Refugees legten Zeugnis ab über ihre persönlichen Erlebnisse.
Zudem wurden diverse Vorschläge gemacht, wie es weitergehen könnte. So wurde immer
