Trends in Durable Solutions

2.4 Trends in Durable Solutions

UNHCR-Egypt has responded in varying ways to the legal constraints placed upon them by the Government of Egypt when it comes to providing durable solutions for refugee populations in Cairo. Both the Government of Egypt and UNHCR-Egypt have promoted voluntary repatriation as the preferable durable solution for the waves of Sudanese, East African and Iraqi refugees

who have arrived over the past few decades. 5

Beginning with the waves of Sudanese refugees who fled to Egypt in the 1980s during the war in Southern Sudan, UNHCR-Egypt performed RSD for each refugee applicant in accordance with the MOU between the Government of Egypt and UNHCR-Egypt. From 1978-1995, the Sudanese in Egypt additionally benefited from the terms of the Wadi El Nil agreement between the Governments of Egypt and Sudan. This agreement granted Sudanese in Egypt (refugees and ordinary migrants) rights of education, employment, health services and property ownership. This agreement ended in 1995 following an assassination attempt on President Mubarak in Ethiopia, which the Government of Egypt blamed on Sudanese Islamists.

Between 1995-2004, Sudanese refugees in Cairo were afforded only the limited protections provided in Egypt under their MOU with UNHCR-Egypt. However, those recognized as refugees by UNHCR-Egypt were eligible for repatriation in third countries during these years. Of the 20,700 Sudanese who were recognized by UNHCR- Egypt between 1997-2004, 14,300 were resettled in third countries. Significant protection gaps remained however: the 20,700 recognized Sudanese refugees constituted only a fraction of the total number of Sudanese who approached UNHCR-Egypt for asylum. Upwards of 60 per cent of Sudanese cases during these years were rejected because the Sudanese could not necessary prove that, as individuals, they had a “well-founded fear of persecution”; they were simply fleeing the general violence of the war.

To rectify this situation, in 2004 UNHCR-Egypt began to recognize Sudanese refugees under the criteria of the Organization for African Unity (OAU), which recognizes refugees fleeing the violence of war even if individuals did not experience targeted persecution. Problematically, however, switching to the OAU criteria for RSD disqualified many Sudanese refugees from international resettlement, since most host countries in Europe and North America do not recognize the OAU’s criteria. Thus from 2004 onward, Sudanese refugees had an extremely difficult time in trying to get resettled internationally, despite the fact that this was the preferred durable solution for most Sudanese refugees.

At the same time, prospects for locally integrating the Sudanese improved somewhat in 2004. In this same year, the governments of Egypt and Sudan entered into the “Four Freedoms” agreement, which provided Sudanese in Egypt with the legal right of work, residency and other freedoms.

Beginning in 2007, Sudanese refugees led protests against UNHCR-Egypt, advocating for increased resettlement opportunities. Though negotiations were sometimes often tense, UNHCR-Egypt began to increase the numbers of cases recommended for resettlement in a third country. Following the Egypt’s revolution and a new wave of protests, High Commissioner for Refugees Gutierrez announced

a “new start” for refugee resettlement for UNHCR- Egypt, announcing a new annual resettlement target of 2,000 cases. This number was several times higher than resettlement rates had been in the mid-2000s (Kagan 2011). UNHCR-Egypt reported to our team that five additional staff members were assigned to review UNHCR-Egypt’s database of resettlement files to identify particularly vulnerable cases that may be eligible for third country placement.

Other refugee populations in Egypt have had less volatile experiences in regards to durable solutions. Perhaps learning from past mistakes with the Sudanese refugee population, UNHCR-Egypt granted all Iraqi asylum-seekers refugee status on a prima facie basis without undergoing

RSD. 6 This qualifies Iraqis for international resettlement; thousands have been resettled since the first wave began arriving in Egypt in 2003. Likewise, refugees from Somalia, Eritrea and Ethiopia were registered either on a prima facie basis or through individual RSD. Recognized refugees from these countries have been eligible for repatriation in third countries, and many have been resettled over the years. Palestinians, in contrast, are not registered as refugees by UNHCR-Egypt, and they are not eligible for resettlement.

Voluntary repatriation is an option to all refugees at all times. Since 2008, UNHCR-Egypt has actively involved itself in assisting Iraqis with voluntary repatriation. According to statistics from UNHCR-Egypt, as many as 1,439 Iraqis left Egypt, either with UNHCR-Egypt assistance or spontaneously. In 2010, that number dropped to 548. In 2011, the year of the Egyptian Revolution, only 445 Iraqis left Egypt despite the increased instability and worsening quality of life. (UNHCR 2011b, 2011c). The declining number of returns may indicate that, despite worsening conditions in Egypt, some Iraqis and other refugees may never voluntarily return. Furthermore, UNHCR-Egypt officials indicated to our research team that these returns are not always sustainable:

a number of “returnees” from Egypt to Iraq ended up leaving Iraq once again to seek asylum in Jordan or Syria.

Likewise, only a small number of Sudanese have returned, and it is unlikely that many will return to South Sudan until the relationship between the governments of the North and South have stabilized. In 2011, 333 Sudanese and Southern Sudanese were assisted with returns by UNHCR-Egypt, and similar numbers of Sudanese returned the year prior (393 Sudanese). To give perspective, a total of nearly 25,000 Sudanese asylum-seekers still remain in Egypt (UNHCR 2011c). Few Ethiopians or Eritreans have returned. According to the research by Fabienne Le Houerou

CH3:

efugee Liv

elihoods

CH2:

egal and P L

olic yF rame

w orks

(2006), many Ethiopians living in Egypt fear reprisal or rights include the opening of primary health clinics and prison upon return due to their roles in Ethiopia’s civil war. primary schools to refugees. On the other hand, these rights

are insufficient even on paper: refugees require education Local integration is arguably the durable solution that

CH3: beyond primary school and have health needs beyond

requires the most attention currently from UNHCR-Egypt primary care. More problematically, these rights often exist

and its partners. On the one hand, a few promising steps

efugee

only in theory and are not realized in actuality. The result is

have been taken by the Government of Egypt to extend that many refugees of all nationalities live precarious lives some rights to refugees who are unlikely to ever resettle to in Egypt, where they are unable to support themselves

Liv

a third country or repatriate to their country of origin. These or become full-fledged members of their host society.

elihoods