Kasinee Silapee
USCRIThailand
Network [List] · [Visualize]
   |
About
Background
Current situation of refugees in Thailand
Thailand has been recognized as one of the largest protracted refugee situations in East Asia, where hundreds of thousands of refugees, mostly from Myanmar, have been encamped without freedom and basic human rights, for almost 20 years. As the country is not a party to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and has no policy to assimilate the refugee into the local community, these refugees are waiting for the other two durable solutions; i.e. resettlement to the third country or repatriation to their homeland. No matter whether one likes to hear it or not, the fact is that both solutions would neither happen to all nor in the near future, and refugees would go nowhere during this time. This is such a waste of humanity. States therefore should be urged to terminate warehousing the refugees and to allow the refugees to live normal lives while pending to9 any durable solutions.
At the end of 2007, there were some 130,616 registered refugees and asylum-seekers, and some 15,000 unregistered asylum-seekers, from Myanmar residing in nine refugee camps in the four provinces of Tak, Mae Hong Son, Kanchanaburi and Ratchaburi. Nearly half of these populations were female and nearly half were children (under 18 years old).
Camp Populations as of 31 December 2007
|
Rank |
Camp Name |
Registered Population |
|
1 |
Mae La ( LMA), Tak |
39,230 |
|
2 |
Umpium (UMP), Tak |
19,851 |
|
3 |
Ban Mae Nai Soi (BMN), Tak |
18,921 |
|
4 |
Mae La Oon (MLO) |
13,793 |
|
5 |
Nupo (NPO) |
13,779 |
|
6 |
Mae Ra Ma Luang (MRML) |
11,707 |
|
7 |
Tham Hin (THI) |
6,018 |
|
8 |
Ban Dong Yang (BDY) |
3,658 |
|
9 |
Ban Mae Surin (BMS) |
3,426 |
Consequences from living in the camps too long without gaining any basic rights, have caused many negative results to the population of refugees in the camps, particularly the domestic violence causes by depression and desperation for hope in lives following the related documents from UNHCR reported on “Thailand SGVB Trends Analysis (2007-08) – Sexual and Gender-Based Violence (SGVB) Affecting Refugees and Asylum-Seekers in Thailand, 2008”
The situation of the refugees in the camps should be analyzed from two points of view. From a strictly humanitarian point of view the joint efforts of donors, international organizations, humanitarian agencies, national and international civil society organizations and the RTG have made it possible to avoid a major humanitarian disaster and provide the refugees with food and basic services. However, from a social point of view, the prolonged stay of the refugees in the camps, without access to work and travel outside the camps, has resulted in anxiety and high levels of depression demonstrated by a significant number of suicides or attempted suicides[1]and increased cases of violence including sexual and gender based violence.[2]
Samples of incident types of the violence can be categorized as rape, attempted rape, domestic violence, sexual exploitation, sexual harassment/ sexual abuse and trafficking.
USCRI and its campaign to end of refugee warehouse
USCRI considers Refugee Warehousing is a waste of humanity and therefore this should be terminated, facts from UNHCR’s “Protection incidents in Refugee camps on the Thai/Myanmar Border: Trends and Analysis 2003-2006” makes the case for ending the warehousing of refugees more forcefully and urgently. Key passages follow:
Restrictions upon education, employment and the right to move beyond the confines of the camps have been in place for up to twenty years, and have forced over 130,000 refugees living in the camps to lead livers of unrealized potential and
frustration. In such an environment, violence and human right abuses have inevitably arisen. The report indicates that more than 350 serious protection incidents falling into 17 different categories have been reported to UNHCR over the past three years. Due to the absence of the comprehensive reporting system, it is assumed that this number represents only “The tip of the iceberg”
Though the RTG in the recent year announced a “new version” for refugee treatment and had made some reform, including allowing children to go to schools, some vocational programs for adults, minor livelihood activities in the camps, and some type of work release program allowing restricted employment with limited choice of employers near the camps, we are yet to see Thailand formulate state policies more conductive to refugee rights.
USCRI made its step to settle its works in Thailand
In November 2007, with supporting from U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugee and Migration, USCRI opened an office in Bangkok, Thailand, and begun a 12-month-pilot civil society project. The project is part of the Strengthening Protection Capacity Project (SPCP) of the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, with UNHCRI acts as an implementing partner.
USCRI works alongside with Thai civil society constituencies, particularly among the business, labor and faith communities, host and donor governments, and other committed to help refugees get more of their basic rights. The overall goal of this project is to build public support for policy changes towards refugees’ rights to work, to practice professions, to run businesses, to own property, to move about freely, and to choose their places of residence. The theory behind the method is that engaging Thai society to promote refugee rights as a win-win proposition is not only democratically correct, but will provide a more secure foundation for these rights than any top-down or outside influence alone. If the project succeeds, Thailand would be a role model for every country in the world.
To reach the goal, we would:
· Build a coalition of interested civil society constituents to do advocacy and public education;
· Use Thai public medias and its power to raise awareness and also making understanding about Refugees among Thai people and its society;
· Conduct and use in-depth research to encourage advocacy efforts
· Engage civil society and the Royal Thai Government (RTG) in policy dialogue and development of refugee protection.
Attitude of Thai public toward migrants in general
USCRI Thailand commissioned a nationwide poll to answer several key questions from an earlier poll on attitude of the Thai public toward migrants in general, without distinction between refugees
and economic migrants commissioned by the International Labor Organization and UNIFEM, which found highly negative attitudes toward the migrants in several areas such as rights they should enjoy in the labor force but found marked sympathy toward the migrants who were victimized or exploited, with most saying they not only thought it was wrong but that personally would take action against it, either informing the authorities or NGOs.
USCRI Thailand’s media advocacy campaign strategies significantly designed from the polls conducted during April to June 2007 among 2900 respondents from various occupations and levels of educations. The answers from these polls can be concluded as follows:
1. Nearly 59 per cent of the respondents said they did not know what the definition of a refugee was.
2. In both poll and the focus group, the theme of refugee’s duty to work had greater resonance than any right of refugees to work.
3. The poll showed the strongest negative attitudes among government workers; and the most sympathetic among students, while in the focus groups, participants from the private sectors expressed the largest support.
Based on the results of both studies, USCRI Thailand seeks to engage Thai media to educate the public on refugee living conditions and refugee rights.