|
MORE news: Refugee Women Protest Over Welfare In Ghana A group of Liberian Women calling themselves Liberian Refugee Women for Refugee Concerns (LRWRC) are staging an on-going demonstration on the field at the main entrance to the Buduburam Refugee Camp since Tuesday last week. The group said they would not stop until their demands are met by the government of Ghana and the Refugee Agency the UNHCR. They told the UNHCR and the Ghana Refugee Board (GRB) that they would not like to be reintegrated into Ghanaian host communities. The women preferred resettlement to a third country of asylum or repatriation to Liberia with US$1,000 package per head.
Speaking to the Equality Trumpet following a meeting with UNHCR and GRB delegations, one of the spoke persons, Decontee Tarlue said consultative meetings held with refugees had shown that majority of the Liberian refugees opposed to local reintegration in Ghana for countless reasons. Ms. Tarlue said a communication which outlined the reasons and recommendations was presented to the UNHCR and the Ghana Refugee Board had highlighted violence against Liberian refugees in Ghana, economic and educational problems and other factors that may hinder the reintegration process. The group said in their communiqué that in 2002 heavily armed military men led by one general identifying himself as Dakor besieged the Buduburam refugee camp. The report said the general had used a helicopter hovering above the camp to order all male from 15 and above to assemble at a local football field within the camp vicinity. The women’s representative said the general had addressed the group of men gathered at the field with a proverb saying “there was a hunter who went to hunt. But during the expedition he encountered a bird and a turtle close to him. The hunter shot dead the bird and took both the bird and the turtle home, and his family had a great feast.” At the time, the representative said, the group had interpreted the proverb to mean that if one refugee were to cause a problem in Ghana, all of them (refugees) would be apprehended. Thus they believed according to the representative that they would be insecure in Ghana should they given reintegration status in that if one unscrupulous refugee committed a crime, the body of refugee as a whole would be linked to the offense. “It is like the righteous would suffer for the unrighteous,” she stressed. Ms. Tarlue further revealed another reason why the refugees would not like to be reintegrated in Ghana stating that “in 2001 refugees were stabbed daily at nights by unknown men believed to be Ghanaians for couple of months until a Ghanaian male suspect was caught with a sharp iron rod in the act.” She narrated that the man who was caught was in the offense was handed over to the Ghanaian police at the Buduburam Police post. “But the man was released because he was a Ghanaian,” she added. The police action to release the suspect erupted into a riot in 2001 when a mob ransacked the Buduburam Refugee camp police station resulting into the arrests of a large number of refugees, she reported. Full text of refugee women communication Liberian Refugee Women with Refugee Concerns February 8, 2008 Dear Sir/Madam: We the Liberian refugee women in Buduburam Refugee camp would like you to work with us in bringing a solution to end our exile. We are Liberian Refugee Women from various ethic backgrounds resident of the Buduburam Refugee camp in Ghana.b In the face of our stay on the shores of Ghana for the past seventeen years as refugee women, we had both challenges and successes. Thanks to our creator. The greatest success has been the time that Ghana and its people allowed us to stay and share the peace they enjoy. We express our gratitude to the people of Ghana. We also express our gratitude to the United Nations and its agencies and governmental and non-governmental donors that have help us in our time of need. Having stayed in the Buduburam for the past five to seventeen years, we now at the point of midnight in this refugee crisis in our lifespan, we ask that you work with us to end one of the longest and most frustrating refugee situations of our time We would like to acquaint you with the challenged we face, so that together we may find solutions and strengthen the implementation of those solutions that have already been pen down. We fear that past challenges that were never properly addressed will continue to undermine efforts to end our exile. We ask for your aid to create and enforce policies that can avoid these previous fallings:
In this document, you will find specific recommendations for:
Recommendations for durable solutions UNHCR/Ghana has stated that organized voluntary resettlement programs have ended and that future programs will focus only on local integration. But we strongly believe that the UNHCR- sponsored repatriation fell far short of the expected numbers of returnees for several reasons that can be rectified in a new program. We think that the decision to end organized repatriation was made prematurely, without the acknowledgement of Liberian refugees; concerns without respect for the legitimate reservations head by refugees based on the refoulement that followed the first UNCHR sponsored repatriation. In 1998, the decision also failed to take into consideration the housing concerns of refugees. According to a survey done by our group, up to eighty percent of refugees that live on the Buduburam refugee camp fled Liberia at a time when they had not acquired personal land nor built a house of their own. They were having either renting or living with some relative. For such people, having stayed in Ghana for five, ten, seventeen years with no employment, no saving no house to live back home going back home is not an easy decision to make. Where will a refugee with family of three to ten members who have stayed out of Liberia for five to seventeen years, sleep or live when he gets home? Is it in a displace camp or an abandoned building? We ask that organized repartition be reinstituted and extended over a two year period (January 2008_ January 2010) to permit refugee to make judgments about their security in Liberia as the situation continues to become more stable. It is difficult for some people to see Liberia as safe while peacekeepers remain needed in Liberia and former perpetrators remain in position of authority. But an increasing number of people would likely be ready to return now, if our recommendation put forth in this document are accepted, and many more will likely be ready in the next two years. We ask that the reinstituted organized repartition program be run in collaboration with post conflict reconstruction and development projects to provide financial support to returning refugees. Liberia for us is home and we need no indicator to point us to this fact. Nevertheless taking into consideration the number of year refugees have spent in this country - seventeen, ten , five - it is very dishearten to see ourselves going back home with 1 bucket,1pot,1blanket,1tarpaulin,half a sack of wheat and around US 5 for transportation. Some returnees are single mothers, widows, disabled - how can they make a living from this? Where do they get food, soap, and clothing for themselves and their children? Many of those who returned sent feedback that they can not fine a place to sleep, and sometimes end up in displace camps. The cost of living in Liberia is height’s rent a single room in Monrovia is LD$1,200 (US$20) per month. We ask that policymaker acknowledge the twofold loss of home assets that refugee in Buduburam face; the initial lost of home, possession and employment in war and the subsequent lost of assets acquired in seventeen year of refugee in Ghana. Because of space limitations in transportation services, returnees can only carry with them a very small amount of luggage (20 kilos). Not that over years of our stay in Ghana refugees struggled to build their own home due to the limited housing facilities. The structures provided by the NUHCR could not meet the needs of the refugee population of forty –two thousand plus at the time these structured will remain in Ghana we leave. We are arguing that return constitutes a special hardship for refugee in Buduburam giving their length of stay here and their inability to carry or receive fair compensation for resources left in Buduburam. Also the training and experience that some Liberia refugee have been able to acquire despite the difficult condition here give them the potential for making exceptional contributions to the economic development and stability of post –war Liberia. In light of the special hardship and potential of Liberian refugee in Ghana, we recommend that donors create programs targeted to returnees from Buduburam run with the collaboration of UNHCR, donors, development agencies, post-conflict reconstruction agencies and refugee representatives. In deciding how these programs should be implemented, policymakers note that research has shown that aid delivered as monetary payments to individual can be significantly more efficient that aid distributed in goods and services (see Gaim Kibreab, 1999, “The consequences of Non-participatory planning: Lessons from Livestock Provision Project to Returnees in Eritrea.” Journal of Refugee studies 12:135-160). Monetary payments allow people to adapt to changing circumstances and new information gained upon return. We recommend that each Refugee (per UNHCR Registration Number) receive monetary payments totaling one thousand united state dollars (US$1,000) as grants to rebuild their homes and to start their lives when they get back home. We also want to recommend that Liberian refugees be given compensation for homes built through their own efforts.
We are recommending this amount taking in to consideration the cost of living and building a two- room house for a family of three. With the US$3,000 that a family of three would receive if the UNHCR accepts our proposal, this would leave approximately US$725 to start a livelihood. We ask that the UNHCR also add the following to the repatriation package:
That an organized repatriation programs be created that recognize the distinct needs of rural and urban refugees. We also recommend that stakeholders create scholarship programs for junior and senior high school and tertiary level. Primary school is now free, but junior and senior high fees run as high as US$100 per year. The university charges US$5 per credit (normal credit load: up to 18 credits per term). 2. Rectifying prior injustices in resettlement programs UNHCR has announced that resettlement programs have ended. But we believe that some things remain unfinished. We full understand that the family reunion (P-3) was under the United States government and has been closed down. But we believe that the UNHCR resettlement (P-1) needs to be reviewed. We make two recommendations for resettlement:
Resettlement fraud In February 2007, an UNHCR-sponsored verification process revealed cases of people, who had been listed as “resettled,” but were still on the refugee camp. Given that UNHCR has improved methods for evaluating resettlement cases that minimize the potential for malfeasance and address fraud through the taking of fingerprints, it is time for those excluded from resettlement through the fraud and corruption of others to have their cases for resettlement reevaluated. Grievance procedures We ask that UNHCR Geneva, UNHCR Ghana, and Foreign Missions refugee coordinators institute a review panel in Buduburam in February 2008 to permit refugees with legitimate grievances about resettlement processing to seek redress. The UNHCR had cases of verified people who were being interview. These cases were closed unceremoniously as in the cases Elizabeth Glay UNHCR registration no.2369301, Felecia Z. Dorbor UNHCR registration no. 1748101 and many more. They were not given a letter of denial nor acceptance. There were cases of Liberian refugee women who were verified under the women-at-risk category in 1999 and up to date those category of women have not been called for interview, as in the cases of Florence T. Jackson UNHCR registration no. 2220701, Hawa Christiana Morris UNHCR registration no. 4521601. These names are just a few examples of affected persons. 3. Creating targeted resettlement programs for refugees We ask that UNHCR Geneva/UNHCR Ghana continue to evaluate individuals for resettlement. Many Liberian refugees who remain in the Buduburam refugee camp cannot return to Liberia due to well-founded fear, but face harsh circumstances in Ghana. We recommend that one such group be women who have legitimate fear of perpetrators currently in high-ranking position of government. How can refugee women go back when the very perpetrators are holding high positions in government? Will a man who raped a woman be set over her as the master of the house? We ask resettlement be established in consultation with refugee representatives in order to stop the menace of other nationals been resettled as Liberians whilst the rightful persons (Liberians) remain in Buduburam. Public dissemination of information on resettlement/integration We would greatly appreciate if the UNHCR Ghana would make the dissemination of information more effective by holding more public meetings before coming up with activities. This will avoid misinformation and help refugees to make proper judgments and decisions. Posting information on the bulletin boards and making consultations with small groups of refugees is not enough. 4. Increasing food security and health for vulnerable refugees We ask that stakeholders work with the World Food Programme and the national Catholic Secretarial to strengthen the food and health programs offered in Buduburam while durable solutions are being considered. Substitute rice for the maize currently distributed. Maize is the stable food of Ghanaians not Liberians. We do not have enough experience in the preparation of maize dishes to make effective use of the food, nor money to process the maize, and so most people resell their rations to Ghanaians at whatever rate they willing to pay to buy a small quantity of rice. We recommend that UNHCR and its implementing partners revisit the payment plans at the St. Gregory Catholic clinic and the cost of drugs be reduced. The clinic has been turned in to a commercial facility charging exorbitant fees for services as evidence by registration, drugs and referrals receipts payments. We also ask that refugees who have chronic medical problems be assisted. Opposition to local integration As recent public meetings have shown, most Liberians strongly oppose local integration. We fear that once UNHCR leaves, we will lose our strongest advocate and our position in Ghana will become much worse. Our fear is based on past experiences: In 2002, a Ghanaian military official General Darker seized the camp. He came with a helicopter and over two dozen military men. The helicopter flew over the camp for around twenty minutes, landed, and military men were deployed in the various zones of the camp ordering everybody out of their houses. All male 15 years and above were assembled on the football field along the ECOWAS highway. General Darkar stood at the entrance of the helicopter and began his speech with proverb. He said, “Once upon a time there was a hunter who decided to go and hunt. While on his hunting expedition, he saw a bird flying above him chirping. There was also a turtle on the ground not too far from where the hunter stood. The hunter shot the bird and the bird fell dead near the turtle. The hunter took both the dead bird and the living turtle home where he and his family had a great fast!” this we refugees saw as a hint to us that if one refugee were to cause a problem, all us would be apprehended and will suffer the consequences for whatever problem was caused. This “One man do and everyone punished” principle, we see as a source of insecurity to us. There have been cases of missing children only to be found with missing body parts. The stabling of refugees whilst sleeping at night –in this case, a suspect was caught with the weapon and run over to the police, only to be released, an event which led to riot in March 2001. Liberians tenants are vulnerable to the threats and brutal attacks from Ghanaian landlords. The sexual abuse and defilement of female refugees by school officials, taxi drivers and local residents has also been a serious problem in Buduburam. Attached are copies of reports of the murder and attacked victims. Economic and Education Problems Ghanaians face high rates of unemployment. Tens of thousands of underpowered refugees put additional heavy burdens on the labor market. We suffer from discrimination from potential Ghanaian employers, who prefer to hire their own people. In the 1980s, Ghana deported Liberians with the argument that they were “Unproductive.” We fear that if a large underpowered population from Buduburam is integrated, the same will happen again after the UNHCR has pulled out. UNHCR/Ghana tried to ensure from the outset that assistance programs integrated strategies for self-reliance, thus avoiding overloading host government with unproductive refugees. One key strategy was to expand education. Unfortunately, they didn't carry out the plan. A proportionate amount of the population was not empowered from primary to tertiary levels. Many Liberians refugees could not afford to get education because schools in Buduburam are expensive and offer low quality education resulting in high failure rates in the West African Examinations. Elsewhere in Ghana, schools are expensive and refugees are charged foreign fees. The only available tertiary scholarship had an age limitation that hindered many. With this large number of underpowered refugees, we believe that local integration will leave us totally vulnerable! Conclusion Liberian refugee women at the Buduburam Refugee camp are asking for an immediate redress to our plight. We ask that UNHCR and other stakeholders sand delegation to the Buduburam Refugee camp to work with us to develop the recommendations outlined in this document and bring a lasting solution to end our exile. The women of Buduburam Refugee camp are hereby emphatically saying: We, Liberian refugees, do not want to be locally integrated. We either be resettle to a third country of asylum or be repatriated in a problem that meets the following guidelines:
We are also recommending the following:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
|
|
|