Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/994982
16 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 17 JUNE 2018 INTERVIEW The recent Aquarius stand- off has pinpointed a lack of international consensus regarding the precise chain of responsibility in such cases; and in the end, the impasse was broken only through the voluntary intervention of Spain. Effectively, this means that the underlying root problem remains unresolved. Would you agree with that assessment? And what do you think the next step after Aquarius should be? Obviously, in such situations, the most important impera- tive is the protection and well- being of refugees and migrants: the people who are taking these very dangerous journeys across the central Mediterranean. We can talk about the root causes of migration, and how we can ad- dress them... but in this kind of immediate situation, the safety of well-being of the people in- volved is paramount. And it should be paramount across the board, among all the countries involved, and other stakehold- ers. Of course, we are very grate- ful for Spain to have stepped in to defuse the situation, and to take those people in after spend- ing a few days in the middle of the sea: with women and chil- dren, sick people, and pregnant women among those who were on board the Aquarius. It was a very unfortunate situation, but it was not a first; it has happened in the past. In fact, we're seeing a bit of a déjà-vu, in terms of in- cidents like this being repeated. What is missing, and perhaps what we should focus on, is [a discussion on] how to have a predictable framework and mechanism, that allows coun- tries to fulfil their obligations in terms of rescue at sea – which is an international, legal obliga- tion – but also what happens to the people who are rescued: whether by a state, by NGOs, or by private vessels. In the Aquarius scenario, for example, the rescue was carried out by six different private boats... and in this, we need to maintain a ro- bust rescue capability; but we also need predictability, because these merchant ships, or pri- vate boats, need to know where the disembarkation would be; where these people would be taken to. Otherwise, next time round they will not deviate from their course to pick up people stranded in the middle of the sea. A predictable mechanism is what is lacking at the moment. And of course, this is not going to be the last incident of this kind. We are going to see many more... One might argue that this mechanism you refer to is already in place: there are international maritime legal obligations, as well as treaties like Dublin II, which specify (among other things) that people rescued at sea should be taken to the 'nearest safe port of call'. This doesn't seem to work in practice. Why not, in your view? First of all, I would say that principle of the 'nearest safe port' is something that should be safeguarded. It is enshrined in conventions, and by best practice, and that should be re- tained. But we need to go be- yond that, and determine where the precise responsibility for disembarkation lies. Because that is ultimately the issue: espe- cially for countries in southern Europe, on the front line when it comes to receiving and dis- embarking those crossing the central Mediterranean. Italy and Malta should not be the only countries where these people end up staying; there should be a mechanism of relocation, re- sponsibility or burden-sharing in that regard. And the Dublin Treaty reform, that is now un- der discussion, should be seen in that context as well. The treaty is now going through a process of revision, and may be facing a bit of a difficulty... but we need to find a solution whereby, first of all, the rescue at sea takes place within a predictable framework; and secondly, how we can dis- tribute the burden among Euro- pean countries. But questions arise even over the existing rules. In the present scenario, for instance – where the central Mediterranean is a major migration route – the 'nearest safe port of call' can only realistically ever mean either 'Italy' or 'Malta'. Doesn't Italy, therefore, have a point, when it argues that the rules themselves are unfairly tilted against southern states? It is true, but first of all I think that we need to keep the entire issue in perspective. The num- bers, in themselves, are manage- able. That is one thing we need to keep in mind, and take a glob- al view. Nine out of 10 of peo- ple who are forcibly displaced, globally, are not in Europe: they are in developing countries... the countries neighbouring where they had fled. What is lacking [in the context of Europe] is a coherent, comprehensive mech- anism of responsibility sharing. It is not realistic to assume, and insist, that the countries that re- ceive or disembark these people, should be the countries where they end up staying indefinitely. When the discussions on Dub- lin II reform come into play – and we're not there yet – there should be a de-coupling be- tween disembarkation, and pro- cessing, for example. Basically, if you are the country receiv- ing the disembarkation, there should already be a framework in place that takes into consid- eration that people may not stay in the country; they might be distributed according to ca- pacity, or other factors. That is where we need to focus the dis- cussion; otherwise we will keep seeing the same stand-offs; and, of course, the people who will be suffering are the migrants and refugees caught up in the mid- dle. [...] So yes, there is definitely also a need to clarify the rules of engagement. And maybe we can talk about the roles that others play, apart from states... such as NGOs, for instance. But The Aquarius incident has once again illustrated how far Europe remains from a workable solution to the recurring diplomatic and political effects of irregular immigration. KAHIN ISMAIL, representative of the United Nations High Commission for Refugees, outlines the urgent need for a reform of the rules of engagement... without losing sight of basic human decency Italy and Malta should not be the only countries where these people end up staying; there should be a mechanism of relocation, responsibility or burden- sharing in that regard What is lacking is a predictable framework mechanism Raphael Vassallo rvassallo@mediatoday.com.mt