Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/994982
17 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 17 JUNE 2018 INTERVIEW ultimately, if it was clear where the disembarkation would take place... if it was clear how the mechanism of burden-sharing would work out afterwards...the rescue operation itself would never have been an issue, in my view. Now, however, people might be thinking... if I rescue people at sea, I might end up in that situation: with no one com- ing to assist in terms of burden- sharing. That is the concern for countries on the front line, like Malta, Italy, Spain and others. Speaking of private rescue boats: does the UNHCR have any information about vessels not responding to distress calls for that reason... i.e., to avoid entanglements of the Aquarius variety? No: as in the Aquarius case, merchant ships and privates do respond, and have always responded, to distress calls at sea. And this has been the case since time immemorial: inter- national law, and basic human decency, demands that the prin- ciple of saving lives at sea is al- ways respected. What we have seen, in fact, is that these ships have been doing a very com- mendable job over the years. But then, of course, these are merchant ships, on their way to somewhere. They need to know where to take those people, and who to hand them over to. That has to be clarified. If not, it could erode the age-old principle of coming to the assistance of those in distress. Another difference between countries and private vessels is that there would be consequences for any ship which (for instance) ignored an SOS. However, there are no immediate repercussions when countries ignore their international obligations. Doesn't this challenge or undermine our entire notion of international law? I'm not an expert in inter- national maritime law; but in terms of international law in general: countries sign these conventions voluntarily... and of course, this is also some- thing that appeals to their sense of values, their decency... it is something the international community agrees is a positive thing to adhere to. And for the most part, we should also say that countries do abide by their obligations. We see all sorts of commerce and transactions tak- ing place at sea, for example: it is all regulated, and for the most part it works. But there is no such thing as 'enforcement', to the extent that you have in na- tional law: where if you violate a traffic law, there will be a traffic cop to stop you. Most countries adhere to these conventions because they believe in these things. The problem arises when you have this sort of dispute: and of course, it must be resolved around a table, and discussions will have to ensue... because it is in the best interest of everyone to have a clear framework in place, so that there is no ambi- guity, and people are no longer exposed to danger as a result of such disagreements. Earlier, you mentioned discussions that are already underway to reform Dublin II, and you sounded optimistic... [Smiling] I'm always optimis- tic... ... no doubt, but it must be said that your optimism is not widely shared. Prime Minister Joseph Muscat described the proposed reform as 'implausible'. The Italian government is likewise sceptical. On a realistic level: what are your own projections? Naturally I am not privy to the discussions at state-level, but at UNHCR we feel that there has to be a reform. [...] I understand that there seems to be a stale- mate, and that there are diffi- culties that the process is going through. But we have no other option but to come to some sort of an agreement, because coun- tries that are taking in refugees and migrants have to be shown solidarity by others in Europe. As I said earlier, the numbers are large, but they are manage- able... for a continent that is very wealthy, and that has actually pioneered the 1951 [Refugee] Convention. That convention was born in Europe: it was Eu- ropean values and principles that actually gave birth to it. So, Europe has a history and tradi- tion, and is still contributing significantly to the protection and assistance of refugees glob- ally. That is where my optimism comes from, that they will find a solution to this issue. Speaking of the numbers involved: UNHCR recently published statistics suggesting that the number of Mediterranean crossings has actually declined in recent years.... That is the case. The numbers speak for themselves. In 2017, we had 172,000 coming across the central Mediterranean: most of them obviously going to Italy. In 2018, we have had 37,000... and of those, 15,000 went to Italy, the rest to Spain and also Greece... But 2018 isn't over, and summer has only just begun.... True, but if you look at the pro- jections, and examine the trend: comparing where we were this time last year, to today, the number is significantly lower... How do you account for that? Could it be a reflection of policies that are actually working, for instance? There are a number of factors involved: there have been some interventions in the countries of origin... there has been some information-sharing, to warn people of the dangers of the crossing. As you know, the dis- cussion tends to focus mostly on Libya, but the process of migration itself begins in the country of origin. My agency, UNHCR, focuses specifically on refugees: I am talking about people actively fleeing for their lives. In Africa right now, there are 12 ongoing wars; we also have the situation in Syria, that has been going on for some years... in Afghanistan and elsewhere... in all these places, people are genuinely fleeing for their lives, and for the safety of their families. We need to keep this is mind. The discussion should not only be about 'keep- ing migrants out'. Europe, as I said, has a history and tradition of helping refugees. It should open its doors to people genu- inely seeking protection and safety. Part of the problem, however, is that even genuine refugees end up being put to sea by unscrupulous, criminal human trafficking organisations. This has raised questions regarding whether NGOs and rescue boats are unwittingly 'colluding' with criminality, by responding to 'distress signals' designed purposely to rope them in. Is this a concern for the UNHCR? When, in the last few years, NGOs became more active in terms of search and rescue, they did so to fill a vacuum that they saw. If you look at the figures in the last few years, I think they have contributed significantly in terms of saving lives. That is without doubt. But while NGOs have a role to play, and have to date played it very commenda- bly... it is true that the concept of search and rescue at sea needs to be given a clearer infrastructure in which to function. Ultimately, responsibility for this sector lies with states, not with NGOs. Be- cause when private vessels do pick up people at sea... they still have to deliver them to a coun- try, somewhere... We have so far talked about other countries' responsibilities in the Aquarius case. What about Malta's? The government claims it has fully abided by its obligations. Do you agree? Should Malta have taken in those 620 migrants? For us, any country that was in a position to take them in, should have taken them in im- mediately: whether it's Italy, or Malta, or elsewhere. But of course, this is what this whole dispute is about: the different interpretations of where the responsibility lies. But yes, we think that countries have to have a manageable way of ful- filling those obligations. Malta is a small country, but it has played its fair share... the Prime Minister offered assistance, and to evacuate medical cases from the Aquarius. We appre- ciate that. And I also think that Malta has come a long way, from the days of automatic de- tention of people upon arriv- ing... which is now in the past, and will hopefully remain in the past. But we need to keep in that direction...