TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Indonesian refugees resettle in Australia: Why not others?
Of the 81,337 refugees referred for resettlement in 2018, only 2.2 percent fell under the “emergency” category and 15.3 percent under “urgent”. The majority of submissions, or 82.5 percent, fell in the “normal” category. Access to resettlement is not necessarily given to the most vulnerable refugees.
Change Size
A Rohingya clothes seller waits for customers at Jamtola refugee camp in Ukhia on Dec. 9, 2019. (AFP/Munir Uz Zaman)
T
he United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has a tendency to claim that resettlement has been a life-saving solution for the “most vulnerable refugees”, which includes victims of violence and torture, women and children at risk, and refugees with medical needs.
For refugees transiting in Indonesia, resettlement — the relocation of refugees from a country of asylum (usually a neigboring country to which refugees have fled) to a country of permanent settlement — is the preferred option. The two other options the UNHCR traditionally offers to address the refugee issue, voluntary repatriation and local integration, are limited and unrealistic.
I have personally met several Indonesian refugees with no specific vulnerabilities who used to be in the care of my agency, and who are now resettled in Australia with the assistance of the UNHCR office in Jakarta, and I could not help but wonder: Why resettle them and not others?
How are the lucky few chosen out of thousands of refugees with similar conditions, who also suffer from hardships and despair as a result of their protracted asylum here? It seems to me that the refugees eligible for resettlement are randomly selected by UNHCR Indonesia and thus, the fairness and reliability of this selection process must be challenged.
It is increasingly evident that vulnerability is no longer a key factor in selecting refugees for resettlement. In fact, by the UNHCR’s own account, most refugee cases submitted for resettlement fall under the “normal” priority for submissions, in that “there are no immediate medical, social, or security concerns which would merit expedited processing”.
The UNHCR Global Resettlement Statistical Report gives me useful insight into the agency’s submission categories. Of the 81,337 refugees referred for resettlement in 2018, only 2.2 percent fell under the “emergency” category and 15.3 percent under “urgent”. The majority of submissions, or 82.5 percent, fell in the “normal” category. Access to resettlement is not necessarily given to the most vulnerable refugees.
As Indonesia is not a signatory to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees or its 1967 Protocol and has no national refugee legislation or procedures, it relies on local UNHCR staff to provide protection and assistance to refugees and asylum seekers, particularly in three core tasks: refugee status determination, resettlement referrals and repatriation. This complete reliance on the UNHCR means the government knows very little about the processes involved.
