APPENDICES

REFUGEE STATUS DETERMINATION AND THE ROLE OF NGOs:
STANDARD OF PROOF AND WORK WITH UNDOCUMENTED
ASYLUM SEEKERS
SUMMARY OF THE NGOS’ ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS FORMULATED
BY THE ORGANIZING COMMITTEE

This is an attempt to describe the current situation in our countries.

First of all I would like to thank all NGOs that contributed to fact finding and those which helped organize this seminar. I also wish to thank the governmental structures of our countries that accepted our invitation and sent their representatives. Their readiness to cooperate is precious; the level of representation is high. This is the main result of the 1996 Conference.

The paper is based on the collected data supplied by NGOs from 13 countries (11 CIS members, Lithuania and Estonia) to the Organizing Committee of the International Seminar on “Refugee Status Determination: Standard of Proof and Work With Undocumented Asylum Seekers.” It was organized by the NGO working group on refugee legislation.

The material cannot be described as exhaustive: the NGOs looked at the problem according to what they knew about it and the amount of information they possessed (often outside their reach).

We do not claim a comparative description of legislation and its application in various countries - something that is rendered senseless by hugely varying situations in our countries. Indeed, while Azerbaijan and Armenia are facing an urgent refugee situation that echoes in all spheres of life Estonia can take its time to create democratic laws and push the problem of refugee status seekers to the back burner.

When answering the Organizing Committee’s questionnaires NGOs from different countries showed different degrees of criticism in relation to the situation at home. This excludes any attempts at comparing information.

Still, we believe that the general problems discussed at the seminar should receive attention: the collected materials have demonstrated that, to varying degrees, they remain topical across the entire former Soviet Union. Forced migration these states did not launch was, in many cases, born by their policies. Today it confronts the newly independent states and their leaders with absolutely new problems and tasks. On top of this there is no habit of prompt decision-making. I should say that a lack of experience of dealing with political problems having in mind individual interests can bring dramatic results for the individuals concerned, society and the state.

Forced migrants are especially vulnerable-they lost protection of one state and failed to become protected by another. This makes it especially important to apply the norms of international law to them; legal aid that will secure them state support is urgently needed. Any decision to grant the refugee status should take account of a refugee’s real situation rather than be guided by formal considerations (a presence or absence of identification documents or written evidence of discrimination especially when the situation in the relevant country is well known.)

This is why the NGOs have decided to discuss the problem of granting the refugee status to undocumented individuals and the standard of proof needed and adequate to get the status.

The paper consists of two parts: A. Standard of Proof and B. Work with Undocumented Asylum Seekers.