Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
06LJUBLJANA109
2006-02-17 07:38:00
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Embassy Ljubljana
Cable title:  

SLOVENIA BACKSLIDING ON ASYLUM PROCEDURES

Tags:  PHUM PREF SI 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXRO1327
RR RUEHAG RUEHDA RUEHDF RUEHFL RUEHIK RUEHKW RUEHLA RUEHLN RUEHLZ
RUEHROV RUEHSR RUEHVK RUEHYG
DE RUEHLJ #0109/01 0480738
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 170738Z FEB 06
FM AMEMBASSY LJUBLJANA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 4590
INFO RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 LJUBLJANA 000109 

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

DEPT FOR EUR/NCE AND DRL/CRA

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PHUM PREF SI
SUBJECT: SLOVENIA BACKSLIDING ON ASYLUM PROCEDURES

REF: 05 LJUBLJANA 549

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 LJUBLJANA 000109

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

DEPT FOR EUR/NCE AND DRL/CRA

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PHUM PREF SI
SUBJECT: SLOVENIA BACKSLIDING ON ASYLUM PROCEDURES

REF: 05 LJUBLJANA 549


1. (SBU) SUMMARY. On Monday February 6, the National
Assembly passed amendments to Slovenia's Asylum Law that will
give the police significant new powers in adjudicating
requests for asylum and reduce the role of trained asylum
caseworkers. The new amendments are likely to further erode
safeguards for asylum adjudication and restrict the number of
refugees entering the country. The regional office of the
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and
numerous Slovenian NGOs have expressed dismay at the new
amendments and the deteriorating conditions at Slovenia's
asylum center, arguing that the amendments make it easier for
caseworkers to circumvent international asylum conventions.
President Drnovsek threatened not to sign the amendments
(which would have contravened his constitutional mandate) but
in the end signed off while urging Slovenia's Human Rights
Ombudsman to refer the law to the Constitutional Court for
review. END SUMMARY.

--------------
UNHCR Criticizes Amendments to Asylum Law
--------------


2. (U) The UNHCR Office in Budapest characterized the
amendments to the Asylum Law passed on February 6 as
"restrictive measures which narrow the scope of protection
granted to asylum seekers and refugees in the Republic of
Slovenia." UNHCR raised concerns with the fact that the new
amendments allow border police to make a prima facie
determination whether a person crossing the border may apply
for asylum. According to a written press statement, "UNHCR
considers that the proposed pre-procedure lacks basic legal
safeguards, including the right to appeal, but critically it
does not allow for a sound examination of reasons for a
person's flight by a qualified case worker within the asylum
procedure as required by international standards."


3. (U) UNHCR also criticized the fact that the amendments
repeal the right to free legal aid at the first instance of
the asylum procedure. For asylum seekers, the free legal
aid, which was provided heretofore by the GOS, was an
essential safeguard in the complex asylum procedure. Since
most asylum seekers cannot afford legal counsel on their own
and lack knowledge of the complexities of asylum law, the
repeal of such free legal assistance has a potentially large

impact on asylum seekers' ability to present their case.


4. (U) UNHCR also criticized the fact that the new amendments
repeal the right of work in the first year after the
submission of an asylum application. Monthly welfare
allowance and financial support to cover meal and
accommodation costs for those living outside the asylum
center are also terminated. UNHCR is concerned that the
repeal of this support will disproportionately affect
vulnerable categories of asylum seekers, forcing them to
become entirely dependent on the care received at the asylum
center.

-------------- --------------
NGOs Criticize Amendments, Conditions at Asylum Center
-------------- --------------


5. (U) Numerous Slovenian NGOs have been critical of the
newly adopted amendments to the Asylum Law, including Amnesty
International, Matafir, Mozaik, the Jesuit Refugee Service,
the Peace Institute, the Legal-Information Center, Racio
Social, Slovenian Philanthropy, and Foundation GEA 2000.


6. (U) In a February 15 meeting with PolMiloff, lawyer Vita
Habjan from the NGO Legal-Information Center explained her
concerns with the new legislation and the conditions facing
asylum seekers in Slovenia. Habjan complained that the
additional restrictions put on asylum seekers could lead to
refoulement (involuntary return to a country where abuse
could take place) and that due process was routinely being
violated. Habjan noted that the police now had the authority
to turn away asylum seekers at the border without conducting
a thorough hearing and without following the requisite
procedures required by international conventions. (NOTE:
Post will follow up with other NGOs to ascertain whether this
is in fact the case. END NOTE). Habjan noted that while
NGOs like Legal-Information Center could still offer free
legal aid on their own initiative, their resources were not
adequate to address the needs of asylum seekers, many of whom
are indigent and/or illiterate and completely unaware of
their rights.


7. (U) Habjan told us that the opposition sympathized with
the plight of asylum seekers and agreed with the NGO

LJUBLJANA 00000109 002 OF 002


community that the amendments were unnecessary and overly
restrictive. Asked whether she thought the Human Rights
Ombudsman might refer the law to the Constitutional Court,
Habjan answered that she thought it unlikely. However,
Habjan revealed that the Liberal Democratic Party (LDS) might
refer the case to the Constitutional Court (NOTE: For the
National Assembly to refer a law to the Constitutional Court,
a minimum of one third of the votes in parliament is
required. END NOTE).


8. (U) Habjan also claimed that conditions at the asylum
center in Ljubljana were below international standards.
Habjan explained that representatives of Legal-Information
Center are present at the asylum center on a daily basis, and
had witnessed numerous examples of substandard care. Habjan
noted that the center had no trained psychologists, that for
one full month there was no one assigned to monitor the
entry/exit of visitors, and that a caseworker was being
investigated for involvement in trafficking in persons.
Habjan also recited stories of favoratism, discrimination,
and lack of sanitary conditions.

-------------- --------------
A Story of Statelessness for Balkan Refugees in Slovenia
-------------- --------------


9. (U) During a February 3 trip to the Roma Association
headquarters in northeastern Slovenia, PolMiloff met a family
of four Roma refugees (a couple with two sons) who had come
to Slovenia in the early 1990s. In some ways, this family of
Roma musicians personify the problems with Slovenia's
restrictive asylum policy. Originally from Bosnia and
Herzegovina, the parents fled Bosnia shortly after the
outbreak of hostilities and moved to Zadar, Croatia. The two
sons were both born in Zadar. During their years in Croatia,
however, the family received multiple death threats and were
concerned about their safety, eventually leading them to flee
to Slovenia during the height of the war in Croatia. They
eventually settled in a Roma encampment near the northeastern
Slovenian city of Murska Sobota.


10. (U) As talented musicians and artists, the family was
able to earn enough money to get by. The older son is
married to a Slovenian citizen and is a successful musician
with numerous popular CDs, while the younger son is still in
high school, where he earned a prestigious Zois scholarship
for his academic merits. Both sons, however, are stateless
persons, having neither Bosnian, Croatian, nor Slovenian
citizenship (forcing the younger son to turn down his
prestigious scholarship). The father is a Bosnian citizen,
the mother a Croatian citizen. The family is reluctant to
formally apply for refugee status after all these years,
fearing that Slovenia's strict anti-immigrant asylum policy
will cause them to be deported back to Bosnia or Croatia.
Fluent in Slovenian, talented, and otherwise successful,
their story highlights the problems of an asylum system that
cannot ensure that refugees are given a fair hearing. The
result is that many refugees simply avoid the system
altogether, settling in encampments or living without legal
status for years, sometimes decades.

--------------
Comment
--------------


10. (SBU) The recent amendments to Slovenia's Asylum Law,
though perhaps not directly contravening international asylum
conventions, certainly make it easier to deny due process to
asylum seekers. As a result, Slovenia's asylum system offers
poor guarantees against refoulement, or the forced return to
a country where refugees might face persecution. Slovenia
already began restricting its asylum procedures under the
previous center-left government, allowing cases to be
dismissed with minimal evidence as "manifestly unfounded"
(see reftel). With these new amendments, however, additional
opportunities have arisen to deny asylum seekers a thorough
hearing. At this point, either the Human Rights Ombudsman
can refer the law to the Constitutional Court or the National
Assembly can do so with one third of the vote. Ultimately,
however, it is not the constitutionality of the legislation
that really matters, but rather the manner in which it is
implemented. Post will continue to monitor Slovenia's asylum
procedure and urge the GOS to recognize its international
commitments in this area.
ROBERTSON