UKRAINE ACTION REQUEST: UNHCR CONCERNED ABOUT DROP

C O N F I D E N T I A L KYIV 000656

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

MOSCOW FOR DHS/CIS, STATE FOR ROLF OLSON AT PRM

E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/24/2016
TAGS: PGOV PHUM PREL UP UNHCR
SUBJECT: UKRAINE ACTION REQUEST: UNHCR CONCERNED ABOUT DROP
IN U.S. ASYLUM REQUEST ACCEPTANCES

REF: 06 KYIV 4680

Classified By: POL Counselor Kent Logsdon, reasons 1.4 (b, d).


1. (SBU) Note: This is an action request for Moscow
DHS/CIS, Mission Geneva and PRM, retransmitting the text of
reftel, slightly modified. Post requests a response to the
UNHCR-Kyiv claim that U.S. refusal rates of UNHCR-Kyiv
referrals in 2006 jumped by 20 percent; see para 9.


2. (C) Summary. Representatives from UNHCR-Kyiv told us in
December 2006 that the situation for asylum seekers in
Ukraine was still precarious and that proposed legislation,
which UNHCR helped to draft, would address the shortcomings
of the current system - including gaps in the legal structure
and nearly continuous reorganization of the State Committee
for Nationalities and Refugees. They added that the
readmission agreement between Russia and Ukraine, signed
December 22, 2006 could make asylum seekers from CIS
countries - especially Chechens - more vulnerable. UNHCR
also raised concerns about the approximately 20 percent
increase in U.S.-refused resettlement applications referred
by UNHCR-Kyiv in 2006. They also provided information on the
11 Uzbeks refouled in February, reporting that several had
received lengthy prison sentences or were subject to
restrictive measures although there was no way to confirm
this information provided by the Uzbek Government. End
Summary

UNHCR: Asylum Seekers Face Hardship and Uncertainty
-------------- --------------


3. (SBU) The office of the United Nations High Commissioner
for Refugees (UNHCR) in Ukraine, Belarus, and Moldova -
including its Regional Representative Simone Wolken -
requested a meeting with us to raise concerns about the
precarious situation for asylum seekers in Ukraine. The four
officials painted a bleak picture in which asylum seekers
face long delays for their cases to be heard (2-3 years),
murky legal status while waiting for their hearings, and few
prospects of receiving refugee status from Ukraine (a four
percent acceptance rate 2002-2005).


4. (SBU) The UNHCR representatives explained that the major
flaws in the current Ukrainian system is how the Government
of Ukraine registers asylum seekers. The current system
lacks an effective mechanism to confer on them the temporary
right of residence in Ukraine, and does not give them the
legal status necessary to work legally. Therefore, these
asylum seekers, often without legal documents and working
illegally, are subjected them to possible arrest and
harassment by local law enforcement authorities. UNHCR added
that access to temporary accommodations, health care, and
subsistence income is very limited, causing the asylum
seekers significant hardship.


5. (C) The UNHCR representatives acknowledged that Ukraine
faces a particularly difficult situation as a transit country
for refugees seeking asylum in the EU (note: as well as
economic migrants). They added that asylum seekers from CIS
countries, most notably Uzbeks and Chechens from Russia, face
further danger due to what UNHCR believes is unwritten but
close cooperation between CIS country security organizations
- especially with Russia in regards to Chechens. Asylum
seekers from CIS countries are especially fearful of even
applying for status in Ukraine and do so only if apprehended
on Ukraine's western borders. At that point, their only
other option is usually immediate deportation to their
country of origin.


6. (C) The UNHCR stated that the readmission agreement
between Russia and Ukraine signed during President Putin's
visit to Kyiv in December 2006, in UNHCR's view, could
provide a mechanism to facilitate deportation of CIS asylum
seekers - most notably Chechens - to Russia or other CIS
countries. However, conclusion of the Ukrainian-Russian
agreement was critical to implementation of the EU-Ukrainian
readmission agreement, a key step forward in Ukraine-EU
relations. Without the readmission agreement with Russia,
Ukraine would have to manage the holding of potentially tens
of thousands of returnees from the EU who had transited
Ukraine, without recourse to further deportation to Russia.
In a November 2006 meeting with Interpol Secretary General
Ronald Noble, President Yushchenko acknowledged that annually
Ukraine was detaining 9,000 to 14,000 irregular migrants, but
only had two facilitates to accommodate the migrants while
status was being determined. Therefore, even before signing
of the readmission agreement with EU, Ukraine's inability to
manage its case load of migrants had resulted in harsh

criticism from the Council of Europe for not meeting European
standards.

Request for USG to Support New Law on Refugees
-------------- -


7. (SBU) Frequent changes in the organization of the GOU
asylum authorities (eight times in the past nine years) and
shortcomings in the 2001 Law on Refugees make it hard to
assist asylum seekers, UNHCR noted. With the November 2006
formation of the State Committee for Nationalities and
Religion, replacing two previous committees, it remains
unclear which Ukrainian government body will have authority
over asylum matters let alone migration policy writ large.
(Note: Implementation of Ukraine's migration policy, to the
degree it exists, is handled by the State Border Guard
Service and the Ministry of Interior (MOI),the latter
assigned in September 2005 to take over responsibility from
the Border Guards for Ukraine's migration detention
facilities. Beyond the problem of insufficient space to
accommodate the large number of irregular migrants detained
each year, Mikhail Andrienko, Head of the MOI's Trafficking
in Persons and Migration Department, said there is a lack of
proper legislation empowering his Department to operate in
this field.).


8. The 2001 Law on Refugees and subsequent amendments to it
do not provide adequate protections to asylum seekers and
falls short of international standards, in UNHCR's opinion.
However, they hope that draft legislation that they helped
write to address shortcomings in the current legislation
would become law in 2008 or 2009. The UNHCR asked for U.S.
support in encouraging the GoU to pass the proposed
legislation without major changes.

Drop in USG Acceptance of Resettlement Cases?
--------------


9. (C) Wolken and her colleagues expressed alarm at the
decrease in the number of resettlement cases from Ukraine
accepted by the USG in 2006 as compared to previous years.
According to their figures, in 2003-2005, the U.S. accepted
approximately 65-70 percent of resettlement requests
forwarded by UNHCR-Kyiv, while in 2006 only 40 percent of
such cases were accepted. They were puzzled by the sharp
drop this year because they saw no qualitative or
quantitative difference between the 2006 cases and those from
previous years. They were especially at a loss to understand
the refusal of cases involving Somalis, since they knew of
Somalis having been resettled from other third-countries to
the U.S. in 2006. They asked us to relate their concerns to
the DHS/CIS representatives in Moscow and asked to meet with
them in Kyiv during the next round of resettlement case
adjudications. (Note: We suggested that UNHCR raise this in
both Geneva and Washington for a response. End Note.)

Fate of the 11 Refouled Uzbeks
--------------


10. (C) In response to our question regarding the fate of
the 11 Uzbeks refouled in February 2006, UNHCR-Kyiv provided
us with a copy of a November 9, 2006, letter from the Mission
of Uzbekistan in Brussels to the Permanent Representations of
European Union Member States to the EU indicating that all 11
had been charged with several criminal offenses relating to
the May 2005 Andijon uprising. Two of the refouled Uzbeks
had received lengthy prison terms; two received three-year
correctional work custody, and one case was still pending.
There was no additional information about the remaining six.
Although there is not a UNHCR office in Tashkent, UNHCR-Kyiv
told us that, according to their sources, those not sentenced
are subject to restrictive measures and police surveillance.


11. (U) Visit Embassy Kyiv's classified website:
www.state.sgov.gov/p/eur/kiev.
Taylor