Liberian Repatriation Suspended

UNCLAS ACCRA 000497

SIPDIS

SIPDIS
SENSITIVE

DEPT FOR AF/FO, AF/W, AND PRM
GENEVA FOR RMA

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PREF PREL LI GH
SUBJECT: Liberian Repatriation Suspended

Ref: A. Accra 380, B. Accra 383, C. Accra 422, D. Accra 475


1. (U) Summary: Following habeus corpus lawsuits filed by two
Ghanaian human rights NGOs that challenged the arrest and planned
deportation of 23 Liberians, on April 8 the court of appeals has
ordered the government to postpone the deportation of 23 Liberians
scheduled for the same day. The court also ordered that their
lawyers be provided access to their clients and adjourned the case
until April 14. End Summary.


2. (SBU) RefCoord and PolOff met with Tuinese Amuzu of the Legal
Resources Centre (LRC),which jointly with the Commonwealth Human
Rights Initiative (CHRI),is pursuing a lawsuit on behalf of 23
Liberians in custody of the Ghana Immigration Service. Although a
separate case filed on behalf of all 630 Liberians was dismissed
when most were released from detention, CHRI and LRC are continuing
to press their court case on behalf of the 23 remaining in
detention. [Note: As reported in Ref B, UNHCR had verified these
individuals were not refugees, and they had been scheduled for
deportation on March 22. End Note]. CHRI and LRC have demanded
access to the Liberians in detention, proof that they were lawfully
detained under the Public Order Act, and action to prevent their
deportation. As a result of the court order, the lawyers will be
given access to the clients, and the case is adjourned until April

14.


3. (SBU) Amuzu also met with the protestors at Buduburam on March
17 and visited Kodiabe on March 18. According to Amuzu, there were
no reports of violence during the March 17 arrests, nor did he
observe evidence of violence. He was told on March 18 that two
women miscarried pregnancies; but said that these reports were not
confirmed. He also expressed concern that the tents at Kodiabe were
inadequate.


4. (SBU) Concerning the 16 Liberians who have already been
deported, Amuzu cited an absence of due process in their return. He
said Ghana's Refugee Law requires an individual withdrawal of status
by the Ghana Refugee Board, written notification, and fourteen days
to appeal. Regarding the GOG's invocation of the "cessation" clause
of the Refugee Law (i.e., a determination that refugee status no
longer applies to the Liberians due to a change in conditions in
their home country) Amuzu said that Article 17 of the Ghana Refugee
Law on cessation is only a clarification of when Article 15 (b) on
the withdrawal of refugee status can be applied. However, he
stressed that the GOG must still follow appropriate procedures to
withdraw refugee status in individual cases. He admitted that a
Supreme Court ruling would be required to clarify this point.


5. (SBU) Comment: While UNHCR lawyers in Geneva are looking at the
reading of the law, the Ghana Supreme Court will have the final say
on the law's interpretation. However, the NGOs' lawsuit may
encourage the GOG to cooperate with UNHCR and GoL in ensuring legal
protections are in place for future returns. End Comment.

BROWN