Engaging governments on ending and preventing detention: practical examples

Brussels - 28 March 2014

2

Case study: UK

Jerome Phelps – starting from scratch

Let’s hear from you:

how have you creatively, strategically, (successfully?) engaged your government?

Pulling it all together: Global IDC member examples

Session Structure

3

Where do you see yourself? (Phillip’s ingredients) Small groups

Tell us about a strategy that you have used that has been successful?

Did it impact on other ‘ingredients’?

Did you engage with other ‘ingredients’ (deliberately? incidentally?)?

Many ingredients to make success

4

To work together, we’ll need different tactics. Which ones?

• Generate noise to get governments’ & publics’ attention

• Technical planning and strategy development

• Service provision methods

• Monitoring fundamental rights

• To be close to refugees, migrants, asylum seekers

• Close connections to decision makers

• Coordinators, people and organisations who can bring it all

together

5

Detention of asylum seekers, including children, is a major concern for NGOs and UN agencies. Government and NGOs have no dialogue • Japanese government with selected NGOs attend East Asia ATD

Roundtable in South Korea– 2010• Agree that detention of children is of common concern and an area

to collaborate on• Release of children from detention – 2010 (ad hoc)• Develop a working group with NGOs to explore further possibilities

for ATD – 2011• IDC Technical visit – national roundtable• Japanese government visits New Zealand to see ATD processes in

practice• Pilot with NGOs for airport arrival asylum seekers developed -

Ongoing

Japan

‘We have case managers who can develop community case plans – let’s try it’

6

Immigration detention is a complex problem – with race, religion, security all discussed publically as reasons for detention. With the overall situation getting worse, NGOs decided to tackle just one aspect of detention first: detention of children and families• Research the problem• Engage experts on the possible solution/s, identify actors

to partner with• Raise awareness: engage government in discussion in

safe spaces – expert round tables, special parliament committees

• Present a practical, workable solution: National Action Plan• National and international advocacy • Public campaign

‘There are only a handful of children in detention, we’ve found a way for you to make it none’

Israel

7

Detaining over half a million people each year, with millions more undocumented in the community NGOs questioned why some were detained and not others

• Detention reform process including working group and research – 2008

• US Department of Homeland Security/NGO Working Group • Development of risk assessment tool – 2011• Community sponsor release program between ICE and LIRS - 2013• Exploration of case management and alternatives for vulnerable

groups – Ongoing

‘We are detaining the wrong people – it’s a waste of money and tearing families apart’

United States of America

8

NGOs and UN agencies suspected refugees, asylum seekers, children, irregular migrants wanting to depart country are in detention (prisons) across Tanzania – but without access, how to be sure?

- Survey of prisons in border areas (to begin with)- Report – who was detained?- Refer – UNHCR, UNICEF, IOM- Problem of screening & assessment identified – how to

expand? Collaboration ongoing

‘Let us help reduce prison over crowding’

Tanzania

9

• Leading NGOs came together regularly to agree on strategic priorities and actions.   There was not always consensus, but shared concerns and priorities.  Building relationships within the sector was crucial.

• Campaign on impact of detention on children and other groups• Community reference group established to provide input to government

policy and practice• NGO identifying most vulnerable and complex cases and offered

community shelter, support• Government agreed to a pilot for a small group of individuals using a risk

assessment model. 3 years later rolled into a national program with case management as central focus

‘Detention is harming vulnerable groups – and we already know how to support people in the community’

Australia

10

How could you apply these strategies to engaging your government on alternatives to detention?

(How can we support you – discuss this later)

Preventing and limiting detention in your country

11

Cost and resource saving Services provided Prevention and rapid response Assistance with complex cases Transitional support including release, integration,

repatriation and resettlement assistance etc.

Benefits of collaboration

What is your message to government?

12

Identify population to test alternatives

Collaboration of government and community service providers to develop, implement and monitor

Identifying key performance indicators E.g cost, compliance, health

Ensuring essential elements: Case management, welfare and legal support

Working group & pilot models

Lessons learnt from ATD models

13

Cheaper than detention Reduce overcrowding and long-term detention Reduce wrongful detention and litigation Improve health, well-being and protect and fulfill human rights Increase compliance with immigration requirements Reduces the financial and human cost of immigration

detention Maximizes management and case resolution in the

community

Benefits of ATD

What is your message to government?

14

Know what you want and be clear in asking for this – your solution should be part of the message

Find arguments to support your message- ‘Detention harms, detention is costly, detention does

not deter, there are alternatives’- Consider pros and cons from government perspective, civil

society perspective and look for common ground- How do you get the conversation started?

Messaging

15

• What is your government doing that you can engage with? Is there any aspect of positive practice that you can focus on?

• What do you think might work? Based on what you have heard from others? 

Thinking ahead (next session)

Starting point for development

• Collaborate & assess • What is available? What is needed, where are the gaps?

• Which laws, polices and practices exist or can be extended, strengthened or created to expand community options?• Establish and review pilots, e.g. training programs,

issuing documentation, community awareness or case management initiatives, extending social welfare services to children, testing new screening and assessment tools.

Of the population at risk of detention:

1. How do people currently meet basic needs in the community? What services are available to this group?

2. What conditions are placed on individuals living in the community? Are the conditions subject to review? Are they necessary, proportionate?

3. What the gaps? How might these be addressed?

4. What and how is information currently provided to population at risk? How to improve?

5. What documentation is provided to population at risk? How can access and provision of documentation be increased?

Group discussion – assessing community setting

18

Public campaigns?

Private advocacy?

Research?

Working groups?

Pilots and programs

Developing policy proposals?

What didn’t work?

What has worked in your country?

19

To work together, we’ll need different tactics. Which ones?

• Generate noise to get governments’ & publics’ attention

• Technical planning and strategy development

• Service provision methods

• Monitoring fundamental rights

• To be close to refugees, migrants, asylum seekers

• Close connections to decision makers

• Coordinators, people and organisations who can bring it all

together