SV and Venstre want a limitation period of ten years for when asylum seekers can have their residence permit revoked. It will reward those who do not contribute to clarifying their own identity, believe, among others, the Labor Party and the Conservative Party.
In January 2012, the then Stoltenberg government – with the cooperation parties Ap, SV and Sp – entered into a return agreement with Ethiopia. Now SV is asking its former government colleagues to stop pending forced returns to Ethiopia.
The Ethiopia returns have sparked interest. Former foreign minister Knut Vollebæk (KrF) has called it “strange and worrying” that Norway is prioritizing these matters now. Minister of Justice Emilie Enger Mehl (Sp) has pointed out that it is the Directorate of Immigration (UDI) and the Immigration Board (UNE) that have made the decisions and says that a lot needs to be done before she intervenes.
Read also: Alerts markings against forced returns: – We do not have a good system
– Tear people up with a mess
Storting representative Birgit Oline Kjerstad (SV) defends the return agreement her party was involved in in 2012, but wants room for greater discretion in the assessment of individual cases. She is the party’s immigration policy spokeswoman.
– In the budget proposal at the time, it was emphasized that the rule of law and the refugee convention should be followed. The case was about an effective return policy for people who have been refused asylum. We think it is right that those who are refused because they do not meet the requirements for protection should not have to wait for years for a return. Uprooting people after 10-20 years, some with children in Norway and having their residence permit and citizenship revoked, is something else, she tells Nettavisen.
In January this year, Kjerstad and Ingvild Wetrhus Thorsvik (V) put forward a representative proposal in the Storting where they ask the government to introduce a proportionality assessment in cases of revocation of residence permits under section 63 of the Immigration Act.
(See fact box: Must avoid putting people’s lives on hold)
The majority gave the thumbs down in the Municipal and Administration Committee. The members from Ap, Sp, H and Frp say they trust the assessments made by the immigration authorities and think it is unfortunate if people who “have actively opposed clarification of their own identity will be allowed to retain Norwegian citizenship with an incorrect identity”.
On that background, the majority in the committee rejected the statute of limitations. The matter awaits final consideration in the Storting.
The majority: Must avoid “putting people’s lives on hold”
Venstre and SV have, among other things, asked for a statutory limitation period of 10 years for revoking residence permits and citizenship. The proposal did not receive a majority during committee proceedings at the Storting and is now awaiting final consideration.
This is the proposal:
The representatives’ proposal concerns the revocation of residence permits and citizenship. The proposal was put forward by Birgit Oline Kjerstad (SV) and Ingvild Wetrhus Thorsvik (V). The case has been finalized in the municipal and administration committee at the Storting. The recommendation was submitted on 23 April 2024. The prosecutor was Tobias Drevland Lund (R).
The wording of the proposal was as follows:
- The Storting asks the government to put forward a proposal to legislate a proportionality assessment in cases of revocation of a residence permit pursuant to section 63 of the Immigration Act.
- The Storting asks the government to introduce a list of points for what must be assessed when revoking a residence permit and citizenship, where factors such as the best interests of the child, that incorrect information was given as a child and whether the person has cooperated in identity clarification, must be given weight.
- The Storting asks the government to put forward a proposal to legislate a limitation period of 10 years for revoking residence permits and citizenship.
- The Storting asks the government to introduce a processing deadline for the administration in revocation cases, preferably 15 months.
- The Storting asks the government to ensure that no case is opened for revocation on too flimsy a basis by instructing the Norwegian Directorate of Immigration to raise the threshold for what is needed and to draw up guidelines for this assessment.
- The Storting asks the government to increase legal aid in revocation cases and to ensure that legal aid is provided in the investigation phase in connection with administrative interviews, so that the person concerned gets a real opportunity to contradict himself.
SV and Venstre did not get a majority for their proposal.
This is what the majority (Ap, Sp, Høyre and Frp) think:
The majority of the committee write in their note that they have confidence that the immigration authorities will consider all relevant matters. “This assessment also applies to the representative’s proposal for a list of points when assessing revocation, where the Directorate of Immigration (UDI) and the Immigration Board (UNE) must assess the individual circumstances and what weight the various considerations should have in the individual case”.
The majority therefore did not support the proposal for a list of points for revoking residence permits and citizenship, saying the matter was up for consideration in the committee.
With regard to the proposal for a limitation period for revoking residence permits and citizenship, the majority believed that it is unfortunate if people who, for example, “have actively resisted clarification of their own identity will be allowed to retain Norwegian citizenship with an incorrect identity”.
For the same reason, the majority believed that it would be unfortunate to have a processing deadline in revocation cases, as the representative proposal advocates.
In their comment on the consideration of children’s best interests, the majority in the committee write that they expect this to be a fundamental consideration in all cases affecting children, including in cases of revocation. The majority believes that it must be ensured “a quick and thorough clarification in all asylum cases”, and that no child or young person should remain in Norway for years in an unclear situation. “It is absolutely necessary to have fast and efficient case management which safeguards legal certainty and at the same time avoids putting people’s lives on hold”.
The majority points out in its comment that a long processing time in itself can be considered to be contrary to the child’s best interests.
In 2021, the Norwegian Immigration Service suspended the obligation to leave Ethiopia due to the security situation in the country. In 2022, this was abolished and the Ethiopia cases were brought up again. In the first instance, the Police’s immigration unit has been given responsibility for sending out a group of around 20 Ethiopians who do not want to leave voluntarily. The first deportation took place on Thursday, when 29-year-old Mulualem from Modum, who had lived in Norway for 15 years, was put on the plane to Addis Ababa.
According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the security situation in Ethiopia is “fluid and complex”.
The Ethiopia issues have received attention in several local communities where the Ethiopians have lived for a long time and have become well integrated.
In total, there are around 150 Ethiopian citizens in Norway who, as of today, have “illegal residence”, according to the Police’s immigration unit. If they do not travel voluntarily, there may be more forced returns.
Also read: Norwegian friends after forced return: – We are afraid of him
Asks UNE to take a break
– We have put forward a representative proposal together with the Liberals on recall. We think it is worrying that Norway is now, against a clear recommendation from the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, starting forced returns to Ethiopia, says Kjerstad to Nettavisen.
– One of the most important things in asylum law is protection from the risk of persecution. We read the law in such a way that the case must be tried in a grand jury when it is not recommended to return to a country. When a decision has now been made to start forced returns, we think it is very worrying. We believe the Immigration Service must take a break and try the Ethiopia cases before the grand jury, says Kjerstad.
Read also: Kripos opens to extradite man accused of murder during the genocide in Rwanda
– Returns well integrated
– When this also happens before the government has come up with legislative changes that we got approval for should come before 1 July with follow-up on the recommendations from the Baumann committee, we react. Here, plans are being made to return many people who have strong ties to Norway, says Kjerstad further and points out that the Støre government is investigating, but has not yet concluded on proposed changes to the regulations for deportation cases where children are affected.
– It provokes me that we are now planning to return many who are well integrated and have a strong connection to the country. We believe the resources are being used incorrectly, and SV proposes a concrete limitation period of ten years for when a residence permit can be revoked, says Kjerstad.
UD: “Complex and unclear”
The ongoing crisis in Ethiopia is complex and unclear, writes the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOF) in its travel advice for Norwegian citizens, last updated on 13 April.
It points to “political unrest and conflict” in the Amhara region, where there is a state of emergency. Despite the state of emergency, armed groups have shown a willingness to carry out attacks even against larger cities, it says. “The situation is fluid and can change quickly,” says the Amhara travel advice.
UNE on the situation in Ethiopia
Fear of Ethiopian authorities
“Most of the asylum cases from Ethiopia that UNE has dealt with in recent years have been from applicants who fear the authorities in the country. Many say that they have taken part in oppositional activity against the authorities, or that they have close relatives who have been or are active in opposition groups,” writes the Immigration Board (UNE) on its website.
During 2018 there was a positive development in the conditions for the political opposition in Ethiopia, but after 2018 there has been “an increase in ethnically motivated violence and conflicts. During and in the aftermath of unrest, oppositionists, activists and journalists have been exposed to reactions”.
UNE writes that they are now seeing more cases where ethnic affiliation and political activity are the subject.
Ethiopia matters were put on hold
During 2020, the conflict between the Tigray Peoples Liberation Front (TPLF) and the Federal Government of Ethiopia escalated, leading to a war that lasted approximately two years. A ceasefire agreement was signed in November 2022 between the TPLF and the federal authorities.
“From November 2021 to April 2022, the cases from Ethiopia were put on hold due to uncertainty surrounding the political situation and developments in the country. In May 2022, we started dealing with Ethiopia cases again,” writes UNE.
Oromia and Amhara regions
UNE points out that Ethiopia has also been characterized by another central conflict, the armed conflict in parts of the Oromia region. In addition, in the autumn of 2023, an extensive armed conflict broke out in the Amhara region. Militant groups are involved in fighting with federal forces in Amhara, the country’s second most populous region. After tensions escalated, the rebels briefly took control of major cities in August. “They are still active in large parts of the countryside”, writes UNE.
Addis Ababa
“Although there are areas in Ethiopia that are characterized by armed conflict, the situation in several parts of the country is relatively stable and calm. This includes the capital Addis Ababa”, writes UNE.
UNE says they follow the situation in Ethiopia closely and always assess asylum cases on the basis of updated country information.
(Last updated 5 April 2024)
The security situation in Tigray is referred to as “improved after the conclusion of a ceasefire between the parties in November 2022”. There are still persistent tensions in the border areas between Tigray and Amhara, Afar and Eritrea.
The Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs describes the situation in the Oromia region as “demanding and unclear in exposed parts”. It is the western parts of Oromia (the Wellega area) that are most at risk, but in the past year central, south-eastern and north-eastern parts of the region have also experienced an increase in clashes and violence, says the travel council. Kidnappings and robberies are on the rise.
“Foreigners must be able to identify themselves on request, and it is recommended that passports are always brought with them”, is what is generally said about stays in Ethiopia.
Regarding the security situation in the capital Addis Ababa, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs writes that “violent demonstrations and clashes between demonstrators and law enforcement may occur”. It is recommended that visitors should keep informed of the situation, exercise caution and avoid crowds.
Red requests assistance response
The return agreement with Ethiopia in 2012 later received criticism because return was linked to aid and because Norway did not demand guarantees from the Ethiopian authorities when it came to the safety of those who were returned. The current return agreement with Ethiopia dates from 2019. In February this year, Norway entered into an agreement with Ethiopia on support for rainforest conservation. Under this agreement, Norway must contribute up to USD 100 million (NOK 1.029 billion) if Ethiopia achieves the goals in the agreement.
Questions are also now being raised about the link between aid and the return agreement. Storting representative Tobias Drevland Lund from Rødt has, in a written question sent to the Minister of Justice on 29 April, asked her to confirm or deny such a connection.
Also read the comment: Some of these must actually be sent home by Emilie Enger Mehl
Tags: Ethiopia Forced return Provoked forced returns resources incorrectly
-
