Asylum problems in the EU's frontier island states
Since May 1, 2004 Malta and Cyprus have become the European Union's frontier island states. The first lies to the north of Africa and the south of Italy, the second to the south of Turkey and the west of Lebanon. Both are small states but Malta, with a...
Since May 1, 2004 Malta and Cyprus have become the European Union's frontier island states. The first lies to the north of Africa and the south of Italy, the second to the south of Turkey and the west of Lebanon. Both are small states but Malta, with a land area of only 122 square miles or 316 kilometres, is 30 times smaller than Cyprus, at 3,572 square miles or 9,251 square kilometres. Although Malta is so much smaller, its ordinarily resident population at 400,000 is more than half that of Cyprus, hence the population density is very much higher.
Both islands were occupied by the British in the 19th century and obtained independence, after a long quest, in the 20th: Cyprus in 1960, Malta in 1964. However, while Malta's population had evolved into a largely homogeneous one, although mixed in its largely Caucasian-Mediterranean origins, and was generally Roman Catholic; that of Cyprus was split into Greek Cypriots, who were Greek speaking and Orthodox, on one hand, and Turkish Cypriots, who were Turkish speaking and Muslim, on the other hand, with old-established Latin, Armenian and Maronite minorities. These minorities have been rather more significant than Malta's tiny Jewish and Indian communities which, by the 20th century, had become very well integrated, but a new Muslim community, both Arab and African, is now steadily arising on the island.
Whereas Malta obtained independence and sovereignty over its territory subject to a time-barred defence and financial agreement with Britain that came to an end finally in 1979, in Cyprus, Britain retained two sovereign military base areas, which are the size of Malta.
Since 1974, the island of Cyprus has been divided into a Turkish-occupied sector in the north, with some 40,000 Turkish troops still there, and the mainly Greek Cypriot south, which now carries the country's credentials as an internationally-recognised EU member state, albeit with a part of it so far left out.
Technically speaking, Cyprus is only one republic, that is, the whole of Cyprus is an EU member state, but with the acquis communautaire temporarily suspended in the north.
EU membership has, if anything, accentuated the comparisons between Cyprus and Malta. As one enters the ministry of finance in Nicosia one is struck by the exhibition of two large euro coin representations next to each other, one entitled "Malta", the other "Cyprus". Both states, which had applied for EU membership within a week of each other, and then acceded in 2004, now joined the eurozone at the same time in 2008.
But the comparisons do not stop there. These island states also face common problems, such as energy generation, even water supply; but most of all they have been both confronted especially since the turn of the millennium with an unprecedented and steadily growing wave of asylum seekers. In Malta's case such persons come mainly from Africa, in Cyprus mainly from Asia, with significant Near or Middle Eastern cases in both.
On the eve of their EU membership, Malta and Cyprus ceased to rely on UNHCR for the processing of any asylum claims and third country resettlement. They enacted their own legislation at about the same time, assuming the right to determine status themselves for those who sought it, not simply from Europe but from anywhere.
Immediately, asylum applications multiplied astronomically, creating all kinds of pressures on the somewhat bewildered "host" countries on the EU's fringes. Moreover, because of the Dublin Convention, purportedly against asylum shopping, which they had inherited with EU membership, such asylum seekers could not very well move on from the islands where they had first set foot, even if that had been their original intention or indeed they had been led to believe so by traffickers.
In Malta, between 2001 and 2002 the figure of asylum seekers shot up from some 50 to nearly 2,000, and continued at a steady pace averaging some 1,500 every year since then, with a total of some 9,000 "boat people" alone so far until 2008. Most of these arrived illegally and undocumented from Libya, although very few of them were actually Libyans. For the most part, they came from sub-Saharan Africa, transiting through Libya, where several would have lived and worked sometimes for years before taking the boat to Europe.
The actual figures of arrivals in Malta by boat, as given by the Refugee Commission, have been 1,686 in 2002, 502 in 2003, 1,388 in 2004, 1,822 in 2005, 1,780 in 2006 and 1,702 in 2007. African boatloads from Libya in 2008 started in February and continued in April and increased in May. During the same period, applications for asylum however have been steadily on the increase: 474 in 2002, 568 in 2003, 997 in 2004, 1,166 in 2005, 1,272 in 2006 and 1,379 in 2007, a nine per cent increase from the previous year. Statistics for "over-stayers", that is those who remain on expired tourist or work visas, are not available, at least not publicly. It is believed that only a very small proportion of these apply for asylum.
In the case of Cyprus, the situation was further complicated by other factors. Many of those on student visas who were resident in the country for educational purposes suddenly jumped on the asylum bandwagon; so too did others who had originally entered the island on fixed-term work contracts of up to four years.
Students are now being allowed to work part-time if they need to, which means they don't have to resort to seeking asylum. In addition, you had thousands crossing the so-called Green Line, the "non-international border" with the Turkish north for which the EU does not hold itself responsible. This is some 200 km long and is not so easily controllable.
According to Cypriot police statistics, as of May 2007 from May 1, 2006 to April 30, 2007 there had been, via the Green Line, 2,844 illegal immigrants, or 97.43 per cent of the total. Of these, 2,313, or 81.32 per cent, applied for asylum. The number of illegal immigrants/asylum seekers in other government-controlled areas were minimal. Of 21 such illegal immigrants, 10 sought asylum. In addition, 54 (1.5 per cent) entered via the British Sovereign Base Areas. At the same time, according to the operations office at Police HQ, checks on persons and vehicles at official crossing points of the Green Line amounted to well over two million (2,137,038) in entries and exits.
Figures and breakdowns from different sources contain some discrepancies but, grosso modo, the number of asylum applications had risen seven-fold by 2007 from less than 1,000 in 2002. That translates into a total of 31,638 applications involving 34,311 persons until February 2008. The corresponding figure for applications in Malta over the same period is 8,880. Whereas pending cases in Cyprus amount to 8,330 applications concerning 9,600 persons, the number of pending applications in Malta as of April 2008 was only 611 (no breakdown given between cases and persons). In Cyprus, 65 persons involving 144 persons were recognised as refugees during these years; while 286 cases involving 530 persons were granted humanitarian status or subsidiary protection. The corresponding numbers for Malta are as follows. Those granted refugee status from January 1, 2002 until February 2008 amounted to 131 cases involving 195 persons, more than in Cyprus. The number of those granted temporary humanitarian protection by Malta, according to the latest Refugee Commission statistics, however, have been incomparably more than in Cyprus: 2,828 cases involving 3,141 persons. Such assistance is of record proportions: it means that just about half of those who applied for asylum in Malta were actually granted some kind of protection, with the right to stay on the island more or less indefinitely, and to benefit from at least the provision of basic needs - food, shelter, some pocket money, health and hospital care, schooling for children, etc - and/or the right to local employment if available.
Moreover, as in Malta under the new legislation, once an entrant claims asylum he or she could not be readily sent back on the grounds of unlawful entry, at least not before the claim had been adjudicated. However, applicants whose claims have been rejected at all stages are seldom repatriated by Malta, whereas in Cyprus this process appears to be more efficient due to some readmission understandings with neighbouring states. Malta seems to have reached only very few such understandings, for example with Egypt. Systematically compiled official statistics are hard to come by but, briefly, such instances would be in the thousands for Cyprus, in the hundreds for Malta.
As already noted, asylum application figures for Cyprus for the five years from 2003 to 2007 are in the region of 33,000, whereas those for Malta stand at approximately 9,000. According to the Cyprus press, quoting the UHCR-released figures, which are largely based on Cyprus government figures, but calculating Europe's rate per year while adding all the years together for Cyprus, "Cyprus has more asylum applications than anyone else". In 2006, Cyprus received 4,550 applications, more than twice Malta's number; and by 2007 this had gone up to 6,789. It was thus held that Cyprus was number one out of 51 countries in terms of applications per capita. While the average number of applications in the EU was 2.6 per 1,000 population, in Cyprus the figure was given as a massive 39 per 1,000 for the same period. Sweden, which was ranked second after Cyprus, had only 15 applications per 1,000, less than half that of Cyprus.
According to the latest UNHCR statistics issued in March 2008, in 2007 Malta received the highest number of asylum applications ever since data started being collected. Taken on a per capita basis, the record number of asylum seekers applying for refugee status in Malta amounts to 3.4 applications for every 1,000 inhabitants. In Cyprus, the highest, it was 7.9 per 1,000, and in Sweden, the second highest, four per 1,000.
It was Malta, however, which had one of the very highest rates of acceptance in the EU - or indeed anywhere. This only concerns those illegal immigrants who apply for asylum. At 1,282 persons per square kilometre, it is Malta that by far has the highest population density in Europe.
On a regional level, the 27 EU member states received an average of 2.6 asylum-seekers per 1,000 inhabitants over the five-year period between 2003 and 2007. However, in Malta's case, the ratio is very much higher, amounting to 13.3 asylum seekers per 1,000 inhabitants in the same period.
In calculating ratios and percentages, a per capita approach may indeed be indicative, but I submit that it is not sufficiently so if it does not also take account of physical size, density of population and national resources (including GNP). There are other constituent elements of what may be called the "reception capacity". Although asylum is a right in itself when justified, these constituent elements would normally include economic, demographic, topographical, cultural and sociological considerations: for example if there is a labour shortage or not, a declining population or not, sheer physical space or not, pressures on infrastructure and social cohesion. Such comprehensive statistical data worked out proportionately would be indispensable if any burden sharing and/or quota system were to be worked out, based on the EU principle of "solidarity", for which, however, the Dublin Convention would have to be drastically revised or scrapped. Comparing small island states such as Malta and Cyprus to comparatively huge countries such as, for example, Sweden or Canada, makes no sense.
Reception conditions are partly a consequence of a package of such factors. In Cyprus there have been labour shortages, so much so that since the mid-1990s foreign workers have been encouraged to go there legally on work permits of up to four years' duration, for example as domestic helpers or farm labourers. This has been much less so in Malta, where even living space considerations militate against induced population density accretion, while farm land is strictly limited.
In this respect, "reception" policies differ markedly. In Malta, migrants arriving illegally, usually by boat via Libya, are medically examined and offered board and lodging in "closed centres" and/or any medical care until their asylum applications are adjudicated. The exceptions are "vulnerable" cases who are very quickly, within days or weeks, transferred to special "open" centres according to category and need (orphans, minors, pregnant women, handicapped, etc), where in addition to medical care they are offered free board and lodging - in principle until their cases too are adjudicated. The staff of the Refugee Commission has been beefed up with trained case workers (what in Cyprus are known as "eligibility officers", who may also have administrative duties). In fact the number of case workers in Cyprus, about 20, is twice as high as that in Malta, and it is planned to increase further. This is partly because of the caseload and also because of a backlog in the adjudication process.
Tomorrow: Drawing parallels between Malta and Cyprus.