Calm before the storm?

The head of the UN Refugee Agency in Malta, Neil Falzon, underlines the need to integrate immigrants amid rising xenophobia and racism.

Surveys show that immigration is one of the major concerns on the island. Does Malta really have an immigration problem?

I wouldn't call it an immigration problem but I would say it is a very problematic situation. Although the situation in Malta could be more problematic than in other European countries, in the global context, which is the way we, the UNHCR look at it, because we are dealing with refugees all over the world, Malta's situation is far from the most problematic. We're working in countries where we're dealing with millions of refugees who have been living in horrible situations for years.

Nonetheless, given Malta's size, its limitations and its novelty to the issue, it is facing a number of problems to deal with the situation.

Last year was a record in terms of arrivals (2,704 immigrants). What will happen if the numbers keep climbing?

We support the government's calls for solidarity and responsibility-sharing with the EU and with other governments willing to support Malta. EU governments have an obligation to come to Malta's assistance. Despite this, we expect Malta to fulfil its international obligations.

What can the EU do that it is failing to do at the moment?

In terms of responsibility-sharing, the EU institutions need to be more proactive in bringing the member states together to see what kind of assistance they can deliver in practice. Assistance does not only mean taking people from Malta. Practical assistance is also needed.

Malta is still learning how to deal with the complexity of migration and asylum while many EU member states have been doing this work for decades. They can teach the Maltese authorities how to do the job.

Is Malta meeting these obligations?

Malta is faced with severe difficulties in coping with the burden of its international obligations, which emerged from both international law and the EU. If we speak of the detention regime, I can identify a number of gaps in the system that need to be addressed and the government is trying to address them; but we think they require more momentum. In other areas, maybe they are being more successful.

Malta's detention policy was recently heavily criticised by a UN working group that described the conditions as "appalling".

Both the policy itself, which applies indiscriminately to all people entering in an irregular manner, and also the management of the detention centres - the physical conditions - are issues on which the UNHCR has repeatedly expressed its concern.

We admit that it is difficult for the Maltese authorities - since they are set up and with the management structure they have chosen - to cope with the numbers of people coming in. Nonetheless, we feel that if the government has chosen to adopt a policy of detention, then it should be doing more to see that at least these people are detained in humane conditions.

What do you think are the critical issues within the detention system that need to be immediately addressed?

We have expressed three main concerns to the government. The first is that we strongly and firmly oppose the detention of children, which is strictly prohibited under international law. It is true that children are fast-tracked for release, but even one or two days in detention for a four-year-old child could have a potentially traumatic effect.

A second issue we feel very strongly about is the joint accommodation of men and women in the same premises, sharing the same toilets and showers, in physical structures that sometimes don't have shower curtains - a situation that could give rise to possible incidents of sexual or gender-based violence. We've seen many situations of women arriving in Malta unaccompanied and leaving detention pregnant.

Another situation we are concerned about is the lack of an effective remedy to challenge one's detention. It seems that there is a national presumption that there can be nothing else but locking people up for up to 18 months.

Do you think it would help the immigrants' cause if the detention policy were eliminated completely?

In terms of integration, definitely. First of all, it would start eliminating the criminalisation of the black immigrant. The whole detention experience traumatises people and when they are released they are very, very angry. The whole detention set-up creates frustration, stress, anxiety, depression and this is why we see so many riots.

On a human level, the situation is extremely difficult. We expect immigrants to willingly and easily integrate with a nation that has repeatedly stated publicly that they are unwanted, a burden, a threat, an expense... Integration is a long process of not only cultural awareness on the part of the refugee but also a change in our awareness about refugees in Malta.

So what would be a better solution than detention?

The revision of the whole migration management system. Upon arrival, people could be put in a reception centre until they are profiled and identified, and also to ascertain if they genuinely want to seek asylum. For that to work, you have to enforce a very effective and fast asylum procedure, which the government is moving towards, and you also have to have an effective voluntary return procedure.

People who don't want to stay in Malta don't need to spend up to 18 months in detention and then see what they're going to do. A big part of the problem at the moment is not related to refugees. There aren't enough effective steps being taken to send people who are not refugees back home. Malta is therefore left with an increasing number of failed asylum seekers who shouldn't be here.

Instead of making so much noise at EU level to take people out of Malta, they could make much more noise to ask the EU to help send people back. We have people who have been here since 2002, waiting for deportation.

In its reply to the UN report, the government said that the group failed to appreciate the problem Malta was facing.

The office of the UNHCR in Malta has been implementing a number of very important projects on the island. We are also heavily engaged in resettling a large number of people from Malta to the US. We are advocating with EU member states the need to come to Malta's assistance, we're helping the government formulate policies and laws to best deal with the situation, and we're providing capacity-building training and other kinds of support to all government institutions involved at a very operational level.

Yet Malta is not in the top five countries for the UNHCR because there are countries like Somalia and those surrounding Iraq, where the problem is much more serious. We are doing our best to come to Malta's assistance but that is not necessarily what people here expect us to do.

The UNHCR's budget depends on the voluntary contributions of governments and they identify the priorities we should be working on. It's not Europe that is housing the world's refugees, it's Africa and it's there that we need to concentrate our resources.

In a comment to The Guardian newspaper on December 30, you stated: "There's an ugly xenophobia developing here and I think the government carries some responsibility for that..." Do you really believe that?

We are very concerned about a lot of statements against people of African origin. I can understand that many Maltese are afraid of the phenomenon of migration because it is very new and there isn't enough information to explain it properly. But at the same time, there is a very big difference between having a rational debate at a national level and emotional arguments that target people indiscriminately.

We argue about how many people Malta can take, but then concentrate solely on black people without taking into consideration other immigrants who are taking what people like to call 'Maltese jobs'.

When we think about space on the island, about economic and social issues, somehow it is only black immigrants that we seem to have a problem with. What I meant when I referred to the government is that, instead of clarifying the debate, a number of policies may potentially be criminalising African immigrants.

The detention policy does no good for the image of a black man. If we are talking about people who are fleeing severe discrimination, then we cannot treat them like criminals just because they entered Malta irregularly. Tell me how can a Somali come to the EU regularly and ask for asylum? The only way is to come illegally and this is why we find it very difficult to understand why governments penalise asylum seekers, because they really have no other hope.

Speaking at a seminar, Foreign Minister Tonio Borg said that the increased number of illegal immigrants was putting extreme pressure on the "social fabric" of Malta. Do you think that such statements are helping to fuel the misconceptions that people have of immigrants?

Partially. I definitely think it is in the government's interest to explain the true nature of the situation to the people - but it has to be the true situation. Politicians must be honest in explaining the extent of the problem. I think they also need to speak about other aspects of the issue to dispel all the myths that people have about refugees.

The government must also show that what it is doing is in line with its international obligations and its humanitarian approach. If people are fleeing persecution or war, they should have the right to come to a country and seek protection and it is the government's duty to help them.

Whether immigrants are affecting Malta's social fabric depends a lot on its definition. I can understand a concern that it could affect Malta's homogeneity, but I think it is up to us to decide, after a reasoned debate, if it is a problem or not. There has to be a clear and rational public debate on the subject so people do not reach conclusions or even take action based upon misconceptions and stereotypes.

Do you believe that Malta isn't doing much to bring about integration?

Whether we like it or not, integration has to be on our national agenda. We cannot keep arguing to try to get people out without considering the implications of having people who are going to stay here. Unless we change our mindset we simply won't move on.

For this to happen, the government plays a key role. As quickly as possible, it needs to establish a national integration strategy, which defines what the government wants from integration, what it understands by integration, and how it can facilitate integration in terms of Malta's absorption capacity.

Integration involves employment, education, health, social policy, justice... it cuts across all the ministries. Being a refugee essentially means you are in limbo - you cannot go home, you are in a country that offered you protection but at the same time you are an outsider just waiting for something to happen.

And what should happen?

First, if the situation in the country of origin improves, the refugee can go home, and we promote this as the best solution. When the situation does not get better after a number of years, like in Somalia, which has been in civil war for about 20 years now and there isn't much hope of it getting better soon, we try to advocate local integration.

In the long term, integration is a process where refugees are increasingly given rights that help them feel more attached to the country protecting them until, eventually, they are offered legal status - and in an ideal world, citizenship.

Many countries do this. I don't think many Maltese are in favour of refugees acquiring Maltese nationality but there are refugees who have been here for a long time, who have children born here, who feel Maltese and speak the language better than I do, so it is difficult to argue for them to return to Somalia should there be peace there one day.

What lessons can we learn from other countries that failed to integrate immigrants?

If you don't facilitate integration, something else will happen. People by nature create their own communities. Then, there's bound to be conflicts because you are not teaching both sides how to live with each other.

If the situation is not managed, I think it will only get worse because you are creating a community of people that will eventually become socially deprived and this will give rise to a host of other problems.

I think we can already see the beginning of it. If you create ghettos, if you allow a situation where you have hundreds of people with nothing to do, no incentive for the future, just sitting around waiting for something to happen which never comes. If they're made to feel angry, if they're made to feel unwelcome, then they're bound to find a way to survive.

Do you think it's already happening?

I think it might be starting and it's totally unnecessary. It doesn't need to happen. All Malta needs to do is to look at other European countries and pick and choose what worked and what didn't, since most EU countries have been dealing with the situation for decades.

The European Network Against Racism said in a report published last month that Malta has made a leap forward in combating racism and discrimination through legislative developments in the field. Do you agree?

Yes. I think the legal structures are strong in terms of the government's efforts to combat racism. In that sense, the government has shown its commitment to zero tolerance to racism and xenophobia.

What I think needs to be done in parallel with that is public information - I can't stress that enough. We would willingly do it, but we'd rather do it hand in hand with the government. The kind of information being given out so far is just alarming. There's very little information being given about what people can do to help the situation.

Do you think there's a lack of willingness to have this kind of information campaign?

I think that because it is still a subject that really gets people going, the government wants to approach this issue very cautiously without wanting to come out strongly on either side of the equation.

For now, too much emphasis is being placed on the security and resources aspect. This is overshadowing everything else.