-2 -
(iii) a specific time-frame for processing and onward movement from the
site;
(iv) the possibility that the site should accommodate not only "boat
cases but also "land cases".
5.
Issues that arise
If the ASEAN proposal, or a variation of it, is to be examined in greater detail, a number of practical questions arise, on which the views of potential donor and resettlement countries are of fundamental importance. These views will indicate whether the proposal, as presently expressed, can serve as a valid basis for future planning, or whether it needs to be
modified.
6.
Some of these issues are as follows:
A.
In regard to the site itself
. רן
(i) Where should it be located? Presumably, it should be for one of the ASEAN group to offer a site; but other governments could conceivably offer one. Clearly, however, the site must be within reasonable reach of present countries of first asylum.
(ii) Assuming that a site is offered, what should be its capacity?
This presumably would depend on:
(iii) For whom should it be intended?
Theoretically, it could be for:
(a) At one extreme, all present "boat cases" in camps in South East Asia, plus all present "land cases".
(b) At the other extreme, only for future new arrivals by boat.
(c) Alternatively, it could be for all "boat cases" presently in camps in South East Asia plus those who might arrive in the future by boat or by land.
(d) Yet again, since refugees are continually moving away fran existing camps, the centre could be planned essentially for those who might constitute numbers in excess of the present caseload in various South East Asian camps, whether these presently exist for "boat" or for "land cases", i.e. the present capacity of these camps should continue to be fully used (even allowing for departures from them), and only numbers in excess of, say, the 31 December