FREEDOM AND INDEPENDENCE
Closed camps
By definition, closed camps deny freedom. The way in which the camps are run, with control vested in the CSD staff, also denies refugees independence.
Our overriding impression of camp life is of people standing around doing nothing. Walk into a hut at any time of the day and you see people sitting on their beds doing nothing. There is a total lack of purpose to life
very odd in purposeful Hong Kong.
-
Relations between CSD officers and refugees appear to be generally good very much better now, we were told, than when the closed camps opened three and a half years ago. There has never been an escape, presumably because the refugees know that it would ruin their chances of resettlement.
The camps have systems for consulting refugees on policies, but in the time available to us we were not able to see how well the systems work. At one camp, the officer in charge invited us to a meeting with hut representatives and said that such sessions were held daily, but we learned later that they were at best weekly. The session we attended was disappointing - the officer spent much of the time lecturing the representatives. Having said that, relationships between CSD staff and refugees generally seem to be friendly and relaxed.
JPS visit the camps regularly and refugees are told that they can discuss grievances with them. Hut representatives meet the JPS privately, without government personnel in attendance. Again we cannot say how this system works in practice. Mr Woodhouse said that most JPs take the visits seriously, but added that some claim not to have time to meet the hut representatives.
Although the refugees are allowed visitors, all closed camps are remote, particularly Hei Ling Chau and Chi Ma Wan.
-10-
Page 45Page 46