6.13.
December, the South China Morning Post reported from Hanoi that:-
"Boat people repatriated under a new programme
[were] warned by the head of the Vietnamese Immigration Department, Mr. Nguyen Can, that they would face re-education unless they adopted the 'correct
attitude'."
A week later, a letter from a "VBP" in Whitehead was published in the press. It read, in part, as follows:
"The huge point
officer in Hanoi
comes in the comments of the immigration
which say that depending on whether or not the 'attitude' of the returnees changed, they would or would not be sent to re-education camps
The VBPS in Hong Kong now have
...
no faith in any repatriation process, not because they do not trust the UNHCR but because they do not trust the Vietnamese
authorities.
11
I have noted the words of a leader in the South China Morning Post on 4th December, 1990, which gives another emphasis to the issue.
-
"The UNHCR's difficult task has been complicated by domestic
Vietnamese politics that requires their Immigration Department chief to sound harsh and officious. Reluctant returnees have been made to seem unpatriotic, and are told that they are subject to 're-education' a word that evokes images of the police state and causes revulsion among the 43,000 boat people languishing in Hong Kong camps. Instead of relaying positive signals to the boat people that they could feel safe back home, the recriminations from these 'non-volunteers' may yet become another public relations fiasco, and arouse more anxiety and rumour in the detention centres. The UNHCR must mov
2move quickly to limit the damage already done this weekend."
I am unsure whether this meets the issues. If we minimise the problems, the Vietnamese people will not be persuaded. So are the problems such that UNHCR can itself limit the damage? How have these events affected the level of trust between UNHCR and the VBPs?
If we assess the problems correctly and then address them, I believe VBPs may be persuaded. And if the Hong Kong and British governments are able to shift the emphasis in the way they approach issues, I genuinely believe some of the problems are curable. But the Vietnamese government has its clear duty as well, and, surprisingly, I have not seen much public emphasis placed on this. Is that right?
To compromise on either of the two pre-conditions in paragraph 6.10 above would amount to a derogation from the humanitarian principles meant to govern states in the exercise of their functions towards asylum-seekers. Even with existing difficulties, such as lack of time, and perhaps lack of information and understanding, the screening