253
RESTRICTED
Mr Haywell
UNITED KINGDOM MISSION
37-39 rue de Vermont 1211 Geneva 20
She
Telex 22956 Telegrams Prodrome Geneva Telephone 734 38 00 733 23 85
DH Colvin Esq
SEAD
FCO
LONDON
my
mitrate of
16 Sinternly
за
Your reference
Our reference
Date
4 September 1989
НКВ
243 19
Dear Dand
VIETNAMESE BOAT PEOPLE IN HONG KONG: REPATRIATION
1.
A number of telegrams recently, particularly your telno 1793 to Hong Kong of 1 September, have suggested that the UK/Hong Kong is in a different category from other first asylum countries on the question of repatriation, because screening was implemented in Hong Kong in June 1988. A linkage has then been made with Hong Kong's introduction of screening and the lack of success so far on voluntary repatriation.
2.
ד
I know that this is sensitive ground, but I am not sure that we are serving our best interests with either the Americans or UNHCR if we link these two points. First, I think it is common ground that repatriation of VBPs to Vietnam can only be on a voluntary basis (under UNHCR auspices) as long as they remain asylum-seekers (ie until their final appeal has been heard and rejected or those classified refugees whether through arrival before the cut-off date or screened-in since). Secondly, non-voluntary repatriation can only be used for those who have been finally screened- out, and who thereby have been classified as illegal immigrants. As you know, at the time of the ICIR in June, there were only some 26 in this latter category. The number has increased since then, but it is still probably too early to judge whether final rejection will increase the number of volunteers for repatriation from among the finally screened-out.
3. I know that Hong Kong argues that the introduction of screening (and probably the initial interview itself) is the crucial psychological moment when VBPS should consider their future. On this basis, Hong Kong argues that voluntary
/repatriation
RESTRICTED
-1
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.