country resettlement, or would have the option to apply for
voluntary repatriation.
Most certainly, the consideration of measures for refugee
status determination and repatriation (voluntary or otherwise)
has proven to be the most controversial aspect of the present
dialogue. While such a component is essential to the structuring
of any truly comprehensive approach to refugee problems, the
manner in which it is implemented is likely to have far reaching
implications.
Critics of this element of the Plan argue that virtually all
Vietnamese asylum seekers in the region have legitimate claims to
refugee status, regardless of their reasons for flight, because
of the existence-in-force of Vietnam's legal penalties for
clandestine departures. Consequently, it is argued, such persons
would have a legitimate fear of being repatriated, unless Vietnam
formally rescinds the laws in question. Though Vietnam has
stated that voluntary returnees would not be subject to
prosecution for illegal departure, no such guarantees have been
given for persons returned/deported against their will.
Not only
do the laws remain in effect, but matters are further
complicated by the proposed Plan's article calling for Vietnam to
enforce its restrictions on clandestine departures.
Clearly, this issue must be addressed by the international
conference, as must Vietnam's refusal to receive back its
citizens who are determined not to be refugees but who do not
wish to return of their own accord.
With such an impasse, the
17
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.