Vietnam; or what different financial benefits would be available to them to help them resettle. We also received reliable information from more than one source that "screened out" asylum seekers were very ignorant of their future prospects. We heard that there were wild rumours that returnees would be sent to development areas in Vietnam far from their homes and might well face arrest on their return. We also heard of organised campaigns of disinformation and a good deal of intimidation by Vietnamese refugee support groups of those inclined to returning to Vietnam voluntarily. It was also suggested to us that some NGOs particularly American - were actively spreading alarmist stories about what awaited returnees in Vietnam.
-
34. Several of the non-volunteers we interviewed said that they would have been prepared to volunteer if they had been given an opportunity. One head of household said that he had offered to sign up to return voluntarily but had not been given the opportunity. understand that another actually decided to apply for voluntary repatriation during the flight on 12 December 1989.
We
35. Nonetheless, there are encouraging signs that the voluntary repatriation programme is gaining momentum. From our discussions in Hanoi, we understand that, including the group who returned on 10 January 1990, 998 boat people have now been repatriated under the voluntary programme and there are nearly 2000 other applications in the pipeline. The average waiting time between signing on and departure from Hong Kong is, we are told, four months. Evidently the British Government intended with the operation on 12 December 1989 to return non-volunteers to make it clear that boat people in Hong Kong not classified as refugees had no choice but to return to Vietnam. We understand that there may be signs that the first repatriation of non-volunteers has given an impetus to applications for voluntary repatriation.
36. None of the non-volunteers was happy about the way in which they left Hong Kong in the early hours of 12 December 1989. (Since we did not visit Hong Kong, we were not, of course, able to hear the views of the authorities there.) There were no complaints of force or deliberate injury, but it is obvious that the large number of police at Phoenix House in full riot gear seemed threatening. The non-volunteers clearly felt that the police had not treated them with sufficient dignity or respect. Unless all the non-volunteers agreed in advance to claim that they had been promised US$50/30 rather than US$30/15, it is clear from the consistency of their stories that there was some misunderstanding about the information they were given; and that a Hong Kong official (whom our interviews did not identify specifically) may for whatever reason have informed them that they would be receiving the higher amount. We are puzzled by the importance that the non-volunteers attached to seeing representatives of the UNHCR and the Vietnamese Government at Hong Kong Airport, and about the conflicting information they received about whether such representatives would be available. they were told they would be available, this was irresponsible, since in fact Vietnam has no representation in Hong Kong and the
12
If
$
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.