CCPR/C/SR.857 page 4
12. Mr. HENDRY (United Kingdom) said that there was no such thing as preventive detention in the dependent territories but cases did occur of
He could people being detained for questioning before a charge was brought. not immediately produce statistics of those cases but would do so later.
In
13. Mr. LALLAH said that he had received information regarding a number of incidents in Hong Kong concerning Vietnamese refugees. In particular, there had been an incident in a detention centre in Hong Kong on 18 July 1988, when a number of refugees had allegedly been subjected to ill-treatment and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees had been asked to intervene. the light of the new screening policy introduced for Vietnamese refugees, he asked what was the Government's policy on the right to freedom of movement in relation to persons recognized as refugees, persons not so recognized, and persons who had applied for refugee status but in whose case a decision was pending.
14. Mr. FEARN (United Kingdom) said that the incident referred to by Mr. Lallah had been followed by an independent inquiry, which had recognized that the Correctional Services Department staff had been operating under great pressure at the time but had concluded that unnecessary force had been used by the staff on that occasion. The Hong Kong Government was currently examining operational procedures and considering whether disciplinary action should be taken against the staff concerned.
15.
The Hong Kong authorities were progressively liberalizing the conditions under which refugees were living in Hong Kong, including lifting restrictions on freedom of movement so as to enable them to take advantage of educational, vocational training and other opportunities. He invited his colleague, Mr. Martin, to supplement his answer with reference to specific categories of refugees.
16. Mr. MARTIN (United Kingdom) said that the refugee question was a matter of considerable concern and a very serious problem for the Hong Kong Government. Hong Kong was extremely crowded and had been a place of refuge for very many people. For instance, over 100,000 Vietnamese boat people had arrived since 1975, although many had now been resettled in other countries. To some extent, the humane attitude of the Hong Kong authorities was responsible for the problem, since they did not turn away refugees as did some other countries in the region. He was glad to report that agreement had been reached with UNHCR concerning the screening of refugees; in future, all persons claiming to be refugees would be screened and those who were genuine would be held in closed centres. It was true that there were restrictions on freedom of movement, since those in the centres were not allowed to find outside work or leave the centres except for emergencies, but within the centres they were provided with accommodation, health, education, and other services. UNHCR met the cost of food and medical items for the refugees and paid for the provision of children's education and adult language training programmes. Social, educational and recreational activities and skilled training programmes were provided by voluntary agencies supported both by the Hong Kong Government and UNHCR. There were plans to liberalize the closed centres over a period of time, since the deterrent reason for which they had been set up no longer applied. Under the new policy, all arrivals would be screened and it was hoped that that would be a sufficient deterrent to stem the influx of refugees. There were currently some 15,500 Vietnamese refugees in Hong Kong and some 9,500 were awaiting screening for refugee status.
It
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.