Les choses changent aux jeux olympiques: on se préoccupe des réfugiés et de la présence de femmes dans les organes directeurs
-. Une équipe de 10 réfugiés
Le CIO l’avait annoncé. Thomas Bach y tenait. C’est désormais officiel: une équipe de 10 réfugiés participera aux Jeux de Rio sous la bannière olympique. Ils défileront à la cérémonie d’ouverture juste avant le Brésil, pays-hôte, seront logés au village et pourront compter sur la présence à leurs côtés de cinq entraîneurs et sept officiels, dont la Kényane Tegla Loroupe, ancienne recordwoman du monde du marathon, désignée chef de mission par la commission exécutive du CIO. Cette première équipe de réfugiés de l’histoire sera composée de:
-. Des femmes au CIO en parité
Les choses changent au CIO. Elles changent vraiment, pas seulement en paroles. L’évolution profite à certains, dont les athlètes, plus écoutés que jamais, les femmes, mieux représentées que par le passé, les sports non olympiques, moins ostracisés qu’au cours de la dernière décennie.
Le 3 juin 2016, la commission du CIO a annoncé au troisième jour de sa dernière réunion avant les Jeux de Rio une liste de huit membres « proposés » pour intégrer en août prochain l’organisation olympique. Huit noms qui, sauf improbable rejet, seront tous acceptés au sein du CIO lors de la session prévue en marge des JO de 2016. Pour rappel, ce contingent de huit futurs membres, quatre hommes et autant de femmes, est composé de l’Indienne Nita Ambani, fondatrice et présidente de la Fondation Reliance; la Finlandaise Sari Essayah, présidente du Parti Chrétien Démocrate finlandais; l’Italien Ivo Ferriani, président de la Fédération internationale de bobsleigh et skeleton; le Colombien Luis Moreno, président de la Banque inter-américaine de développement; la représentante de la Papouasie Nouvelle-Guinée Auvita Rapilla, membre du comité exécutif de l’ACNO; le Sud-Africain Anant Singh, producteur et réalisateur de films; la Canadienne Tricia Smith, présidente du comité olympique canadien; l’Autrichien Karl Stoss, président du comité olympique d’Autriche.
-. Un projet pour les camps de réfugiés
Le sport pourrait bien s’imposer très vite comme l’une des premières activités dans les camps de réfugiés au Rwanda. Le CIO et l’ONU ont uni leurs efforts, et surtout partagé leurs moyens, pour financer un projet de soutien de 400 000 dollars destiné au sport dans les six camps actuellement recensés dans le pays. L’initiative a été présentée par Jacques Rogge, l’ancien président du CIO, à l’occasion d’une visite du camp de Mahama où vivent actuellement plus de 70 000 réfugiés du Burundi. Jacques Rogge, désormais envoyé spécial de Ban Ki-moon, était accompagné de la ministre en charge des questions de réfugiés, Seraphine Mukantabana, du président du comité olympique rwandais, Robert Bayigamba, et de la nageuse Pamela Girimbabazi. Le projet de l’ONU et du CIO vise notamment à réhabiliter les équipements sportifs dans les six camps au Rwanda. Un exemple à méditer et à développer. Toutes les fédérations sportives devraient donner l’exemple
Pour en savoir plus et sources principales des informations
Francs jeux.com http://www.francsjeux.com/breves/2016/06/10/un-projet-pour-les-refugies/27297
Over the past two years, the debate concerning the reform of the Dublin Regulation has gained political attention, as the so-called refugee crisis keep has increasingly revealed several flaws in the functionality of the system. This was at the heart of the Commission’s Agenda on Migration and of the European Parliament’s Resolution of 29 April 2015.
More specifically, the main problem lies in the criteria for determining the State responsible for the receipt and the processing of an asylum claim.
On April 6th, the European Commission issued a Communication called “Towards a reform of the Common European Asylum System and enhancing legal avenues to Europe”, which contains several references of the need for reforming the current rules established by the Dublin Regulation.
In this, the European Commission suggested two possible pathways for reforming the Dublin Regulation. The first proposal was similar to one made in September 2015, and introduced a permanent system of emergency relocation, which consisted of a corrective mechanism. However, the criterion of the state of first entry would not have been modified in this case.
The second proposal was more radical because it would decisively change the criterion of the state of first entry, since the responsibility would be allocated on the basis of a so-called “distribution key”, which takes into account certain factors like the size and the wealth of the Member State. This means that, on this basis, asylum seekers would have to be allocated to a Member State when they apply for international protection in the EU according to an evaluation of the economical and social availability of the Member State to. On May 5th the Commission finally came up with a proposal concerning the reform of the Common European Asylum System, which also contained a partial reform of the Dublin System.
In this article, we are going to analyse the main aspects of the final proposal, underscoring the major critical points related to the Dublin rules.
Since its inception, the Dublin system has been concerned with tackling two phenomena related to migration and asylum requests: the so-called “refugee in orbit” and “asylum shopping”. However, it has failed to fulfil its goals, on top of which it has also created several problems for Member States in charge of the control of external borders, notably because of the criteria of allocation of responsibility.
It is important to note that, according to the Dublin III Regulation, the criteria for determining the competent State for the receipt and the treatment of an asylum claim is, in order of priority:
As often declared by the Commission, the Dublin rules were not initially conceived for setting up a fair and supportive system. The goal was only to quickly come up with a way to establish the competent State. The lack of fairness and solidarity is one of the main reasons of the failure of the system and the urgent need to recast it.
Indeed, the aim of the Commission’s current proposal is to establish a fairer, more efficient and more sustainable system based on solidarity.
As first Vice-President Timmermans has declared: « We know that people will keep arriving at our borders and ask for asylum, and we will need to make sure those who need protection receive it. Yet we have seen during this crisis how just a few Member States were placed under incredible strain because of the shortcomings of the present system, which was not designed to deal with situations of this kind. There’s simply no way around it: whenever a Member State is overwhelmed, there must be solidarity and a fair sharing of responsibility within the EU. This is what our proposal of today is meant to ensure. »
Similarly, the Commissioner for Migration and Home Affairs, Dimitris Avramopoulos, has said: « If the current refugee crisis has shown one thing: it is that the status quo of our Common European Asylum System is not an option. The time has come for a reformed and more equitable system, based on common rules and a fairer sharing of responsibility. With the proposed reform of the Dublin system today we are taking a major step in the right direction and putting in place the European-level structures and tools necessary for a future-proof comprehensive system. We must turn these proposals into reality as swiftly as possible. »
According to the current proposal, the new system will assure transparency and effectiveness, given the following provisions:
– A corrective allocation mechanism (the so-called fairness mechanism) will be able to determine whether a country is handling a disproportionate number of asylum requests. This will be calculated on the basis of a country’s size and wealth. If the number of asylum requests exceeds 150% of the reference number, all further applications will be relocated.
– Shorter time limits for Dublin procedures: this provision will apply to the applicability of the illegal entry criterion and the deadline to send a transfer request. Moreover, the so-called “shift of responsibility” (art 19 Dublin III regulation) will be removed.
These provisions have raised much criticism, most of which is related to the fact that the main criteria have not modified at all. As professor Marcello di Filippo said during a debate in Brussels, “why providing a corrective mechanism instead of changing the main criteria, which is also the principal critical issue about the Dublin system?”
Furthermore, the proposal contains several human rights related issues. First of all, art. 16 of the proposal provides that non-compliance has to be sanctioned, which means that the procedures have to be carried out more quickly and that the asylum seeker is not entitled to the reception conditions according to art. 14 of Directive 2013/33/EU.
Furthermore, the Commission also proposes a limit on the scope of the right of appeal to systemic deficiencies of the system or for family reasons.
Moreover, according to the proposal, these provisions shall be applied to beneficiaries of international protection as well, which would mean a restriction of rights, especially the rights of free movement.
Finally, the proposal envisions that, in case of absence of family members or relatives, the country of first entry is the one in charge of the examination of an asylum request of an unaccompanied minor. This provision is highly problematic with regards to the assessment of the best interest of the child, which should be taken into account before every decision concerning unaccompanied children and minors.
Ultimately, two positive changes can be observed:
– The extension of the definition of family members to siblings and the abolition of the necessity that family has to exist in the country of origin.
– The reduction of the duration of detention to 6 weeks (currently the system allows a maximum of 12 weeks.)
Francesca Rondine
For further information: