By L. Muthoni Wanyeki
In Summary
The allegations and rumours that Usalama Watch was
actually about the takeover of the illegal sugar importation business
from Somalia are even worse
"Somalis are Scapegoats in Kenya's Counter-Terror Crackdown."
This is the title of Amnesty International's
briefing on Usalama Watch. The personal testimonies in the briefing --
from both Kenyans of Somali descent and Somali asylum-seekers and
refugees -- are as harrowing as all of those collected since the start
of the "screening operation" by groups as diverse as InformAction, Pawa
and Human Rights Watch.
Quoting from the briefing, this, for example, is
Usalama Watch: "The Somali community, in particular urban refugees and
asylum-seekers in Nairobi, have [said] their movements are extremely
restricted. Some report being stopped and questioned on multiple
occasions during a single journey. Having documentation does not offer
protection, leading people not to leave their house. One woman said that
'I had decided to imprison myself' and had remained in the house for
two weeks. Mohamed's alien card was taken from him during his arrest and
not returned. Five weeks later, he was still unable to leave the house
for fear of arrest. Many who work feel unable to do so anymore.
Hussein runs a tailoring business in Eastleigh. He
said: 'I can no longer go to work. One of my workers has been arrested
and taken to Kakuma. I have had to pay money to police to be freed on
many occasions, and cannot go to work for fear of further arrest. I am
almost bankrupt.'"
This is Usalama Watch too: "Other women report
having been sexually assaulted. On April 8, three [General Service Unit]
and one police officer from Pangani police station entered one woman's
house. They demanded her ID. When she showed it to them they said it was
fake and threw it aside. They put all of her children in one room and
demanded that they lie down. Her 17-year-old son reported that 'two of
them went to her and tried to do bad things to her body. I stood up to
try and defend her; they punched me in the head. Before they left they
threatened to rape her the next time.' Other women told [of] how they
have been inappropriately touched during the round-ups. In most cases,
the women screamed for attention, causing the security forces to quickly
leave."
The briefing -- documenting arbitrary arrest,
detention without trial beyond the constitutional 24-hour limit,
physical and sexual harassment, extortion, forcible relocation contrary
to a High Court ruling and expulsion contrary to regional and
international norms on non-refoulement -- was released on Tuesday.
Tuesday was also the day that nine members of the
Eastleigh Community Association filed a class action suit in relation to
all human-rights violations committed in the course of the operation on
behalf of 500 others.
It is about time.
On Thursday, Haki Africa, Justice Forum and
Muslims for Human Rights together with AI, HRW and Open Society's
Justice Initiative also called on relevant mandate holders of the
African Commission on Human and People's Rights and the United Nations
Office of the High Commission for Human Rights to call on the government
of Kenya to comply with its regional and international obligations, end
the deportation of asylum-seekers and refugees, provide full access to
the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and the constitutional Kenya
National Commission on Human Rights to all aspects of the "screening"
operation.
They also urgently called for international support for third country relocation.
The public letters to the ACHPR and the UN OHCHR
noted all of these human rights violations are taking place in the
context of Kenya's legitimate security concerns. The irony is, of
course, that according to the briefing, not a single terrorism-related
charge has been laid against any of those brought to court as a result
of the operation.
The few that have been charged have only been charged with various immigration-related offences.
So, if the operation isn't about counter-terrorism, what is it about?
Forcible relocation of urban asylum-seekers and
refugees to the camps against a High Court order and thus contempt of
court? If so, just
1,000 of the estimated 55,000 urban asylum-seekers and refugees have been moved to the camps -- in some cases separating breast-feeding babies from their mothers and children from their parents.
1,000 of the estimated 55,000 urban asylum-seekers and refugees have been moved to the camps -- in some cases separating breast-feeding babies from their mothers and children from their parents.
Or is it about expulsion to a country still in
conflict contrary to regional and international norms on
non-refoulement? If so, only 359 asylum-seekers and refugees have been
expelled--including three registered refugees as well as many others who
claimed their documentation was confiscated and destroyed during the
operation?
No comments :
Post a Comment