The Skeptic الشكاك

182 Sudanese Refugees Redux

I read it very quickly, but I liked the report the Forced Migration and Refugees Studies (FMRS) department of the American University in Cairo did on the crackdown on a protest Sudanese refugees in Cairo. It was, as far as I know, the only serious study on the topic. From discussions with the researchers, some of whom are good friends, I’d been afraid they would pull their punches on UNHCR. They didn’t.

Soon after the report came out, in mid-June, I spoke with a friend who has worked closely with the refugees and asked her what she thought of it. Her response was so interesting and intelligent, and so clearly came from the perspective of one who sincerely wanted to do something to help, that I asked her to write down what she had just told me. She very kindly did, but stressed she had to remain anonymous:

As background? About a month ago now the Forced Migration and Refugee Studies (FMRS) program at the American University of Cairo (AUC) released the findings of investigation into the sit-in and forced removal of Sudanese demonstrators from Moustpha Mahmoud park.

I had been looking forward to the release of the report, but when it was released and I read it I was somewhat disappointed.

I had looked forward to this report because I felt that it was really important for all involved to know as much as possible what had happened and why, as part of the healing process for all involved.

The Sudanese community has been traumatized and huge fractures created and exacerbated between the Sudanese community, UNHCR, NGOs, the Egyptian Government, and the Egyptian community. As a result of this, I feel that some form of truth and reconciliation process is what is needed. All persons involved need to reach an understanding of what happened; a recognition of why it occurred, including a recognition of each party?s failings; a rebuilding of trust and relationships; and, finally, joint action to ensure the tragedy is not repeated, in Cairo or elsewhere. Unfortunately there will probably be no other report and FMRS was in perfect position to undertake a thorough investigation from a neutral and academic viewpoint. This could have been a key step to begin the healing process, however I feel this opportunity was missed.

The report unfortunately has some major flaws, namely:

• Lack of adequate consultative process: Most academic reports are generally given to those interviewed or consulted to comment on, or published as a draft in some form first. This means those involved can correct misperceptions of the authors, identify gaps where they can assist to fill but may not have thought about. The current report was never published as a draft, nor were advanced copies provided for comment to relevant organizations involved during the demonstration.
• Inaccuracies: As a result of the lack of consultation there are a number of inaccuracies in the report (some legal, some factual) as well as sections which are misleading and should be reviewed.
• Inadequate substantiating evidence: Many parts of the report and many statements had little or no supporting evidence. Bald unsubstantiated statements do not lend themselves to confidence in the claims. This affects the report as a whole, as it is likely to be taken less seriously due to a lack of academic rigor and therefore there be less action on its very valuable recommendations.
• Gaps: A number of matters were never looked into. What was the role of NGOs in this process? Was the UNHCR RSD process in prison acceptable? What did Sudanese who were not involved in the demonstration think about it?
• The key questions: The report asked a number of key questions at the beginning but these were never answered. In particular the report asked ?what more could UNHCR and the government have done?? The title even alludes to this with the reference to ?false expectations?. However the issue of what UNHCR and the Government and NGOs could have done and should have done was not explored.

The issue of expectations is very important. It was not clear what organizations could do and could not do, due to resources and in the case of UNHCR due to mandate. It was not clear what UNHCR and the Government of Egypt were obliged to do. This is essential to identify what are legitimate and what are unrealistic expectations. And if these false expectations are never recognized and addressed then they will continue, as will the disappointment, anger and poor relations between the community, UNHCR, Government and other organizations.

The report also failed to identify the specific legitimate expectations of those demonstrating which were not met. By failing to do this, the report misses the chance to be a useful advocacy tool for the community in its dealings with UNHCR and the Government in the future.

I still hope that the community and all affected by the tragic events of last year find closure, that there is a rebuilding of positive relationships and trust, and that efforts are made to prevent the tragedy from occurring. But the opportunity for FMRS to give people some closure and to kick start this reconciliation process was unfortunately missed and this chance will never be repeated.

[tags]Sudanese refugees, Cairo, Egypt, Sudan, UNHCR[/tags]

2 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

1. positive relationship and trust with the UNHCR maybe, but with the Egyptian government?

   Comment by Alaa — July 19, 2006 #

2. Yeah, good point, Alaa. I don’t think the refugees ever had any trust or positive relationship with the government of Egypt to rebuild.

   Comment by Administrator — July 19, 2006 #

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

I'm Reading: