Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

267. To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if his attention has been drawn to the fact that refugees who escape North Korea by crossing the border to China are regularly returned by China to North Korea; his views on whether this violates international law; and if he will raise the issue with his Chinese counterpart. [15018/17]

Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am concerned about reports of cases of DPRK refugees and asylum seekers being arrested in China and facing refoulement to the DPRK. I would urge the Chinese authorities to ensure that they do their upmost to meet their international and humanitarian obligations in this regard.

The risk of serious harm for the returned is very high, as documented by the 2014 Report of the UN Commission of Inquiry on human rights in the DPRK.

It is a fundamental principle of international law that states are prohibited from returning asylum seekers to a state in which they would be in likely danger of persecution based on “race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion”. This principle, known as the principle of “non-refoulement”, is set out in Article 33 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees of 1951. Ireland and China are both party to the Convention and its 1967 Protocol.

China is also obliged by the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment of 1984 not to return, expel or extradite anybody to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he/she would be in danger of being subjected to torture.

Furthermore, under the terms of its 1995 Agreement with the UNHCR, China is bound to cooperate in the field of international protection of and humanitarian assistance to refugees. In consultation and cooperation with the government, UNHCR staff may have unimpeded access at all times to refugees. UNHCR also conducts refugee status determination for asylum seekers in China. However, it is not allowed to do so for DPRK citizens as China considers any such citizen entering illegally as an economic migrant.

The EU raises the issue of non-refoulement of refugees from North Korea with China regularly and through a number of fora including raising individual cases of concern with the Chinese side. Specifically, the issue is raised in the context of the annual Human Rights Dialogue between the EU and China. The last session of this dialogue took place in November 2015. The next session is scheduled to take place shortly. The issue of North Korean refugees has been raised in this dialogue since the inception of the dialogue in 1995. The issue is also raised with China by the EU, where appropriate, in other meetings at both working level and at political level including at the annual EU-China Summit and EU-China High-level Strategic Dialogue.

Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

268. To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if his attention has been drawn to new legislation that allows the Israeli Government to ban persons who advocate for boycotts of Israel or Israeli settlements from entering the country, which stops them transiting to Palestine (details supplied); his views on the fact that Irish citizens will be banned and deported. [15019/17]

Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Every country has of course the right to determine for itself the conditions for entry to its territory.

Nonetheless I consider that the recent Israeli law on visa restrictions, which was strongly opposed by many parties in the Knesset, is deeply regrettable and unjust. It aims to exclude people on the basis of their having expressed non-violent political opinions, and is cast in the broadest and most general terms, which could apply to very large numbers of people. It is akin to earlier legislation which used the same broad definitions to make Israelis who advocated the same opinions liable for financial damages.

This law, and other recent legislation in Israel, are deeply damaging to that country’s international image, and reputation as a democracy. Close scrutiny will now be paid to how the law is operated in practice.

As well as the territory of Israel, Israel also de factocontrols entry to the occupied Palestinian Territory, and it would be further unjust if persons are prevented from entering that territory on the basis of non-violent political opinions held about that occupation, and the behaviour and actions of the occupation authorities. I am already concerned that Israel is in practice more and more acting to exclude from Palestinian territory international aid and human rights workers, and even political observers, who seek to examine and document the operation of the occupation and the actions of the authorities. No military occupation should endure in the longer term, but if it is justly operated it should have nothing to hide.