PARIS Sept 5, 2008 -Protecting the human rights of migrant victims of violence or trauma: A question of implementation? Alanna RyanInternational Catholic Migration Commission: 61st Annual DPI/NGO Conference.

"They couldn't speak, they couldn't stand, they were nearly unconscious and you could not touch them because of the pain".- Fran Vicente, Spanish Red Cross

Such was the scenario on 10 July 2008, when a boat carrying thirty-three surviving migrants and refugees of African origin made it to shore in Almería, Spain in the early morning hours. With the survivors in a grave physical state and severely traumatised after having lost nine children and six adults along the way, the Spanish Red Cross, which has attended to hundreds of boat arrivals in recent years, stated that they had "never encountered a tragedy like this".

Similarly, in Malta just last week, seventy lives were lost - including three pregnant women - when a boat capsized carrying migrants and refugees from Eritrea, Somalia and Sudan, making it "one of the deadliest losses at sea involving people trying to reach Europe from North Africa by sea", and leading Pope Benedict to make an exceptional statement calling especially for more "efficient political responses that are better adapted to the needs of irregular migrants as they reach out for solidarity".

As we celebrate the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and our commitment to the dignity and worth of the human person, the ongoing tragedy of lives lost and/or drastically changed on dangerous border crossings worldwide presents a timely opportunity to reflect upon the extent to which migrant men, women and children enjoy the rights guaranteed to them by the fundamental rights frameworks - and upon how we, as human rights advocates, might better ensure their comprehensive application.Are migrants and refugees on dangerous border crossings able to enjoy their right to life, liberty and security of person?Are asylum seekers and refugees permitted to exercise their right to access and claim asylum in a safe third country? What is being done to ensure that those who have had their basic right to freedom from torture and cruel and inhuman treatment violated over the course of their journey receive the psychosocial and legal support they need upon arrival?

Many NGOs and other organisations working on the ground will say no - too many are not able to enjoy their right to life and security, too few are able to access countries of asylum and too little is being done to provide first aid, recovery and referral assistance to vulnerable victims of violence and trauma upon arrival.As a result, some have suggested recently that perhaps a new legal framework is needed to define the rights of those who survive particularly treacherous border crossings.Thanks to the Declaration and other rights frameworks inspired by and built upon it, however, we would do well to recall that we have sixty plus years of wisdom and a collection of legal tools to effectively protect migrants and refugees in these situations - if only we ensure their application and implementation.

For many, the journey begins long before ever embarking on a boat, and the proliferation of smugglers and human traffickers at virtually every point of transit - as well as increased border enforcement - is resulting in increasingly perilous migration experiences.While some of those involved in mixed migration flows are traditional asylum seekers, protected under the 1951 Refugee Convention, many are not.And, as the migrants themselves have recalled, men, women and children are suffering terrible violence and trauma in as many as nine out of ten boats in the Mediterranean and the Gulf of Aden, regardless of their legal status: being stabbed, shot, starved or thirsted to near-death, raped, injected with drugs, doused with chemicals, abandoned en route or thrown overboard to drown, largely at the hands of human traffickers and smugglers.As reports from the French NGO Médecins Sans Frontières have indicated in Yemen, "most every" survivor of such journey that they had treated had "not only been through traumatic events themselves, but have lost loved ones from violence or drowning ... people arrive exhausted, many of them are ill and emotionally shattered, and present general body pains and headaches - physical manifestations of the psychological consequences of the extreme hardships of the journey".

Over the course of the past year, the "what to do" dilemma posed by mixed migration and the abuses suffered as migrants and refugees undertake journeys across notoriously dangerous borders has become especially pronounced in many political circles, particularly with regards to the so-called "boat people".While we know that boats are frequently used as a means of transportation for migrants, refugees and victims of human trafficking everywhere from Burma, to Bangladesh, Cuba, Guatemala, Haiti, Libya, Mexico and Senegal, recent focus has largely been on the Mediterranean and Gulf of Aden, where well over 170,000 people reached land following treacherous trips towards Europe and Yemen in 2007; the actual number, including the unknown many who departed but never arrived, is most certainly significantly higher.

Beginning in the 1970s and continuing up to today, "rescue at sea" - "rendering assistance to all those in distress at sea without regard to their nationality, status or the circumstances in which they are found" - has been a priority issue as much for humanitarian agencies such as the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, as for institutions such as the International Maritime Organisation.Demonstrative of the importance - and complexity - of situations in which rescue at sea is needed, Guidelines on the Treatment of Persons Rescued at Sea have been established, a number of relevant conventions adopted, and a series of UNHCR Executive Committee Conclusions endorsed.

Because of these important and praise-worthy initiatives, we often hear the argument that boat-based migration is an issue already adequately addressed by maritime law and other existing legal frameworks, including those on human trafficking, reception and return.Indeed, to a great extent this is true - in the same way that the rights of those on the boats should be protected by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other human rights frameworks, much of the more "finite nuances" of mixed migration are in fact covered by these additional frameworks.Unfortunately, incidents such as that which left 27 people clinging to a tuna net in the Mediterranean for days, and the lack of legal and social assistance to those who have been brutally injured or traumatised by smugglers or traffickers en route indicates that the rights defined in these frameworks are not being adequately guaranteed in practice.

Nonetheless, it may be said that considerable energies have been committed to establishing norms for rescue at sea, returns and victims of trafficking, especially when compared to those focused upon to the equally important question of what to dowith people following rescue and disembarkation and prior to any potential return. To some extent, this is both surprising and disconcerting: surprising because of the great number of NGOs and other institutions whose work is almost entirely dedicated to responding to "new arrivals"; and disconcerting because we have ample evidence that the violence and severe trauma suffered during the course of their journey may seriously hinder people's capacity to express asylum claims or other protection needs, to assume their roles and responsibilities in their family and community and to integrate or reintegrate into society, be it within the country of arrival or back home.

To cite just one example, an ICMC Deployee working on resettlement with UNHCR in Malta told us recently of meeting a 15 year old boy who, together with his mother and five siblings, had attempted to cross the Mediterranean Sea from Libya. Like so many others, the boat sank and the entire family drowned with the exception of the boy - including his three year old sister whom he had been trying to save.When he got to shore, the boy was put directly into a detention centre with no psychological attention.As a result, interviews to establish whether he had valid claims to asylum had to be cancelled not one, but five times because the boy broke down sobbing every time.

Sadly, his story is not unique.Instead, it provides ample evidence that humanitarian interventions for all arrivals, irrespective of status, in that decisive moment immediately followingrescue or arrival and just prior to the determination of legal status, are especially critical, in order for those who have been victims of violence or trauma to regain their physical and psychological health and the capacity to move on in their lives as contributing members of society. Both pro- and pre- status determination, ICMC believes that ensuring first aid, recovery and referral services that are more than ad hoc during this time contributes significantly to the protection of the human rights of those involved, particularly asylum seekers, children, vulnerable women and victims of trafficking or torture who may currently be overlooked and/or not provided with the assistance they need.

As seemingly clear-cut as the problematic - and solution - may be, however, the current debate over to whom, when and how we can afford to provide protection has been entrenched in questions of mandate. Is it a migration issue or a refugee one? Should it be a sovereign state responsibility or an international one? In fact, the question of caring for migrant and refugees victims of violence and trauma is neither migration nor refugee, but universally human and, as such, it is useful to recall that one of the fundamental pillars of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights lies in the recognition and affirmation of the rights and inherent dignity of all persons, without distinction of any kind - including legal status. With this in mind, we further insist that increasing initial protections to everyone upon arrival results in an increased capacity to preserve the protection space and serve 1951 Convention refugees; an increased capacity to identify and protect victims of trafficking and torture, and an increased capacity to assess and protect the rights of vulnerable women and children.

Fortunately, ICMC is by no means the only organisation to have seen the great need - and urgency - to improve medical, psycho-social, legal and referral support to migrants and refugees who survive particularly violent and traumatic migratory journeys.This past December 2007,UNHCR High Commissioner Antonio Guterres convened State delegates specialized in migration issues and select civil society representatives, including especially NGOs and numerous representatives of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, for the first ever High Commissioner's Dialogue on Protection Challenges, focusing especially on the complexities of mixed migration situations. Conclusions of the Dialogue recognised that there are effective protection gaps in these situations, calling for greater operational and political collaboration between organisations in responding to the needs of vulnerable migrants and refugees.UNHCR has further emphasized the potential role that its "Ten Point Plan of Action" might play in improving the protection of human rights in dangerous border contexts and elsewhere, encouraged states to elaborate an Executive Committee Conclusion on Protection and Solutions in Maritime Contexts and has continued to be active on the ground through on-the-field response, interaction with local authorities and actors and the coordination of regional conferences on the issue.

For its part, the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement has been highly active on the level of its National Societies insofar as the initial reception and care of migrants and refugees who have survived these treacherous crossings is concerned and has made a firm commitment, on the international level, towards improving the treatment of migrant persons, irrespective of status, through reinforced international cooperation led by the newly established Office for the Special Representative on Migration.

Meanwhile, the European Committee of Migration of the Council of Europe has resolved to work with Council of Europe Member States, the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, the International Catholic Migration Commission, the International Organisation for Migration, the United Nations High Commission for Refugees and other interested organisations towards the development of "minimum standards for the immediate care, ongoing protection and determination of the legal status of people on the move who have suffered trauma in transit" by 2010.

Finally, the European Commission has demonstrated tremendous leadership and commitment by providing support and funding towards the realisation of projects in this area, including UNHCR's regional conference series on refugee protection and international migration and, potentially, a joint NGO project lead by ICMC in the Mediterranean Basin and Gulf of Aden region. If funded as we hope, the project will begin in January 2009 and allow for enhanced interaction and the exchange of best-practices between NGOs in Djibouti, Italy, Malta, Mauritania, Greece, Somalia, Spain, Turkey and Yemen who are directly involved in responding to the first aid, recovery and referral needs of refugee and migration victims of violence or trauma.Moreover, the project will produce a set of operational field-based policy recommendations that will provide additional input for the Council of Europe and other policy makers towards the development of international guidelines on response practices.

In short, there is significant political movement, but we are not there just yet.We need NGOs - the people who see and feel, first hand, the fear, anger, sadness and confusion of a mother whose child has been thrown overboard - to step up on this issue.

We need states to recognise that improving protection to refugees and migrants who have been made victims of severe violence and trauma will not burden them with extra work and additional people, but rather will make their work easier - allowing for the efficient identification of those with genuine, long-term protection needs; decreasing suicide rates in detention centre; reducing costs for serious medical treatments; and improving the psychological state of irregular migrants who must being returned in such a way that decreases the likelihood of further instances of psychologically traumatised people being tasered - or dying - on return flights home.

Finally, we need international organisations to set a model for action, leadership and effective, collaborative engagement. One which gives proper consideration to the full context of mandate: the implementation of the legal and general rights frameworks upon which their work is defined, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

In short, we have the expertise, we have the tools and we have the capability to make life changing - if not to say life saving - differences to asylum seekers, victims of trafficking or torture, children, vulnerable women and others who have suffered terrible violations of their basic human rights. What we need now is a concerted commitment to do so by ensuring that the fundamental rights guaranteed to all persons sixty years ago this year are protected and applied.