Engaging governments on ending and preventing detention: practical examples

1. Engaging governments on ending and preventing detention: practical examples Brussels- 28 March 2014

2. Session Structure • Case study: UK Jerome Phelps – starting from scratch • Let’s hear from you: how have you creatively, strategically, (successfully?) engaged your government? • Pulling it all together: Global IDC member examples

3. Many ingredients to make success • Where do you see yourself? (Phillip’s ingredients)Small groups • Tell us about a strategy that you have used that has been successful? • Did it impact on other ‘ingredients’? • Did you engage with other ‘ingredients’ (deliberately? incidentally?)?

4. To work together, we’ll need different tactics. Which ones? • Generate noise to get governments’ & publics’ attention • Technical planning and strategy development • Service provision methods • Monitoring fundamental rights • To be close to refugees, migrants, asylum seekers • Close connections to decision makers • Coordinators, people and organisations who can bring it all together

5. Japan ‘We have case managers who can develop community case plans – let’s try it’ Detention of asylum seekers, including children, is a major concern for NGOs and UN agencies. Government and NGOs have no dialogue • Japanese government with selected NGOs attend East Asia ATD Roundtable in South Korea– 2010 • Agree that detention of children is of common concern and an area to collaborate on • Release of children from detention – 2010 (ad hoc) • Develop a working group with NGOs to explore further possibilities for ATD – 2011 • IDC Technical visit – national roundtable • Japanese government visits New Zealand to see ATD processes in practice • Pilot with NGOs for airport arrival asylum seekers developed - Ongoing

6. Israel ‘There are only a handful of children in detention, we’ve found a way for you to make it none’ Immigration detention is a complex problem – with race, religion, security all discussed publically as reasons for detention. With the overall situation getting worse, NGOs decided to tackle just one aspect of detention first: detention of children and families • Research the problem • Engage experts on the possible solution/s, identify actors to partner with • Raise awareness: engage government in discussion in safe spaces – expert round tables, special parliament committees • Present a practical, workable solution: National Action Plan • National and international advocacy • Public campaign

7. United States of America ‘We are detaining the wrong people – it’s a waste of money and tearing families apart’ Detaining over half a million people each year, with millions more undocumented in the community NGOs questioned why some were detained and not others • Detention reform process including working group and research – 2008 • US Department of Homeland Security/NGO Working Group • Development of risk assessment tool – 2011 • Community sponsor release program between ICE and LIRS - 2013 • Exploration of case management and alternatives for vulnerable groups – Ongoing

8. Tanzania ‘Let us help reduce prison over crowding’ NGOs and UN agencies suspected refugees, asylum seekers, children, irregular migrants wanting to depart country are in detention (prisons) across Tanzania – but without access, how to be sure? • Survey of prisons in border areas (to begin with) • Report – who was detained? • Refer – UNHCR, UNICEF, IOM • Problem of screening & assessment identified – how to expand? Collaboration ongoing

9. Australia ‘Detention is harming vulnerable groups – and we already know how to support people in the community’ • Leading NGOs came together regularly to agree on strategic priorities and actions.   There was not always consensus, but shared concerns and priorities.  Building relationships within the sector was crucial. • Campaign on impact of detention on children and other groups • Community reference group established to provide input to government policy and practice • NGO identifying most vulnerable and complex cases and offered communityshelter, support • Government agreed to a pilot for a small group of individuals using a risk assessment model. 3 years later rolled into a national programwith case management as central focus

10. Preventing and limiting detention in your country • How could you apply these strategies to engaging your government on alternatives to detention? • (How can we support you – discuss this later)

11. What is your message to government? Benefits of collaboration • Cost and resource saving • Services provided • Prevention and rapid response • Assistance with complex cases • Transitional support including release, integration, repatriation and resettlement assistance etc.

12. Lessons learnt from ATD models Working group & pilot models • Identify population to test alternatives • Collaboration of government and community service providers to develop, implement and monitor • Identifying key performance indicators E.gcost, compliance, health • Ensuring essential elements: Case management, welfare and legal support

13. What is your message to government? Benefits of ATD • Cheaper than detention • Reduce overcrowding and long-term detention • Reduce wrongful detention and litigation • Improve health, well-being and protect and fulfill human rights • Increase compliance with immigration requirements • Reduces the financial and human cost of immigration detention • Maximizes management and case resolution in the community

14. Messaging Know what you want and be clear in asking for this – your solution should be part of the message Find arguments to support your message • ‘Detention harms, detention is costly, detention does not deter, there are alternatives’ • Consider pros and cons from government perspective, civil society perspectiveand look for common ground • How do you get the conversation started?

15. Thinking ahead (next session) • What is your government doing that you can engage with? Is there any aspect of positive practice that you can focus on? • What do you think might work? Based on what you have heard from others? 

16. Starting point for development • Collaborate & assess • What is available? What is needed, where are the gaps? • Which laws, polices and practices exist or can be extended, strengthened or created to expand community options? • Establish and review pilots, e.g. training programs, issuing documentation, community awareness or case management initiatives, extending social welfare services to children, testing new screening and assessment tools.

17. Group discussion – assessing community setting Of the population at risk of detention: • How do people currently meet basic needs in the community? What services are available to this group? • What conditions are placed on individuals living in the community? Are the conditions subject to review? Are they necessary, proportionate? • What the gaps? How might these be addressed? • What and how is information currently provided to population at risk? How to improve? • What documentation is provided to population at risk? How can access and provision of documentation be increased?

18. What has worked in your country? What didn’t work? • Public campaigns? • Private advocacy? • Research? • Working groups? • Pilots and programs • Developing policy proposals?

19. To work together, we’ll need different tactics. Which ones? • Generate noise to get governments’ & publics’ attention • Technical planning and strategy development • Service provision methods • Monitoring fundamental rights • To be close to refugees, migrants, asylum seekers • Close connections to decision makers • Coordinators, people and organisations who can bring it all together