On June 15, 2004 a small convoy carrying former residents of Meheba and Ukwimi Refugee settlements left the departure centre outside the gates of Meheba to begin their return to Angola.  This event marked the commencement of the second year of voluntary repatriation on the part of Angolan refugees.  By the end of 2004, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) expects over 30,000 Angolans to have returned to Angola from Zambia.

This brief article has two aims: firstly, place the repatriation within the larger context of refugee life in Zambia and secondly, reflect on other solutions to the Zambian refugee situation apart from repatriation.

WHO IS A REFUGEE?

Returning home, or repatriation, marks the end of a person’s life as a refugee in Zambia.  Since the early 1970s Zambia has accepted the definitions of the term refugee found in the 1951 Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees as well as the 1969 Organization of African Unity (OAU) Convention on the Specific Aspects of the Refugee Problem in Africa.

The Geneva convention, which arose in response to the World War II situation in Europe, defines a refugee as a person who is outside of his or her home country because of a well founded fear of persecution based on race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or persecution.  In essence, this definition requires the person seeking refugee status to show that he or she is present in Zambia because he or she fears persecution based on one or more of the five grounds of persecution listed.

A moment’s reflection on this definition shows that the person seeking refugee status must establish two motives: his or her own motive for leaving the homeland (fear of persecution); as well as the motive of the alleged persecutor.  The persecutor, in turn, could be a government or a group acting on behalf of the government (for example a death squad), or a group which the government is unwilling or unable to control, such as a rebel group.

One procedural consequence of the Geneva Convention definition of refugee is that an individualized status determination is required.  In Zambia this occurs when an asylum seeker presents his or her claim to the refugee eligibility committee.  This is a group made up of representatives from various organs of government and includes a representative from immigration, the police, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Office of the President.

The committee is chaired by the Commissioner for Refugees or his delegate.  Their task is to determine whether the asylum seeker presents a credible explanation of his or her presence in Zambia which establishes that he or she has a reasonable fear of persecution in the homeland.  Clearly, this is a time consuming, though vitally important procedure.  It constitutes one of the major drawbacks of the 1951 convention, especially in circumstances of large refugee influxes as occurred in Zambia between 2001-2002.

The member states of the then OAU, now AU, were very much aware of refugee influxes when they enacted their 1969 convention.  In addition to defining the term refugee as those fleeing the consequences of the freedom struggles of the time, they also inserted a provision stating that a refugee was someone away from the homeland because of “events seriously disturbing public order in either part or the whole of his country of origin”.

In other words, if a civil war is raging in a country, people fleeing from the conflict are refugees.  A most important aspect of this definition is what is NOT included, namely an individualized fear of persecution.  In Africa a non-combatant who flees from a conflict is a refugee.  This is not the case in Europe or the United States of America.  A practical consequence of the OAU definition of refugee is that all that is required of a host country in terms of status determination is that the government officials keep abreast of current events.

Thus when groups of Congolese from Eastern Katanga, the Kivu or Ituri Provinces enter Northern Zambia, the Immigration or Army officials at the border can, acting on behalf of the Minister of Home Affairs, immediately direct the people to a refugee camp because they are presumptively fleeing the conflict in those areas of Congo.

Before proceeding further in this exposition, it is worthwhile to note who is not a refugee under either of the definitions employed by Zambia.  Anyone who enters Zambia for purposes of business, study, or tourism are naturally not refugees.  Moreover armed combatants fleeing an opposing force or persons who enter the country in order to steal or commit other crimes are not refugees.

REFUGEE LIFE IN ZAMBIA

Refugees have lived in Zambia since the time of Independence.  Initially they lived alongside Zambians in the villages, towns and cities of the country.  During the struggles for independence in other countries in the region, Zambia would be attacked from time to time because it had given asylum to the political leadership of the independence struggle in the region.

In 1970 Parliament passed the Refugee Control Act which gave the Minister of Home Affairs the power to require refugees to live in camps or settlements which the Minister designated.  In part this bill was intended to address legitimate security concerns as well as to comply with the provisions of the 1951 Geneva Convention and the OAU convention.  As a result of the legislation, three refugee settlements were designated in the early years of the republic.

These were Mayukwayukwa, in the Western Province, Meheba, in the North-western Province and Ukwimi, in the Eastern Province.  These locations are called “settlements” rather than “camps” because the refugees were allocated land to cultivate.  It was expected that the refugees would become self-sufficient and not rely upon the UNHCR for food after living in the settlement for two growing seasons.

Of course not all refugees live in settlements or camps.  The boundary lines of Zambia, drawn up in Europe to address European concerns, arbitrarily divided tribes and families.  Thus in the border regions of the country, some family members may be Zambian citizens while their brothers and sisters are Angolans or Congolese.  To the present day there remain large numbers of “refugees” who are spontaneously settled along the border regions of the country where they live with relatives.

Regrettably for Angolan refugees, both those in the camps and settlements and those spontaneously settled, the duration of their stay exceeded all initial expectations.  The conflict in Angola, initially the struggle for independence then followed by an internal struggle for dominance, lasted nearly over 30 years.  During all that time Angolans lived in Zambia as refugees.

THE ANGOLANS RETURN HOME

It is reasonable to estimate that the period in which the greatest number of refugees were living in Zambia was shortly after the death of Jonas Savimbi in February 2002.  During the first half of 2002 the Zambian refugee population exceeded 300,000, the largest number of these were Angolans.  There had been a steady influx of Angolan refugees since early 2000 and the camps and settlements in the west and northwest of the country became quite full.  By the end of May 2002, however, the influx of Angolan refugees had abated and some Angolans began to return to their homelands.

As would be expected, the newest arrivals were among the first to spontaneously repatriate to Angola.  Since at this point the UNHCR had not begun to provide transportation, the journey home to Angola was done on foot or by hired lorry or a combination of each.  The first regions resettled were small to medium sized towns near to the Zambian border, chief among these was Cazombo which is the District Capital of Upper Zambezi District of Moxico Province.  The distance from Meheba Settlement to Cazombo is about 420 km.

The area along the border with Zambia as well as strategic points along the way (e.g., bridges) were mined.  This made the journey of the initial returnees all the more daunting.  Under these circumstances it is unsurprising that it was generally younger men who returned to Angola first.

By August 2002 the sand road from the Zambian border to Cazombo had been thoroughly explored by initial returnees.  Lorry traffic between Western Zambia and Cazombo began to become more regular.  NGOs also moved into the area.  One of the first groups to make the trip was MSF-France whose head of mission for Zambia drove to Cazombo in August.  African Humanitarian Action (AHA), MSF-Belgium, Lutheran World Federation, and Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) all had projects in Cazombo before the end of 2002.

In early November 2002 the first overland JRS mission to Cazombo from Zambia found about 5,000 returnees present in the town and surrounding villages.  In addition there was about twice that number of Angolans who had not left the area during the conflict.

IMPORTANT STEPS

In November 2002 the political steps necessary for repatriation got underway.  An agreement between the government of Angola, the government of Zambia and the UNHCR about repatriation was negotiated.  This was an important step because by means of it, returning refugees were granted certain assurances by the Angolan Government.  These include recognition of their status as citizens of Angola, right to lands, duty free importation of goods which had been acquired during their stay abroad.

The agreement also granted the UNHCR the right to monitor the returnees back in Angola.  The aim of the agreement is to insure that refugees who return to their homelands do so voluntarily and under conditions of safety and dignity.

With the agreement signed, the UNHCR was in a position to assist refugees who wished to return to Angola in their homeward journey.  Information campaigns were mounted in all the camps and settlements housing Angolans in Zambia.  These were to provide data about conditions in Angola so that individual determinations on whether, when and where to return could be made.

Additionally, Mine Risk and Mine Awareness education campaigns were instituted so that returnees, especially those who had not lived in combat areas before, would pay attention to these dangers.  These education programmes took on a much less theoretical basis when reports were received in Zambia of six MSF staff persons who died in a mine explosion in Eastern Angola in December 2002.

REPATRIATION

The first convoy carrying returning Angolans was scheduled to leave Meheba for Cazombo during the week of Refugee Day 2003 (June 20). Unfortunately, mines were found near the intended crossing point into Angola during the first week of June.  This resulted in the initial convoy’s departure being pushed back until a thorough inspection was performed.  When the first convoy departed in early July, it did so amid great celebration.  Dignitaries from the Governments of Zambia, Angola, donor countries, the UNHCR and NGOs assembled at Meheba to watch the departure of the first group.

The refugees had been collected the day before.  They had undergone customs and immigration procedures by the Zambian government as well as medical screening.  They were served a hot meal and bedded down for the evening in dormitories.  Their possessions (they were allowed 70 Kilogrammes per person -- which turned out to be a more than adequate allowance) had been labelled and bagged and were loaded separately into trucks.  On the morning of departure they were served a hot breakfast and then assigned by family groups to buses.

The journey to Cazombo took place over two days.  For the first evening the refugees were housed in temporary structures near the Angolan border.  The following morning Angolan officials performed the immigration and customs inspections and the buses were sent on their way to Cazombo.

There had been no formal arrangements for a reception of the first returning former refugees on the part of Angola.  The townspeople were aware, however, of the date of arrival of the first group and had spontaneously gathered to observe the event.  When the buses pulled into Cazombo the people began to dance and sing songs of welcome to their returning compatriots.  Needless to say, the former refugees were overcome by the warmth and genuineness of their welcome as were NGO bystanders who had gathered to receive them.

The returnees were off loaded at the reception centre.  They were issued food provisions and non-food items such as agricultural implements to restart their lives in Angola and then transported to their villages of origin in the Cazombo area.

This process was repeated around 15 times in 2003.  By mid-November when the convoys ceased due to the coming of the rains on the Angolan side, more than 18,000 former refugees had departed Zambia.

In June of 2004 the process recommenced.  Instead of consisting exclusively of overland convoys to areas near the Zambian border, repatriation is also by means of flights to the interior regions of the country as well as to those border areas which are not accessible overland (due to landmines and lack of roads to the western border of Zambia and into Angola).  The target this year is to move 30,000 refugees.  Moreover, all the camps housing Angolan refugees are being affected in this year’s repatriation exercise.

INTERNALLY DISPLACED

As was the case for the later convoys of 2003, it is no longer mostly the newly arrived refugees who are returning.  Instead residents of Meheba and Mayukwayukwa who have lived in Zambia their entire lives are among those who are “returning” to Angola.

It should be pointed out that it is not only former refugees who are returning to areas of Angola.  While there were perhaps a total of 500,000 Angolan refugees living in Congo, Zambia and Namibia, the years of war resulted in an estimated 4,000,000 persons being internally displaced.  Many of these persons had to flee from their homes quite suddenly and thus were separated from their families.

When hostilities ceased, campaigns to find lost family members became quite prevalent and the International Committee of the Red Cross took a lead role in tracing lost family members.  At the same time the relocation of these internally displaced people was a high priority for the Angolan government.  Thus when the refugees returned to Moxico and other provinces in Eastern Angola they found other new arrivals also there.

ANGOLAN CONDITIONS

The conditions to which the Angolans are returning are what is to be expected in a country which has suffered 30 years of warfare.  In addition to the landmines, most civic infrastructure is badly delapidated and social service nearly non-existent.  The roads, schools, water, sanitation and medical facilities are in a state of disrepair.  In the eastern area of the country there are almost no secondary schools.

The returning internally displaced persons (IDPs) were accustomed to these conditions.  The returning refugees, by and large, lived under better conditions in the refugee camps and settlements in neighbouring countries.

There have been remarkably few reports of troubles between returning refugees and the Angolans who remained in the country.  This is in part due to the policy of the UNHCR to provide relocation packages, consisting of food and non-food items, to all people living in an area  where repatriation is occurring.  Thus returning refugees are not perceived as being better off materially than their fellow citizens.

In addition, the return of the refugees coincided with an increased presence of NGOs in remoter areas of Angola.  These in turn provided employment opportunities for members of all groups of the population since the NGOs are, by and large, undertaking the tasks of rebuilding the infrastructure of the country.

In several respects long term refugees from Zambia are less well off than the Angolans who remained in the country.  For many of the returning refugees Portuguese is an unknown language.  This is especially the case for those refugees who were born and educated in Zambia where the medium of instruction had been in English.  Thus one of the tasks NGOs are fulfilling in Angola is providing classes in basic Portuguese for returning refugees.

Similarly, the process of obtaining an Angolan identity card or passport has proven to be somewhat daunting.  Moreover, documents such as birth certificates, marriage certificates, educational or other qualifications earned need to be laboriously translated into Portuguese in order to receive recognition.

WHY DO THEY GO BACK?

Why do the Angolans, especially those born in Zambia, “return” to a place where they have never been?  In many cases, the answer is that there are family and other relatives living in Angola which attracts them to return.  In other cases they are looking for a way to live without the constraints which accompany refugee life in general and in Zambia in particular.

As noted earlier, Zambia requires refugees to live in designated areas.  This entails that permission must be sought from the Government every time one desires to leave the camp or settlement.  In addition, restrictions are placed on employment opportunities for refugees and study beyond basic education requires a study permit.  In short, there are a series of restrictions placed on refugees throughout their stay in this country.

Normally refugee status is not meant to be permanent.  It is intended to terminate in one of three ways: voluntary repatriation, resettlement in a third country, or local integration into the host country.  The reality is that for refugees in Zambia, voluntary repatriation is the only way to terminate refugee status and its concomitant restrictions.

The UNHCR refugee statistics for 2003 indicate that of the 242,000 refugees in Zambia, only 157 were resettled in third countries during that year.  While a resettled refugee who goes to the U.S., Canada, or Australia (the three major resettlement countries in the world) becomes integrated into that country and has the option of becoming a citizen after a relatively short period of time, the small number who are allowed to receive this benefit means that for practical purposes it is not a real solution.

Similarly, while local integration would seem to be an attractive solution especially for “refugees” whose parents or, in some cases, grandparents, were the last to live in Angola, this is not possible under   existing  Zambian  laws  or regulations.  Perhaps an illustration drawn from the actual situation of one Angolan refugee, but without divulging his real identity, would make this point more clearly.

THE CASE OF JOHN

John is in his mid-20s.  He was born in the Northwestern Province, but not at Meheba Settlement.  His father was and is a teacher in the Zambian school system.  John’s parents are both from Angola and came to Zambia in the early 1970s as refugees.  John attended primary and secondary school in Zambian schools.  He did well in his examinations and won a scholarship to the University of Zambia where he is pursuing studies in Education.  Like his father, John wants to be a teacher.  John’s father has now been educating Zambian children for nearly 25 years.  His son wishes to follow the same career.  John cannot become a Zambian, nor even as established resident of Zambia.  The current laws, or rather, the current interpretations of those laws, just do not permit this to happen.

There are literally thousands of Angolans whose situations are analogous to that of John.  They cannot work, or move freely about the country in which they were born, educated, and which their parents have helped develop.  Rather than continue to live such a restricted life, they choose to “return” to a home and homeland that they have never seen.

From many perspectives, their departure marks a loss for Zambia

Michael Gallagher, S.J.
Jesuit Refugee Service
Lusaka