Refugee Studies Forum Index Refugee Studies
Discussion Forum for Current and Former Students of Forced Migration and Refugee Studies
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
UEL Links:Refugee Studies Programme   Refugee Council Archive
Start Here:Welcome & Instructions
IOM - whose side are they on?

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Refugee Studies Forum Index -> Research Resources
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message

PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2006 6:59 pm    Post subject: IOM - whose side are they on? Reply with quote

This article: IRIN - MAURITANIA: Migrants lie in waiting mentions that IOM are "providing support" to the Mauritanian state to set up paramilitary checkpoints to intercept would-be migrants, presumably in order to send them on to 'deplorable' conditions in Mauritanian detention facilities...

I have long-suspected IOM are dodgy, a view reinforced by their involvement in voluntary return programmes in UK ( )
how can someone who's been made destitute or been refused access to healthcare by legislation be in a position to make a decision to return voluntarily? doesn't this fishy collusion between ngo & state go against the 51 convention?

there is a fine denunciation of IOM on
they also cite critiscism by AI & HRW

has anyone got anything postive to say about IOM?
or are they really just an ngo front for the worst of state's anti-migrant practises???
Back to top

PostPosted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 5:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

noone stepping up to defend IOM yet then??

here's an interview with the boss:
Brunson McKinley

Eurasylum ( has just released its new monthly policy interview, featuring Mr. Brunson McKinley, Director General of the International Organization for Migration (IOM). The interview discusses the future of multilateral cooperation systems on migration after the UN High Level Dialogue, including the role, activities and added value of the Global Migration Group and the Global Forum on Migration and Development.
The interview can be accessed from:

Eurasylumís interviews may be reproduced freely on condition that both the original source and the URL are explicitly acknowledged.


from JISC
List archives are available at:
Back to top

Joined: 21 Oct 2007
Posts: 36

PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Statement by Amnesty International & Human Rights Watch (Geneva, 2-4 December 2002)
Governing Council, International Organization for Migration

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch welcome the opportunity to attend the IOM Governing Council as Observers. We stand ready to work constructively with the Council and the offices of IOM, including in informal discussions, on matters of human rights compliance, transparency and accountability. We are mindful of the contribution made by IOM and its predecessor organizations to the well-being of many thousands of migrants and refugees since 1951, and particularly welcome this year's paper entitled "Migrants' Rights: IOM Policy and Activities." We trust that this document will provide a foundation for further development of IOM policy.

As organizations committed to the promotion and protection of human rights, however, we also come to this meeting with concerns about the human rights impact of certain IOM operations. In particular, we are concerned that IOM's work in certain contexts is adversely impacting upon basic human rights of migrants, refugees and asylum seekers, including for example the right to be free from arbitrary detention and the fundamental right to seek asylum.

In coming to this Council meeting, Member States cannot leave their other obligations at the door. Notably, Member States bring with them international responsibilities for the protection of the human rights of migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers. We note, for example, that a number of IOM Member States are parties to the Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers and Their Families, and most are parties to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees or its 1967 Protocol. More than half are members of the Executive Committee of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, and all but three are parties to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. These obligations are critical to ensuring that the work of IOM is grounded in established international standards and norms, both today and in the context of discussions on the future relationship between IOM and the United Nations.

We urge IOM Member States to ensure that these international obligations are reflected in both IOM policy and its work in the field. This means that the Governing Council should urge IOM to refrain from or immediately cease engaging in any activities that have the effect, either directly or indirectly, of obstructing enjoyment of basic human rights by migrants, refugees and asylum seekers.

We are conscious of the fact that IOM is playing an increasingly prominent role in the reception, assistance, and return not only of migrants, but also of asylum seekers, refugees and the forcibly displaced. Given that IOM does not have a protection mandate for its work with refugees and displaced persons, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch recommend that IOM should refrain from taking a lead role in situations which fall squarely under the protection mandate of other international organizations, such as UNHCR. The same is also true in the context of "mixed flows" involving the onward movement of asylum seekers in search of effective protection and so raising substantial refugee protection issues. We recognize, therefore, that the ongoing work of IOM and UNHCR to define their respective roles more clearly is of critical importance.

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are also concerned that IOM should not provide an alternative agency for states where they prefer to avoid their human rights obligations or where UNHCR has declined engagement in a given situation on the basis that it sees grave problems or dangers. Even with the best of motives, IOM involvement in such situations can end up unwittingly facilitating abuses and harming migrants, refugees and asylum seekers. IOM's presence should not have the effect of prolonging untenable state policies and practices which themselves fail to comply with international human rights standards. Such policies range from certain border control and deterrent measures, to arbitrary and unlawful detention to encouraging premature return to countries of origin. In such circumstances, states should be required to act in their own name and should be held directly accountable for their actions.

On behalf of our respective organizations, we look forward to continuing dialogue in furtherance of the protection of the rights of migrants, refugees, asylum seekers, and the displaced.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 21 Oct 2007
Posts: 36

PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 7:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

this is brilliant!
Inside the IOM Birmingham conference
one of brum noborders | 09.07.2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Refugee Studies Forum Index -> Research Resources All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group