vi. to inform the destination state of the measures taken to ensure the expelled persons are not considered criminals;

1 33 cases of suicide were recorded in Germany by the PRO-ASYL association between October 1993 and January 1998.

2 Case of Daruish Al-Nashif and others against Bulgaria, final decision of 25 June 2001.

3 “Passengers stop deportation”, Campsfield Monitor n°15, September 2000.

4 Sources: and Autonoom Centrum, “KLM – your deportation agent”.

5 Preamble and Art. 1 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights; preamble of the International Pact of Civil and Political Rights; preamble of the Pact on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, , and the preamble of the International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination towards Women.

6 Ruling Maaouia against France of 5 October 2000.

7 « Licence to kill », CARF (Campaign Against Racism and Fascism) No. 50, June 2000..

8 Source: Augenauf Association, Report on the Directorate of security and social services of the canton of Zurich, prepared in December 2000 for the lections to the Bundesrat, and Amnesty International, 2000 Report.

9 Source: Contribution of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) at the seminar, organised by the Office of the Commissioner for the Human Rights of the Council of Europe, on human rights standards applying to the holding of foreigners wishing to enter a Council of Europe member state and to the enforcement of expulsion orders, Strasbourg, 20-22 June 2001.

10 “Licence to kill”, see footnote 4.

11 Notes of Dr Lecourt for the meeting of 23 May 2001 with the Secretary of the Department of Justice and Police of the canton of Geneva, representatives of the Swiss League of Rights and of the Geneva Ecumenical Chaplaincy for asylum seekers.

12 Proposal registered on 24 July 2000.

13 “Lukrativer Flugauftrag mit gefesselten Passagieren”, Otto Hostettler, Berner Zeitung, 8 March 2000.

14 Proposal on repatriation policy, 25 June 1999.

15 “Deaths and demonstrations spotlight detention centres”, Statewatch Bulletin, vol. 10, January-February 2000.

16  17 Statement by Mr Urs Hadorn, Deputy Director of the Federal Office for Refugees, Berner Zeitung, 20 April 2000, and motion tabled by Mr Jean-Jacques Schwaab in the National Council on 13 June 2000 and transformed into a parliamentary motion by decision of the Federal Council on 18.09.2000.

17 United Kingdom: Detention Rules of 2 April 2001; Belgium: Ministerial ruling of 1 April 2000 on the conditions for the transport of difficult passengers.

18 E/CN.4/1999/80 of 9 March 1999, para. 84.

19 Presentation of the legal framework of expulsion in Europe, Hearing on the humanisation of expulsion procedures, 17 April 2000, Paris.

20 Pedro Lima, Régis Sauder, “Arenc, inhumaine antichambre du départ”, Le Monde Diplomatique, November 1999.

21 Ministry of the Interior circular of 11 October 1999; 1998 report by the Senate Committee of Enquiry on Regularisation.

22 Catherine Bellini, “La défaite des mesures de contrainte”, L’Hebdo no. 6, 1996.

23 These measures are reserved for the repatriation of persons from Kosovo or Bosnia (letter from the Federal Office for Refugees, 31 May 2001).

24 Source: International Human Rights Federation.

25 Report of the American Congress on human rights practice in the United Kingdom in 1999.

26 “Arenc, inhumaine antichambre du départ”, see note 21.

27 Decision of the Administrative Tribunal of Rennes, 21 October 2000.

28 Rulings of the Federal Court, 16 August 1999 and 21 June 2000.

29 The NGO Statewatch reports the following figures: in 1999, 11 269 foreigners were detained, 3 987 were expelled, 6 773 were released without expulsion, according to the Italian press agency Ansa, there were 8 947 detainees, 1 116 with no legal justification, whereas only 348 cases of detention were invalidated by magistrates, according to the Ministry of the Interior.

30 Ruling Dougoz against Greece, 6 March 2001.

31 CPT/Inf(98)11, 18 June 1998.

32 Case of Ibrahim Kourouma, reported by Amnesty International, doc. EUR/01/02/99.

33 Visit of 25 to 27 May 1998; CPT/Inf (99) 10, date of publication: 27 May 1999.

34 Association nationale d’assistance aux frontières pour les étrangers, Paris.

35 Source: CPT

36 2000 report concerning Belgium.

37 Sources: Augenauf, Report (see note 7) and survey conducted by Béatrice Guelpa and Béatrice Schaad for Expulsions No. 8, 24 February and Amnesty International, 2000 Report.

38 Expulsions No. 8, 24 February 2000.

39 Interim report of the Belgian government in response to the CPT report concerning its 1997 visit, published on 31 March 1999, CPT/Inf (99) 6 [FR].

40 Migration NewsSheet, June 2001, p.7.

41 Source: Augenauf and notes by Dr Lecourt, see note 12.

42 Contribution by Amnesty International to the hearing on this subject in Paris on 17 April 2000, organised by the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Demography.

43 Source: Collectif Anti-Expulsion, Paris.

44 AFP press release dated 2 December 1999.

45 La zone d’attente dénoncée de l’intérieur” (the waiting area denounced from the inside), Charlotte Rotman, Libération, 28 March 2001.

46 Source: Statement by the Belgian Cockpit Association, Brussels, 14 April 2000.

47 International Civil Aviation Organisation.

48 Convention on offences and certain other acts committed on board aircrafts of 14 September 1963.

49 Annex 9 of the Chicago Convention of 7 December 1944.

50 Source: Autonoom Centrum.

51 Ruling Nsona against the Netherlands, 28 November 1996.

52 Report of the Commission of Enquiry of the French Senate, 1998.

53 Source: Comité Anti-Expulsion.

54 VC-INFO 01-02-2001 and one year after Semira.

55 Bundesamt für Flüchtlinge.

56 “Lukrativer Flugauftrag mit gefesselten Passagieren”. Otto Hostettler, Berner Zeitung, 8 March 2000.

57 Case reported by Vincent Decroly during the Strasbourg seminar, see note 8.

58 Case of the expulsion of Amanji Gafor, reported in “Passengers stop deportation”, see note 3.

59 Amnesty International, doc. EUR01/001/2001.

60 1. No Contracting State shall expel or return a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. 2. The benefit of the present provision may not, however, be claimed by a refugee whom there are reasonable grounds for regarding as a danger to the security of the country in which he is, or who, having been convicted by a final judgement of a particularly serious crime, constitutes a danger to the community of that country”.

61 Rulings Cruz Varas against Sweden, 20 March 1991, Chahal against United Kingdom, 15 November 1996, and H.L.R. against France, 29 April 1997.

62 Source: PRO-ASYL.

63 Some expulsions were suspended because passengers protested.

64 Sources: Autonoom Centrum and National Coalition of Anti-Deportation Campaigns Augenauf for Switzerland.

65 Sources: International Human Rights federation and AFP press release dated 2 December 1999.

66 “Abschiebung per Charterjet: Behörde plant neue Flüge”, Ira von Mellenthin, Die Welt, 4 December 2000 and Contribution of Augenauf to the Strasbourg seminar, see note 8.

67 Source: Amnesty International 2000.

68 Source: Autonoom Centrum, “KLM – your deportation agent”.

69 Contribution of Cimade to the Strasbourg seminar, see note 8.

70 Source: Amnesty International 1996.

71 CPT visit to Belgium from 31 August to 17 September 1997, CPT/Inf(98)11, 18 June 1998.

72 Sources: Béatrice Guelpa and Béatrice Schaad, “La Suisse réinvente la traite des Noirs”, L’Hebdo, 20 January 2000; “Angela, morte à 20 ans sur la ‘Route de l’Afrique’” (Angela dies at 20 on “the road to Africa”), Expulsions no. 5, 3 February 2000 and “Baîllonné, expulsé, décédé…”, Expulsions no. 8, 24 February 2000. The Federal Office for Refugees has stated on this matter that “Switzerland has … carried out a certain number of confirmations of nationality during transit to third countries. (…) Each situation was individually monitored by the Swiss representation… Switzerland has always committed to returning to its territory persons who could not be identified. The conformity of this practice with its internal legislation and with its international commitments has been confirmed by both the Federal Court … and by …Parliament. (…)”

73 Source: Contributions of the Anafé and Elisa associations to the Strasbourg seminar, see note 8.

74 Source: “Die Tageszeitung”, 31 May 1999.

75 Report in response to the CPT, see note 17.

76 Amnesty International, Doc. EUR/01/01/99 and EUR/01/001/2001.

77 “La zone d’attente dénoncée de l’intérieur”, see note 42.

78 Source: Deportation Alliance.

79 Source: Amnesty International, 1994, 995, 1996, 1997 Reports.

80 Report by the Senate Committee of Enquiry, 1998.

81 “Tod des Sudanesen bleibt rätselhaft”, Süddeutsche Zeitung, 31 May 1999 and Amnesty International, Doc. AI/EUR/23/04/97.

82 Amnesty International, Doc. EUR/01/01/99.

83 The verdict on the third police officer, accused of having given the order to gag Mr Abuzarifeh, has not yet been given.

84 Source: Der Bund, 4 July 2001, telephone interview with judge Andreas Fischer of Bülach.

85 Contribution of the ILPA (Immigration Law Practitioners Association) to the Strasbourg seminar, see note 8.

86 “Bavure en zones d’attente: le témoignage qui accuse”, Alexandre Fache, L’Humanité, 28 March 2001.

87 See the references in Nicole Hitz and Bertrand Cottet, “Thèses de l’Organisation suisse d’aide aux réfugiés”, Berne, January 2000.

88 As an indication, the IOM provides the following statistics. In Belgium since the start of the policies in 1994, there have been 10 000 voluntary returns, in the Netherlands 7 000 since 1992.

89 Short speech by Ndioro Ndiaye, Assistant Director General of the IOM at the Belgim* on 16 November 1999.