- Home /
- News /
- 2007 /
- September /
- Statewatch News Online: Biscay/Spain-Morocco: Protecting foreign minors or getting rid of them?
Statewatch News Online: Biscay/Spain-Morocco: Protecting foreign minors or getting rid of them?
28 March 2012
Biscay/Spain-Morocco
Protecting foreign minors or getting rid of them?
Peio
M. Aierbe
SOS Arrazakeria/SOS Racismo
6 September 2007
About the Awareness
Raising, Protection and Reception of foreign under-14-year-olds
who have arrived in Biscay proposal, presented by the Grupo
Popular Vizcaíno (Popular Party Group of Biscay) of the
Juntas Generales de Bizkaia (Biscay General Assembly)
A proposal from the Partido Popular is set to
be debated soon in the Juntas Generales de Bizkaia, whose core
consists in the setting up of a reception centre in Morocco for
under-14s to which to send those who arrive in the institutions
of Biscay [the province of Bilbao].
To us in SOS Arrazakeria-SOS Racismo, this proposal appears particularly
relevant because it would mean crossing a line that has, by and
large, been respected to date. That is, in terms of not initiating,
from the Council, procedures for the expulsion (disguised behind
the euphemism of "re-grouping") of unaccompanied foreign
minors, which is what the current proposal envisages.
What is perverse about it, is that it attempts to embellish its
real purpose, that is none other than to get rid of these kids
because they are, supposedly, an unbearable burden, by manipulating
concepts and pretending that the goal is to "raise awareness,
protect and receive". It would be a platitude to state that
the best place in which to achieve this goal is here, where we
can provide them with the resources that are made possible by
the great purchasing power of our institutions. Moreover, this
is what these minors who have overcome thousands of obstacles
to get here want. But those who submitted the proposal close
their eyes before what is obvious.
The argument for returning them to their family environment is
"because that is where they are better off"; then,
could they let us know, why is it that they emigrate?
In this sense, reference is made to the precedent of the Madrid
Autonomous Community. Well, this clarifies matters as to the
authentic purpose of the proposal, as that Community has been
repeatedly condemned by all sorts of entities working with unaccompanied
foreign minors for violating their rights, with a commonplace
practice of carrying out expulsions without guarantees, with
similar conclusions also reached by different judges in their
sentences opposing this practice. The mentioned Community, funded
by the AENEA programme, is building two centres, in Tangiers
and Marrakech, costing three million Euros, for the exclusive
purpose of having an alibi to avoid having judicial decisions
passed against it for violating minors' rights.
It is claimed that "these projects serve to prevent these
minors from embarking upon this migration plan in [their place
of] origin" and that they stop them "putting their
own lives at risk". Well, it is precisely the opposite that
is true, as it has been demonstrated that a large majority of
those "re-grouped" are abandoned in the street and
return to the Peninsula, placing their lives at risk again to
achieve this, and re-starting their journey around the Institutions,
which was brusquely interrupted by the expulsion.
It is proposed to include this proposal within the framework
of development co-operation while running contrary to the most
accessible option, [that is] more rational and viable, of taking
care of their education and development ourselves.
A plan is proposed to "raise awareness among Moroccan families
so that they may know about our socioeconomic reality and the
impossibility of working for under-16s": it is obvious that
they already know the basic trait of our socioeconomic situation,
that is, the possibility of seeking a future here that they are
denied in their country. And even though they cannot work here
at 16 years of age, at that age they can acquire the professional
skills that may prepare them to enter the labour market, or is
it that we want them to return to their countries so that...
yes, it does happen there, they may end up working at 16 years
of age in conditions of extreme exploitation and for a miserly
income!
The problem is that this proposal may find fertile ground among
those responsible for the protection of minors in the Local Council
of Bizkaia.
Why do I say this? On the past 21 June, in the context of a seminar
organised by Harresiak Apurtuz in Bilbao, we attended the dissertation
by Iñigo Pombo, Director of the Infants department of
the Local Council of Bizkaia, that illustrated the local authority's
policy towards unaccompanied foreign minors. Considering the
context in which he presented it, before an audience a majority
of whom are busy working with minors, it may be inferred that
the effect that he sought was to transmit the criteria for intervention
of his department with clarity. And it must be said that the
effect, on a considerable part of the people attending the seminar,
was one of dismay. If anyone had thought that the policy followed
by the Madrid Autonomous Community, to use the paradigmatic example
of institutional ill-treatment towards unaccompanied foreign
minors and their systematic expulsion (pardon me, re-grouping),
would not have reached these whereabouts, they now know that
it is only a matter of (a very short) time. Mr. Pombo put this
forward, in black on white.
In an address in which he displayed the superlative self-esteem
with which the institution that he represents evaluates its work
with minors, showing how they are the best in this field in the
entire State and, it may be deduced, in all of Europe, through
an array of figures, he repeated the discourse that he has been
using for some time: there are too many of them, they saturate
reception services, there are not enough resources... Well, we
already knew these arguments and in the (brief) round of interventions,
it was possible to listen to the counter-argument regarding the
immense resources that this Council devotes to many other fields,
before which those dedicated to this matter pale into insignificance.
However, the local authority's official in charge, certain that
he stood on firm ground, put forth new arguments that complete
the framework of his current analysis, and which fill in any
remaining gaps as regards the political basis from which their
future interventions are planned. With the only qualification
of expressing them as questions, he addressed the public in these
terms: by acting as we are (in a model manner, according to his
version), might we not be contributing to the exploitation of
these minors? (one imagines [that he means] by their families,
viewed as being the ones that send them here). Might we not be
strengthening the activity of mafias? Are we not treating them
differently to minors from here, who we try to re-integrate into
their families, something that we don't do with them? It would
be impossible to issue the call for us to join the policy of
expulsion of these minors with greater clarity, considering that
otherwise, not only are we addressing a problem that apparently
does not concern us, but rather, we are co-operating with the
mafias, with their exploitation... Well, never mind, let us continue
sending them back, even though they resist with all their means,
although they return time and again in the bottoms of lorries
or in the corresponding dinghy. In purely statistical terms,
at one time or another they will die during the attempt and they
will be one less problem for us.
As there were people who questioned the idyllic picture painted
by Mr. Pombo among those those who attended the talk, and they
insisted on talking about institutional ill-treatment, he unveiled
what he considered to be the lithmus test: this argument is contradicted
by the minors themselves, as they choose Bizkaia as their main
destination! And there is nothing left to talk about. This is
the grand argument (or rather, the absurd reasoning) that, from
now on, will neutralise any lawsuit against the illegal exploitation
of workers; how could it be true, if the migrants themselves
have signed up for the corresponding job? Or will it belie the
charge that the obstacles that Europe places in the way of legal
immigration are causing hundreds of deaths in the Strait [of
Gibraltar] or on the African coast; if thousands are still coming,
how could it be true that hundreds die trying? And so on.
Times are coming that are (even) harder and it would be best
to prepare for them. If Mr. Pombo is capable of putting forward
this discourse, in this setting, it is because they have clearly
made up their mind, as an institution, and because they feel
that they are stepping on firm ground, because as soon as they
air this message, they expect to be able to count on society's
support for it. It is necessary to react from the active sectors
of society by voicing an alternative discourse, revealing the
perverse nature of these approaches and their enormous contradiction
in relation to the principle that it is claimed that they defend
and that feature in the treaties that have been signed…
To show, once and for all, that we are not facing some sort of
plague that has befallen us, but rather, on the contrary, an
opportunity that this society must learn how to make the most
of.
Peio M. Aierbe
SOS Arrazakeria/SOS Racismo
Article in Spanish: ¿Proteger a los menores extranjeros
o deshacernos de ellos? (pdf)
Statewatch
News online
| Join Statewatch news e-mail list | EU research resources:
Joint online subscription
© Statewatch ISSN 1756-851X.Material may be used
providing the source is acknowledged.
Statewatch
does not have a corporate view, nor does it seek to create one,
the views expressed are those of the author. Statewatch is not
responsible for the content of external websites and inclusion
of a link does not constitute an endorsement.