Pursuing Reform of Europe’s Asylum System
IHRC Students Investigate the Obstacles Refugees Face in Bulgaria,
by Dalia Fuleihan, BUSL’18
As I walked into the old school that had been converted into an open center for refugees, the first thing I noticed was the heaviness of the air. It was damp, there was a bad smell, and the air was thick with cigarette smoke. There was a pile of dirty mattresses behind the building, mattresses that were clearly infested with bedbugs, and inside there was dirt all over the floor. This is where refugees in Bulgaria live while their asylum applications are pending. It is a place where you wouldn’t put your dog if you cared about it.
We had come to Bulgaria to gather information about Bulgaria’s asylum process and the obstacles refugees faced when trying to gain asylum. Our goal was to put together a report that documents the situation in Bulgaria and come up with strategies to challenge problematic aspects of Bulgaria’s asylum system as well as the European system as a whole. One of our main areas of interest as we planned our fieldwork, was Bulgaria’s practice of detaining asylum seekers. Bulgaria detains asylum seekers in both open centers, where asylum seekers can come and go during specified hours of the day, and in closed centers, which resemble prisons. The center we visited in Sofia, Voenna Rampa, was old, in disrepair, filthy, and overcrowded. Asylum seekers are required by law to live in these centers while their applications are pending, which can take over a year. Through our prior research we had learned that asylum seekers often endure horrible conditions in the centers, only to have their applications refused and then be deported back to their home countries.
Ever since 2014, the number of refugees coming to Europe has increased dramatically. Most of these refugees are fleeing violence and unrest in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Bulgaria’s border with Turkey is the land crossing point that many refugees take into Europe. Before many European countries began closing their borders, refugees entered the European Union through the Bulgarian-Turkish border and continued on their journey to the more affluent countries of western Europe. Once the borders closed, it became increasingly difficult for refugees to leave Bulgaria. Many of those who managed to leave were returned to Bulgaria under the European Union’s Dublin Regulation, which requires refugees to apply for asylum in the country where they first arrived. As a result, a growing number of refugees are stuck and forced to apply for asylum in a country that neither wants them nor has the will or the resources to provide for them.
During the course of our fieldwork, we met with many of the attorneys at non-profit organizations who are trying to help refugees navigate Bulgaria’s asylum system. The community of refugee assistance organizations is very small in Bulgaria, but all the attorneys are incredibly dedicated to their work. They were all very welcoming to our project team and eager to share their thoughts and experience.
Many of the attorneys we spoke to made observations about the system in Bulgaria which reflected what our prior research had led us to expect: there is little to no information available in the detention centers about the process of seeking asylum, poor interpretation services, and significant barriers to attorneys’ access to asylum seekers to provide legal assistance. The attorneys we spoke to attributed many of the obstacles to the anti-refugee sentiment that characterizes Bulgarian politics and much of public opinion.
We heard similar stories from the refugees we interviewed. One young Iraqi refugee described the deplorable conditions he endured in the camps. The facility in which he was housed had dirty sewage leaking from the bathroom on the floor above him and bedbug-infested mattresses that kept him awake most of the night. He claimed that food was scarce, and the facility staff was unhelpful. Asking about the asylum process or the status of his claim was futile. “The situation is impossible” he said “there is no one to answer my questions or tell me how to go through the process. It hurts my soul.”
Putting together a strategy to challenge the existing European and Bulgarian laws governing the asylum process seems like a daunting task, especially after witnessing firsthand the dire situation of refugees in Bulgaria. The enormity of the task, however, only underlines its importance. While the International Human Rights Clinic and its NGO partners cannot tackle this problem alone, they have a role to play in pushing for progress. Hopefully, with enough pressure and enough interest from various organizations, governments, and other interested groups there can be some improvement in the future.
