BELGIUM: Rewards for rejecting refugees (1)
01 January 1991
BELGIUM: Rewards for rejecting refugees
artdoc March=1995
A leaked document has revealed that the Belgian
Commissioner-General for Refugees, Marc Bossuyt, is rewarding his
lawyers with bonus points for every rejected request for asylum.
The internal memo, published by the League for Human Rights shows
that any lawyer working for the government can expect to be
rewarded with 1.2 bonus points for rejecting a request for
asylum. If on the other hand the claim is upheld the best the
lawyer can expect is 0.6 points. Bossuyt explains in the memo
that the points system will allow lawyers to see how well they
are performing in comparison with others, and goes on to
congratulate those who have earned most points.
The League for Human Rights argues that what this amounts to is
a bonus system for turning down asylum applications without
taking any account of the rights and wrongs of each particular
case. This system is underpinned by the fact that very few
lawyers working for the Commissariat-General have permanent
contracts and therefore are in constant danger of losing their
job. `It's not surprising taking this precarious work situation
into account that lawyers are actively fighting for points',
Pierre Hebecq, the general secretary of the league stated. `The
competition between lawyers working for the commissariat is
increasing. In the last few years the commissariat has employed
more and more lawyers in order to cope with the growing mountain
of asylum requests. There used to be 50 lawyers working for the
commissariat in 1990... now there are over 250'.
Whilst freely admitting the existence of the points system Mr
Bossuyt denies that the aim is to reduce the number of asylum
seekers. He claims that the system is nothing more than an
internal method for measuring productivity. The only reason that
rejected asylum requests get more bonus points is because
rejected applications require written explanations.
The league however claims that this is a untrue. According to
them the only difference between acceptance of a claim and
rejection is that the written explanations are made open in the
event of rejection. The league describes the whole system as
`unworthy for somebody entrusted with the even-handed application
of the Geneva Convention, especially if that person is
representing Belgium on the UN sub-committee for Human Rights'.
De Morgen 17.11.94.
Statewatch, Vol 4 no 6, November-December 1994