UNHCR Eligibility Guidelines:
Factual Findings or Recycled Defamation?

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Asmara, 17 December 20150|P a g e

I.

Background and Overview

In April 2009, the UNHCR issued a 35-page booklet entitled “UNHCR Eligibility
Guidelines for Assessing the International Protection Needs for Asylum-Seekers from Eritrea”.
UNHCR further published the second Guidelines on 20 April 2011. This 37-page
document was essentially a replica of the first publication in terms of format, language
and substantive contents albeit few, insignificant and inconsequential, updates.
UNHCR’s purported purpose in issuing these guidelines was to “assist decisionmakers, including UNHCR staff, Governments and private practitioners in assessing
the protection needs of Eritrean asylum-seekers”. The organization flaunted theseguidelines as “authoritative legal interpretations of the refugee criteria in respect ofspecific groups on the basis of objectively assessed social, political, economic, security,
human rights and humanitarian conditions in the country of origin concerned”. It
further asserted that “the guidelines are researched strictly and are written based on
factual evidence provided by UNHCR’s global network of field offices and informationfrom independent country specialists, researchers and other sources which is rigorously
reviewed for reliability”.
As we will demonstrate in subsequent sections, nothing can be farther from the truth.
First off, UNHCR “Guidelines on Eritrea” do not emanate from a” rigorous andindependent fact-finding work” conducted by the agency in Eritrea and elsewhere
abroad. This is borne out by the following salient facts:Both reports epitomize sloppy, cut-and-paste, desk “research”, characterized asthey were, by wholesale regurgitation of prevalent, negative literature on Eritrea
from biased and politically motivated entities. This is indeed amplified by acursory scrutiny of the footnotes and references. The two booklets contain 473
references. The bulk of these footnotes are, however, iterative attributions to i)
US State Department of State, Country Report on Human Rights; ii) Amnesty
International; iii) Human Rights Watch; iv) Reporters Without Borders; and, v) a
couple of notorious Eritrean quisling publications.



A largely recycled document from suspect entities can hardly qualify for “factual
evidences collected and rigorously validated by the UNHCR” or provided byother “independent country specialists”.



UNHCR’s lopsided methodology of information collection and validation isextremely hard to explain. Along with other UN agencies including the UNDP,
1|P a g e

UNICEF, and the WHO, UNHCR has a duly accredited and fully functioning UN
office in Eritrea headed by a Resident Representative. But there are no
indications whatsoever that the “findings” the booklets enumerate largely
quoting the usual, Eritrea-bashing sources cited above, have been validated orreviewed by the UNHCR Office in Asmara for purposes of “rigorous factual
accuracy and reliability”. If anything, the UNHCR Office in Asmara and
UNHCR’s global network of field offices are conspicuous in the booklets for theiralmost total absence as credible sources of information and/or validation for
UNHCR’s “findings and conclusions”.
Secondly, most of the “findings” are replete with presumptuous caveats andqualifications such as “reportedly”, “allegedly”, etc. In view of the gravity of the subject
matter and its ramifications for the country in question, UNHCR’s approachaccentuates an appalling lack of responsibility and professionalism. This contrasts
starkly with, and undermines, UNHCR’s proclaimed standards of “objectivity, accuracy
and reliability”.
Thirdly, the UNHCR is guilty of a breach of trust to the host nation. Common sense,
normative decency and agreed ground rules dictate that the UNHCR communicate its
findings, however unsavory, to the host nation. The UNHCR is also duty-bound torequest policy clarifications from the host nation instead of second-guessing themand/or seeking third party interpretation; particularly when the latter are notdisinterested entities and/or when they harbor hostile political agendas. In the case of
these booklets, however, the whole exercise was shrouded in secrecy in as far as Eritrea
is concerned. The UNHCR did not, in fact, communicate its findings formally to theGOE while circulating them to other entities.
The UNHCR tries to justify this wayward approach under the lame excuse that “accessto independently verifiable information on the situation in Eritrea is difficult to obtaingiven the Eritrean Government’s control over virtually every aspect of life in the
country, the lack of independent media and the curtailment of NGOs activities”.
In Eritrea as elsewhere, the statutory mandate of NGOs is to carry out
humanitarian/development work. Why the UNHCR conflates the development workof NGOs with anti-government, alternative media is difficult to comprehend.
Furthermore, there are a plethora of UN agencies in Eritrea that produce
comprehensive annual/periodic reports on the country. Eritrea’s development partners(the European Union, Africa Development Fund etc.) also produce periodic reports that
focus on their specific projects but that also include the underlying political, economic,
security and social realities in the country. More importantly, not visiting the country
for any reason, does not give UNHCR any moral ground or responsibility to scavenge
on unaccounted, fabricated information on the country’s situation.
2|P a g e

In view of these facts, UNHCR’s preference to rely solely and fully on narratives
peddled by Eritrea’s known detractors cannot be shrugged off as oversight or poor
judgment. It may indeed belie an underlying agenda that may have been imposed on it
by its principal funders.
II.
Response to UNHCR’s major “findings” on Eligibility Guidelines (April 2009)
1. “Presidential and legislative elections, planned for 1997 and 2001 respectively, have been
postponed indefinitely. The Constitution, which was approved by referendum in 1997,
remains unimplemented”.
This account is inaccurate and highlights the author’s detachment from primary sourcesof information. Presidential and legislative elections were not planned or contemplated
for 1997 and 2001. As a matter of fact, legislative elections for the National Assembly
had taken place at the end of 1997 after the adoption of the new Constitution.
Furthermore, the new Constitution was adopted not by referendum but by an 862member Constituent Assembly. The Constitution drafting process took about two years
as it was preceded by civic education and extensive discussions throughout the country
as well as in the Diaspora to ensure maximum participation of all segments andstakeholders in the society.
The Constitution was a home grown, indigenous process that emanated from the values
and convictions of the PFDJ and the GOE. It was not imposed externally by Eritrea’s
development partners as a quid pro quo for financial assistance or some other lucrative
inducement. Moreover, the Eritrean society is also known for its rich and written bodyof customary laws, some even going back to the 15th century. Thus, Constitution
drafting process was not a late-date, externally-driven alien concept, imposed on the
country to address challenges and opportunities of modernism.
The political trajectory contemplated in those days was to enact subsequent laws on theformation of political parties and election rules. Those were not completed at the time.
The Election Commission was formed in anticipation of these laws. This naturalpolitical process of nation building in the broadest sense of the term was interrupted by
the border war with Ethiopia that erupted in May 1998. The second war with Ethiopia
was large-scale and ferocious that lasted for two years involving three large-scale
offensives at intermittent intervals.
The costly war with Ethiopia as well as dire conditions of perennial belligerency thatensued in its aftermath have adversely affected the tempo and pace of the politicalprocess of national building. Elections (except local and regional level elections) andrelated political processes were consequently kept on hold as priorities changed and thecountry had to grapple, first and foremost, with existential issues of preserving its
sovereignty and territorial integrity. In the event, speculative and presumptuous
3|P a g enarratives that gloss over or disregard overriding external environmental contexts thatshaped policy cannot be taken seriously.
2. “The country as a whole has been effectively on a military footing since its independence.
With estimated personnel of 200,000-320,000, Eritrea has one of the largest armies in Africa,
and the largest in Sub-Saharan Africa. It spends approximately 6.3% of its GDP on the
military, placing it ninth globally in per capita military expenditure (US Central Intelligence
Agency). An estimated 35% of its population is reported to be in active military service…
President Afwerki reportedly uses the border demarcation dispute with Ethiopia as
justification to maintain Eritrea on a war footing”.
This is again another case of cut-and-paste work laced with stunning hyperbole andpresumptions. But what is the real situation?
The first act that the Government of Eritrea took after independence in 1991 was toembark on a massive demobilization of about 100,000 EPLF liberation fighters. This was
the army that had to face Ethiopia’s (during the Mengistu’s reign) huge - the largest in
Sub-Saharan Africa - and well-equipped army of occupation (Ethiopian POWs at theend of the war alone were more than 105,000). But immediately after independence, all
freedom fighters who were assigned to the Civil Service were ordered to surrender their
weapons. This was followed by an extensive demobilization programme to reduce thesize of the Eritrean Defense Forces to about 35,000. The demobilization programme wascarried out entirely through the Government’s own resources (at a time of formidable
challenges of national rehabilitation and reconstruction and considerable financial
constrains after three decades of war) as development partners were not forthcomingwith prompt financial assistance.
The GOE pursued large-scale demobilization and reduced Eritrea’s defense forces toaround 35,000 because it did not contemplate a resumption of hostilities with Ethiopia.
Indeed in those times, the post-Mengistu EPRDF government in Ethiopia andIndependent Eritrea were earnestly working to cultivate a new framework ofregional/bilateral ties that optimizes collective cooperation and integration while
respecting each other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. To this end, Ethiopia andEritrea exerted concerted efforts to revitalize IGAD as the most appropriate regional
institution to prevent and resolve potential Intra-State conflicts as well as to lay thegroundwork and create an effective situation for incremental regional economic
cooperation and integration.
Eritrea introduced the National Service Programme, through Proclamation No. 82, in1994 against the backdrop of massive demobilization and vigorous efforts for a robust
framework of regional security and development cooperation. The National Service insome ways was essentially seen as a contingent security architecture which would
allow the young nation to maintain a very small regular army with the latitude to
4|P a g emobilize the necessary force if and when it is faced with existential threats. In normal
times, the National Service is limited to 18 months by law; 12 months of which are
generally spent on civilian/public works assignments.
This normative configuration is affected today due to Ethiopia’s continued occupationof sovereign Eritrean territories and its pronounced plans of destabilization against thecountry. Eritrea has been forced to prolong the duration of the National Service from its
statutory 18 months to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity. The war and its
sequel of continued hostilities between the two countries is the result of Ethiopia’s
flagrant violation of international law; fundamental provisions of the UN Charter andthe Algiers Peace Agreement signed between the two countries. Eritrea harbours no
territorial ambitions or schemes of “regime change” or political destabilization of its
neighbor. In the absence of appropriate measures by the UN Security Council against
Ethiopia, explicitly stipulated in the Algiers Agreement, Eritrea has no option but totake necessary measures of self-defense that are proportionate to the threat it faces.
Sadly, the UNHCR’s report glosses over all these facts to churn out inaccurate andhypothetical figures on the size of Eritrea’s Armed Forces and its annual military
expenditure quoting dubious sources who may have their own sinister agendas against
the country. The UNHCR has failed to validate these figures. It does not, also, try to
put it in perspective through comparison with the size of Ethiopia’s army or its military
expenditure.
The figures that the UNHCR quote are grossly inaccurate. In as far as the size of
Eritrea’s army is concerned, the CIA computation fails to take into account the various
demobilization programmes that the Government of Eritrea has undertaken after 2001.
So while the number of those who can be mobilized during war may remain
substantial, the army is not as blotted as it is portrayed in the distorted CIA report. The
following facts amply corroborate the discourse above:

From 2001 until 2005, for instance, the GOE demobilized over 105,000 soldiersfrom the National Service. A Commission for Demobilization was in factestablished in 2001 pursuant to Proclamation No 113/2001 (A Proclamation to
Establish a National Commission for the Demobilization and Reintegration Programme – DRP).
The project, which was funded by the UN, the EU, USAID and otherdevelopment partners envisaged full demobilization of the army in three phases.
The demobilization process was implemented successfully and in accordancewith the envisaged schedule from 2001 until 2004. But subsequent phases were
terminated when Ethiopia rejected the EEBC decision through a formal letter of
its late Prime Minister to the UN (in September 2003) and the latter shirked its
responsibilities to take appropriate action.

5|P a g e

In spite of this major obstacle, large scale demobilization practices have andcontinue to occur almost continuously on various grounds; especially for womenand other segments of society.



The majority of National Service members are routinely assigned to civilianfunctions in the Civil Service or other public sectors. In terms of financial
expenditure, the figures that the UNHCR quotes from secondary sources arefalse.

The last sentence of the UNHCR report that claims “President Afwerki reportedly uses theborder demarcation dispute with Ethiopia as justification to maintain Eritrea on a war footing “
is offensive to say the least. We will revert to this presumptuous and erroneous claim in
subsequent parts of this response. We wish to point out here that the illegal occupationof sovereign Eritrean territory is not a fig leaf of imagination or fabrication by Eritrea’s
Head of State. In the border war that took place from 1998 to 2000, Eritrea was forced to
pay the precious lives of 20,000 of its best sons and daughters. Coming in the heels of
the long war that claimed 65,000 lives, this is indeed a heavy price to pay for a small
nation like Eritrea.
The United States declared “war on terror” and marshaled all the powers of the State in2001 after the terrorist attacks in the twin towers. Horrible as this incident was, the lossof life was about 3,500 in a nation of 250 million. Lives are lives and it may soundindecent to compare figures. But Eritrea has every right of self-defense – and to resort toa credible defensive posture – as it has lost 20,000 in the last border war and as Ethiopia
maintains its belligerent stance and continues with its endless saber rattling. The fact is
Ethiopia’s Prime Minister continues to issue almost monthly threats of imminent andlarge-scale military action while intermittent acts of destabilization and subversion
against Eritrea continue without let up.
3. “In April 2002, an independent Boundary Commission established under the terms of the
Algiers Agreement issued its recommendations for the demarcation of the border in favour ofEritrea‟s territorial claims. Ethiopia has not implemented these recommendations….”.
The Boundary Commission did not issue “recommendations” but a “final and binding”
arbitral Award on the sovereignty and territorial integrity of both countries. Thisoccurred after two long years of legal litigation. Both sides reverted to arbitral litigationin accordance with fundamental articles of the UN Charter and the Algiers Peace
Agreement signed by both sides in Algiers on 12 December 2000. The Algiers
Agreement was brokered by the United States, the European Union, the OAU and theUnited Nations as guarantors and witnesses. Key provisions of the Algiers Agreement
are the following:

6|P a g e Article 1-1: The parties shall permanently terminate military hostilities between
themselves. Each party shall refrain from the threat or use of force against theother.
 Article 4-1: Consistent with the provisions of the Framework Agreement and theAgreement on Cessation of Hostilities, the parties reaffirm the principle ofrespect for the borders existing at independence as stated in resolution
AHG/Res. 16(1) adopted by the OAU Summit in Cairo in 1964, and, in thisregard, that they shall be determined on the basis of pertinent colonial treaties
and applicable international law.
 Article 4-2: The parties agree that a neutral Boundary Commission composed offive members shall be established with a mandate to delimit and demarcate thecolonial treaty border based on pertinent colonial treaties (1900, 1902, and 1908)
and applicable international law. The Commission shall not have the power tomake decisions ex aequo et bono.
 Article 4 - 15: The parties agree that the delimitation and demarcation
determinations of the Commission shall be final and binding. Each party shallrespect the border so determined, as well as the territorial integrity andsovereignty of the other party.
The arbitral award by the EEBC delimited and demarcated the boundary between thetwo countries in 2002 and 2007 respectively. This was in duly endorsed by the UN
Security Council. The Maps with the coordinates of the delimited and demarcatedboundary have consequently been deposited at the Cartographic Unit of the UN. As
such, there is no “unresolved border dispute” between Eritrea and Ethiopia. Ethiopia’srefusal to withdraw from sovereign Eritrean territories contravenes international law,
the Algiers Peace Treaty and the subsequent arbitral ruling of the EEBC. It is an issue ofpure and simple illegal occupation.
Ethiopia’s refusal to respect its treaty obligations and, its breach of the Algiers
Agreement constitute therefore flagrant acts of aggression with serious consequences
for regional peace and security. The UN Security Council has, indeed, obligations totake necessary punitive measures against Ethiopia both on account of Article 14 of the
Algiers Peace Agreement and Articles 39 to 42 of the UN Charter. That this has not
happened to-date is due to US lopsided position in support of its regional “anchor
State”. US diplomatic clout at the UN Security Council and its unwarranted support ofEthiopia’s violation of international law cannot, clearly, diminish the gravity of the act.
For the UNHCR to ignore all these facts and describe the reality with such sloppiness isdifficult to fathom.
4. “There is growing scarcity of basic staples such as bread, sugar, and fuel, and despite
Government programmes designed to ensure food security, two thirds of the population are
still reliant on food aid….”
7|P a g eAgricultural challenges in Eritrea as well as in many parts of Sub-Saharan Africa
including the Horn of Africa Region are huge indeed. In Eritrea, rainfall is erratic andmost of agricultural cultivation remains archaic and traditional. These are the reasons
why the government of Eritrea has put food security as one of its policy priorities forthe last ten years. Eritrea is in fact pursuing a two-track approach to achieve nationaland household food security in a sustainable and irreversible manner within a specified
time line. Effective implementation of these broad policy objectives consists of:i)building the requisite water and irrigation infrastructures to achieve adequate
harvests each year that can meet domestic demand irrespective of thefluctuations and vagaries of rainfall in an ecologically fragile environment; andii)bolstering individual farm-household income through the phased Integrated
Agricultural Scheme. This package aims to supplement and ensure sustainable
farm-household income through diversification and provision (grants/low-credit
arrangements) of 1 cow, 25 chicken, 2 bee-hives, 20 trees – 10 fruit trees, 5 foranimal feeds, and 5 as source of energy through regular pruning, and a small
1000 to 2500 sq. m. plot of land)

All these programmes remain work in progress. Still the country has already achieved
tangible results in the past years. In the immediate years after Independence, 75% of
the population was literally dependent on food assistance. The World Food Programme
had permanent headquarters in Eritrea and it was distributing around 250,000 tons offood aid annually throughout the country. Through purposeful efforts, the acutedependency on food handouts from the WFP and other donors was reversed. WFP
closed shop in 1996. UNHCR’s assertion, in its 2009 report, that two thirds of the
population is reliant on food assistance is thus outdated and grossly incorrect.
Fuel and sugar are imported items. As such, shortages in fuel supply can occur fromtime to time due to logistical glitches or financial constraints. Shortage of sugar or otherdaily staple consumer items is however rare, if not totally non-existent.
The thirty-year war of liberation, the border conflict that erupted in 1998 merely sevenyears after independence and continued belligerence by Ethiopia thereafter haveadversely affected Eritrea’s economy and the pace of its development drive. But allthese obstacles notwithstanding, the country has registered notable achievements on
key social indicators. This is illustrated by the Demographic and Health Survey (EDHS)
conducted in 2010 (an updated survey will be completed this year): Life expectancy rose from 46 in 1991 to 63 (male/female in 2010)
 Adult literacy increased from 30% to 67%
 Student population rose from 200,000 to 600,000
8|P a g e Household access to clean and adequate water increased by 65% and access toelectricity by 38%
 1100 villages were supplied with access to adequate safe water Maternal mortality rate decreased from 998/100000 to 250/1000000
 Child mortality rate fell from 135/1000000 to 63/100000
 Residential buildings constructed to about 128,000 families
5. “National Service is mandatory for every Eritrean, male or female, between the ages of 18
and 50. …Following the completion of 18 months of active national service, citizens are
subject to compulsory service in the reserve army until the age of 50, and as such are liable tobe called for national mobilization, (further) military training or “defense in artificial or
natural disasters”.
In the first place, Eritrea is not in the business of manufacturing “artificial disasters”.
As described in greater detail earlier, National Service was introduced to deter
existential threats to the country in critical times and in a turbulent region for reasons oflegitimate national defense. In times of peace, National Service members do not haveany other obligations once they fulfill their duty of service for 18 months. But they arein theory part of the reserve army eligible for recall if and when war breaks out. So intimes of peace, the National Service Members are not hooked up to the army until theyreach the age of 50. The duration of National Service is only 18 months. The legal
clauses for the upper age limit constitute contingency provisions that may be invoked intimes of war; if and when the country faces a war of aggression that jeopardizes its
sovereignty and territorial integrity.
As a young nation Eritrea has no territorial or other hegemonic ambitions against its
neighbors. In all the cases of border dispute with its neighbours(Yemen/Ethiopia/Djibouti), Eritrea has not tried to review and alter the inheritedcolonial boundaries. Eritrea’s principled position has been, and remains, respect of theinherited colonial boundaries and their peaceful settlement through arbitration in theevent of any dispute. Eritrea has dutifully abided by the Permanent Court of
Arbitration’s decision on the Hanish Islands in its dispute with Yemen. Similarly, it has
faithfully accepted the EEBC decision when the border dispute with Ethiopia wasreferred to this Arbitral body in accordance with the provisions of the Algiers
Agreement.
The fact is that Eritrea strictly abides by international law and fully subscribes to theprinciple of the peaceful settlements of disputes through arbitration as enshrined inarticle 77 of the UN Charter. If these instruments are not upheld by concerned Member
States or the UN Security Council – as indeed it is the case today with Ethiopia’s
flagrant occupation of sovereign Eritrean territories – Eritrea has no option but to devise
reasonable mechanisms of self-defense. This is the reason why National Service –9|P a g elimited by law to 18 months – remains prolonged. This is why National Service
members are recalled into a “Reserve Army” that was put into law merely as a residualand contingent option. In the event, focus of international attention should not be on
Eritrea - the victim – but on Ethiopia and its allies which are causes of, and havecreated, this anomalous situation.
6. Although the minimum age for military conscription is 18, forced underage recruitment,
detention and ill-treatment of children has been reported. A militarization of education is
also reported. The University of Asmara, prior to its closure in September 2006, hadreportedly denied enrollment to prospective students, who were instead required to attend
vocational prorammes. Since 2003, a mandatory final year (12th grade) has been added to thesecondary school curriculum, which students must attend at Sawa military training center
under military authority and including military-type training.
The claims of forced underage recruitment, detention and ill-treatment are simply nottrue. Similarly, the assertion that there is under-age conscription into the military iscompletely false. In the first place, military conscription is a misnomer and the accurate
term is National Service. In this respect, Proclamation No. 82 of 1995 of the National
Service program is crystal clear on the issue of age. The articles 11 (1) to (3) deal withregistration explicitly specify that the eligibility age for National Service is from 18 to 40
years.
Pre-university education consisted of 11 years before 2003. But this was revised intandem with the comprehensive curriculum review that was undertaken by the
Ministry of Education. As a result, the duration of secondary schooling was extended
by one year to a total of four years. Within this revised programme, 12th Gradeschooling for all High School students was determined to take place at the Sawa HighSchool for a number of cogent reasons. University entrance is predicated on students
obtaining passing marks in the National High School Leaving Examinations.
Aggregating all students in one High School for the last year creates a level playing
field in and ensures higher meritorious competition. The four months period of
National Service is also taken at Sawa during that year. This is divided into twosegments: one month in August prior to the start of the school year and three months
from April to June when students had already completed their academic year and sat
for the National High School Leaving Examination.
Sawa High School is fully administered by the Ministry of Education and is not under
the responsibility of the Sawa National Military Service Centre. This duality of
responsibilities and functions cannot be misconstrued as militarization of education.
The two functions occur at different times under different administrative bodies. Hence
Education has not been militarized.

10 | P a g e

The GOE has built seven new Institutes and Colleges spread throughout the country in
the past ten years to increase access to tertiary education in a more balanced spatial
distribution. These are:

The Institute of Science and Technology, located in the outskirts of Asmara(Central Region), is today offering Bsc. and Msc. courses in engineering, the puresciences and education.



The College of Health Sciences, the Orotta School of Medicine and Dental Scienceand the Residence School offer first degree and specializations on medicine,
pharmacy, medical technology, public health, nursing and related fields.



The College of Marine Sciences in Massawa (Northern Red Sea Region) offers
first degree courses on marine engineering and marine sciences.



The College of Arts and Sciences in Adi-Kayeh (Southern Region) provides
degree courses on humanities.



The Business College in Halhale (Southern Region) offers degree and diploma
courses on economics, finance and business management



The Agriculture College in Hamelmalo (Western Eritrea), offers degree, diploma
and Msc courses on agricultural engineering, plant and animal sciences.

As illustrated above, the claim that the University of Asmara was closed is patently
false. Indeed its premises and facilities are being used by the Orota School of Medicine;
one of the seven new institution of higher education described above. The University of
Asmara, or any of the new institutions of higher education, cannot deny enrollment to
students who obtain passing marks at the National High School Leaving Examination.
Again, the claim that this happened at the University of Asmara in 2006 is totally false.
Students who get less than the required passing mark are however enrolled incertificate or other vocational training centers.
7. Desertion is most severely sanctioned and entails imprisonment up to five years, but in timesof mobilization or emergency, this can increase from five years to life, or, in the gravest cases,
death, for desertion from a unit, post or military duties or for failure to return to them after
an authorized period of absence. (Eritrean Transitional Penal Code…?). Since military
courts are not operative, punishment for military offences is carried out extra-judicially, andhas been widely reported to include “shoot to kill” orders….
8. Furthermore, extrajudicial executions are allegedly ordered by local commanders and carriedout in front of military units for what might be serious military offences. In practice, the
11 | P a g e

punishment for desertion or evasion is thus severe and disproportionate such as to constitutepersecution.
9. Punishment for refusing to perform military service may constitute persecution if, inter alia,
owing to a 1951 Convention (or OAU Convention) reason, the punishment is applied in a
discriminatory manner; the punishment is aggravated; or the person is denied due process oflaw (UNHCR Handbook).
We see no reason why desertion should not be considered a crime punishable, severelyor otherwise, by the laws of any country, Eritrea one of them, that maintains an army.
Desertion (Article 300) and Absence without Leave (Article 301) are just two of thedozens of military offences contained in the Transitional Penal Code of Eritrea (Articles
296 – 353). There is an erroneous assumption here, assuredly the result of anassumption or lack of thorough investigation, that “military courts are not operative”
and hence “punishment for military offences is carried out extra-judicially, and has
been widely reported to include “shoot to kill” orders”.
Eritrea has a military court system established by the first post-independence legislationof Eritrea, Proclamation 1/1991 of September 1991. Articles 4(2) and 6 of said
proclamation established a lower and higher military courts which entertain, on first
instance basis, military offences of varying degrees of severity. The Court of Final
Appeal, the highest court in Eritrea, gives, on appeal basis, the final verdict on cases
appealed from these two military courts. The military courts are still operational in
Eritrea and continue to hear and decide on cases. There are prosecutors and judges,
extracted from the military and trained in law, who dwell on military offences in
Eritrea.
As has been explained in the introduction to this document, the UNHCR again has
sadly subjected itself to an indefensible position. Desertion from active military service
remains by law a serious crime punishable with rigorous imprisonment. Hence, they
are duly accounted through both the legal and administrative measures. This in asmuch as possible greatly takes into account the rights of the guilty citizen and whenever
there is discrepancy or any degree of violations appears, both judicial andadministrative remedies are made.
The allegations enumerated in the guidelines are indeed grave crimes resulting insevere punishment under the domestic penal law and as reflected in international
conventions to which Eritrea is a party. The Transitional Penal Code criminalizes arrest,
confinement, detention or otherwise restraining the freedom of any person, without
lawful order. Tortures, ill-treatment of or unlawful killing of a detainee, are among thegrave crimes dealt with by the Penal Code.

12 | P a g e

The administration of justice falls under an independent judiciary comprising of
hierarchical courts and Public Prosecution institution headed by an Attorney Generalwhich are clearly spelt out in Proclamation No.1/1991. The Constitution endorsed in
1997 not only protects these basic human rights of the citizens but also provides judicial
and administrative remedies in case of any violation. (Also raised in the 2011
Guidelines)
But what Eritrea finds sad and perplexing in this context is why the UNHCR without
any explanation (as indicated in both Nos 7 and 8 of the 2009 Eligibility Guidelines)
accepts this dubious and unfounded allegation of extrajudicial killings, shoot to killpolicy by local commanders „in front of military units for what might be serious military
offences….’. This sweeping accusation deliberately inserted to give weight to the matterand tarnish the image of Eritrea is unfounded, irresponsible and an offense to the nationand its government.
It must be noted that the National Service Proclamation contains penalty provisions(Article 37) for persons who violate some of the provisions of the national service law
including refusal to perform military service. Enforcement of the penalty provisions isapplied uniformly against any such violator.
10. Refusal to bear arms, however motivated, reflects an essentially political opinion regarding
the permissible limits of State authority. Military service has become politicized in Eritrea
and actual or perceived evasion or desertion from military service is regarded by the Eritrean
authorities as an expression of political opposition to the regime. The politicization of themilitary service is evidenced, inter alia, by the armed forces being under the personal controlof the President, the special courts being staffed with military officers, and the use of military
service as a repressive measure against real or perceived opponents of the Government(HRW).
Military Service was enacted by law due to the imperatives of National Defense against
foreign aggression. It cannot and does not otherwise have any political connotation.
Nor can it be misconstrued or seen as a reflection of loyalty or opposition to theincumbent government. Eritrea’s armed forces are not under the personal control of the
President. Eritrea has a Minister of Defense and the normative Chiefs and militaryhierarchies of the Infantry, Navy, Air Force and Police as is indeed the case with othercountries. The President is also the Commander-in Chief of the Military; but this isagain the case with all independent countries all over the world. So we find it curious,to the say the least, for the UNHCR/HRW to invent a new set of standards andterminologies in order to denigrate Eritrea’s military configuration.
The Special Court is a different set-up. It is not part of Eritrea’s Defense Forces. The
Special Court was created by law and has specific mandates to investigate
embezzlement of public funds by government officials. The policy that underpinned its
13 | P a g e

foundation is a positive attitude of “zero tolerance for corruption”. The yardstickshould be the appropriateness of the underlying laws or whether there have been casesof miscarriage of justice; not whether the staff has military background or not.
11. Moreover, conscientious objection itself may be regarded as a form of political opinion, andconscientious objectors, or some particular class of them, could constitute a particular socialgroup. While a State has a justifiable interest in ensuring national security, the measurestaken to that end must be “reasonably necessary in a democratic society”.
Eritrea’s laws do not allow exemption from the National Service on account of religious
beliefs. Proclamation No. 82/1995 is unequivocal in this regard when it states “noEritrean citizen is exempted from fulfilling his/her national service requirement on thebasis of religion, gender, ethnic origin, etc. except on the basis of age, disability andmotherhood”. Existential threats to a small country cannot be shouldered by somesegments of the population. This is a common burden that has to be thwarted by theefforts of all eligible citizens. And this is not new to Eritrea. The Eritrean people have,indeed, fought colonial rule in unison in the past.
UNHCR’s proselytizing on how to safeguard National Security is, in our view,
somewhat over the board. The people of Eritrea have fought for 30 long years alone
without meaningful international support or sympathy. They have paid the precious
lives of 60,000 of their best sons and daughters. They have also paid dearly – in the
lives of 20,000 additional martyrs – in the border war with Ethiopia. As they face acontinuous threat from Ethiopia also in the present times, they cannot listen to
unsolicited advice from quarters that will not come to their defense when and if war
erupts again.
12. Jehovah‟s Witnesses continue to be subjected to harsher treatment, such as dismissal fromcivil service,; revocation of business licenses; eviction from Government housing; and denialof identity cards, passports and exit visas. Conscientious objectors, particularly Jehovah‟s
Witnesses, may thus be at risk of persecution, on the ground of their religion, imputed
political opinion or membership of a particular social group, for draft evasion or desertion.
This is again wide of the mark. The truth is the Jehovah’s Witnesses publicly
announced, at the outset immediately after liberation, that they do not recognize
Eritrea’s independence and the “temporal government and authority” establishedthereby. This was unprecedented and unheard of as far as we know. Be that as it may,they were not “subjected to especially harsh treatment” as claimed above. The
Government simply refused to issue or to renew their business licenses. Indeed theycannot have it both ways: refuse to recognize the temporal Government and to respect
its laws but at the same time request legal services from the same Government. Refusal
to enroll in the National Service entails certain legal consequences as explained in other14 | P a g e

sections above. With the Jehovah Witnesses, the problems arose early after liberation
for the reasons described earlier long before the enactment of the National Service law.
13. Some female conscripts are reportedly subjected to sexual harassment and violence, including
rape….No effective mechanisms for redress or protection exists within or outside themilitary, and perpetrators generally go unpunished.
This is another defamatory statement without rigorous validation. Eritrea’s customarylaws and traditions do not tolerate sexual harassment, violence and rape. These laws
have been reinforced in the Penal and Civil Codes enacted after independence. The
latter is indeed an obvious corollary of the women’s pivotal role in the liberation
struggle. If and when sexual violence and rape occur, appropriate punitive measures
are taken by the relevant institutions; especially the courts. Furthermore, standard
reporting and monitoring mechanisms are in place for protecting the dignity of female
participants in the national service and national defense.
14. Family members and relatives of draft evaders and deserters may also be at risk ofpersecution due to the practice of substitute service and/or punitive fines and imprisonment,
and could be considered, in this respect, as a particular social group. .. Forced conscription offamily members, particularly the father, of the draft evader, and withdrawal of trade licenses
and closure of businesses held by members of the nuclear family of a deserter/draft evader.
These claims are again false and constitute a misrepresentation of facts on the ground.
In the first place, Eritrea’s laws unequivocally reject the notion of collective punishment.
The laws do not recognize or allow collective culpability, or accountability by proxy, forcrimes committed by a family member. The laws uphold the legal principle of personal
punishment for an offence committed by an individual
Similarly, the National Service Proclamation does not allow the conscription of family
members in lieu of a draft evader. Nor are businesses licenses of a person revoked
simply because or on account of the evasion/defection of one family member from the
National Service.
Complicity or being an accessory to crime is clearly another matter. In this regard, there
are provisions in the general laws and in the Proclamation on National Service forculpability of persons who willfully assist a person to commit an offense, including
evasion or desertion from the national service.
15. In September 2001, 11 PFDJ Government Ministers and four former independent movement
leaders, known as the G15 were arrested after publicly calling for democratic reforms,
including the implementation of the Constitution and holding of elections…. Some 65
political prisoners… the majority having been arrested in the aftermath of the September
2001 protests….In light of the crackdown which led up to, inter alia, the arrest and detention
15 | P a g e

of the G15 and the banning of all privately owned newspapers,…. Political dissidents or
persons perceived as political dissidents may have a well-founded fear of persecution on thebasis of their political opinions
This narrative is simply wrong. The 11 senior government officials, and few others thatbelonged to the same ring, were detained for conspiring and attempting to overthrow
the legal government of the country in times of war and for colluding with hostile
foreign powers with a view to compromising the sovereignty of the nation; forundermining Eritrean national security and for endangering Eritrean society and thegeneral welfare of its people during a time of war. These are violations of theTransitional Penal Code of Eritrea: Attacks on the Independence of the State (Article259); Impairment of the Defense of the State (Article 260); and High Treason (Article
261). Besides these national laws, the perpetrators of the act also violated Articles 29(3),(4) and (5) of the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights.
The allegation that the eleven persons were “political prisoners” or “prisoners ofconscience” detained for “having made a call in favor of reform and democratic election
and greater respect for human rights” is factually unfounded and far from the truth. It
is otherwise well known that expressing one’s political opinion or belief is not a crime
in Eritrea for any citizen.
The Eritrean Government did not also arbitrarily arrest the 11 persons. Their case wasbrought to, and discussed by, the National Assembly (almost all of them were also
members of the National Assembly). The National Assembly deplored the grave acts
perpetrated by the detainees and mandated the Government to handle the matterappropriately. Subsequent developments that include a prolonged state of belligerency
by Ethiopia, continued occupation of sovereign Eritrean territories, Ethiopia’s
pronounced policy of “regime change” and US belligerent and hostile stance on Eritrea
have all compounded the problem and made various conceivable options difficult tocontemplate.
In this connection and for the benefit of the UNHCR, it is also important to note on the
allegation that journalists who protested against the Government were similarlyarrested. This is again completely false and misleading. Not a single Eritrean has beendetained in the past twenty four years since independence for expressing his/her
opinion or performing their duties or for criticizing the Government. Breach of national
security and sovereignty is of course another matter and the case of some journalists
mentioned at times is in fact interwoven with the G-11 Group mentioned earlier. They
belonged to the same clandestine organization that was engaged in acts of sedition
during those difficult days.

16 | P a g e

16. Foreign newspapers are rarely sold and their importation is prohibited. Eritrea was the lastcountry in Africa to enable local Internet access, with Internet connections reported to belimited, unreliable or censored.
This is another false report that is widely at variance with reality. In the first place,importation of foreign newspapers is not prohibited by law. Indeed, the UNHCR could
have easily checked with its Office in Asmara and learn of the exponential growth intelevision satellite dishes that have sprouted throughout the country including in mostof the rural areas and peripheries. With the standard decoders that most families own,
households have access to more than 600 foreign satellite TV channels from all over theworld (the same applies to radio channels) that broadcast their programmes 24 hours a
day without any restriction whatsoever. CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera, CCTV, RT, France 24,
Euro News and so many others, including Ethiopian and TV stations from allneighbouring countries are available on Arab Sat and Nile Sat channels that areaccessed by these decoders without subscription fees.
Internet access is not also censored or restricted. But the broadband width of internet
remains slow simply because Eritrea could not join the sea-based Fiber Optic Cable
connections when they were launched 10-12 years ago for financial reasons at the time.
But the Government has been negotiating with foreign companies and Fibre-optic based
broadband internet access will be secured sometime early next year. The prevailing low
bandwidth and speed notwithstanding, there are no restrictions whatsoever on Internet
access and internet café’s are preponderant everywhere.
17. Any group of more than seven persons cannot assemble without the prior approval of theGovernment, despite the right to freely assemble being entrenched in the Constitution. …
Although union leaders are typically Government employees, and thus union activities are
generally sanctioned, the Government did not approve the formation of any unions in
2008…. Furthermore, given past arbitrary arrests and detention of prominent tradeunionists and labor right activists, such individuals may be at risk of persecution on the basisof (imputed) political opinion.
This is preposterous and can only be peddled by someone who has no clue of Eritreansociety or by a person/entity engaged in rabid disinformation. Formation of politicalparties has been deferred pending the enactment of relevant laws. But this has neverbeen a hindrance to the formation of professional and civil society associations. Eritrea
is a country of laws; some of the written customary laws go back to the 15th century.
Popular and community assemblies have thus been the order of the day and ingrainedin their cultural norms and traditions. The armed struggle was also based on popularsupport with its attendant mechanisms and instruments of popular participation in thedecision-making process of the EPLF.

17 | P a g e

Eritrea’s labour laws also uphold workers’ rights and the formation of trade unions.
There were no government regulations, laws or directives that froze or prevented theformation of trade unions from 2008 onwards as the UNHCR report wrongly asserts.
The various trade unions have their own constitutions, elected leaders and activists andconduct regular and timely congresses, conferences, meetings and activities. Union
leaders are not, and cannot be, Government appointees by any stretch of imagination.
Recognized associations in the country include the following three categories:

Civil society associations contributing to the all-round national development
goals – National Union of Eritrean Women, National Union of Eritrean Youthand Students and the Confederation of Eritrean Workers;Interest groups established for promoting professional interests (Association ofEngineers, nurses, chemists, pharmacists, doctors, agriculture science, etc.), laborinterests (various federations and unions encompassing various sectors andtrades including in rural agriculture and women’s economic empowerment);
they have been instrumental in fulfilling their aspirations and at the same timeraising responsible participation in the nation building endeavors; and,

Organizations established for fulfilling special needs of citizens affected by arange of physical, intellectual and developmental problems in the society (theEritrean Association of the Disabled, the Association for the Deaf, the Association
for the Blind, the National Association of Intellectual and Development
Disabilities, etc.).

Hence freedom of association and assembly in Eritrea is respected by law and deeds.
But furthermore, it is essential to look at the harmonious social fabrics of the society andunderstand how communities and citizens continue to use the social and cultural
networks to develop cooperation, strengthen local networking and socialize extensively.
18. Freedom of religion is severely restricted for all but the four officially recognized religions,i.e. Sunni Islam, the Eritrean Orthodox Church, the Roman Catholic Church and theEvangelical Lutheran Church. In 2002, the Government required all religious groups, otherthan the four officially recognized, to close their places of worship and register prior to
engaging in religious activities. This invitation was not extended to certain groups,
including the Jehovah‟s Witnesses. An additional requirement to publish membership lists
has prevented some groups from applying for registration due to reprisals. …In addition, thepractice of one of the four recognized faiths is sometimes not allowed in the armed forces orduring national service…
As pointed out before, Eritrea is a secular state. Religious freedom is indeed
guaranteed by law. Eritrea has also a rich history of religious tolerance, co-existence
18 | P a g eand harmony in a turbulent region that is often wracked by acute religious
polarization and strife. Eritrea is also a pious nation where Christianity was
introduced in 329 A.D. and Islam around 600 A.D. The different Christiandenominations and Islamic faiths have co-existed with mutual respect and tolerance
for the last 14 centuries. Eritrean cities and town are indeed known for their
skylines that are dominated by minarets and church bell-towers and domes.
Asmara even boasts a Synagogue for the handful expatriate Jewish community.
Freedom of religion is not only protected by law, but it is also a tradition and culture
respected by every citizen.
Even within the confines of secularism, the Government of Eritrea has obligations toensure that centuries-old religious tolerance and harmony is not perturbed byexternally-induced new trends of Islamic or Christian fundamentalism that corrode
the social fabric. The Government thus introduced administrative regulations in2002 that basically request new faiths to declare their sources of funding. Most of
the miniscule new faiths did not want to comply with the regulations because they
have external funding. The Jehovah’s Witnesses had long forfeited their legal statuswhen they refused to recognize the “temporal government” after liberation and thereferendum process.
19. Islamic militants operating out of Sudan have engaged in a low-level insurgency against the
government, occasionally employing terrorism as a tactic in their campaign to establish an
Islamic state. However, human rights organizations report that they consider it likely thatmany of the Muslim suspects detained without charge by the security forces are being held
primarily for their views, including their criticism of alleged anti-Muslim discrimination or
their opposition to the government-recognized leadership of the Muslim community, rather
than for supporting or engaging in violence”.
This paragraph is difficult to understand. The Eritrean Islamic Jihad (EIJ) – which
has connections with Al-Qaeda and global Islamic terrorism – is engaged
intermittently in sporadic terrorist acts in the country from its bases first in the
Sudan and in the latter times, in Ethiopia. In the event, the GOE has legitimate
rights to take deterrent action against EIJ militants. There is no discrimination
against Muslims and the speculative allegations cited above are simply wrong. The
Government is not involved in the election processes of religious bodies and theirrespective hierarchies – the Synod, the Dar-al-Iftae, and other decision making
organs in the Christian and Islamic faiths. The paragraph above thus reflects total
ignorance of religious jurisprudence in Eritrea or represents recycled misinformation
originating from Eritrea’s arch-enemies.
20. Violence against women, including domestic violence and rape, is reportedly widespread in
Eritrea, despite criminalization of such practices. However, rape inside marriage is notconsidered a crime. (Article 589 of the ETPC)… When rape is reported, the authorities
19 | P a g e

reportedly encourage the perpetrator to marry the victim”. Furthermore, cases of domestic
violence are rarely prosecuted and no legal penalties for such crimes are enshrined into
law…. Failure to conform to conventional roles and the legal restrictions concerning
women‟s sexual and reproductive rights may expose women and girls to violence,harassment or discrimination…
Eritrea’s Penal Code contains explicit provisions for severe punishment against rape
and/or sexual violence. Eritrean women had played an unparalleled role in theliberation struggle and gender equality constitutes a fundamental pillar inindependent Eritrea’s political, social and economic dynamics and development.
Hence, there is no space for sexual slavery and widespread, systemic, violenceagainst women. Any repressive act is indeed accounted duly by the law whenreported, and appropriate measures are promptly taken. UNHCR’s assertion thatreported cases are not dealt with and that “authorities encourage the perpetrator to
marry the victim” is baseless and such a sweeping generalization is totallyirresponsible.
Victims of rape are not coerced or prodded by government authorities to marry theperpetrator of the crime. Furthermore, the culture of the society and the community
give much value and respect to girls and women and do not condone rape. This is
in fact one of the majors factor why sexual violence and rape remain insignificant inEritrea. Sexual violence and rape may not of course be always reported by thevictims due to social stigmatization which impinges on one’s reputation. To combat
this, civil society organizations such as the National Union of Eritrean Women andNational Union of Eritrean Youth and Students and local media outlets periodicallyconduct sensitization, advocacy, and consultancy programmes. The NUEW in
particular conducts advocacy services and actively defends the rights of the victims
through its legal department and experts.
Taking into consideration the above facts of reality, the following points are worth
mentioning:The accusation is an intentionally perverted reading of the rape laws ofEritrea. UNHCR has selected to view Article 589 of the TPCE as one
condoning marital rape. Any reader of criminal law knows that thecriminalization of marital rape is decided by a mix of individual, cultural andreligious factors to balance the interest of victims of marital rape withmaintaining the sanctity of families. Whereas Article 589 criminalizes only
rape commited outside of wedlock, there are ample provisions in the Penal
Code (for instance provisions that punish all forms of physical injury [Articles
538, 539, 544 etc.]) that protect the person and liberty of any person, including
women, from physical harms causes by any person, incluing their spouses.

20 | P a g eThe allegation that “When rape is reported, the authorities reportedly encourage theperpetrator to marry the victim” is again a deliberately misguided reading of thesexual offence laws of Eritrea, particularly Article 599 of the TPCE. Article 599
reflects the long-held customary laws of Eritrea which have the peacefulresolution of disputes at their heart and reads, without the need for theintervention of our analysis:Art. 599. - Non-prosecution in the event of subsequent marriage.
 Where the victim of rape, indecent assault or seduction, or abuse of her
state of distress or dependence upon another, freely contracts a marriage
with the offender, and where such marriage is not declared null and void, noprosecution shall follow.
 Where proceedings have already taken place and have resulted in aconviction, the sentence shall terminate forthwith (emphasis added).



It is hard to understand why a provision that, as such and with the free choiceof the victims of sexual assaults, allows the peaceful resolution of disputes
has been misconstrued to conclude that Eritrean criminal laws and theirpractice encourages domestic violence, including sexual attack, against
women or as a “[failure to conform to conventional roles and the legal restrictions
concerning women‟s sexual and reproductive rights”.

Furthermore, the allegation that “cases of domestic violence are rarely prosecutedand no legal penalties for such crimes are enshrined into law” simply reflects
ignorance, at least, of the criminal laws and their practices before Eritrean
courts. All forms of violence are prohibited by the criminal laws and various
means of redress are available through the Civil Code provisions on damages
caused extra-contractually.

21. In so far as the risk of persecution emanates from the State and its agents, internal flight or
relocation to another part of the country cannot be considered as available, given theomnipresence of the military, a well-established network of Government informants, and,generally, the State agents‟ countrywide control and reach over the population, including
through round-ups, house searches, setting roadblocks and targeting family members.
Consequently, where the agent of persecution is the State, the relevance criterion of theinternal flight alternative test is not met.
22. The Cessation clauses, effective 31 December 2002, were strictly limited to those who had fled
Eritrea as a result of the war of independence and the Ethiopian-Eritrean border conflictseemingly resolved by the Algiers Agreement, and thus, did not apply to refugees who had
fled for other reasons…. Since the 2002 Cessation Declaration, the human rights situation in
21 | P a g e

Eritrea has seen a sustained deterioration as illustrated in the present Guidelines which has
created new international protection needs.
Paragraphs 21 & 22 reveal and epitomize the critical weakness of the UNHCR’s
reports. These are the conclusions that the UNHCR has apparently reached on thebasis of false, recycled reports, without rigorous and independent verification.
UNHCR’s misguided advocacy of granting asylum to Eritrean migrants has in fact
become one of the principal pull factors for young people to leave their country; notbecause of political persecution but simply because of wrong perceptions of “muchgreener pasture” in Europe. UNHCR policy has also contributed to huge numbersof Ethiopians, Sudanese, Somalis and other Africans to pose as Eritreans because of
the ease and speed of the asylum granting process.
23. Eritreans who are forcibly returned may, according to several reports, face arrest withoutcharge, detention, ill-treatment, torture or sometimes death at the hands of the authorities.
(Footnote/reference: In October 2008, Ethiopia accused Eritrea of torturing 166 of those
returned by Egypt whom Eritrea determined were not Eritrean but Ethiopian nationals andwere subsequently repatriated to Ethiopia.
This allegation is simply preposterous and irresponsible. The cases in reference areperhaps the returnees from Libya and Egypt that occurred in the past througharrangements with both countries. Although in purely legal terms, those who leave
the country illegally commit an offense and should face appropriate, though lenient,penalties for breaches of the relevant laws, the government waived these regulations
to practically exercise clemency for the returnees. UNHCR cites Ethiopia forcorroborating its allegations. This is senseless, imprudent and only amplifies thelack of objectivity and professionalism that characterizes in general the UNCHR
2009/2011 reports and eligibility guidelines.
24. For some Eritreans, being outside the country may be sufficient cause on return to be
subjected to scrutiny, reprisals and harsh treatment.
No Eritrean is subjected to harassment simply because he/she lives abroad. The fact
is even those who have asylum papers come back to their country periodically forfamily reunion, vacation and other personal matters. Eritrea’s tourism is largely
based on the Diaspora who visit their country in Summer as well as during theChristmas, Easter and Independence Day celebrations. More than 85,000 Eritreanscome back for vacation every year and this number is greater on special occasions,as will be the case in 2016 when Eritrea will celebrate next May its Independence
Silver Jubilee. For obvious financial reasons, few families can afford to visit their
homeland each year and most people come every five-seven years. The figures
above mean that around 600,000 Eritreans visit their country every seven years. The

22 | P a g e

allegation cited above is simply incompatible with the facts and reality on the
ground.
III.

Additional Notes on the UNHCR ELIGIBILITY GUIDELINES (April 2011)
The UNHCR Eligibility Guidelines of 2011 repeat – albeit in somewhat new
formulation and packaging – false allegations on “government interference in the
Judiciary; government policy of denial of international humanitarian access tovulnerable groups; extrajudicial killings of draft evaders; persecution of
conscientious objectors and Jehovah’s Witnesses; collective punishment tofamilies of draft evaders” etc. As these have been addressed in part I above, weshall confine our comments here to new allegations that were not cited in the2009 Eligibility Guidelines.

1. UNHCR considers that individuals with the profiles outlined below require a particularly
careful examination of possible risks. These risk profiles, while not necessarily exhaustive,
include (i) persons avoiding military/national service; (ii) members of political oppositiongroups and Government critics; (iii) journalists and other media professionals; (iv) tradeunionists and labour right activists; (v) members of minority religious groups; (vi) womenand children with specific profiles; (vii) lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex(LGBTI) individuals; (viii) members of certain minority ethnic groups; and (ix) victims of
trafficking.
Most of the categories enlisted in the risk profiles have been addressed in theprevious section on the 2009 Eligibility Guidelines. The new categories not cited
before might be viii) and ix) regarding minority ethnic groups and victims of
trafficking. On ethnic minority groups, Eritrea prides itself for its unique attributesof social harmony in a turbulent region afflicted by acute ethnic and religious fault
lines and strife. This is the outcome of decades of purposeful work during theperiod of armed struggle and appropriate GOE policies hinged on even andequitable policies of rights and opportunities for all segments of the population after
independence. Victims of human trafficking are not and cannot be persecuted.
In a broader perspective, it will be helpful for the UNHCR to refer to independent
reports issued by third parties, including those made by the Home Office of theUnited Kingdom, the fact-finding mission of the Danish Immigration Service, and adelegation from the Norwegian Ministry of Justice. Observations published by these
foreign delegations that have actually visited Eritrea, demonstrate the huge discord
between the UNHCR’s conclusions regarding the various issues including thenational service and the realities in the country. In this respect, it must be underlinedthat the gamut of “possible risks” spelled out above is far detached from the reality
in the country.

23 | P a g e

2. In light of current serious human rights violations, as well as transgressions of international
humanitarian law during the 30-year war for independence from Ethiopia and subsequentborder disputes, exclusion considerations under Article 1F of the 1951 Convention and/or
Article I95) of the OAU Convention may arise in individual claims by Eritrean asylumseekers….(vii) members of the armed liberation movements during the war of independencewith Ethiopia…..
The insinuation that there may have been transgressions of international
humanitarian law during the war of independence from Ethiopia is erroneous,unacceptable and uncalled for.
3. Thousands of citizens and residents were reportedly expelled by both Ethiopia and Eritrea
during the 1998-2000 war, including an estimated 70,000 persons of Ethiopian origin
forcibly expelled or voluntarily repatriated from Eritrea. Furthermore, during that period,
many Ethiopians reportedly lost their jobs, were arbitrarily and/or unlawfully detained or
became the subject of physical attacks.
The inherent bias against Eritrea is evident in this paragraph. It is a welldocumented fact that it was the Ethiopian Government that officially initiated theforcible expulsion of Eritreans and Ethiopians of Eritrean origin soon after it
unleashed its war of aggression against Eritrea. Melles Zenawi, Ethiopia’s latePrime Minister, shamelessly justified the policy publicly declaring that we can expel
them “... if we don’t like the color of their eyes”. Ethiopia’s expulsion measure are,moreover, well documented (UNHCR can be provided with a factual document by an
NGO “Eritrean Citizens for Peace”) and recount harrowing stories of the deliberate
selection of elders, women with children, people with disability or chronic healthproblems, etc. who were forced to travel through unsecure borders and remote areas
in very dangerous conditions.
Eritrea’s National Assembly condemned Ethiopia’s inflammatory statement andmyopic policy in its session in June 1998. The National Assembly publicly
acknowledged that Eritrea will not reciprocate to expel Ethiopians from Eritrea in
retributive action. It announced that the full rights of Ethiopian citizens willcontinue to be respected as before. Many Ethiopians left only after the end of thewar in 2000. The orderly repatriation process of Ethiopians was carried out with the
ICRC as an intermediary. It is also worth noting that UNHCR report fails to cite thenumber of Eritreans expelled from Ethiopia in the above statement. Fairness andbalance should have dictated symmetry in the reporting of these events.
4. At the end of 2009, there were approximately 197,313 Eritrean refugees (103,798 persons in
the Sudan and 44,791 in Ethiopia).

24 | P a g e

These figures are not accurate. A recent, independent, study establishes that the
number of Eritrean refugees in Ethiopia is around 34,000. UNHCR itself is aware of
the large discrepancy in the numbers. While publically maintaining that Ethiopia
hosts nearly 107,000 Eritrean refugees, it privately informed the Danish Immigration
Service that the actual numbers were significantly lower. The Danish Immigration
Service (DIS) in its report writes:“Currently; UNHCR has registered a total of 73,680 Eritrean refugees in its Shire
operation. In reality, though, it is known that fewer Eritreans than this figure are
actually living in the four refugee camps in Northern Ethiopia.”
This is not surprising. Although the UNHCR provides the funds, it does not actuallyadminister the refugee camps in Ethiopia. The camps are administered by ARRA of
the Ethiopian Government. Additionally, although UNHCR conducts a validation
exercise intermittently it does not perform the daily counting and registering processitself. All refugees are registered by ARRA and the numbers are provided by ARRA
to UNHCR. UNHCR is also aware of ARRA’s involvement in misusing UNHRC
created asylum opportunities of transferring Eritreans to Europe and other countries
to transfer Ethiopians in the name of Eritreans.
5.

Group-based approaches may include, as appropriate in the circumstances, a range ofoptions from grouping together of claims of a similar nature in an accelerated process, to theapplication of prima facie group recognition, to the granting of temporary protection.
This is not appropriate and emanates from wrong UNHCR perceptions andunwarranted tendency to advocate bona-fide refugee status to Eritrean economic
migrants. The granting of refugee-status must depend on individual andincontrovertible evidence of persecution.

6. … The extent of the forced labour imposed on conscripts, the unpaid nature of their work andthe length of the military conscription imposed should also be taken into account. In May
2002, the Government officially introduced the WarsaiYekalo Development Campaign, anational social and economic development effort, which effectively rendered the national
service open-ended and indefinite.
7.

The Government reportedly uses human resources as a nationalized asset (HRW) utilizing
the labour of military conscripts under the guise of development programmes. There isevidence to suggest that most manual labour in emerging mining projects in Eritrea isprovided by military conscripts…Construction companies belonging to the ruling party arereportedly the main property developers throughout the country, and the large majority ofmanual workers on these developments are military conscripts…

25 | P a g e

8.

In situations of emergency, which would endanger the existence or well-being of the wholeor part of the population, conscripts (alongside other citizens) may nevertheless be called
upon to undertake non-military work. The duration and extent of compulsory service, as
well as the purposes for which it is used, should be confined to what is strictly required in thegiven situation. Where it can be established that compulsory military service is being used toforce conscripts to execute public works, and these works are not exacted in the case of an
emergency, and do not constitute a necessity for national defence or a normal civic
obligation, such work constitutes forced labour. According to the ILO Committee of Expertson the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, the “no war no peace” situation in
Eritrea does not amount to a genuine situation of emergency and, as such, recourse tocompulsory labour cannot be justified. The Committee recently held that the current largescale and systematic Government practices of imposing compulsory labour within theframework of national service in Eritrea are incompatible with both the 1930 Force Labour
Convention and the 1957 Abolition of Forced Labour Convention. (2010).
Eritrea does not practice forced labour. National Service members are not employedin private enterprises unless they are formally discharged. False accusations against
Nevsun have been exposed for what they are by independent, credible, third party
corporate responsibility audit bodies. As described above, National Service has been
prolonged due to continued threats and state of belligerency by Ethiopia. The
Warsay-Yikalo campaign was a development campaign that encompassed all
segments of the population. The appellation itself means the freedom fighters(Yikalo) and Warsai (National Service/post independence generations in unison.
The salaries of National Service may have been fixed at one level; but this is also thecase with all Civil Servants. Pay in the civil service – from the highest echelon to thelowest – has been frozen since the border war; it was the highest in absolute andpurchasing power parity (PPP) terms in the region prior to the war. This is a case of
burden sharing in harsh times of continued belligerency. To what extent the ILO
committee was aware of the facts is another matter.

9. Government officials reportedly monitor the political activities of the Diaspora, allegedly
harassing critics and intimidating exiled Eritreans into participating in pro-Government
rallies and paying remittances – the two percent “income tax” required of all citizens
residing abroad – for fear of reprisals against family members in Eritrea.
This is simply ridiculous. Eritrea’s diplomatic presence in few capitals – most ofwhich have skeletal and even only one-diplomat staff – can hardly be used to spy on
and intimidate the almost one million strong Eritreans abroad. This paragraphfurther illustrates the utter ignorance of the authors of Eritrean history and current
realities. Eritrea’s liberation struggle had galvanized the entire population, including
those in the Diaspora. The majority of Eritreans living abroad were organized incivil society groups and raising, especially during difficult times for the liberation
struggle, up to 20% of their monthly income out of their volition.
26 | P a g e

The 2% Rehabilitation and Recovery tax – which is small by those and otherstandards – was thus rooted in the above tradition and the commitment of Eritreansabroad to share in the burden of nation-building with their compatriots at home.
When civil servants in Eritrea have not seen pay rises for almost 15 years since theborder war and the National Service are shouldering similar responsibilities, thecontribution of 2% from Eritreans abroad is not onerous by any standards. In any
case, those who do not pay their tax obligations forfeit certain services in Eritrea.
Otherwise, there are no reprisals on their families back home; most of whom will
have met other obligations on their own right.
10. Although banned in 2007, female genital mutilation continues to affect an estimated 90
percent of the female population…. The incidence of child marriages is reportedly
increasing…
By law, underage marriage is totally banned in Eritrea. FGM was also legallyabolished and criminalized in 2007. Under the leadership of the National Union ofEritrean Women (NUEW), the law was broadly and extensively discussed by all
sectors of the society before it was promulgated and is being implemented
extensively with wide public support. There is also an ongoing extensive media andcommunity sensitization programme to consolidate and internalize the legal
provisions. FGM that affected 45% of girls under the age of 5 in 1995 has dropped to
12% by 2014, and is a promising trend for change indeed.
It does not require much analysis that this violence, including early marriage
practiced for many centuries, would require time and effort to completely stopthem. But the political commitment of the Government is there and extensive
mobilization and sensitization of the whole society for transformation that could
lead to fundamental changes is gaining momentum. In this respect, it is vital to notethat continuous monitoring on these issues is taking place by law enforcement
agencies and local administrations in collaboration with the communities andactivists on the issue and whenever reported is accounted by the law.
11. Although the principle of non-discrimination and equality before the law is enshrined in the
Eritrean Constitution, the Government‟s “one nation, one people” policy effectively promotes
cultural homogenization and reportedly discriminates against the way of life of minority
ethnic groups in Eritrea. (US Dept. of State). .. The Kunama are reportedly subject todiscrimination, harassment and other intimidating techniques. Historically, the Afar people
have also been perceived as ambivalent in their support for the EPLF….The new land policy
is seen as effectively undermining the clan-based traditional ownership rights of theKunama… The Kunama are reportedly particularly vulnerable to arbitrary arrest anddetention… the encroachment on Kunama land rights, severely impact on their livelihoods
and in certain cases, may be tantamount to persecution. UNHCR considers that members of
27 | P a g e

certain minority ethnic groups perceived historically as sympathetic to Ethiopia, particularly
the Kunama, may be at risk on account of their ethnicity/race and/or imputed politicalopinion.
The Government does not pursue a “one nation, one people” policy. Government
policy is in fact hinged on “unity with diversity”. This applies to religious andethnic diversity. The State is secular on account of these considerations. There is no
official language and every citizen has the right to elementary education in one’s
vernacular language. National Radio programmes and daily newspapers are printed
in various Eritrean languages.
As explained over and over again, the overarching government policy anddevelopmental strategy is anchored on the promotion of equal rights andopportunities. There is no discrimination, exclusion, restriction or preference madeon the basis of ethnicity, religion, social status, language, opinion, gender and race.
Equal treatment of all citizens remains the characteristic feature of the nation. This
is indeed why Eritrea is not afflicted by religious or ethnic strife. Eritrea in fact
remains an oasis of ethnic and religious cohesion and harmony in a turbulent region
racked by cleavages along these fault lines. This exemplary cohesion and unity ofdiverse groups is the result of positive political work during the decades of armed
struggle and prudent policies thereafter in independent Eritrea.
It is strange that the report alludes to the alleged persecution of the Kunama ethnic
group. The report’s reference to encroachment on Kunama lands is utterly wrong
and shows total ignorance of the land tenure system in Eritrea (Land Proclamation No
58/94). But UNHCR, along with the US and certain European countries, wereinvolved in the mass resettlement of Kunama refugees who were displaced during
the border war. The GOE had strongly protested then against this ill-advised andpolitically motivated act (copy attached).
IV.

Conclusion

The exposition described in the above responses amply illustrates that the UNHCR has
largely relied on secondary and biased sources for the Eligibility Guidelines that it
issued in 2009 and 2011 respectively. Flawed approach, erroneous data and consequent
bleak depiction of the reality in the country has thus led to blanket recommendations ofautomatic extension of refugee status to Eritrean economic migrants. This has in turnspurred a disproportionate number of Eritreans to leave their homeland under the false
hopes and expectations of acquiring with ease refugee status in Europe that is
associated, in their eyes, with attractive privileges in terms of free housing, education,
employment and other social benefits.

28 | P a g e

This is not confined to Eritreans. Tens of thousands of Ethiopians, Sudanese, Somalisand other Africans have been prompted to seek refugee status posing as “Eritreans”
due to the perceived ease of acquiring refugee status under this label. In Switzerland
alone, 40% of the estimated 5,000 “Eritrean refugees” are reportedly Ethiopians. The
Austrian Ambassador to Ethiopia also recently stated that 60% of asylum seekers inAustria are Ethiopians although they apply as “Eritreans”.
UNHCR’s utterly wrong classification of Eritrean economic migrants as “bona-fide”
refugees thus constitutes to this day as the primary pull factor that is contributing
largely to the influx of Eritrean youth to Europe. In the event, the Government ofEritrea requests the UNHCR to review and rectify its previous reports andrecommendations on Eritrea in light of the facts described above.

29 | P a g e