Malta still not in line with Massoud human rights ruling – Amnesty International

Amnesty International, the global human rights organisation, has highlighted Malta's opposition to amend laws considered to be illegal by the European Court of Human Rights, in its 2012 annual report.

No measures have yet been taken by the Maltese government to implement the 2010 judgement of the Strasbourg court in the case of Louled Massoud versus Malta, which found that "the Maltese legal system did not provide for a procedure capable of avoiding the risk of arbitrary detention pending deportation."

Asylum seekers whose claims are rejected on appeal before their 12-month detention period is up have their detention extended by a further six months, a situation which the ECHR ruled is illegal because there is no realistic prospect that any deportation takes place within those six months. Amnesty also said the Returns Directive as transposed in Malta, which provides for a common standard amongst EU member states when detaining and returning people who stay in a country illegally, excludes those who enter Malta irregularly. "The Directive would therefore not apply to the vast majority of those it was meant to protect," Amnesty said.

In its report, Amnesty said appeal procedures to challenge the length and legitimacy of detention in Malta, or to challenge decisions to reject an asylum claim, continued to be inadequate. "In November, the Constitutional Court found that the authorities had violated the human rights of two Somali men who, in 2004, had been forcibly returned to Libya, where they were tortured and subjected to unfair trials. While in Malta, the two men were denied an opportunity to apply for asylum or to be assisted by an interpreter. The two men were awarded compensation," Amnesty pointed out.

During 2011, more than 1,500 people arrived by sea from either the Middle East or North Africa, returning to the levels seen in 2009. Amnesty said that reports showed conditions in both detention and open reception centres to have worsened as a consequence of the number of new arrivals.

Amnesty reiterated previous observations from the Council of Europe's Commissioner for Human Rights who reported back in June the policy of mandatory detention of migrants and asylum-seekers was "irreconcilable with the requirements of the European Convention on Human Rights and the case-law of the Strasbourg Court."

The most recent indictment of Malta's detention policy came from the International Commission of Jurists, which Malta should abandon its policy of mandatory detention of irregular migrants and asylum seekers and significantly improve reception conditions. In its report of its study mission in September 2011, the ICJ said Malta's international human rights law obligations require it to provide decent reception conditions for migrants, even if they arrive in large numbers.

But home affairs minister Carm Mifsud Bonnici dubbed the report to be "warped", saying Malta's detention policy was justified in the present circumstances, and that its aim was to safeguard national security. "The overwhelming majority or irregular migrants reaching the country do so undocumented, as well as in disproportionately high numbers, as recognised by the International Commission itself."