In January 1991, Somalia’s government collapsed, leading to clan-based conflict and widespread violence.^[1] Civil strife and chaos have since reigned, resulting in the deaths of thousands and displacement of millions of Somalis. Human rights have been grossly disregarded, leading to extra-judicial killings, arbitrary detentions, gender-based violence and exploitation, discrimination against minority groups, torture, and forced disappearances. The total refugee outflow from Somalia numbers around 400,000, and the refugees’ prospects for a safe return to their country are bleak.^[2]  

There are approximately 600 Somali refugees in India who have registered with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in New Delhi, making them one of the largest African communities in the country. Of the 600, however, only about 140 are officially recognized by UNHCR as refugees.^[3] Apart from specific refugee groups such as the Tibetans and Sri Lankan Tamils, that are protected and supported directly by the Indian government, all other refugee groups, including the Somalis, rely on UNHCR for protection and support, and struggle to live with dignity. 

There is no coherent legal framework in India for the care and protection of all refugees in India. India is not a signatory of the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol, nor is there any domestic legislation to guide the treatment of refugees. Further, there is no formal written agreement between the Government of India and UNHCR dictating the duties and obligations of either body.[4]  This has led to an unstable policy environment in which UNHCR must operate, and an insecure rights protection framework for Somali refugees. 

UNHCR and its implementing partners are mandated to protect, assist and provide direction for individual asylum seekers.^[5] However, this is easier said than done. To avail of UNHCR’s protection, Somali refugees must travel to New Delhi and apply for refugee status determination (RSD) at the UNHCR office. RSD is intended to assess whether those seeking asylum fall within the definition of a refugee in need of protection under international law. According to RSD procedures, each UNHCR office, regardless of staff and resource constraints,^[6] must incorporate certain core principles and standards into RSD procedures, including providing efficient, adequate, consistent, informative and confidential services by qualified representatives. These obligations are often breached. For example, Somali refugees usually endure exceptionally long waits between the date of registration and their RSD interview, typically ranging from six months to two years.^[7]  

Problems have also been reported with the interviewing process. According to UNHCR guidelines, interviews are to be conducted in a non-intimidating, non-threatening and impartial manner.^[8] But some refugees felt the process was rushed, that the interviewer often interrupted them and did not let them finish their responses.^[9] Some reported that the atmosphere during the interview was intimidating, or that the interviewers seemed disinterested.^[10] Many aspects of refugee testimony were not taken seriously and interviewers repeatedly suggested to the asylum-seekers that they were lying.^[11] Moreover, many refugees did no know how to interpret or process what happened during their interviews and were left disheartened and confused. Certain interviews also lacked qualified and competent interpreters, who even discussed confidential interview testimony in public.^[12] Although refugee status determination should “be issued within one month following the RSD Interview,”^[13] Somali refugees experience long delays in the status determination process.^[14] During these periods, they lack protection and live in fear and destitution.  

Several times between August 2005 and March 2007, UNHCR placed a blanket suspension of protection services being provided to Somali asylum-seekers. Thus, all processes relating to resettlement, registration or provision of subsistence allowance (SA) to many Somali refugees was halted. The suspension was without regard to the merits of each case. Nor did UNHCR communicate the reasons for the blanket suspension. Asylum seekers reported that as a result of the suspension, they were left foundering, without any support, basic education, health care, or assurance of safety during that period.”^[15] In the absence of documents, unrecognized refugees were at risk of deportation and harassment by the police. Refugees’ correspondence with UNHCR indicates that even after the suspension was lifted, the RSD process remains difficult, and is lengthier than before.  

One of the stated goals of UNHCR New Delhi is to encourage and promote the self-sufficiency of refugees.[16] To promote self-reliance, the UNHCR has embarked on a phase-out policy when it comes to the Subsistence Allowance (SA) given to refugees, in which the amount of SA is gradually reduced. As the term indicates, the SA has always been a very small amount that barely fulfils the most basic needs of refugees. As with refugees in general, Somali refugees are not legally permitted to work in India, and with the SA being ‘phased-out’, the refugees are left with practically no options as far as livelihood is concerned. 

Education is virtually inaccessible to most Somali refugee children. Government schools only teach in Hindi, a language unfamiliar to most Somalis. Private schools, however, teach in English, a language with the same alphabet as the Somali language, which children can adapt to quickly with the help of other Somalis who also are able to speak English.  Moreover, some Somalis are able to help the children with schoolwork in English, while virtually none know how to write or read Hindi. But private school fees are four times the UNHCR annual education allowance for each child. Furthermore, many private schools refuse to accept refugee children or have unattainable requirements. These obstacles in addition to others, such as daily bullying, coalesce to make school attendance virtually impossible for many Somali children.  

Finding a place to live in Delhi is another pressing problem. The refugees often face harassment from a xenophobic local population and the police. Also, few house owners are willing to rent out their homes to refugees. Those who do manage to find housing must make do with cramped spaces, with families often sharing accommodation, and are additionally burdened by increasing rents at a time when the SA is being phased out. 

Although officially, refugees are meant to have access to all government-run hospitals, in cases of emergency they often have to resort to private hospitals. However, UNHCR and its implementing partner, the Young Men’s Christian Association (YMCA), refuse to cover any costs incurred at private hospitals even when it comes to life-threatening emergencies.^[17] The refugee healthcare system set up by the UNHCR and the YMCA also offers no assistance in cases of chronic ailments. Refugees are provided with treatment only for a specific set of ailments listed by the YMCA, which does not even include influenza. ^[18]  

India is a colour-conscious society and Somali refugees are easy targets of racist taunts, harassment and discrimination. This adds to their discomfort and impedes their ability to earn a livelihood in the informal sector. They are thus more disadvantaged than many other refugee groups who are able to blend into the general population and can pass off Indians. When assaulted, the Somalis are threatened and instructed not to make trouble, compelling them live with the uneasy knowledge that they have no real protection. 

UNHCR presents three potential durable solutions for refugees, including repatriation to their country of origin, local integration in the country of asylum, and resettlement to a third county. The UNHCR office in Delhi, however, has made it clear that resettlement is not a right.^[19] From 2005 to 2007, during its suspension of action on Somali asylum-seekers’ cases, no resettlement was offered to Somali refugees. Voluntary repatriation is not an option for most Somali refugees. 

Refugees also report that UNHCR employees are often tactless, insensitive and handle their cases with disdain. The refugees are also concerned that although UNHCR appears to have an established system of meeting and having discussions with refugees, this arrangement only gives the appearance of dialogue and has not resulted in the amelioration of the refugee position. 

It is clear that UNHCR staffing constraints and resource limitations contribute to the difficult experience of Somali refugees. But the Somali refugee experience with UNHCR in Delhi includes not only innocent misunderstandings, but also direct discrimination.[20] 

It goes without saying that a more sensitive approach on the part of UNHCR is required. The refugee agency must also ensure clarity and transparency in the refugee determination process, improve communications with Somali refugees – including the use of more competent translators – and ensure that refugees are able to access the Office and its staff. The agency must recall that it is mandated to ensure that refugees not only survive but are also able to live with dignity.