bodyType

customContents

entityId

entityUuid

articlePageQuery

filter

article

articleBaseAdvertisingInfoArticle

articleListArticle

articleSeoArticle

hooksArticleAcknowledgementGateOverlayArticle

hooksTrackPageViewArticle

hooksContentInterestArticle

articleLinkingDataContent

hooksAmpRedirectArticle

articleSchemaContent

liveArticle

advertZone

sentiment

contentLock

topics

types

sections

paywallTypes

createdDate

publishedDate

sponsorType

urlAlias

moreOnThisArticles

commentCount

authorLocations

authors

corrections

displaySlideShow

multimediaEmbed

printHeadline

seriesContainer

articleSpeeches

socialHeadline

headline

images

flag

firstTopic

glossary

flattenTypeIds

image

relatedLinks

relatedNewsletters

__typename

sponsor

pdfFiles

seriesReverseOrder

series

disableOffPlatformContent

published

updatedDate

summary

subHeadline

body

keywords

readingTime

customTimezone

liveContents

Victoria Finlay

FIVE years after the screening process for Vietnamese boat people was introduced, the Government has come under fire for leaving hundreds of legitimate refugees stranded in Hongkong.

  Today there are 1,988 refugees at Pillar Point - Hongkong's last refugee camp.

  Six months ago there were 2,709, and many of those left know that their hopes of starting a new life abroad are dwindling.

  Some are drug addicts, others petty criminals, and many of the adults have in some way or other disqualified themselves from attaining citizenship in most or all resettlement countries.

  They are the unwanted ones, and their fate has become an internationally sensitive issue that neither the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), nor the Hongkong Government are yet willing to tackle.

  ''We will have to find a solution, obviously, if there is no country willing to take them,'' said UNHCR chief of mission Robert Van Leeuwen.

  ''There always will be some people who cannot be resettled, but we will cross that bridge when we get to it.''   Although there was no set time-scale for that decision to be made, he ''certainly hoped'' it would be decided within the next two years.

  He said many of the residents of Pillar Point had arrived in Hongkong before the screening programme started in 1988, so were de facto refugees. Others had been screened in before the regional transit camps had been introduced.

  Mr Van Leeuwen said there were not many options for refugees if resettlement countries refused to take them.

  ''A decision to send back people who are either de facto or de jure refugees is not one to be lightly made,'' he said.

  However Mr Van Leeuwen was unwilling to speculate on whether it was likely that they would have to be absorbed by Hongkong.

  Refugee Co-ordinator Brian Bresnihan said the Government was still trying to persuade consulates to take the refugees.

  ''But the caseload is becoming less attractive, and it is harder to place [the refugees] in countries that will agree to take them.''   The Government and the UNHCR came under fire from legislators this week for not applying enough pressure to resettlement countries to take Hongkong's unwanted refugees.

  ''There is still a hard core of refugees living at Pillar Point who might not find anywhere else to live,'' said United Democrat, James To Kun-sun.

  ''I find that extremely worrying . . . and it appears that the UNHCR and the Government are not doing enough to solve the problem.

  ''The problem has to be solved - sensitively - before 1997. The Chinese have always said this is a UK problem and not a Chinese one, so they won't want to have to find the solution,'' Mr To said.

  ''Hongkong agreed to give them first asylum, but other countries have agreed to give them new homes - they should keep those promises, and the UNHCR should make sure they do.''   Independent Legislative Councillor Hui Yin-fat agreed: ''The countries agreed to take all the refugees.

  ''They did not spell out that they would not take people because they had been criminals, prostitutes, drug addicts or soldiers.

  ''If they are now trying to change their minds, the Hongkong Government should persuade them not to. Maybe it is not trying hard enough.''   He said that whether Hongkong offered to keep the refugees or not: ''These people don't want to stay here anyway. They want to go to California, not to Hongkong.''   Fellow legislator Elsie Tu said she would present a written question to the Legislative Council this month to ask about the future of the Pillar Point refugees.

  ''I'd like to know exactly what is going to happen to them,'' she said.

  ''These are the forgotten people; we never hear about them.''   She said that while the issues of the detention centres and the screening process had been widely covered and commented on, ''nobody talks about the ones that are refugees and cannot find homes''.

  ''But if they are criminals, we certainly don't want them to stay here in Hongkong indefinitely,'' she said.

  Legislative councillor, Martin Barrow, said he hoped the Pillar Point refugees found countries willing to resettle them very soon.

  ''They are entitled to live elsewhere - they are refugees, and there is no basis for them to have to go back to Vietnam, although maybe some of them will want to if Vietnam's own situation improves.''   He said Hongkong should consider resettling some of the refugees, if nowhere else would have them. ''We would have to look at it from a case to case basis,'' he said.

  ''After all, Hongkong does need more people, and no doubt some of [the refugees] can already speak Cantonese.'' 



Plight of unwanted refugees stirs anger at official inertia