Does asylum seeking in the Netherlands ring an alarm for the persecution of Copts in Egypt?
“So now Copts who feel persecuted in Egypt need take it no longer, not when a lifeline has been extended to them and they can look forward to a bright future in the Netherlands where they can be valued in their own right as human beings entitled to basic human rights.” For many Copts already fed up with the hardship they face day in day out at home on account of being Christian, that appeared to be the frame of mind induced by news of more lenient measures for religious asylum for Copts in the Netherlands. Add to that the fact that the community in Egypt appears to be quickly getting to the point where anyone or anything non-Islamic is anywhere between second- or tenth-class, and you get a feel of just how insecure some Copts feel, and how appealing the idea of an escape route may be.
But are matters really that simple? Would the case now be one of a Coptic exodus from Egypt that would make everyone happy: the final solution to Copts’ indignity at home and Muslim intolerance of them? Open arms welcoming persecuted Copts in the Netherlands to cries of “Treason!” from Muslims at home?
Nothing could be so misleading.
Human rights pact
In an appearance on the talk show Bihodou## (Quietly) on CBC TV channel, Bahaa## Ramzy, head of the Dutch Coptic Association (DCA), said that his association took up the issue of persecuted Copts with the Dutch government following the Maspero massacre on 9 October 2011 in which 27 Copts lost their lives, crushed under military armoured vehicles. The DCA met members of the Dutch government, including the Minister of Foreign Affairs Uri Rosenthal. DCA presented evidence and documents of cases of persecution in Egypt, in which the victims were never accorded justice by the Egyptian government.
The Copts of Holland chose to resort to the Dutch government because it is considered a human rights authority that has signed a human rights pact with Egypt. According to recent studies performed by the Netherlands, the Copts of Egypt, who could represent 20 per cent of Egypt##s population, are subject to human rights violations. For more than ten years, DCA has called upon the Egyptian government to investigate cases of Coptic persecution, to no avail. These violations reached their peak in the Maspero massacre in which military armoured trucks crushed the peacefully protesting Copts instead of protecting them.
Ramzy pointed out that the asylum resolution was issued by Gerd Leers, Minister of Integration, Immigration and Asylum Affairs on 11 July 2012. This was done after a 53-page study was presented to the Dutch government by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs explaining the situation of the Copts in Egypt and giving an impartial account of recent attacks against Copts.
Nothing new
Granting religious asylum in the Netherlands is nothing new, Ramzy said; it has existed for a very long time. The decision has to be taken while in the Netherlands, and does not automatically entitle any Copt for Asylum. What happened recently, he said, was an amendment to make the procedures and conditions required for granting asylum to Egyptian Copts in particular, more lenient.
The resolution discussed the urfi (traditional) conciliation sessions very commonly used by the authorities in Egypt to resolve sectarian problems, through which the Copts are obliged to accept out-of-court settlements in which they lose all their legal rights because the police and the judiciary seldom grant them justice. This implicitly acknowledges that Copts are persecuted. As a result, the government of the Netherlands exempted Coptic asylum seekers from the condition of having to provide official proof that they had to resort to the police for protection.
According to the new resolution, a persecuted Copt does not need official proof of persecution but can give other forms of proof such as a document issued by an acknowledged human rights association of the testimony of witnesses.
Because Coptic persecution in Egypt is not systematised, the Netherlands does not grant asylum to groups but rather investigates each case separately. Meanwhile, it is not possible to encourage an exodus of the Egyptian Copts by granting them group asylum.
A similar EU resolution?
The new resolution, Ramzy said, can help the Copts of Dahshur, who were forcefully evicted from their homes following the collective attack against them last month. The government obviously failed to provide them with any help or protection.
Ramzy reminded that the Egyptian government always turned a deaf ear to Coptic hardships and failed to protect them. A long line of events of attacks against Copts is witness to that, he said, from the notorious al-Khanka incident in 1972 up to Dahshur in 2012. Had justice been attained for the Copts in any of these incidents, we would not be where we are now. The only indictment issued was in the Nag Hammadi massacre of 2010, and rumour has it that this was because one of the slain victims was a Muslim.
Ramzy called upon the current government to reassure the Copts and start measures that would make them on equal footing with their fellow Muslims.
As for the implications of the new Dutch resolution on to the European Union, Ramzy said that a meeting is scheduled next October to discuss the issue of granting asylum to Egyptian Copts in all EU countries. The meeting is to be attended by all Coptic associations in Europe, with a view to limiting the cases of religious asylum to those in dire need for it in order not to empty Egypt of its Coptic population.
Gesture of goodwill needed
Michael Meunier, head of Al-Hayat party, said that in order to understand the problem of Coptic persecution in Egypt, the word persecution must be clearly defined. According to the International Criminal Court, “Persecution means the intentional and severe deprivation of fundamental rights contrary to international law by reason of the identity of the group or collectivity”.
He explained that the main problem with the persecution of Copts is the utter failure of successive governments to grant protection or bring justice to Copts. The fact finding commission sent by the government of the Netherlands, which came to Cairo on 2 June 2012 discovered numerous instances of violations against Copts, which took place for years yet went to date unpunished. Basing upon this, the Netherlands admitted the presence of religious persecution in Egypt.
Meunier partially blamed President Mursi for failing to set an example for non-discrimination. After his election as president, he appointed a Copt among his aides; but this contradicts his electoral promises of appointing a Copt in the higher position of Vice-President. He issued a pardon for radical Islamic cleric Wagdi Ghoneim who is an icon of intolerance. Mursi has also appointed a Salafi governor to Sohag governorate which is known to be home to the highest population of Christians in Egypt.
If he is serious about his goodwill towards Copts, Meunier said, President Mursi ought to work to pass the long-awaited anti-discrimination law and the unified law for places of worship.
Coptic exodus?
Dr Emad Gad, vice president of Al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies, said that according to the international definition of persecution, we can confirm that the Copts are highly persecuted. Meanwhile, he said, we consider this a domestic problem and do not welcome any discussion of it internationally.
Gad said he wished the Dutch government would have surveyed the Egyptian street about the asylum decision because Copts long for establishing justice and tolerance rather than fleeing their homeland.
He expressed his fear over a possible exodus of Copts from Egypt. Referring to the famous film of the Egyptian cinema, he said that many years ago, “Hassan, Morqos and Cohen” lived in harmony in Egypt; they were unfortunately reduced to “Hassan and Morqos”. The greatest fear now, Gad said, is that Hassan alone would remain in Egypt in the near future.
BOX
The Embassy of the Netherlands in Egypt issued a press release which it posted online concerning religious asylum for the Copts.
The document criticised the mishandling of the topic in the Egyptian media and offered a clarification of the matter.
The document reads that The Netherlands Ministry of Interior Affairs and Kingdom Relations wishes to state that “There has been no decision by Dutch Parliament to grant asylum to Egyptian Christians as a matter of course.
“There has been a Government decision on a change in the asylum procedure. This applies only to Egyptian Christians who are already in the Netherlands.
“Egyptian Christians present in the Netherlands can apply for asylum and will be asked to provide proof of persecution. Every request for asylum by Egyptian Christians will be assessed on its own merit as in the case for any asylum seeker in the Netherlands. It remains up to each Egyptian Christian individually to demonstrate that he/she is in need of international protection. This has always been the Dutch asylum policy for all asylum seekers including Egyptian Christians.
“The change in the procedure as it applies to Egyptian Christians was decided upon on July 11, 2012 by the Netherlands Minister of Immigration, Asylum and Integration and entails the following: in case an individual Egyptian Christian asylum seeker can make a plausible case that there is a risk of a breach of article 3 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms or that he/she is persecuted as described in the United Nations 1951 Refugee Convention, he/she does not need to demonstrate that he/she asked the Egyptian authorities for protection.
“A single decision by the Dutch authorities on an individual case concerning an asylum seeker does not imply any assessment of the functioning of the rule of law in general in the alien’s country of origin.”
WATANI International
23 September 2012