On November 11, France welcomed more than 230 people on board the ship “Ocean Viking”. Most of them had been placed in a waiting area in the Var. Franceinfo reveals the conclusions of a parliamentary “flash” mission on the reception of these migrants.
“We will draw conclusions, of course”, had promised, on November 22, the Minister of the Interior, Gérald Darmanin. Five months after the boat docked in Toulon (Var) Ocean Viking chartered by the SOS Méditerranée association, with 234 migrants on board, a “flash” parliamentary fact-finding mission delivers its conclusions on Wednesday March 29, which franceinfo was able to read in preview. The reception of theOcean Viking – after Italy’s refusal – had sparked intense controversy at the time, particularly on the far right, opposed to the landing of these migrants on French soil.
Led by Renaissance deputy Ludovic Mendes and National Rally deputy Julie Lechanteux, this mission focused more specifically on the temporary waiting area that had been set up on the Giens peninsula, in the town of Hyères ( Var). From November 11 to 24, the adults had indeed been placed in a holiday center, while the quarantine of unaccompanied minors had been taken care of by child welfare.
“We found that the rights of people placed in the temporary waiting area had been generally guaranteed,” ensure the two rapporteurs, while adding “having identified several dysfunctions that call for changes to our law”. Unsurprisingly, the two elected officials, who belong to opposite political sides, do not systematically share the same findings or the same recommendations.
“Completely suitable accommodation conditions”
Before listing their recommendations, the rapporteurs return in detail to the reception conditions for these migrants. One hundred and ninety people, including 171 men and 19 women, were received in the waiting area. They came from Bangladesh, Syria, Pakistan or even Egypt. We also learn that three people, “two Syrians and a Pakistani, likely to pose security problems”, have been “reported and filed S”. Of these 190 people, four were not admitted to French territory, 132 applied for asylum and 54 others left their accommodation without seeking asylum in France.
The cost of hosting these people is estimated at 123,000 euros “for the cost of food, accommodation, transport and for the provision of various materials and supplies” while 400 public officials were mobilized, as were 3,515 members of law enforcement and 300 association volunteers. The rapporteurs judge that the migrants received in Hyères “benefited from very suitable accommodation conditions”.
“In view of the conditions in which this temporary waiting area had to be created and managed, the record in terms of respect for the rights of the people placed is generally positive.”
The authors of the missionin their report
The two elected officials, however, point to several “malfunctions”. They denounce first “an event for which the public authorities were insufficiently prepared”evoking, for example, “the change, within a very short time, of the choice of the port of disembarkation”. The port of Marseille, for a time envisaged, had finally been abandoned in favor of the naval base of Toulon to accommodate theOcean Viking.
“It is essential that the choice of the port of disembarkation is better anticipated.”
The authors of the missionin their report
The two parliamentarians insist on the fact that “the choice of a military base as a space for a temporary waiting area remains isolated, exceptional”. “Spaces allowing the entry of associations and the press will have to be privileged in the future”, they write again. Other shortcomings: “the choice of a place of accommodation geographically isolated from the main structures” or “difficulties in accessing interpreters”. They propose in the future to set up “‘a ready-to-use plan’ for central and decentralized services” in order to allow them “to deal with a potential new massive arrival of migrants”.
Too many cases to judge on time
The rapporteurs also point out “a faulty intervention of the judicial judge”, who had only 24 hours to examine a record number of files. For 108 people, justice had indeed ordered the lifting of the maintenance in the waiting area, for lack of being able to rule in time. To avoid this type of situation, the report proposes extending this period from 24 to 48 hours. “in the event of simultaneous placement in the waiting area of a large number of foreigners”, but also to relocate the courtroom near the waiting area.
Finally, the two elected officials want “facilitate repatriation” by removing the free day from which the migrant benefits “before being rerouted in the event of refusal of entry into the territory”. A measure that would not deprive a person not admitted to the territory from seeking asylum at the border, they assure. In this case, “rerouting would then be suspended”.
