COMMITTEE ON PROTECTION OF RIGHTS OF MIGRANT WORKERS CONSIDERS INITIAL REPORT OF ALGERIA

The Committee on the Rights of Migrant Workers has considered the initial report of Algeria on how it is implementing the provisions of the International Convention on the Protection of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families.

In introducing the report, Idriss Jazairy, Permanent Representative of Algeria to the United Nations Office at Geneva, said Algeria wanted to frankly discuss the real situation on the implementation of this Convention, their accomplishments but also the challenges. Given its geographic location, rich history and economic potential, Algeria was a true crossroads for cultural exchange. It had changed from a transit country to a destination country for migration flows, legal and illegal. Algeria had 4 million Algerians who were registered in consular services throughout the world and they had a ministerial department that studied this issue. Algeria was concerned about this population and it was for this reason that they worked with other countries to preserve the dignity of citizens, defend their rights and protect them against xenophobia, racism and Islamaphobia. At the crossroads of Africa and Europe, Algeria was also a transit country, seeing an increasing flow of migrants from approximately 30 sub-Saharan countries and also seeing an increase in migration from Asian countries whose migrants used Algerian territory to travel to the Mediterranean.

Myriam Poussi Konsimbo, the Committee Expert acting as Rapporteur for the report of Algeria, in preliminary concluding observations, said during the discussion, the Committee had learned that Algeria was a country of origin, destination and transit for migration flows, which made migration of special interest to it. The Committee also recognized the considerable efforts made by Algeria to harmonize its legislation with the Convention, but also noted areas for improvement, namely in the State’s data collection regarding expulsions and appeals, and statistics on human trafficking and its victims. The Committee also suggested that additional measures be taken to inform migrant workers of their rights, both Algerian workers abroad as well as migrants in Algeria.

During the discussion, which was held over two meetings, Committee Experts raised a number of questions regarding labour issues in Algeria. The question was posed as to whether migrant workers could call on union representatives to help them defend their rights, and Experts were also interested in hearing specific information about the future labour code that Algeria would adopt and how this would address the issue of migrant workers’ rights to join unions and their right of assembly. In terms of labour, Experts also raised questions about Algeria’s report in which it was stated that when an employer hired an irregular migrant this employer was breaking the law as was the migrant who took the job. What were the sanctions applied and how was the migrant affected? Experts also requested clarification on the number of bilateral agreements Algeria had which respected the right of social security and which social security benefits were exportable as well as the fate of a migrant worker’s family when he or she died, since the law stated that his or her work permit was revoked upon death.

The Algerian delegation consisted of representatives from the Ministries of Foreign Affairs, Education, Justice, Culture, Labour, and the Interior, and members of the Permanent Mission of Algeria to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

The Committee will release its conclusions and recommendations on the report of Algeria towards the end of the session, which concludes on Friday, 30 April 2009. The report of Algeria is the only report that the Committee will be reviewing this session.

When the Committee reconvenes for its next public meeting at 10 a.m. on Friday, 30 April, it is scheduled to discuss activities to commemorate the twentieth anniversary of the International Convention on the Protection of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families.

Report of Algeria

The initial report of Algeria (CMW/C/DZA/1) says that like other countries, Algeria is experiencing an influx of migrants. This phenomenon, which is assuming growing proportions, is prompted by various factors and incentives. These include the political situation (governance), the economic situation, the search for a better standard of living, conflicts, natural disasters and gaps in levels of development. Globalisation, the prodigious development of communication and transport and the role of trans-national networks of smugglers have exacerbated the phenomenon. The first population influxes from the neighbouring countries of Mali and Niger were recorded as early as the 1960s and 1970s. There was a second migration flow at the end of the 1980s owing to conflicts in the north of those two countries and the drought which ravaged the Sahel. Since then, irregular migration flows have continued, prompting Algeria to step up its control of land (7,000 km) and sea (1,200 km) borders, for which it has allocated considerable human and material resources.

According to available statistics, on average 7,000 illegal migrants are picked up each year on Algerian territory. Approximately 70,000 illegal migrants have been registered in the last decade. The number of people expelled has been estimated at around 20,000 between the year 2000 and the first half of 2007, while the number of foreigners refused entry at the frontier during the same period has been estimated at 42,284. In other words altogether 62,399 foreigners have been denied entry to Algerian territory.

Algerian legislation governing education and training does not in any way bar the admission of children of migrant workers in educational establishments. According to statistics, on 30 October 2006, 2,024 foreign children of school age were registered with the public schooling system throughout the national territory under the same conditions as the children of nationals. Among the 2,024 foreign children, 882 were attending the first and second cycle and 1,142 children the third cycle.

Presentation of Report

IDRISS JAZAIRY, Permanent Representative of Algeria to the United Nations Office at Geneva, introducing the initial report of Algeria, said Algeria had ratified the International Convention on the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families by presidential decree on 29 December 2004. From the beginning of the process, Algeria was determined to realize the principles and objectives of the Convention. Algeria was very aware of the scope of the rights that were included in the Convention and the Permanent Mission of Algeria to the United Nations Office at Geneva continually called for the ratification of this instrument and its universal implementation.

Mr. Jazairy said that the objective of this dialogue with the Committee was to ensure implementation of the Convention. The Algerian State would spare no effort in securing the promotion and protection of human rights without discrimination. As the Algerian delegation saw it, this was an essential condition of all democratic societies to ensure the rule of law, and these were priorities for the Government. It was in this respect that Algeria had given primary place to fundamental freedoms in constructing a modern State which were underscored by a humanist vision of society and a true desire to make the rule of law the motor of their continued progress. As such, Algeria was a signatory to eight human rights treaties and ILO conventions. Algerian authorities continued to work to harmonize national legislation with international standards and systematically ensure implementation. The choice made by Algerian society to enlarge liberty and freedom was an irreversible process, and they continued to incorporate international treaties into their national legislation, which in fact enjoyed primacy over national law, and to ensure the equality in treatment of all citizens and to not limit rights of migrant workers.

Mr. Jazairy said the delegation wanted to frankly discuss the real situation of the implementation of the International Convention on the Protection of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, their accomplishments but also their challenges. Given its geographic location, rich history and economic potential, Algeria was a true crossroads for cultural exchange. It had changed from a transit country to a destination country for migration flows, legal and illegal. There were 4 million Algerians who were registered with consular services throughout the world and there was a ministerial department that studied this issue. Algeria was concerned about its own migrant population and it was for this reason that they worked with other countries to preserve the dignity of citizens and defend their rights and protect them against xenophobia, racism and Islamaphobia. At the crossroads of Africa and Europe, Algeria was also a transit country, seeing an increasing flow of migrants from approximately 30 sub-Saharan countries and also seeing an increasing migration from Asian countries whose citizens used Algerian territory as a transit way to countries in the Mediterranean.

There were 107,000 legal migrants living in Algeria. An increasing number of illegal as well as legal migrants had entered into national territories in recent years. Certain migrants worked in the informal sector either because they were trying to get to Europe or they wanted to stay in Algeria. It was becoming more difficult for Algeria to face these increasing migration flows alone. This was why they believed strongly in addressing the migration question by using a global, balanced and coherent approach that took into account the relationship between migration and development.

Algeria was also sparing no efforts to ensure human dignity and fundamental rights of migrants and the Government was determined to protect the lives of its citizens, even those engaged in illegal immigration.

Mr. Jazairy also highlighted for the Committee the important role Algeria played in the regional debate over migration. The idea was put forth by Algeria to create an observatory for monitoring migrant flows in the Mediterranean. At the international level, Algeria had participated in several international organizations to discuss migration policy, including partnership with the International Organization for Migration. Algeria had a legislative framework that favoured addressing the situation of foreigners in their territory. Legislatively speaking, they had several legal texts which translated into national law the provisions of international conventions to which they were party. The main objective of the legal mechanism was to ensure respect for the rights of all migrant workers and their families and protect them against abuse and exploitation.

After reading the text which the Committee prepared, Mr. Jazairy said Algeria took several steps to harmonize its legislation with international law, specifically enacting the law 08-11 on the entry, stay and movement of migrant workers in Algeria. This law replaced ordinance 66-211 and represented a significant improvement over previous texts including reunification of families and legal protection for foreign minors and children. The procedure of expulsion was specifically addressed in law 08-11 and this took into consideration respect for human dignity and the right of appeal, which was decided on an individual basis, as the Algerian legislature did not authorize collective expulsion. The law also called for sanctions for those individuals involved in illegal migration, which aimed to protect those members of society who were especially vulnerable and eliminate human trafficking. For the same reason, illegal exits were criminalized because this practice endangered the lives of illegal immigrants. It was the right to life that was Algeria’s priority. There were additional laws that defended migrants against smuggling and could lead to imprisonment or fines.

According to Mr. Jazairy, Algeria also had protection measures based on agreements with other countries such as provisions for social security and elimination of double taxation. These accords were based on and incorporated provisions of human rights laws.

Institutionally speaking, migration was addressed in Algeria by several ministries, including the Ministry of Interior, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of National Solidarity of the Family and Community Abroad, the Ministry of Labor, Employment and Social Security, and the Ministry of National Education, Health of the Population and Hospital Reform. Given the transversal nature of migration, public authorities attached great attention to coherent management of this issue across ministerial bodies.

Mr. Jazairy concluded his statement by underlining the considerable contribution made by migrant workers and their families to the economy and prosperity of Algeria. They represented a rich diversity and the country was thankful to them for it. The protection and preservation of their human rights would remain a priority for Algeria.

Mr. Jazairy said that this initial periodic report gave Algeria the opportunity to underline the country’s dedication to this Committee, and how could this be otherwise when Algeria had 10-15 times more Algerians abroad than there were migrant workers in that country? The members of the Algerian delegation were at the Committee’s service to clarify and complement information in the report and they were prepared to listen to the Committee’s suggestions and recommendations.

Questions by Experts

MYRIAM POUSSI KONSIMBO, the Committee Expert acting as Rapporteur for the Report of Algeria, raised a number of questions for the delegation. She pointed out that Algeria had concluded quite a few bilateral agreements related to migration, and wanted to know if the delegation could provide feedback on the implementation and effectiveness of these agreements. Also, Ms. Poussi pointed out that in Algeria’s report they talked about irregular or clandestine migration, and she asked whether more information could be provided about regular migration to Algeria as well as further details on the expulsion of illegal immigrants from the country.

Ms. Poussi also pointed out that Algeria’s report seemed to imply that the protection of any foreigner depended on their manner of entry and stay in the country and that in order to be protected, the migrant worker needed to be lawfully present. She raised the question of whether this was contrary to the relevant part of the Convention, which talked of the rights of migrant workers irrespective of their migrant status. Ms. Poussi requested clarification about whether migrant workers must be in the country lawfully to enjoy rights.

Additional questions rested on freedom of thought, conscience and religion because according to Ms. Poussi the Algerian report seemed to make no mention of the enjoyment of migrant workers of freedom of thought, conscience, religion or the right to freedom of opinion and expression. These rights seemingly related purely to Algerians. In terms of migrant workers, were there any texts laying out those freedoms, were there any restrictions on the exercise of such freedoms, and if so what were those restrictions?

Additional questions posed by the Rapporteur included inquiries into the labour code and whether foreign migrant workers were able to join unions as well as what was being done about the children of irregular migrant workers born in Algeria. Did migrant workers put themselves in any danger by declaring the birth of their children if they were there illegally?

Ms. Poussi drew particular focus to the legal rights of migrant workers in the country and had numerous questions about the legal apparatus and its dealing with migrant workers. She inquired as to how legal aid worked in the country and how many migrant workers had already benefitted from it. The subject of the legal aid mechanism for ensuring migrant rights raised a number of ancillary questions from the Rapporteur, including: what did the Algerian criminal code state regarding attenuating sentences of migrant workers given their status? In other words, was their status as a migrant worker deemed to be an attenuating circumstance? If the answer was yes, did Algeria draw a distinction between regular and irregular migrants? How were individuals notified of expulsion? What form did notification take and what were the possible appeals against expulsion? Were migrant workers properly informed as to rights of appeal and if they were not how were individuals in question informed of appeals procedures? When people were assigned a residence pending expulsion, who paid the cost of the individual who remained in the country before they were sent back and how long could such a situation last? What happened to the individual who was ordered expelled but who could justify that they could not return to their country of origin and could not go to another country? Why not determine this status before the decision to expel them was taken?

With regard to migrant workers not being able to join unions, Ms. Poussi asked the delegation to provide examples of what was said earlier about how international treaties superseded national laws in Algeria.

Ms. Poussi also inquired as to whether it would be possible for migrant workers to participate in their community through the political process?

The delegation was also asked whether children of migrant workers and foreign born children had the opportunity to attend the school of his or her choice or were the schools predetermined?

Ms. Poussi then referred to a past event that the Committee learned of that raised the issue of migrant workers and the right to property. The Committee was told that in 1975 there was a mass expulsion of Moroccans who had been long time residents of Algeria. The expulsion affected about 45,000 families or 350,000 to 500,000 individuals and based on the information given to the Committee they were expelled inhumanely. The delegation of Algeria was asked if this account was in fact true and if so what were the causes of the situation, did the expulsion take place in conformity with legislation valid at that time in Algeria (was there a valid legal basis at the time), what were the consequences of the expulsion of these families and had the Government undertaken an initiative to ensure reparations of the victims of these expulsions?

The Committee was also told about unaccompanied migrant children and Ms. Poussi asked for further information on the situation of these children. Had Algeria tried to improve the situation of these children in terms of housing, food, or uniting them with their families? Did national legislation ensure that the Convention was applicable to refugees and stateless persons? On the question of Sub Saharan migrants, did they have the ability to appeal their expulsion decision, and if so could the delegation from Algeria provide more information on this? Specifically, what was the appeals procedure and were there individuals who were not expelled due to appeals or did their appeals have no effect?

Lastly, Ms. Poussi inquired as to how the work of protecting migrants was harmonized across various governmental ministries to ensure coherence in policy.

Other Experts who addressed the delegation raised concerns about the rights of women. It was pointed out that women did not enjoy the same economic and social standing as men as evidenced by their lack of rights to inheritance and other financial matters, the failure of the Algerian family court to outlaw polygamy, the low participation of women in the labour force, and the low levels of literacy for women and girls. Committee Experts asked if more information could be provided on these areas and whether Algeria had any programmes in place to address these issues.

The Committee Experts also raised a number of questions regarding labour issues. The question was posed as to whether migrant workers could call on union representatives to help them defend their rights and also Committee Experts were interested in hearing specific information about the future labour code that Algeria planned to adopt and how this would it address the issue of the migrant workers’ right to join unions and their right of assembly. In terms of labour, Experts also raised questions about Algeria’s report in which it was stated that when an employer hired an irregular migrant this employer was breaking the law as was the migrant who took the job. What were the sanctions applied and how was the migrant affected? Experts also requested clarification on the number of bilateral agreements Algeria had which respected the right of social security and which social security benefits were exportable as well as the fate of a migrant worker’s family when he or she died, since the law stated that his or her work permit was revoked upon death?

Following up on the issue of bilateral agreements, a Committee Expert pointed out that Mr. Jazairy said earlier that Algeria would like to give the treatment to migrants in that country what it hoped Algerian nationals received abroad. To further explore that sentiment, the Expert asked for additional information on the bilateral agreements that were in force, including the countries Algeria had them with and in what ways they had been useful. Experts also questioned how religious and cultural norms affected the law, specifically in terms of divorce and marriage rights?

In addition to the right of assembly, there were also several questions raised by Experts regarding the rights of person and property. Specifically, Experts pointed to the text of Algeria’s initial report that only allowed foreigners who were in the country legally could enjoy respect of his person or property. How did Algeria protect this right for irregular migrants? Migrants and their families could not be deprived of their property and even if they were expelled they must be compensated for their property. Was that true of migrants in Algeria or just Algerian migrants living elsewhere? These questions also once again raised legal protection questions in terms of expulsions and due process for migrants. For example, what procedure did Algeria use to expel the approximately about 30 foreigners per day who were deported? Was this a legal procedure and did migrants have the right to lawyers? If the migrants did not have money to pay for counsel, what provisions were made to give them the right to counsel? Were there any figures that could be provided on legal aid access by migrant workers? Had foreigners made use of their right to assistance to their diplomatic representative in Algeria? What practical measures were taken to ensure they had access to this?

Experts also pointed out that Algeria also had an outflow of citizens and they requested more information on the demographics of Algeria’s own migrant population. For example, what was Algeria’s approach as it was linked with development? In terms of Algerians who emigrated abroad, were they leaving rural areas or cities, was any statistical data on them available? Were the migrants who were coming to Algeria very different from those leaving the country? In addition, for migrant Algerians who were working abroad, how did Algeria provide social protections for those who were working in States that did not have social protections? How did the Algerian Government deal with this? The Experts felt this information was very important both from the point of view of protection of human rights and making sure migrant rights were respected.

Committee Experts also raised questions regarding the rights of children whose parents were migrants or who may be migrants themselves. Experts pointed to the penal code which stated that trafficking of children was prohibited only for the purpose of prostitution, and asked the delegation should trafficking not also be prohibited for both labour and sexual exploitation. The delegation was also asked if the law provided for any sort of help or protection for victims of human trafficking, such as hostels that provided counselling and other types of services. In terms of outreach, had Algeria developed any sort of campaigns informing people of the risks of travelling in an undocumented fashion? The Committee also had questions regarding access to healthcare and education for children of irregular workers. Specifically, what was requested of them to benefit from such access? Was the right to access to healthcare only in emergency situations or did it also cover primary health for example? What happened to migrants who were minors? Were there special detention centres purely for migrants, and if so were there minors there amongst irregular migrants? If not, where were they placed? Was any special care provided for Algerians who had been deported back to Algeria from other countries?

Other lines of inquiry by Committee Experts included questions on whether Algeria was compliant with the mandate of the International Civil Aviation Organization on biometrics and the issuance of machine readable passports and e-passports, whether the country worked with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in terms of looking out for undocumented and documented migrants, and whether there were any mechanisms that were used in obtaining statistics from these NGOs in preparing these reports.

Response by Delegation

In response to the questions, the Algerian delegation said with regard to children of migrant workers, the Algerian Constitution stipulated a right to education of all citizens and all people residing in Algeria. Education until the age 16 was free and open to all, so the children of migrant workers, legal or illegal, had every right to enter Algerian schools. Moreover, there were foreign schools sponsored by foreign countries and children of migrant workers had every right to join such schools as well and they enjoyed all the privileges guaranteed to Algerian citizens. Also, children of migrant workers were not obliged to take religious courses offered in school. With regard to practicing religious prayers and Islamic prayers, Algeria respected all religious practices, this was governed by law.

With regard to healthcare, it was secured and children living on Algerian soil were subject to all the vaccinations that were required for every child and the vaccinations were free and available for all children regardless of nationality.

As for NGOs and civil society organizations, Algeria had consulted with representatives from these groups although it should be noted that in Algeria there were no NGOs concerned with the situation of migrant workers.

Regarding labour laws, the 08-11 law considered all workers as people who received remuneration from employers, so there was no distinction between workers whether they were Algerian or otherwise. They had the right to social security, work protection, and right to settlement of work disputes. In terms of unions, it was necessary to be an Algerian national to join a union, but a foreigner could eventually participate in union groups and a foreign national could participate as a candidate in elections if they had been working legally in the country for some time.

Algeria adopted a law, 09-01, which changed the penal code and made human trafficking and migrant smuggling an offence. Minors could be protected and could receive assistance when their heath or other factors were at risk, and this was deemed to be the situation of an unaccompanied child without his or her parents and this could be instituted by judge, the prosecutor’s office or the wali. When the minor was a foreigner or migrant worker they were repatriated. If there was not enough information to determine the origin of the child they could be placed in protective services and they were classified as Algerian.

On the matter of bilateral agreements, the delegation said there were several agreements signed by Algeria with other States concerning migration. The first dated to the 1960s and 1970s and were signed with other countries in the region, followed by agreements with sub Saharan countries such as Mali and Nigeria. Then there was a third group of agreements signed with European countries and these were what were referred to as readmission agreements. Algeria had agreements with France, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, Germany and the United Kingdom.

Regarding social security, there were bilateral agreements signed with five other countries including France, Tunisia, Belgium, Libya, and Romania. These conventions also covered the areas of healthcare, maternity, death and indemnity, work related illnesses and family care.

In terms of inter-institutional coordination among different ministries, in the 1970s Algeria had created a committee under the Ministry of Interior to oversee the monitoring of illegal migrants. The committee included the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of National Security and the Ministry of Health, which all prepared reports on the movement of foreigners into and from Algeria. They also had committees presided over by walis, although the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was not represented in these committees. The Ministry of the Interior also prepared periodic reports which were sent to the Foreign Ministry.

The delegation also provided more details on the expulsion procedure. The person who was to be expelled was notified and they had between 48 hours to 15 days to leave territory or file an appeal. When an appeal was made this suspended the expulsion decision and this appeal could be made before the judge in question within a period of five days after the expulsion decision was made. The judge then had 20 days to examine the appeal and this had a suspensive effect. There was also the possibility under Algerian law to postpone the expulsion in specific cases as defined by the law, for example in the following cases: if there was a minor child involved, if the foreigner also has a child, if the child was an orphan, etc. The individual could also request assistance from their diplomatic mission for example, a lawyer or interpreter. If the migrant could justify their inability to leave Algerian territory then the judge was obliged to find another residence.

With regard to protection of goods and property of migrant workers, current legislation protected the property of all migrants whether they were regular or irregular in accordance to human rights treaties and treaties with other States. The delegation also addressed questions regarding the rights of women in terms of marriage, divorce and inheritance and recommended that the Committee consult the reports of Algeria on the relevant Conventions. With regard to migrant women who were mistreated or exposed to abuse, the delegation said they unfortunately had not yet received any complaints or grievances on this issue in Algeria. If the Committee had any cases of which they were aware, the delegation would be grateful for this information.

On the question of Algerian nationals returning from abroad, an inter-ministerial committee was responsible for receiving Algerian nationals returning to the country to help deal with all the problems relating to health coverage and documentation, but also with regard to definitive return to help these citizens be integrated into society by proposing areas in which they could make investments based on their qualifications and their choice.

With regard to illegal exits from the country, the delegation said Algeria had an essential obligation to preserve the right to life. When migrants left Algeria, whether Algerians or persons in transit, and they took the enormous risk of leaving on ships to Europe, the death rate linked to such choices was extremely high and Algeria had decided to incriminate these initiatives, particularly people who smuggled humans using these methods as well as people who acted irresponsibly by putting their lives in danger as well as the lives of others. When Algerian nationals who left illegally came back they were welcomed with open arms. Regarding rights to property, there was a general measure that spoke of abandonment of property, but this was irrespective of nationality or status.

Concerning refugees and stateless persons, they were not subject to the edicts of the Convention according to the delegation. There was also some question on differentiating between refugees and irregular migrants and there was review of that relationship to provide clarification which would lead to new texts to define the tasks to be assigned to the Algerian office that dealt with refugees. On the topic of travel documents, the delegation said that Algeria had taken a number of measures, including devoting a significant part of the budget to the issuing of short term biometric passports and staff training. Many migrants tried to obtain false Algeria passports so this was an important initiative.

Looking at sanctions levelled against employers, there was a 1981 law which governed this. They could be fined up to 10,000 dinars although the fine for the worker was not usually applied.

The delegation then addressed the topic of marriage and divorce and the rights of women in such cases. Either men or women could apply for divorce based on the laws of the family code. In the case of foreign nationals, their divorce was governed by the laws of their country of origin.

Algerian law 08-11 addressed the issue of the death of a migrant worker and what happened to their permit upon their death. The permit was withdrawn from the father, but the other members of the family did not have their permits withdrawn. Children of majority age had an ad hoc permit so the permit was not withdrawn from the entire family and the State was obliged to respect the valid nature of the permits. To renew the permits the State followed rules that applied to everyone. In an ambiguous situation permits were dealt with on a case by case basis.

In terms of the question raised about expulsion and consultation with foreign embassies, diplomatic representation offices in Algeria were informed systematically within an eight-day period about the expulsion measures taken against their respective nationals. All political rights enshrined in Algerian legislation were enjoyed by immigrants except the right to set up a political party as only Algerian nationals participated in Algerian political life while bi-national citizens could have access to the parliament. The law did not authorize foreigners to participate in local elections, this was also true in industrialized countries, but there was nothing barring migrants from belonging to local associations. They could not themselves create such organizations or preside over them, but the law did allow for the creation of foreign organizations which immigrants could preside over.

Turning to the expulsion of Moroccan immigrants, the Committee was not provided with full information, according to the delegation. There were also many Algerians who were expelled at this time, and the Algerian Government was looking into the issue further.

With regard to the nature of foreign immigration, the delegation said there were about 107,000 legal migrants in Algeria in various sectors of society. The penal code did not take into account one’s migration status, but the judge could take into consideration any attenuating circumstances such as someone living far from family, etc.

QUESTIONS FROM EXPERTS

Committee Experts raised additional questions on the report of Algeria. One question concerned the freedom and the right to belong to associations. Experts pointed out that Algeria had ratified Convention 87 of the ILO and had also ratified the International Convention on Rights of Migrant Workers and both provided workers with a right to belong to trade unions. The delegation was asked to please further explain the position of migrant workers in regards to these two conventions.

The Committee also wanted to know whether migrants who were citizens of countries other than the ones that Algeria had bilateral agreements with had protections in terms of social security, and also whether immigrants living in Algeria had the freedom to transfer funds or was this limited. Also, was there a mechanism in place for the transfer of funds because the Committee was aware that in many countries the cost of transferring capital was quite high?

In terms of the historical relationship between France and Algeria, one Committee Expert asked whether there was a mechanism in place to normalize migratory flows between the two countries, including receiving migrant workers from Algeria into France and also for the return of such nationals. The Experts also requested clarification on the total number of migrants in Algeria, irregular as well as regular.

Additional questions were raised about the re-entry into Algeria of Algerian nationals and whether the laws of illegal exit applied to them when they returned from abroad if they exited the country illegally. Also raised was what happened to third country nationals whose countries Algeria does not have readmission agreements with? What was the procedure for these people and did undocumented workers get their social security benefits if they returned to their home country?

The Committee also asked the delegation how were migrants informed of their protections and rights under the Convention? How did Algeria implement the Convention practically speaking? For example, had judges ruled based on the Convention, had they been trained on the Convention, and had there been awareness raising among government officials, especially since the Convention had primacy over national law?

In terms of harmonizing the work of Algerian Ministries regarding migrant workers, experts wanted to know whether the Ministry of Labour was a part of the inter-ministerial committee that addressed migrant workers and if not, why not? Also, how did Algeria determine who was a refugee and who was an irregular worker?

Looking at the issue of Algerians abroad, the Committee noted many were forced to leave their home country, not because they were persecuted by the State but because of armed groups, and they were not given refugee status as a result. There had been a new category of people created to deal with this scenario. Were these immigrants treated as immigrants or as migrants?

Regarding children of irregular migrant workers, the Committee requested clarification on what measures were taken to integrate these children into Algerian society and whether the law on human trafficking integrated a victim protection aspect? The question was also asked about where migrants were housed while awaiting expulsion, whether they were housed in special facilities and whether there were any statistical data on these cases.

The delegation was asked whether non-governmental organizations and civil society groups were allowed to participate in the preparation of Algeria’s report and how did the Algerian Government protect its citizens abroad to ensure they had social protections in countries where this might not be the case?

The Committee was also curious as to what role Algeria played in investigating the situation of migrants in the sub Saharan region and ensuring the safety of these migratory flows?

Regarding family law, the Committee asked the delegation what happened when someone without an identity document was married to an Algerian citizen. Could an irregular migrant without papers marry an Algerian citizen and regulate their status?

Response by Delegation

Answering these questions, the delegation of Algeria began by addressing concerns on trade union rights and membership. The State’s legislation allowed migrant workers to belong to trade unions and to be elected to head these trade unions, but it did not allow migrant workers to form trade unions. If a person was not an Algerian national, they could create an association, but a foreign one which was recognized under Algerian law. The Algerian delegation noted that this was a slight difference between the Convention and their legislation.

With regards to political rights, migrants had the right to participate in elections in their home country through their missions, but they could not participate in Algeria’s local elections. With respect to property rights, there were no restrictions and the delegation was not aware of any expropriation of property without compensation. Foreigners could enjoy property rights in a certain framework which required obtaining authorization to prevent the sale of property belonging to the Algerian State. Migrants could also transfer funds out of the country, although this applied to regular migrants. In terms of the commissions charged for transferring such funds, the delegation agreed that they were quite high. To this end, the Algerian Government was looking at setting up a network of Algerian banks abroad to transfer funds under more reasonable conditions.

Regarding statistical data, the State did not differentiate between complaints made by migrants and those made by citizens so those numbers were unavailable.

Turning to the question on the historic relationship between France and Algeria, the delegation said currently there was no mechanism for normalizing migration flows to France, but this had gone through several stages over the years. In the 1960s and 1970s the countries had labour agreements that were signed which authorized Algerians to work in France under a bilateral agreement. In the 1970s, Algeria decided to put an end to the migration to France based on xenophobic acts targeting the Algerian community in France. In the 1980s there was another perspective given which provided for the voluntary return of Algerians from France and that policy was accompanied by action by the French Government in terms of assisting returnees. This failed in terms of the numbers because there was not a significant number of Algerians who benefitted from that measure.

In terms of providing a total number of irregular migrants, it was difficult to have an accurate count. On the question of readmission of Algerians returning to the country, there was no penalty applied to them based on how they left the country or how long they were gone. With the export of social security benefits, when there was no bilateral agreement there was a basic social security regime and the Ministry of Labour did in fact work with the committee that looked at migrant issues.

The delegation then turned to the question of identifying refugees. The State’s High Commissioner for Refugees decided this matter. The problem that had arisen was how to differentiate an irregular migrant from a refugee candidate and the current procedure was something that was being worked out with the High Commissioner for Refugees.

With regards to providing social protections for Algerians abroad, the delegation said Algeria could not finance workers abroad; it only assured social protection for people in its territory.

The delegation clarified that the children of irregular migrants all had the same access to education and healthcare as citizens and that unaccompanied minors were not treated as criminals, but instead were treated as children who were in danger and given assistance in reuniting with their families and other social assistance. There were no special centres for victims of human trafficking but there were centres for abused women or endangered children, and these were provided by the Ministry of Health or NGOs, but there currently were no centres specifically for victims of human trafficking.

For those immigrants awaiting deportation, they were not put in a special residence, they must simply check in with the authorities every day.

Regarding Algeria’s regional role in the Sahara and migration, Algerian authorities had intensified their border patrols, put into place an illegal immigration centre, and they worked closely with the governments of Mali and Nigeria as well.

In terms of raising awareness for migrants of their rights under the Convention, the population was informed through the media and there was training for lawyers and magistrates. Also, Algeria celebrated the International Day of Human Rights and published all the human rights conventions to which it was a party and gave copies of the book to all law enforcement officers. There were also conferences, roundtables and seminars regarding human rights and the rights of women and children. Algeria also held a migration day that received broad media coverage and the State tried to promote the Convention on that day.

With regards to mixed marriages, these were ruled by legal procedures under the family law that was currently in place. Marriages between Algerians and foreigners required certain things. For example, this type of marriage was not authorized except with constraints on the foreigner such as religious restraints since Muslims could not marry non-Muslims, but this was a religious question. Only when an irregular migrant made their situation legal could they get married. Marriage without proper identification and proof of citizenship was not legal.

The delegation noted that Algeria was seriously undertaking the implementation of this Convention and the guarantee of human rights for everyone within its borders.

In response to another question on foreigners’ right to vote, the delegation said that foreigners could vote in elections held in their own country using their consular facilities, but they could not vote in local Algerian elections. The delegation added additional information concerning expropriated property or abandoned goods and explained that there was no link between the State’s finance law and migrant workers. When companies owned properties that had not been registered with local authorities and there has been a complaint against the owners of the property, this was where the law applied. Vacant and abandoned properties that did not have owners who claimed them could be taken by the State, but this had nothing to do with migrant workers.

Preliminary Concluding Remarks

MYRIAM POUSSI KONSIMBO, the Committee Expert acting as Rapporteur for the Report of Algeria, said that during the discussion, the Committee had learned that Algeria was a country of origin, destination and transit for migration flows which made migration of special interest to it. The Committee also learned the State had made considerable efforts to harmonize its legalisation with the Convention. Ms. Poussi stated that the presentation of this report would help to improve the practices for protecting and promoting the rights of migrants in Algeria and pointed out that one item that was not addressed was transit routes through Algeria. The Rapporteur stated that there was also room for improvement on the State’s data collection regarding expulsions and appeals and statistics on human trafficking and its victims. Ms. Poussi noted that it would also be helpful to create an observatory for migrant flows in Mediterranean for further data collection. Ms. Poussi concluded by saying additional measures should be taken to inform migrant workers of their rights, both Algerian workers abroad as well as migrants in Algeria.

For use of the information media; not an official record

CMW10/003E