11.03.2008 - Source: US Department of State

526,998 Sudanese refugees reside in neighbouring countries (Chad, Uganda, Ethiopia, DRC, CAR, Egypt, Eritrea, Kenya); more than 56,000 refugees returned home in 2007 ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2007") [ID 23227]

"The UNHCR reported that 526,998 Sudanese refugees resided in neighboring countries, because of the conflicts in the south and Darfur.

Some 231,000 of these were in Chad, and another 162,000 were in Uganda; the remainder were in Ethiopia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Central African Republic, Egypt, Eritrea, and Kenya.

Improved security in the south increased the return of displaced populations into areas of origin that were severely affected by the war and lacked basic services.

More than 56,000 refugees and tens of thousands of internally displaced persons from the north/south conflict returned to their areas of origin, particularly to the Nuba Mountains region and Central Equatoria."

Document(s): Open document

20.04.2006 - Source: Austrian Centre for Country of Origin and Asylum Research and Documentation

Situation of failed asylum seekers upon return to Sudan ("10th European Country of Origin Infomation Seminar Budapest, 1 - 2 December 2005: Final Report on Sudan") [#49770],  [ID 19057]

"Failed asylum seekers won’t face severe problems upon return, as long as they are not recognized as a threat to the state. However, if they are seen as a threat – there is no guarantee. In the beginning of the 90ies there were cases of people who just disappeared. A lot of persons who left the country after the coup returned from exile. Of course they feared that they would be arrested at the airport, but nothing happened. However, this does not mean that the situation will continue like this.

HS: In the past persons who left the country after the coup and stayed away for more than one year, would be questioned upon return automatically. This is no routine policy anymore; also the practice of arrests straight at the airport is not common anymore at the moment. Returnees might get visits from security officers later and be questioned or warned not to start any “funky business” in Sudan. I have no information that these people are particularly being targeted. Instead, some people who have been abroad for many years, maybe for political reasons, have come back to Khartoum. They are subject to close surveillance and they know that they cannot engage in political activities. They also know that they can be arrested, questioned, and detained at any time. They feel a little bit more secure if they obtained a foreign passport before their return. But if they are still Sudanese citizens, they have no protection at all.
There have been some positive developments, but the security is monitoring the situation very closely and it is quite unpredictable."

Document(s): Open document

12.01.2006 - Source: ReliefWeb

Agreement between Sudan, Kenya and UNHCR upon enabling 70,000 refugees to return to South Sudan from exiles in neighbouring countries signed ("Milestone tripartite agreement paves way for organized South Sudan returns (UNHCR)") [#41699],  [ID 13140]

"In an important milestone, the UN refugee agency on Thursday signed the first of seven expected tripartite agreements that will clear the way for up to 70,000 refugees to return to South Sudan in the first half of this year.

The agreement was signed in the Kenyan capital today between the governments of Sudan, Kenya and UNHCR – exactly one year and three days after the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) that ended 21 years of north-south civil war in Sudan was also signed in Nairobi. [...]

The UN refugee agency plans to help some 70,000 refugees (Including up to 10,000 from Kenya alone) go back to South Sudan from their exile in neighbouring countries before the start of the rainy season in May or June. Fakhouri said more may be able to go home during the second dry season towards the end of the year."

Document(s): Open document

10.2003 - Source: UK Home Office

Treatment on Return of Rejected Asylum Seekers ("Country Report - October 2003") [#17341],  [ID 13141]

"6.150 According to the report of a Danish fact-finding mission to Khartoum in 2001, in general, rejected asylum seekers with proper travel documentation encounter no difficulties when they return to Sudan. Consequently, they are generally treated the same as other returning Sudanese nationals. However, if a Sudanese national has been abroad for more than one year they are required to report to the Sudanese tax authorities on their return. Sudanese nationals who have lived in another country for a considerable period are eligible to pay tax on foreign income for the period spent abroad.

6.151 The Foreign and Commonwealth Office confirmed in a letter dated 5 June 2002 that there is no written decree in force, which states that returning asylum seekers will be arrested, and suffer ill-treatment, upon arrival in Sudan. The letter goes on to state that "there is a general feeling that the government of Sudan is encouraging refugees, immigrants, asylum seekers and opposition members to come back home.""

Document(s): Open document

09.09.2003 - Source: Integrated Regional Information Network

Plans to relocate thousands of Sudanese refugees from an area in western Ethiopia have been abandoned/ an alternative site is being sought instead ("Change of plan on refugee relocation") [#15911],  [ID 13143]

Document(s): Open document

02.09.2003 - Source: UN High Commissioner for Refugees

7 people injured as stone-throwing refugee youths staged violent resistance to the government-organised relocation of some 15,000 Sudanese refugees from Kiryandongo camp to to Madi Okollo in Arua district and to Ikafe in Yumbe ("Uganda: Relocation of Sudanese begins") [#15778],  [ID 13144]

Document(s): Open document

16.05.2003 - Source: ReliefWeb

Over 40,000 persons returned from the Northern Sector to Nuba Mountains and 20,000 refugees return from Ethiopia back to locations in Southern Blue Nile State ("WFP Emergency Report No. 20 of 2003 (WFP)") [#12774],  [ID 13145]

Document(s): Open document

18.12.2002 - Source: UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs

Access to land and property restitution ("Report focused on IDP situation, security issues and return of the displaced") [#10524],  [ID 13146]

"Access by returnees to rural land is not seen as a potential problem providing the
displaced return to their tribal areas where access to land is guaranteed through
customary rights. There is no shortage of land, albeit availability of water is often a
serious constraint. Moreover, customary law can normally resolve disputes over
access to rural land. In high-density agricultural areas, this may be more problematic.
In several parts of the South, displaced communities have been replaced in their
traditional home areas by IDPs from elsewhere. In such cases, access to land or reassuming
ownership of former lands, risks becoming a source of inter-community
conflict, especially in the event of any sudden or mass return. Such situations may
require a process of sequenced return movements that the authorities appear ill
equipped to promote or manage.
In urban areas, land and property disputes are more difficult to resolve. With returnees
coming back to urban areas, disputes over land rights and the restitution of property
are expected to rise. Statutory judicial systems are woefully under-capacitated to
manage this task, especially in the SPLM area where there are only 17 judges
currently employed. Consequently, support to strengthening the judicial system is
key to the reduction of potential conflict and the promotion of reconciliation.
Access to land presents a special problem with respect to the displaced that choose not
to return to areas of origin. It is incumbent, therefore, upon the GOS and regional
authorities to ensure that IDPs choosing to remain in an area of displacement have
equal opportunity of acquiring access and/or title to land that other local residents
have. To a limited degree, such accommodation is already in place in parts of
Khartoum where some IDPs now have title to land. Likewise, access to rural land has
been provided to IDPs choosing to relocate to the Sanam el Naga settlement scheme
in southern South Darfur. The appropriate authorities must be prevailed upon to
continue promoting such initiatives.
While the special considerations regarding rights of access to land and property for
women-headed households may not be necessary within most southern traditional
systems, this may be a problem in urban areas. More problematic will be the
determination of rights for children of unidentified parents."

Document(s): Open document
00979sud.pdf

19.09.2002 - Source: American University of Cairo - Forced Migration and Refugee Studies

During 1994 and 1995 more than 24.000 Eritreans were repatriated, but there was a large flow-back of these refugees back into Sudan ("Report on the Situation of IDPs and Refugees in Northern Sudan: Findings of an exploratory study September 2002 (by Gina Bekker)") [#12484],  [ID 13147]

"Eritreans
The repatriation of Eritreans commenced through a pilot bilateral project between COR and
UNHCR on the one side and the Eritrean government and UNHCR on the other side. During
the period between 1994 and 1995, COR stated that more than 24 000 Eritreans were
repatriated. However, there was quite a large flow-back of these refugees back into Sudan.
After the restoration of diplomatic relations between the Sudanese and Eritrean governments
the foundation for the repatriation of Eritreans in Sudan was laid. In April 2000, a tripartite
agreement was singed to repatriate Eritreans. Under the tripartite agreement, the repatriation
program was supposed begin in mid-2000. However, the renewal of the Eritrean-Ethiopian
border war in May 2000 forced authorities to cancel the return program before it began.
When the war ceased a new tripartite agreement was signed in April 2001. Mubarak Talha,
the Head of Protection at COR pointed out that assistance to Eritrean refugees in Sudan had
ceased in December 2001. In this regard, he acknowledged that this could potentially affect
the voluntariness of repatriation.
In February 2002, UNHCR declared the application of the cessation clause in relation to
Eritrean refugees. The cessation clause will take effect on 31 December 2002. Mubarak
Talha, the Head of Protection at COR, stated that the Sudanese government had reservations
in this regard, but that in spite of them, it had decided to continue with the process. He stated
that one of COR’s major concerns was the insufficient time frames for implementation.
At the time of my visit, UNHCR, COR and the Eritrean government had already started
conducting information campaigns on return, registrations for those wishing to return had
been open for just over a month and registration for screening had also just opened up. I
visited both one of the 8 registrations centers around the country as well as the sole
“screening center” in Khartoum, which had started screening applications on the day of my
visit.
The registration center was jointly staffed by COR as well as local UNHCR employees. The
day I visited, no one came to register. I was told that in the last 10 days before my visit, only
7 families (30 persons in total) had registered, most of whom were middle aged. The sense I
got from all parties concerned was that the majority of refugees were waiting for screening. I
was told that the first convoy would leave on 31 September 2002 from the East of Sudan and
that the first convoy from Khartoum was scheduled to leave on 3 October 2002. The scene at
the screening center was a far cry from that at the registration center. I arrived at about midday
and there were at least 100 people lined up outside the offices waiting to register. I was
told that persons registering would be scheduled for an interview for the following day, but
that waiting periods were likely to increase as more people applied. I was told that results
would be posted within 10 days, but that this would also in all likelihood increase and had
earlier been informed by Mamadou Balde, the Associate Protection Officer that written
reasons for acceptance/rejection would be provided to applicants. Applications would be
screened by teams of COR and UNHCR lawyers, who would make a joint decision.
Applicants could appeal to an appeals board if rejected. At the time of my visit, the appeals
board had not yet been constituted. I was informed that it too would be jointly staffed by
UNHCR and COR officials."

Document(s): Open document

19.09.2002 - Source: American University of Cairo - Forced Migration and Refugee Studies

Thousands of Ethiopians live in Sudan in refugee like circumstances, without any legal protection ("Report on the Situation of IDPs and Refugees in Northern Sudan: Findings of an exploratory study September 2002 (by Gina Bekker)") [#12484],  [ID 13148]

"Ethiopians
In February 1993, a tripartite agreement between UNHCR, the government of Sudan and
Ethiopia was signed in terms of which the voluntary repatriation of Ethiopians was
encouraged. This process continued up until June 1998, with large numbers opting to return
home.
As a result of perceived improved political and human rights conditions in Ethiopia, UNHCR
declared in March 2000 that Ethiopian refugees who fled prior to 1991 (most of whom fled
because of the civil war and human rights abuses during the 80s) no longer qualified for
prima facie refugee status. This in effect meant that this group of Ethiopians in Sudan either
had to repatriate or apply for individualised refugee status. The process of individualised
refugee status conducted by the Sudanese authorities in concert with UNHCR has been
extremely controversial (in particular complaints were raised about the neutrality of the
translators and quality of their translation during the screening interviews). Out of the
approximately 3000 applicants who applied, fewer than 300 were “screened in.” Those who
were rejected, are treated as aliens by the Sudanese authorities. COR officials stated that they
were given the opportunity to legalise their status in Sudan by obtaining national passports
from the Ethiopian Embassy and then obtaining residency from the government of Sudan
provided they met the criteria as set out in the immigration laws. This process is still
underway. In practice however, thousands of Ethiopians, unwilling to approach their
Embassy because of a well-founded fear of persecution and having been rejected in the
“screening in process” now live in Sudan in refugee like circumstances, without any legal
protection and as such are particularly vulnerable."

Document(s): Open document

19.09.2002 - Source: American University of Cairo - Forced Migration and Refugee Studies

Rrepatriation of Chadians, Congolese and Ugandans ("Report on the Situation of IDPs and Refugees in Northern Sudan: Findings of an exploratory study September 2002 (by Gina Bekker)") [#12484],  [ID 13149]

"Other groups
Chadians, Congolese and Ugandans are all being encouraged to repatriate to their countries of
origin. Even though the Chadian refugees present in Sudan are for the most part selfsufficient,
given the Sudanese authorities stance towards local integration, UNHCR has been
encouraging them to repatriate. UNHCR has also been working with the Ugandan Embassy
in Sudan to assist the residual Ugandan refugees to repatriate to Uganda. However, as
mentioned above, given the insecurity prevailing in northern Uganda, this is not a UNHCR
priority. As with the case of the Ugandan refugees, UNHCR is also working towards
repatriating Congolese refugees, particularly those who arrived 20/30 years ago."

Document(s): Open document

12.2001 - Source: UK Home Office

General political and human rights situation and information on the nature of asylum claims frequently received from nationals reported ("Operational guidance note - Sudan") [#7862],  [ID 13150]

"Returns
Failed Sudanese asylum applicants can be returned to Sudan but only to Khartoum which is the capital city and is in the north of the country. It is not considered safe to return Sudanese nationals directly to the south of the country as the ongoing fighting in the civil war is concentrated in the south. There is no internal flight option available to facilitate the movement of people from Khartoum to the south and vice versa."

Document(s): 01039sud.htm

01.04.2000 - Source: Danish Immigration Service

Entry into Sudan: anyone suspected by the security police, on the basis of questioning, of having engaged in political activities for the opposition, etc. risks ill-treatment, including torture ("Report on the fact-finding mission to Cairo (Egypt) and Geneva (Switzerland) (29 January to 12 February and 3 to 7 March 2000)") [#14024],  [ID 13151]

"In connection with the Danish Immigration Service's enquiries into the existence and application of
a reported Sudanese decree No 4/B/307 on admission of Sudanese nationals into Sudan, the
Netherlands Embassy in Cairo informed the Danish Embassy there in writing that there is no
decree, law or regulation with the number 4/B/307, by means of a letter dated 13 January 2000 (see
Annexes 6 and 7). The letter also states that Sudanese nationals who have been abroad for more
than one year do not have to report to the security service, police or any other investigative agency
in Sudan for an interview. On the other hand, those who have been abroad for more than one year
do have to report to the tax authorities in Sudan on their return. This is because Sudanese nationals
abroad are required to pay tax in Sudan for the period spent abroad. The tax is payable in foreign
currency. If they fail to do so, they are guilty of tax evasion and will not be able to get an exit visa
if they want to travel abroad again.
Fathelrahman (SHRO), however, reported that there is a decree requiring Sudanese nationals who
have been abroad for over one year to be detained on their return and transferred to security service
headquarters in Khartoum for questioning, regardless of where they entered Sudan. He stressed that
the decree remains in force in Sudan.
Fathelrahman went on to point out that the decree in practice applies to anyone entering Sudan after
spending more than a year abroad. There are no exceptions and the security police have standing
orders to make sure that everyone covered by the decree is in fact taken to security police
headquarters in Khartoum. He explained that many students returning to Sudan after having lived
in Cairo are thus taken to police headquarters in Khartoum for questioning.
The same source made the point that it is not the letter of the decree, or of the law, that determines
what might befall anyone taken to be questioned by the security police. The latter's own
interpretation of the law and the contingent circumstances prevailing at the time will decide the
consequences of detention and questioning for the detainee. Anyone suspected by the security
police, on the basis of such questioning, of having engaged in political activities for the opposition,
etc. risks ill-treatment, including torture."

Document(s): original document

01.04.2000 - Source: Danish Immigration Service

Risk of returning Sudanese nationals suffering abuses ("Report on the fact-finding mission to Cairo (Egypt) and Geneva (Switzerland) (29 January to 12 February and 3 to 7 March 2000)") [#14024],  [ID 13152]

"1.2. Risk of returning Sudanese nationals suffering abuses
Fathelrahman pointed out that, under the 1991 Sudanese penal code, the security police enjoy
immunity from prosecution. In practice this means that the security police are completely free to
act exactly as they like. Nor is there any law requiring the security police to seek a court order or
other judicial authorisation. He added that Sudan's present constitution, introduced in 1998, has
made no difference in this respect. Both the penal code and a number of other laws in practice
applicable to security matters in Sudan take precedence over the country's constitution.
Babiker explained that the position for members of the political opposition who have been abroad
for whatever length of time and return to Sudan is often far more difficult than for those remaining
inside the country. He pointed out that ordinary (rank-and-file) members of opposition parties and movements returning after time spent abroad who have engaged in political activities abroad, e.g.
attending conferences or other known political work, will be questioned about their situation and
activities on their return. They risk lengthy detention. In his view, SPLM/A members, in
particular, would risk ill-treatment in the event of re-entering Sudan.
More prominent members of the opposition, on the other hand, do not face lengthy detention on
returning. They will merely be questioned briefly about their time abroad. He put this down to the
authorities being far more concerned about reactions in the outside world when detainees are known
abroad.
Fadol (UP) considered that ordinary people returning to Sudan would not be questioned about their
situation, on re-entering the country, not even people who have been abroad for some while, e.g. a
number of years. This has been the case throughout the present regime's time in power. He added,
however, that people returning to Sudan from countries having strained or hostile relations with
Sudan would be questioned about their situation. At a time in 1997 when relations between Eritrea
and Sudan were strained, for instance, someone returning to Sudan after a stay in Asmara, in
Eritrea, was warned that he would be taken in for questioning on his return. However, the person in
question had well-placed contacts at the highest level in the Sudanese Ministry of the Interior, from
whom he obtained assistance in entering the country without any difficulty. Had he not had that
contact at the Ministry, he would have been unable to enter the country so easily.
Fadol added that anyone suspected by the authorities in Sudan of working for the opposition abroad
would risk being questioned and possibly arrested on returning. He could remember an incident
in 1995 when an opposition activist had been detained for nearly a week and there was no way of
knowing for certain whether people are still being detained in that way. Last year he had given
some thought to whether to let his wife travel from Cairo, where he and his family are now living,
to Khartoum in order to visit her relatives. He considered there to be a risk of the authorities not
allowing her to leave the country again.
As to whether expulsion of rejected asylum seekers from European countries to Sudan might expose
them to ill-treatment on arrival in Sudan, Leonardo Franco had no knowledge of any such cases.
He added that he was not aware whether any countries which had expelled people to Sudan have
carried out any kind of monitoring of their subsequent fate. He pointed out, however, that there is
in any event no chance of a returnee from abroad entering the country unnoticed via Khartoum
airport. The airport has few arrivals and departures and extensive checks are made on passengers.
Daoud, of the Royal Netherlands Embassy in Cairo, reported that the Sudanese authorities are not
interested in ordinary members of Sudanese opposition parties returning to Sudan. In her view,
only prominent active members of such parties may risk attracting the Sudanese authorities'
attention on re-entering Sudan."

Document(s): original document

09.09.1998 - Source: Refugees International

The lost boys ill-equipped for integrating into the Dinka and Nuer societies and vulnerable to forced conscription ("Sudan: The Lost Boys") [#16304],  [ID 13142]

Document(s): Open document