By Harriet Ní Chinnéide, LLM student International Human Rights Law, h.r.ni.chinneide student.rug.nl 

Ireland has long and proudly proclaimed itself as the land of the famous “céad míle fáilte,” promising one hundred thousand welcomes to all those who set foot on her shore. Yet, this fantastical claim is in stark contrast with the harsh reality of direct provision, the current reception system awaiting asylum seekers in Ireland. Discriminatory, dehumanizing and detrimental to physical and mental health: the Covid-19 crisis highlights the deficiencies of direct provision. Simply put – direct provision needs be abolished.

What is direct provision?

Direct provision refers to the reception system for asylum seekers in Ireland. Under this system, asylum seekers are given a weekly payment of €38.80 per adult and €29.80 per child. Asylum seekers are housed in either communal, institutional style centres or in former hotels and guesthouses managed by private contractors in various locations, spread around the country. Some centres are located in very isolated and rural areas and asylum seekers have no input into where they are placed. They are precluded from looking for work or relying on other social welfare payments. Direct provision was originally intended to provide short term accommodation for those awaiting a decision on their asylum application. However the average length of time spent in these centres is 24 months and some residents have remained in them for up to 12 years. Centres are extremely overcrowded. Families are often confined to one room and single adults can be forced to share cramped quarters with people from different countries, cultures and religious backgrounds which may lead to conflict. This overcrowding is an increased cause for concern in the context of the current pandemic.

The Right to Health

Asylum seekers are provided with a medical card which gives  access to many healthcare services free of charge. However the right to “the highest attainable standard of health” as enshrined in Article 12 of the International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights  should not be conflated with a simple right to healthcare. In General Comment 14 (paragraph 11), the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) provides an authoritative interpretation of the right to health as an inclusive right, extending to the “underlying determinants of health.” States have positive obligations to ensure minimum standards are met under a tripartite respect, protect, fulfil framework. Non-discrimination is one of them.

The underlying determinants of health noted by the CESCR in the aforementioned General Comment include elements such as food and nutrition, adequate water and sanitation, appropriate housing and a healthy environment. Residents in direct provision centres often have no access to any self-catering facilities and in a 2014 report carried out by Nasc, the Irish Immigrant Support Centre, the negative food situation was found to be a continual stressor that “exacerbates the other multiple stressors faced by asylum seekers living in Direct Provision.” In the report, interviewees highlighted specific health issues caused or worsened by the nutritional standards of the food provided in those centres, whilst others complained that their medical dietary requirements were not met.

In the context of the current pandemic, canteen style dining facilities can make social distancing even more challenging. It is abundantly clear how housing plays a fundamental role in securing the right to health as overcrowding and communal style arrangements make it almost impossible to curb the spread of disease.

Direct Provision and Covid-19

The Movement of Asylum Seekers in Ireland has described the government’s response to the Covid-19 crisis as “shambolic” and criticised inadequate efforts to alleviate the exacerbated risks posed by the current pandemic. Figures from a report released by the Irish Refugee Council (IRC) this August show that 55% of respondents felt unsafe during the pandemic and 50% reported that they were unable to practice social distancing. In the words of one resident: “we are powerless, just sitting ducks waiting to die.”

Looking back on policy decisions made during the pandemic, it is hard not to come to the conclusion that differential standards are applied. The timeline in the IRC report shows that as far back as March 22nd, the IRC petitioned the government to remove vulnerable people from direct provision. This did not happen and mid-May there were 13 clusters and 171 cases of Covid-19 in direct provision centres. In August, at least 1600 people continued to share bedrooms with non-family members despite comments from the Chief Medical Officer, months previously, that doing so proscribes effective social distancing.

Over 30 residents in one centre went on hunger strike in July, following months of having their complaints about conditions largely ignored. Among other issues, they claimed that during the pandemic, despite a boil water notice being in place in the town, their supply of bottled water had been reduced from 5 litres to 2 litres to none at all. On foot of this, the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission (IHREC) issued a statement calling on the Minister to set out the measures being taken to protect the health and wellbeing of those in direct provision and to address concerns relating to the ability of residents to self isolate. The IHREC noted that “people in direct provision are at an increased risk due to Covid-19 because they have been placed by the State in a situation which does not empower them as individuals and families to protect themselves in the same way as the general population .” Provisions have since been made to relocate residents and close this particular facility.

The statement made by the IHREC echoes statements by the UN CERD Committee in 2019 which noted with concern the continuous failure of the state to provide adequate accommodation for asylum seekers and urged Ireland to take concrete steps to phase out direct provision completely.

 Where are we now?

The current government is committed to abolish direct provision and replace it with a new international protection accommodation policy centred on a not for profit approach. While this has been welcomed by the IHREC and the IRC, a need for real and immediate action remains to advance this ultimate aim and to tackle the ongoing challenges posed by the pandemic. The IRC recommends a review of current accommodation be conducted with a view to end shared living space with immediate effect. This should be coupled with a constructive internal inquiry into how the pandemic was handled up to this point and the implementation of an updated testing strategy.