INTERNATIONAL MIGRANTS TRIBUNAL

Quezon City, Philippines

MIGRANTS ALL OVER THE WORLD
at
the
suit
of
MIGRANTE
INTERNATIONAL (MI), GABRIELA, ,
ASOSIASI
TENAGA
KERJA
INDONESIA
(ATKI-INDONESIA),
CARAVAN, VOICE REFUGEE FORUM
and
MOVIMIENTO
MIGRANTE
MESOAMERICANO
Complainants,
-versusGLOBAL FORUM ON MIGRATION
AND
DEVELOPMENT
(GFMD)
through and represented by the
heads of governments and relevant
agencies of the States forming its
Steering Committee, and all other
similar
formations
or
other
individuals,
organizations
and
entities acting or cooperating
under its authority and for or on its
behalf, name and stead,
Defendants.
x----------------------------------------x

JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT
The testimony of the witness, Ms. LUZ MIRIAM JARAMILLIO, is respectfully offered in
order to prove the following:
a.)
The personal circumstances of Ms. Luz Miriam Jaramillio, her qualifications as
chairperson of the IMA Europe section and knoledge of the plight of migrants in
Europe.
b.)

The situation of undocumented migrants in Europe.

c.)
The manner how Global Forum on Migration and Development (GFMD) has
further encouraged the criminalization and violations of the rights of undocumented
migrants in Europe through the European Union (EU) Return Directive.
It is respectfully prayed that the Honorable Tribunal admit this Judicial Affidavit of Ms. Luz
Miriam Jaramillio as the Direct Examination of the witness in order to expedite the
proceedings.

With the kind permission of the Honorable Tribunal.

(The Honorable Tribunal declares Proceed.)

Direct Examination Questions
1.
Good day, Mme. Witness, for the record, please state your name and other
personal circumstances.
A:
I, LUZ MIRIAM JARAMILLIO, Colombian, of legal age, for the purpose of this
action, utilizing the address of our counsel, Panel of Peoples Prosecutors, from the
International Association of Peoples Lawyers (IAPL) and National Union of Peoples
Lawyers (NUPL) at c/o 3rd Floor, Erythrina Bldg. Matatag cor. Maaralin Streets, Quezon
City, Philippines.
I come originally from Colombia but was forced to migrate to Italy to work. Now, I am a
migrant worker in Rome. I am also a migrant organizer and advocate. I am a member of
Comitato Italy, an alliance of several migrant organizations in Italy. I am also the
Chairperson of the International Migrants Alliance (IMA) Europe Section.
2.
Mme. Witness, you mentioned a while ago that you are the Chairperson of the IMA
Europe Section. Do you recall if you have executed any document in relation to this case
in your capacity as such Chairperson?
A:

Yes, I have. I executed a Judicial Affidavit in relation to this case.

3.

Do you have a copy of this document, Mme. Witness?

A:

Yes, I do.

4.
Your Honors, we respectfully manifest that the witness handed a document entitled
Judicial Affidavit.
Mme. Witness, what relation does this document have with the document entitled Judicial
Affidavit you mentioned earlier?
A:

It is the same one.

5.
On the last page of this Judicial Affidavit there appears a typewritten name LUZ
MIRIAM JARAMILLIO, and above the said typewritten name is a signature. Whose
signature is this that appears above the name Luz Miriam Jaramillio?
A:

It is mine.

We also respectfully move, Your Honors, that the Honorable Tribunal mark the Judicial
Affidavit and the succeeding pages as Exhibits A to A-8 for the prosecution and the

signature of the Witness as Exhibit A-9.

(The Honorable Tribunal states Make the appropriate markings.)

Now, Mme. Witness, as Chairperson of the IMA Europe Section, can you tell us what you
know about the situation of migrants in Europe?
A:
Of course. I intend to present my testimony on the situation of undocumented
migrants in Europe and how the GFMD has further encouraged the criminalization and
violations of the rights of undocumented migrants in Europe through the EU Return
Directive.
6.
What details can you tell us about the European Union Return Directive, Mme.
Witness?
A:
On 18 June 2008, 27 member-states of the European Union through the European
Parliament ratified a proposal on the deportation of what it called illegal immigrants from
the 27 member-countries of the bloc.
The measure took effect beginning January of 2010. Britain, Ireland and Denmark opted
not to bind themselves with the measure.
The return directive adopted a two-step approach: first, a deportation decision is made
and immediately followed with a voluntary departure period, and, second, if the deportee
does not leave, a removal order is issued. The directive has a maximum period of
detention of six months, extendable to 12 months. It imposes a re-entry ban of five years
maximum if the person is deported after the voluntary return period has expired, or longer
if the individual represents a serious threat to public safety.
The EU has set aside 676 million (US$1.1 billion) to implement the deportations,
including financing legal aid.
The return directive, which took years in the planning, is the first of three directives
integrating immigration policies in the EU. Two more directives awaiting approval with
the EU Parliament include: measures to promote skilled workers legal immigration (the
so-called 'Blue Card' directive) and another directive that would punish employers of illegal
immigrants, thus discouraging clandestine work. The 'Blue Card' directive was already also
ratified.
7.
What are the reactions of the concerned and affected groups on the European
Union Return Directive?
A:
The return directive, having large support from right-wing groups and politicians,
has generated so much condemnation not only from concerned migrant organizations and
advocates, but also from international organizations and progressive political leaders.
The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour criticized the new regulations,
saying EU countries would do better at ratifying the UN convention on the rights of

migrant workers. Amnesty International assailed the text adopted for not guaranteeing the
return of irregular migrants in safety and dignity. Greens civil liberties spokesperson
Kathalijne Buitenweg said the European Parliament had adopted a law that goes far
"below acceptable standards of civilization."
According to estimates, Europe has some 12 million overstayers or undocumented
migrants, many of them living way below European standards, and employed in often
dangerous, dirty and difficult jobs that most Europeans wouldn't do anymore. Among
overstayers are nationals from the Philippines, China, Ukraine and Latin America. In
particular, the directive has ignited outrage across Latin America because the measure
would affect an estimated 1.8 million undocumented Latin Americans.
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, Ecuador's President Rafael Correa, Bolivia's President
Evo Morales, Brazil and Uruguay have issued strong statements condemning the EU
Return Directive describing it a hatred initiative and called for its repeal as it attacks
people's lives and rights.
Wilfredo Ardito, director of the Peruvian human rights group Aprodeh, said that It seems
sort of two-faced for European countries to talk about fighting poverty, and then treat
migrant workers like criminals.
Carlos Alvarez, the president of the Mercosur trade bloc grouping Argentina, Brazil,
Uruguay, and Paraguay, said the EU should remember the past, when millions of
Europeans came to our countries victims of hunger, war, injustice and totalitarian regimes,
and were assimilated with no problems whatsoever.
The concern of these Latin American leaders on the return directive does not simply
involve the human rights of undocumented workers, but that the remittances sent back to
poor countries in the region, such as Ecuador and Bolivia, are an important source of
income.
8.
What are the reasons for the widespread condemnation of the European Union
Return Directive?
A:
Our condemnation of the return directive are summarized and based on the
following reasons:
a) the new EU ruling goes against the core of international agreements,
conventions and principles on undocumented migrants, such as the Parliamentary
Assembly Council of Europe Resolution 1509, the European Charter of Fundamental
Rights, the UN International Convention for the Protection of the Rights of All
Migrant Workers and the members of their Families and many others.
b) that the EU refuses to understand the fundamental reasons for the forced
migration of many, not only in the EU but also in other countries of the world.
Among these reasons are the economic, political and social conflicts in the countries
of origin of migrants, particularly the economic impositions of the advanced
capitalist countries that cause and exacerbate poverty, hunger, landlessness,
unemployment, economic and financial crises in many oppressed and
underdeveloped countries which in turn breed unbridled forced migration and

displacement of peoples in the world. These conditions leave the people of

oppressed and underdeveloped countries poverty-stricken and persecuted, without
any option: migrate or leave their country and family in order to gain safety and
survive.
c) the EU does not take into account the contribution to the economies in Europe of
these overstayers, who take on legal jobs that common European nationals don't
take on anymore, such as cleaning, care-giving and such other jobs that are
considered dirty, demeaning and dangerous.
d) many of these undocumented migrants send home money they earn that help
support their families and the economies of their home countries.
e) these undocumented migrants, in general, are law-abiding and live quiet lives
and are willing to fulfill their legal and social duties and responsibilities. Their
aspiration is to be recognized and regularized so they can continue to earn their
living without any threat of expulsion.
f) the long term solution to forced migration is to fundamentally address the
structural problems of economic backwardness, political dependence and
neocolonial enslavement of the home countries of these undocumented migrants.
9.
Can you explain to us the framework of the EU Return Directive and of the GFMD's
thrust to manage migration?
A:
The EU Return Directive or the forced removal of the undocumented was in the
making has long ago using the framework of managing migration flow to the EU. This is
the same language that the framers and promoters of the GFMD commonly used. Host
countries can manage, use and dispose of Migrants like any commodity.
The greed of monopoly capitalist interests motivates the management of migration to
exploit for maximum profits. This framework to manage migration flow is concerned only
with the migrant-receiving countries particularly the advanced capitalist states need
for migrants and their labor, and deliberately deletes from the arguments the compelling
reasons why forced migration results from imperialist-driven wars and the imperialist
globalization policies imposed on poor and underdeveloped countries that are causing so
much poverty, unemployment, hunger and displacement.
As Caritas International in its paper in 2006 on the undocumented so sharply stated:1
Wars, conflicts, persecutions, human rights violations, economic crises and
collapsed state structures and environmental and natural disasters are causes of
forced movements. The inequalities between North and South are accentuated in a
world where globalization plays an important role. In a number of countries people
dont perceive any improvement in their living conditions so they emigrate to places
where the conditions and the economic, political and social rights are preferable to
those in their country of origin. These perspectives are strongly encouraged by a
1

Undocumented Migrants: The Precarious Situation of Third Country Nationals Residing Irregularly in
Europe, Position Paper of CARITAS Europa, February 2006.

real demand for a cheap labour force in Europe.

10.
What are the effects of the European Union Return Directive, if you know, Mme.
Witness?
A:
The European imperialists drive to manage migration through building a fortress
Europe has resulted to thousands of tragic and unnecessary deaths on the borders and
within the continent, including deaths of people who were forcibly removed. The UNITED
for Intercultural Action, a European network against nationalism, racism, fascism and in
support of migrants and refugees, has excellently compiled a disturbing list of some
15,181 deaths in fortress Europe. Such is the fate of those trying to enter Europe, or
trying to resist their deportations. According to UNITED and other migrant and refugee
advocates, these deaths are not just 'isolated incidents' but are consequences of policies
at the national and international levels.
Today, there is a virtual news blackout in the European media on the deportations in
implementation of the directive. Very few incidents are able to trickle into the newsrooms.
But by word of mouth, we learn of the quiet deportations happening around us. In the
Netherlands, for instance, hundreds from Indonesia, Africa and the Philippines were
already reportedly deported. The immigration police allegedly has a quota. Circles of
friends would usually learn that a colleague had already been deported when he/she has
become a desaparecido, missing from work and the community. Very few are able to
contact their relatives and friends and some advocate groups once in the hands of the
immigration police and under detention.
11.
Can you give the Honorable Tribunal an overview of the situation of undocumented
migrants in Europe?
A:
Because they are an invisible sector of society in Europe, the undocumented
migrants live discreet lives and work in difficult, dangerous and dirty jobs that even
Europeans don't want to do anymore. They provide services that contribute significantly to
the smooth functioning of communities and societies in general. They always live in
constant fear of getting caught and deported, and deprived of their means of survival.
It is difficult to make a description of the actual situation of an undocumented migrant,
but a summary of his/her plight could give an insight as follows:2
Undocumented migrants suffer discrimination in regard to their human rights,
including: the right to adequate housing; the right to health care; the right to
education and training; the right to family life; the right to a minimum subsistence;
the right not to be arbitrarily arrested; rights during detention or imprisonment; the
right of equality with nationals before the courts; the right to due process; the
prohibition of collective expulsion; and the right to fair working conditions,
embodied by the right to a minimum wage, the right to compensation in cases of
workplace accidents, injury or death, the right to equality before the law (e.g. in
employment-related cases), and the right to organize. Due to the widespread lack
of legal protection and to their exchangeability in the informal labour market,
undocumented migrant workers find themselves in precarious employment
2

EMN 2007; LeVoy 2004; Anderson, P. 1999 for the UK.

conditions, as they usually lack any power and status and are in a very weak
position when they have to negotiate with their employers.
12.

What is the GFMD in actuality?

A:
The GFMD is a tool of collaborating states and governments in criminalizing
undocumented migrant workers and promoting the imperialist agenda of managing
migration.
13.

Why do you say so, Mme. Witness?

A:
It was not because of fate that the first GFMD was held in Europe (Brussels 2007)
at the time the EU was in the midst of finalizing the grand European imperialist design of
managing migration through the EU Return Directive and other similar measures.
Architects of imperialist globalization in Europe have in fact already timelined it. The GFMD
was concocted purportedly as a forum to discuss migration and development, but is in fact
designed to follow the monopoly capitalist design of imperialist globalization and managing
migration, and maximize the development benefits of migration and migration flows.
It should not come as a surprise that the GFMD's Steering Group,3 composed of
governments that are firmly committed to offer sustained political and conceptual support
to the Forum process and to the Chair-in-Office, and to ensure continuity of the process,
includes the biggest and most powerful imperialist powers on the planet, and governments
that have long passed-on their citizens as commodities for export, exploitation and abuse
abroad in exchange for cash.
Peter Sutherland, chairman of several Europe-based monopoly capitalist enterprises such
as Goldman Sachs International, British Petroleum and the Royal Bank of Scotland, and
who used to head the World Trade Organization the imperialist tool to control world
trade, was principally responsible for promoting the establishment of the GFMD. Today he
holds on to his business interests while sitting as UN Special Representative for Migration!
Even before the EU Return Directive, most European governments that are consistent in
promoting the GFMD, have implemented the worst policies against migrants in general
and the undocumented in particular, the government of Mr. Sutherland, Britain, is no
exception, despite opting to be exempted from implementing the directive. The
governments belonging to the EU in the GFMD, have not taken decisive measures to give
justice to the 15,181 victims of fortress Europe, or to publicly commit to prevent future
loss of lives, but instead are now vigorously promoting the forced removal of the
undocumented. Not that forced removals or deportations were not implemented before in
the EU, but that the return directive merely integrates all the initiatives of the EU countries
on deportations, making it more systematic and efficient, and under a stronger legislative
3

The Steering Group is comprised of governments that are firmly committed to offer sustained political and conceptual
support to the Forum process and to the Chair-in-Office, and to ensure continuity of the process. As the Forum evolved
from its inception in 2007, the membership of the Steering Group has also changed. Starting with only about 20
governments in Brussels, the GFMD Steering Group is now comprised of 37 governments, namely:
Argentina, Australia, Bangladesh, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Ecuador, Egypt, France, Germany, Ghana, Greece, India,
Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Kenya, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Netherlands, Norway, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Republic
of Korea, Senegal, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, United
Kingdom, and the United States of America.

cover.
Thus, since 2007 when the GFMD started in Brussels and then Manila, Athens, Mexico and
Switzerland, no one among the state representatives from the EU nor anyone among the
pliant civil society office-based groups ever raised a howl about the EU Return Directive
and the plight of the undocumented migrants in the forum that is the GFMD. Statefunded development agencies excluded and starved of financial assistance those
grassroots-based migrant and refugee organizations and groups truly fighting for the
rights and welfare of migrants and refugees so that they cannot participate in the GFMD
so as to allow the promotion of the agenda of the big businesses and enterprises.
14.

What actions have the affected peoples undertaken in countering the GFMD?

A:
Resisting the apparent exclusion, progressive, anti-imperialist and grassroots-based
migrant and refugee organizations and advocate groups banded together in Hong Kong in
June 2008 to establish the International Migrants Alliance (IMA). Upon the perseverance
and initiative of this global alliance, a counter to the GFMD was begun during the GFMD
meeting in Manila in 2009. This counter GFMD was called the International Assembly of
Migrants and Refugees (IAMR) and was instrumental in drawing into the counter-activities
not only the progressive grassroots-based organizations of migrants and refugees,
members of the IMA, but also those sincere groups and important international migrant
formations attending the GFMD that were seeking more answers and concrete solutions to
the problems and plight of migrants and refugees, that were sorely absent in the
blabberings in the GFMD.
From thereon in Manila up to Geneva in 2011, grassroots-based migrant and refugee
organizations have taken on the issue of the plight of the undocumented in all global
regions, and tackled particularly the EU Return Directive in Europe. The IMA and its
section in Europe have in fact an ongoing campaign to stop the criminalization, detention
and deportation of the undocumented and a call to repeal the EU Return Directive.
In a conference that Christian churches initiated on the monitoring of forced returns and
deportations in Europe held in 2007 in Germany, figures and actual cases revealed the
inhuman extent of the forcible removals of undocumented migrants in Europe, including
several reported deaths in the hands of the immigration police. In 2006, for instance,
there were 11,000 deported from Spain, 12,000 from France and 13,000 from Germany.
And this was before the EU Return Directive. The Brussels-based PICUM (Platform for
International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants) offers up-to-date information and
resources on the undocumented, including monitoring deportations.
In June 2012 in Stocklholm, Sweden, Tribunal 12, a Swedish formation, presented an
international jury of world renowned authors and experts and accused Europe of continual
violations of human rights and the systematic mistreatment of refugees, migrants and
asylum seekers. Its significant finding stated that the criminalization of refugees and
migrants is a political strategy that the European states use in order to legitimize breaches
of human rights. People are treated like criminals or worse, and are often subjected to
violence, abuse and injustice, Tribunal 12 emphasized.
15.
Lastly, Mme. Witness, what are your Pleas and Demands as the representative of
Migrants and Refugees?

A:
As migrants and refugees, we plead in unison and strongly demand that
this International Migrants Tribunal declare the GFMD obsolete and useless to
the cries and plight and struggle of us, migrants and refugees. Because of its
defeaning silence on the criminalization, detention and deportation of the
undocumented in Europe and on the EU Return Directive, the GFMD is guilty of
promoting the anti-migrant, anti-refugee and anti-people imperialist
framework of managing migration for the maximum profit of the monopoly
capitalists. Because of its inaction on the serious violations of the rights and
welfare of migrants and refugees, particularly the undocumented, the GFMD is
guilty of violating the United Nations Universal Declaration on Human Rights
and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms. The GFMD and the EU Return Directive are imperialist
sugar-coating for the massive violations of the human rights of undocumented
migrants and refugees.
We strongly demand a stop to the criminalization, detention and deportation of
the undocumented; repeal of the EU Return Directive; respect the UN Universal
Declaration on Human Rights, the International Convention on the Protection
of Migrants and Their Families; end political and military aid to politically
repressive migrant-sending countries like the Philippines and Mexico; and, end
all imperialist-instigated wars and conflicts!
16.

No further questions, Your Honors.

(The Honorable Tribunal affirms, The witness is excused.)

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature this 28th day of

November, 2012 at Quezon City.

LUZ MIRIAM JARAMILLIO

Affiant
SUBSCRIBED and sworn to before me, this 28th day of November 2012, in Quezon City.
I hereby certify that I personally examined the affiant; that she has voluntarily, knowingly
and intelligently executed the foregoing and that she fully understands it contents.

ADMINISTERING OFFICER