A.

Summary of the Topic

Xenophobia and Bigotry, highlighted the rising level of hate and prejudices
which caused the discrimination, threats, and inequality faced by migrants in a
foreign country, in which the migrants does not have any sufficient access to social
protection, and the sense of acceptance from the society. Most of the prejudices
raised towards migrants by a few main factors which is the prejudices from locals
towards migrants they considered as a threat to their original culture, and scaring the
effects from migrants in a form of destruction of the original local culture carried out
by migrants. Also not to forget about the security issue such as terrorist attacks
carried out by terrorist and implanted to the migrants flow which caused the rising
tension and negative stigma that migrants are terrorists, therefore, this kind of
problem and stigma should be eliminated
Therefore, SOCHUM should discuss about the handlement of the issue to
ensure equality, and acceptance also to eliminate negative stigma and prejudices
also negative judgment from locals towards migrants. And the importance of the
fundamental rights freedom for every migrant to gain equal access in a country.

B. Introduction to the Council

1. United Nations General Assembly (UNGA)
United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) is one of the six principal organs of
the United Nations system as a whole. The UNGA itself is the only committee in the
UN where all member states has their equal representation and voting rights, UNGA
itself also held the mandate to appoint a member of the Security Council, and to
oversee the budget of the UN. UNGA itself already established many subsidiary
organs of the United Nations since their establishment. The General Assembly
meets annually in September until the middle of January under the President of the
GA and the Secretary-General. UNGA itself consist of 6 main principal committee
which are (UN “Main Committees):
a. 1st Committee : Disarmament and International Security (DISEC)
b. 2nd Committee : Economic and Financial (ECOFIN)
c. 3rd Committee : Social, Humanitarian, and Cultural (SOCHUM)
d. 4th Committee : Special Political and Decolonization (SPECPOL)
e. 5th Committee : Administrative Budgetary and General
 f. 6th Committee : Legal Committee

UNGA itself uphold the principle of “One County One Vote” where all
member states have equal rights and power to vote under the two-third majority
voting system. Furthermore, the resolution adopted by the General Assembly was
brought forth by sponsoring states. These are generally statements symbolizing the
sense of the international community about an array of world issues. Most General
Assembly resolutions are not enforceable as a legal or practical matter, because the
General Assembly lacks enforcement powers with respect to most issues. The
General Assembly has authority to make final decisions in some areas such as the
United Nations budget. Although the General Assembly Resolutions are generally
non-binding on member states, but carry considerable political weight, and are
legally binding towards the operations of the General Assembly. The General
Assembly can also refer an issue to the Security Council to put in place a binding
resolution.

2. 3rd Committee of GA : Social, Humanitarian, and Cultural Committee

SOCHUM as one of the main committees of the UN General Assembly, took

the role as a forum for 193 member states to discuss the social, humanitarian, and
relevant human rights issues, specifically the advancement of woman, the protection
of children, indigenous people, and the elimination of racial discrimination, also the
issue about the self-determination. Not limited to that, SOCHUM also focus at the
field of the promotion of fundamental freedom. SOCHUM work together with the UN
Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) to collaborate together, since ECOSOC
had various agencies reporting their work directly to ECOSOC such as the ILO, IMO,
UNESCO, IMF, WHO, FAO, IFAD, etc. SOCHUM resolutions is not legally binding
following the main characteristic of the UN General Assembly resolutions.
C. Background of the Issue
a. Definition Xenophobia and Bigotry
Xenophobia word itself comes from greek which is xénos, meaning 'the
stranger' and 'guest' and phóbos, meaning 'fear'. Literally, Xenophobia means
fear of guest/ stranger, which can be easily understandable by the dislike, and
negative prejudice towards foreigners or a hostility against non-native people
(Smelser, N. J. and Baltes. 2001). UNESCO, along with several other UN bodies,
has adopted the definition of xenophobia as “an attitudinal orientation of hostility
against non-natives in a given population”. (Boehnke, Klaude. 2001: 2.) Another
possible definition of xenophobia agreed on the Asia Pacific NGO Conference
against xenophobia in Tehran is "attitudes, prejudices and behavior that reject,
exclude and often vilify persons, based on the perception that they are outsiders
or foreigners to the community, society or national identity.", or can be
understood by the hate towards foreigners from the natives regarding their
differences of skin color, race, and religion (The Asia-Pacific NGO Meeting for the
World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and
Related Intolerance. 2001). It is important to note, that xenophobia and racism
are two different concepts, although they often overlap to each other. While
racism concentrates on physical characteristics of a person, e.g. the color of their
skin or facial features, xenophobia implies prejudice to someone who is not a part
of a community, regardless of what they look like. Yet because of the fact that
foreigners often have different appearance from local people, xenophobia and
racism are easy to confuse among people in the society.

Bigotry itself according to the Cambridge Dictionary means the fact of

having and expressing strong, unreasonable beliefs and disliking other people
who have different beliefs or a different way of life or with the easier word,
disliking another person who is having a different opinion. Xenophobia has
become one of the dangerous yet problematic issues in the world, hence the war
in the world is still going, the refugee flow will still go on, and to emphasize, that
Xenophobia and Bigotry is the same kind of issue, complementing each other,
and that is why it needs to be resolved to ensure equality for all human without
any fear of discrimination, disliking towards each other, and also the destruction
of good social behaviour.
b. Root Causes of the Xenophobia
The rise of xenophobia is often attributed to two wide-scale causes. The first
one is the shift in the migration patterns. As the division between the developed and
developing countries is becoming more visible and new armed conflicts and
economic crises emerge, more people become migrants and decide to flee their
homeland to seek better living standards abroad. In addition, the labor market is
gradually becoming more internalized, so the percentage of employees of foreign
origin has a tendency to rise. This, in turn, creates grounds for a misconception that
migrants are ‘stealing’ the jobs of citizens of the receiving countries, which becomes
one of the core reasons for xenophobia and prejudice towards them.
Another root cause is the effect globalization has on the living standards of
the citizens of the receiving countries. Since this process enforced competition
between states, this led to them reducing some social welfare expenditures from
their national budget plan, thus making a number of social groups marginalized due
to this budget pressing situation. These groups see migrants as their competitors for
the reception of these payments. Research made by ILO, IOM and OHCHR has
provided data proving that income inequality and high marginalization level
contribute to the rise of xenophobic tendencies (NGO Working Group on Migration
and Xenophobia for the World Conference 2001).

D. Status Quo
a. Positive Impact of Migrants to the society in a foreign country
Despite an array of stereotypes and prejudice surrounding migrants and
fueling xenophobia, numerous research shows that an influx of migrants has positive
consequences for both receiving and sending states. Since people usually migrate
from poorer countries, they agree to work for lower salaries than locals. Cheaper
workforce, in turn, lowers the price of locally produced goods and services, thus
making them more acceptable for the population. Additionally, since migrants tend to
agree to work on the jobs that local people usually reject due to unacceptable
conditions or salaries, this subverts one of the root causes of xenophobia – the belief
that migrants steal jobs. Migrants contribute to the receiving states in taxes as well.
For instance, a study of University College London shows that the UK annually
receives approximately 2 billion Euro worth of taxes from EU immigrants alone
(University College London News, 5 November 2013). The same study claims that
most of the 60% of the total migrants from Eastern and Southern Europe are college
graduates.
This is in contrast of the ‘polish plumber’ stereotype, which is one of the way
xenophobia manifests itself in British society. In another way migrants may positively
impact the society they work in by helping alleviate demographic burden existed in a
state. In 2018, The European Commission predicts that the amount of working-age
population in the EU will decrease by approximately 40 million people in total, which
in turn will lead to rising public expenditure for pensions (European Commission
News, 25 May 2018). Also, by eencouraging legal migration will help alleviate that
burden by receiving more money in taxes to cover the social welfare payments. UN
DESA reports, that migrants contributed for approximately reaching 40 percent of the
population growth in North America from 2000 to 2015, and it is due to migration that
the population of Europe has risen by nearly 2 percent during that period. Without
migrants, it would have fallen by less than a percent (UN DESA, 2017). Migrants
also make numerous positive contributions to the economies of their countries of
origin. According to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, remittance payments
make up to about $600bn a year, which is three times the amount of all foreign
development aid (Guardian News, 11 January 2018). In some countries, such as
Tajikistan, payments from abroad comprise approximately 35% of the GDP of the
country (Sputniknews Russia, 25 January 2019)

b. Negative Impact of Migrants to the society in a foreign country

At the same time, there is some data that shows that migration is a
controversial process, bringing about both positive and negative change. Immigrants,
especially undocumented ones, have less legal protection than citizens, and tend to
agree to lower salaries, which makes it more beneficial for employers to hire them.
This creates a complicated situation for native people, who have to agree to non-
livable wages to remain competitive in the workforce market. This, along with the
influx of migrants itself, increases the number of people who face the risk of
marginalization and poverty if the recipient country undergoes economic difficulties.
 There is a widespread assumption that migrants create additional burden on
the social welfare system. However, a report by the OECD in 2013, taken from the
Global Migration Group suggests that while immigrants on average have lower net
fiscal rate than natives, it is generally caused by the fact that they contribute less in
terms of taxes because of lower salaries they are given to, not by the fact they are
too reliant on welfare (Global Migration Group, 2013).
The same report, exploring the fiscal impact of migrants on OECD countries,
claims that there is no clear conclusion on whether this impact is mostly positive or
mostly negative to be understood as the economic influence in social welfare.
Moreover, the findings of the report show that this influence, whether good or bad,
barely reach 1% of GDP a year in any given country. Exceptions are for both
Switzerland and Luxembourg, where the public actually receives more money due to
migration, while the difference existed only about approximately two percent of GDP
per year. The amount and the character of impact also depends on the inner politics
of the country on the subject.
As for the impact on the countries of origin, while remittances make a
significant contribution to their economy, there are negative consequences too. High
level of migration is the cause of the so-called ‘brain drain’ – which means that a
situation in which there is a mass exodus of qualified and educated workforce from a
country in a large scale. It also negatively impacts population level in general – an
example of this are the Baltic states, that lost about 10 percent of its population since
1991 due to emigration (Hazans, Mihails. 2016: 297-344). In general, migration fuels
changes in society in many different ways that are too hard to classify as solely
positive or negative. Still, even the documented negative change has turned out to
be relatively insignificant. Thus, not only is xenophobia destructive and insidious to
any society, it also has no credible ground to exist.

c. Migration legal status on a sovereign state

According to the International Organization for Migration, a migrant is ‘any
person who is moving or has moved across an international border or within a State
away from his/her habitual place of residence, regardless of the person’s legal
status; whether the movement is voluntary or involuntary; what the causes for the
movement are; or what the length of the stay is in certain states, but these
provisions should be matched with the national provisions and regulations regarding
migrants (UN, retrieved from https://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-
depth/migration/index.html, accessed at 4 November 2019). The definition does not
distinguish between the documented and undocumented immigrants, but they differ
significantly in their legal status and makes the latter more vulnerable and exposed
to xenophobia and bigotry. This can be explained by the fact that their status stops
them from trying to integrate into society, receive higher-paid jobs, pay taxes and
contribute to the community in other ways. In recent years, there has been a rise of
right-wing political parties, to which the growth of xenophobia among the public is
often attributed by the political party (UNESCO.retrieved
http://www.unesco.org/new/en/social-and-human-sciences/themes/international
migration/glossary/xenophobia/, accessed at 4 November 2019). One of the key
points of the right-wing agenda is restricting immigration. However, this has not
shown to be an effective measure to handle the migration issues. Since the root
causes of migration are linked to the situation in countries of origin rather than
receiving countries, measures adopted by the latter will not curb immigration but
rather illegalize it. An example of this is Germany whose level of illegal immigration
has significantly risen after the introduction of stricter migration policies (Global
Migrant Status. 2003).

Source : migrantdataportal.org
 Thus, to combat xenophobia, it is important to give people an opportunity to
immigrate safely and legally in short term. This will lead to an influx of qualified
immigrants capable of contributing to native communities and integrating in them,
reducing risks of marginalization. Numerous examples have shown that the opposite
tactic of cutting the legal opportunities will not only fail to curb immigration, but will
additionally delegalize it, thus enforcing xenophobic views among the public. On the
scope of legal basis, UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) clearly emphasized that
every migrants are entitled to protection and equal human rights access.
UNHRC also uphold the principle of non-refoulement based on the article 33
of the 1951 Refugee Convention in which the convention prohibits a
mobilization/removal of a migrants/refugees to a country considered risky for them to
live in, and the states have the obligation to grant the migrants a legal status. The
identified challenges for this basis is only one, the prejudices and xenophobia
towards migrants due to the lack of education, awareness and care towards
migrants.

d. Threats received by migrants

Threats received by migrants can be identified by determining the policy and
social perceptions towards migrants, for example, in most cases, the differences
between the majority of religion of the locals and the religion held by the migrants
itself. Also the dynamics of the SWOT analysis towards the migrants presence in a
state can also be used as the parameter of research to identify the threats received
by migrants this analysis can be used by government to design the appropriate
policies, most of the government cannot improve migrants management policy either
is it internal or external, and also the failure of governments to analyze the loopholes
on their shared border enforcement policy and lack of investment towards a better
screening system. Also to take into account, that migrants presence in a society can
be perceived as a threat by the locals to the assimilation or destruction of the native
culture, those kinds of reasons are being used by the locals to justify their actions
which caused threats to the migrants, this kind of justification cannot be received
without careful analysis since it will only cause more threat and social conflicts
towards migrants, that this council should address.
Another solid threats faced by the migrants is the discrimination and inequality
of access to opportunities, fundamental freedom, and discriminations for jobs
towards migrants, for example, a few positions or careers in a certain country is are
limited only for the locals/ natives, while the migrants only granted another position
considered lower than the native one, even though the migrants is qualified for it.
Learning from the South Africa’s xenophobia case, the DVV International
highlighted that education for the migrant, especially for the unskilled migrants are
needed in order to prepare them before integrating them into the society, the
education itself could be in the form of job training (semi-skilled or skilled vocational
training) and numerous basic education empowerment to ensure the qualifications of
migrants can match the demand of the job market itself (DVV International, 2008).

e. The Danger of Bigotry Legitimation

Bigotry itself cannot be legitimized, since a person can’t judge someone
based on their subjective view and violently justify their actions. Bigotry should be
eradicated in order to stop the negative stigma and prejudices towards migrants and
to stop continuous number of threats to the migrants. The terms bigotry itself has
been used in political or social situations, however until now, the terms of bigotry is
subjective and have no specific justifications. One of the notable acknowledgment
from UN towards bigotry itself is stated during the Secretary General of the UN
speech on the Holocaust remembrance event at the UN Headquarter, Gutteres
stated “We see bigotry moving at lightning speed across the Internet”, underscored
the UN chief, pointing to “intolerance entering mainstream politics – targeting the
minority groups, Muslims, migrants and refugees, and exploiting the anger and
anxiety of a changing world in the disruption era” (UN News, 28 January 2019). The
73rd President of the UNGA, Mrs. Maria Fernanda also stated that “We must draw
lessons from history; this is why it is so vital that we remember the Holocaust and
honor the victims of that atrocity”. Fernanda also called upon quick and solid actions
by world leaders to stand up against the rising tide of racism, anti-Semitism,
xenophobia and intolerance in all its forms (UN News, 28 January 2019). The
example of bigotry is : Islamophobia, Anti-Semitism in which those kind of issues if
not taken care seriously will boost the growth of bigotry in line with xenophobia.
The rapid development of technology, and social media boosted the number
of free flow information in the scope of international communications, in which the
bigotry can be transferred and justified as a permanent stigma by other people
around the world if there is no solid actions taken by each member states to contain
it seriously to avoid mass legitimation of bigotry/ hatred towards specific
race/religion/skin color/ people from another nationality.

The specific legal basis to tackle the bigotry itself is the International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) which
was signed by 88 states and 180 parties involved after the convention was adopted,
the related articles such as the article 2,3,5,6 of the ICERD itself (ICERD. 1965).

f. Terrorism and negative stigma towards migrants

Terrorism has become a frequent prejudice towards the migrants, this is the
main issue why xenophobia occurred in the European countries towards migrants
from the middle eastern states. They migrate to Europe, looking for a safe haven,
avoiding the armed conflicts on their war torn homeland. Terrorist usually utilize the
flow of migrants to Europe/ America to plant their cells or sleeper agents, in which
they will be activated to spread and conduct a terror activities, causing many
casualties. Xenophobia and other discrimination towards the migrants sparks when
in 2017, there are 5 attacks carried out by migrants and offensive movement towards
migrants across United Kingdom, and another followed 4 terrorist attacks such as
the London Bridge bombing, 2017 Westminster attacks, and other bombing and
shooting as well (BBC News. 2017).
Not only the United Kingdom, but also across the EU countries, the terrorist
attacks happened in the forms of bombings, and shootings, where it wrecked havoc
in the society and rose the tension of natives/locals towards migrants. Many blamed
this terrorist attacks happened since EU established their open border policy, where
migrants from conflict states in middle-east region are welcome in the EU to be
granted refugee status and integrated into society, but this is somehow problematic
where many of the terrorist cells are able to penetrate the EU’s border. This is a
serious issue since the terrorist attacks also grew the negative stigma and prejudices
towards innocent refugees.
The Schengen agreement, as the benchmark for the EU open border policy,
where EFTA (European Free Trade Area) and European Union share open inter-
state borders as part of the Schengen Agreement, allowing free flow of people
between nations: controls on entry to the entire Schengen area are carried out at the
first country of entry. This also somehow problematic since there are many things
and aspects which can be penetrated and utilized by the terrorist groups to plant
their cells towards the EU countries. This kind of abuse grew so many contradiction
towards the agreement where the shared border is useless and not beneficial at all
for economic activities.
According to the European Commission website, to respond this issue, EU
has developed a holistic counter-terrorism response – the EU Counter-Terrorism
Strategy. Adopted in 2005, this strategy commits the Union to combating terrorism
globally, while respecting human rights and allowing its citizens to live in an area of
freedom, security and justice. It is built around four strands: PREVENT people from
turning to terrorism and stop future generations of terrorists from emerging;
PROTECT citizens and critical infrastructure by reducing vulnerabilities against
attacks; PURSUE and investigate terrorists, impede planning, travel and
communications, cut off access to funding and materials and bring terrorists to
justice; RESPOND in a coordinated way by preparing for the management and
minimization of the consequences of a terrorist attack utilizing the migrants in this
case, improving capacities to deal with the aftermath and taking into account the
needs of victims (EC Crisis and Terrorism Webpage. 30 October 2019).

Sources : Gallup
 Not only in European continent, the migration also took place in Asia Pacific,
where a crucial issue surfaced, that the Asia Pacific considered as ground zero
terrorist and separatist activities carried out by terrorist networks originated from the
middle east, or migrant flows whose considered as vulnerable to be penetrated by
the terrorist group. One of the solid example is the terrorist stronghold located in the
Philippines, where a bloodbath battle happened between the government army
versus the Abu Sayyaf forces who are pledging alliance with the ISIS, in which the
bigotry towards the middle eastern migrants rose from the locals. What we need to
understand is that this kind of terrorism issue should be the priority to be carried out
when screening a migrant coming from other foreign country, to ensure the terrorist
threats are minimized and the awareness raising is needed to ensure no negative
prejudices for the society to grow the sense of acceptance and to eliminate
restrictions towards migrants (Sun Star Magazine. 11 September 2015. Retrieved at
30 October 2019).

Source : Xenowatch Website for African Center of Migration

 Source : European Data on Journalism Networks

E. Past Actions by UN and International Community

1. European Union Anti-Discrimination Policy
European Union back on 11 June 1986 already established the Joint
Declaration by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission against
racism and xenophobia. The Declaration itself already integrated with the EU Anti-
Discrimination Policy on the Annex 1, the declaration itself condemned the use of
force towards another person based on their religion, race, cultural, and national
differences. The declaration was followed by Annex 2 and Annex 3 containing the
EU Parliament resolution on racism, xenophobia, and anti-Semitism, both of them
were adopted on October 1994 & October 1995. Also, the EU made a joint-action
based on the Treaty of European Union, and another resolution in 1998 as the
efforts against racism, and xenophobia (Working Paper of EU Parliament. EU Anti
Discrimination Policy).

2. World Conference Against Racism and Xenophobia

The world conference against racism and xenophobia is known for its joint
discussion paper by the International Labor Organization (ILO), International
Organization for Migration (IOM), and the Office of the UN High Commissioner for
Human Rights (OHCHR) alongside with the UN High Commissioner for Refugee
(UNHCR) entitled “International Migration, Racism, Discrimination, and Xenophobia”
was produced on October 2001. The document itself contained the core principle of
the actions against the migrations, racism, and xenophobia. Also, the document
emphasized on the core frameworks, and recommendations for both the national
action, and the UN responds towards xenophobia. The documents highlighted on the
importance of holistic approaches, use of mass campaigns, and the right-based
approach integrated with the policies implemented towards the issue. The document
also highlighted the key roles of International Organizations as the facilitators of the
responds, actions, and resolvement of the discrimination, and xenophobia issues
(Joint ILO, OHCHR, IOM Discussion Paper. October 2001: 18-25).

3. UNHCR Protection from Xenophobia, and Regional Office for Southern

Africa’s Xenophobia Related Programmes
This key documents was produced by the UNHCR of South Africa in
accordance with their evaluations towards the protection from xenophobia
programme in African continent. The document concluded that there is an urgent
need for a coherent, and a comprehensive local strategy in addressing the asylum
seeker and refugee populations to protect them from xenophobia. This report also
highlighted the importance of partnerships and a broad-based response on
xenophobia. This document also highlighted the importance of human resources
empowerment and investment towards the regional programs and action plans
towards xenophobia. Also we can understand from this document that the
management and result based advocacy platforms are needed to resolve the issue
(Misago and Freemantle. The African Centre for Migration and Society. February
2015: 77-79).

4. Asia-Pacific NGO Meeting for the World Conference Against Racism, Racial
Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance
The declaration was held on 18 January 2001 at Tehran, Iran. The conference
produced the well known draft to respond the migrants and trafficked person packed
in xenophobia, the Asia Pacific NGO met to urge the governments of the Asia Pacific
region to take further and serious actions for the countermeasures towards
xenophobia, the documents acknowledged the unequal access of migrants health
services, xenophobic attitudes, woman’s rights violations, victimization of asian
women, arbitrary detentions, countries policy for a deportation towards trafficked
person, and also the restricted access of legal immigration, and labor law for the
migrants in Asia pacific (The Asia-Pacific NGO Meeting for the World Conference
Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance. 2001).
The Asia Pacific NGOs urged the governments by drafting the following
solutions as the vision of their goals about the importance of ratifications such as the
UN Convention for the Protection of Migrant Workers and Members of their Families,
also the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination,
and all other related international instruments related to support the tacklement of
xenophobia, and the discrimination towards migrants. NGOs also drafted the
importance of easier health access for migrants, the assurance of migrants basic
political rights, urging the international and regional collaboration also the
commitment of each states, the investigation towards the root causes of migrants
discrimination, voting rights of migrants voices, and the empowerment of monitoring
policy for the recruitment of migrants to the labor and corporations, and also the
importance of equal access of social protection programme by each member states
(The Asia-Pacific NGO Meeting for the World Conference Against Racism, Racial
Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance. 2001).

5. International Convention on the Elimination of All forms of Racial

Discrimination (ICERD)
ICERD was adopted by the UN General Assembly on December 1965, and it
highlighted on the eradication of apartheid, prohibition of hate speech, and the
promotion of tolerance. ICERD itself consists of 25 Articles and it also mentioned the
importance of equality of political and social rights for all people, race, and color, and
was signed by 88 states (ICERD, 1965). ICERD also include the dispute resolution
mechanisms and the individual complaints mechanisms to ensure check and
balances of the ICERD to tackle the issue of bigotry and xenophobia.

6. IOM Regional Strategy (IOM 2017-2020 Strategic Migrant Framework)

The regional strategy itself presents the key migrations and its priorities for
the Asia Pacific region, for these following points as their aims of the strategic
framework itself (IOM Asia Pacific. Retrieved from https://www.iom.int/asia-and-
pacific at 30 October 2019):
a. Improve the protection of and assistance to migrants in need.
 b. Reduce health vulnerability among migrants and migration affected
communities;
c. Strengthen systems and tailored solutions that harness the benefits of
migration;
d. The importance of Capacity Building to manage migration crises and the
resilience to cope with natural disasters including adaptation to climate
change;
e. Develop policies and programmes based on evidence, systematic
approaches for the monitoring and analysis of the migration dynamics;
f. Enhance the development for partnerships and dialogues to address
migration challenges and opportunities in order to support the systematic
and evidence based approach.

7. European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia

Also called as the EUMC, this monitoring program already elaborated their
efforts to tackle racism and xenophobia issues on EU. EUMC operates with their well
known The European Racism and Xenophobia Information Network (RAXEN) and it
also supported by the cooperation with the EU Commission and the EU Parliament,
while also collaborate with other International Organization such as the collaboration
with the UN. Their report on 2005 also stated that meetings, workshops, and
thematic approaches were needed to handle the issue (European Monitoring Centre.
2005: 7-15).

8. UN General Assembly Resolutions

There are a few UN General Assembly resolutions about the efforts to tackle
of discrimination, various forms of intolerance, such as:
a. UN General Assembly resolution A/RES/70/139
b. UN General Assembly resolution A/RES/70/140
c. UN General Assembly resolution A/RES/70/157
d. UN General Assembly resolution A/RES/68/151
All of the mentioned resolutions commonly talked about the Combating
intolerance, negative stereotyping, stigmatization, discrimination, incitement to
violence and violence against persons, based on religion or belief. Combating
glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices that contribute to fuelling
contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related
intolerance and others (Refworld. UN General Assembly Resolution Archive).

F. Study Case

On Wednesday, October 30th 2019, news broke that the police had
stormed the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) offices in Cape
Town, forcibly removing refugees who were peacefully -protesting, ironically,
to leave South Africa for fear of an imminent xenophobic attack. Videos are
swarming all over Twitter of spray canisters and rubber bullets being fired as
protesters and mothers were separated from their children. For some reason,
a wave of frustrated anger engulfed me. Once again, in an almost sadistic
cycle of violence in this country, we are seeing vulnerable people being
mistreated and disregarded by structures meant to protect them. This incident
is one among the several that have taken place in 2019 alone. By no means
is xenophobia a uniquely South African phenomenon. This is the reality we
live in, where complex social and economic issues are being
compartmentalized into who deserves access and who does not, who belongs
and who does not, who is a foreigner and who is not, and boosted by the
deadlock among all stakeholders in negotiation. But there is unarguably a
worryingly high level of denials by both the government and a large part of the
South African public, who refuse to acknowledge how hateful sentiments
targeted towards specific groups of African immigrants have direct
consequences on the livelihoods of their fellow brothers and sisters on the
-continent.

Political statements made by leaders create binaries of “good” and

“bad” citizens, and stirs up tensions as a means to not only garner support,
but also to enable structural violence to continue unchecked. Equating
xenophobic rhetoric to dealing with issues of criminality is symptomatic of how
South Africa has failed to redress, not only how they treat others, but the
structural legacy of policies that ‘bothered’ their own not too long ago. The
democratic transition after 1994 saw expansive promises to improve the lives
of South Africans, and that the country belongs to all those who live in it; but
instead of critiquing the failure of policy implementation, the blame is shifted
onto a specific group for social and economic woes. Former Johannesburg
mayor Herman Mashaba stated just over a month ago that it was “not
necessary for South Africa to apologize for xenophobic attacks”, under the
argument that criminality and lawlessness had to be dealt with. What
Mashaba and others fail to realize is that framing narratives around poor
criminal justice frameworks and equating lawlessness to migrants enables an
environment for vigilante justice in which it’s dangerous to the society and the
security of the region. Furthermore, it erases the reality and nuances of South
Africa’s socio-economic landscape.

In 2018, a study conducted by the World Bank found empirical

evidence that immigrants contribute positively to the labour market through
diverse skill sets, and having complementary jobs rather than competing
ones. South Africa needs to acknowledge that issues of migration are not only
a security issue, but a pressing developmental issue that must, on different
levels, incorporate all those that contribute. By failing to see the humanity in
the ‘other’, we set the precedent for low levels of social cohesion, create
harmful narratives and fail to recognize the reality of globalization in the
disruption era. But we know what the responses will be; a flimsy letter of
acknowledgement will be issued by the South African government or, in this
case, just for “illegal” immigrants to be rightly dealt with. Task teams will be
mandated, meetings will be held, and frustrated academics like myself and so
many other stakeholders will be having -conversations in echo chambers, with
no real effective attempt from those that can make changes to redirect the
narratives around African migrants in South Africa. From a personal
perspective it is deeply saddening to know that a place that I have called my
home for the past 10 years fails to make me feel like I belong. Like myself and
so many other African migrants that come to South Africa, it is a paradox to
feel unwelcome in a country that has embedded ideologies of pan-Africanism
and decolonization in its social fabric. Critical self-reflection needs to be done
among South Africans to understand why there is a pervasive need to create
physical and psychological boundaries between those that are not South
 African. Although it is true that everyone is a foreigner somewhere, let us
reframe the discourse so that no one needs to be a foreigner anywhere. That
way, a more inclusive and co-operative South Africa can be a space for their
brothers and sisters to no longer be ostracised. (IOL News, 1 November
2019)

Text adopted from https://www.iol.co.za/news/opinion/south-

africa-has-a-xenophobia-problem-36436047 retrieved at November 4th
2019

G. Further Research
Delegates are encouraged to further research about the following items
to be reconsidered as their resource for research:
1. UNHCR Protection from Xenophobia Annual Report 2014. Which can
be retrieved from https://www.unhcr.org/55cb153f9.pdf
2. UN General Assembly resolutions for Hate Crime, Discrimination,
Human Rights, Xenophobia, and Racism. Which can be retrieved from
https://www.refworld.org/topic,50ffbce582,516e75ed4,,0,UNGA,RESOL
UTION,.html
3. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). UDHR is one of the
fundamental legal basis in regards to the xenophobia issues itself.
Which can be retrieved from
https://www.un.org/en/udhrbook/pdf/udhr_booklet_en_web.pdf
4. Delegates are encouraged to further research about their country past
actions against terrorism, since we understand that the terrorist
implanted their cells among the migrants flow. And understand how the
mandate of SOCHUM should be the parameter of the solutions.
5. The Durban World Conference adopted text which can be retrieved
from
https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/Durban_text_en.pdf
6. Keynote speeches of the world leaders, in this case taking example
from the President of Cuba keynote speeches during the world
 conference against xenophobia in Durban, South africa. Can be
retrieved from https://www.un.org/WCAR/statements/0109cubaE.htm
7. Text of Asia Pacific NGO meeting for the World Conference Against
Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance,
can be accessed from
https://www.hurights.or.jp/wcar/E/tehran/migration.htm
8. The understanding of the root causes of xenophobia, can be accessed
fromhttps://www.iol.co.za/news/opinion/understanding-the-root-causes-
of-xenophobia-20733820 amd also can be retrieved from
https://www.msn.com/en-za/news/national/understanding-the-root-
causes-of-xenophobia/ar-BBVGZ5d
9. The concrete example of xenophobia, which can be retrieved from
https://www.medindia.net/patients/patientinfo/xenophobia-
examples.htm
10. UNESCO legal definition of xenophobia
http://www.unesco.org/new/en/social-and-human-
sciences/themes/international-migration/glossary/xenophobia/
11. Relevant and comprehensive data regarding international migration
can be accessed from https://migrationdataportal.org

H. Question A Resolution Must Answer (QARMAs)

1. Referring to the status quo, what are the challenges identified in

resolving xenophobia and intolerant prejudices in the society towards
migrants?.

2. What kind of social and evidence-based approach that this council

should take in order to resolve the illegal migrants issue and to
strengthen the monitoring framework to prevent terrorism among
migrants in order to eradicate the terrorist prejudices towards
migrants?.

3. What are the mechanisms to provide equal access to legal status, job
opportunities and social protections for migrants?. And how to train a
 skilled migrants to meet the demand of the industry of the country to
avoid jobless migrants, in which it’s identified as a burden in a
country?.

4. What are the best approach taking example based on the ICERD,
UDHR, and the World Conference against Xenophobia to ensure
commitment (compliance measure) by the member states and multi
stakeholder partnership approach to tackle xenophobia?.

I. Bibliography

Smelser, N. J. and Baltes, P. B. (eds.). 2001. International Encyclopaedia of

the Social and Behavioural Sciences. Amsterdam: Oxford Science Ltd.

European Union Parliament Working Paper. European Union Anti

Discrimination Policy. Public Liberty Series. Retrieved from
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/workingpapers/libe/102/text5_en.htm at 27
October 2019.

Joint Discussion paper of ILO, IOM, and OHCHR. 2001. International

Migration, Racism, Discrimination and Xenophobia. Switzerland: United
Nations in Geneva

Misago, Freemantle. 2015. Evaluation of UNHCR’s Regional Office for

Southern Africa’s Xenophobia Related Programmes. Witwatersrand: UN High
Commissioner for Refugee.
European Union Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia. 2005. EUMC
Annual Report 2004/2005. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the
European Community

UN General Assembly Resolutions Archives. Refworld. Retrieved from the

https://www.refworld.org/topic,50ffbce582,516e75ed4,,0,UNGA,RESOLUTIO
N,.html accessed at 27 October 2019

Refworld. UN General Assembly resolution archive. Retrieved from

https://www.refworld.org/publisher,UNGA,RESOLUTION,,516e75ed4,,0.html
Accessed at 28 October 2019

European Commission. EC Crisis and Terrorsim webpage. Retrieved from

https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/crisis-and-terrorism_en
accessed at 30 October 2019

Schmid, Alex. 2016. Links Between Terrorism and Migration: An Exploration

(Vol.7): Terrorism and Counter-Terrorism Studies

Sunstar Magazine Philippines. 2015. Retrieved from

https://www.sunstar.com.ph/article/30723/Business/Philippine-court-
designates-Abu-Sayyaf-a-terrorist-group accessed at 30 October 2019

IOM Asia Pacific Website. Retrieved from https://www.iom.int/asia-and-pacific

accessed at 30 October 2019

DVV International. 2018. Migration and Xenophobia in Southern Africa.

Retrieved from the https://www.dvv-international.de/en/adult-education-and-
development/editions/aed-702008/migration-and-integration/migration-and-
xenophobia-in-southern-africa/ accessed at 30th October 2019

Global Migration Group. 2013. International Migration Outlook 2013. Retieved

from https://globalmigrationgroup.org/system/files/Liebig_and_Mo_2013.pdf
Hazans, Mihails. 2016. “Migration Experience of the Baltic Countries in the
Context of Economic Crisis”, in: Martin Kahanec and Klaus F. Zimmermann
(eds), Labor Migration, EU Enlargement, and the Great Recession. Berlin -
Heidelberg: Springer (2016), 297-344.

The Guardian News. 11 January 2018. Retrieved from

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/11/migration-benefit-
world-un-global-compact accessed at 3 November 2019

European Commission News. 25 May 2018. Retrieved from

https://ec.europa.eu/info/news/economy-finance/policy-implications-ageing-
examined-new-report-2018-may-25_en accessed at 3rd November 2019

Sputnik News Russian. 25 January 2018. Retrieved from

https://tj.sputniknews.ru/main/20190125/1028085163/obem-perevodov-
tajikskih-migranty-russia-37-procento-vvp-respubliki.html (Russian) accessed
at 3 November 2019

UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs. 2017. International Migrations

Reports of 2017. Retrieved from
https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/publications/mi
grationreport/docs/MigrationReport2017_Highlights.pdf accessed at 4
November 2019

UN News. 28 January 2019. Retrieved from

https://news.un.org/en/story/2019/01/1031442 accessed at 4 November 2019

Migration Data Portal. 2017. Retrieved from

https://migrationdataportal.org/infographic/total-number-international-
migrants-region-and-sex accessed at 4 November 2019

International Convention on the Elimination of All forms of Racial

Discrimination. 1965. Treaty Archive. Retrieved from
https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CERD.aspx accessed
at 4 November 2019
UNESCO. Retrieved from
http://www.unesco.org/new/en/social-and-human-
sciences/themes/international-migration/glossary/xenophobia/ accessed at 4
November 2019