Letter to the Editor: Community right not to accept unjust asylum centre
The right to protest is central to the democratic process. As well as being threatened by physical force, it is also threatened when smothered by social pressure and slandered with attributions of underhand motive.
The protest against the direct provision centre in Oughterard is a case in point. Protesters have been careful in their use of language, referring to “inhumane direct provision”, rather than simply direct provision, so that their motives are not misinterpreted. Nonetheless, the impression being given is that this protest is motivated by racism and xenophobia. One statement suggested there is something “dark and ugly” associated with the protest. However, we should remember this protest is against the decision by the State to impose upon a local community without consultation. The Department of Justice has stated there would be engagement with locals once a contract has been signed: consultation after the fact.
In the papal encyclical Laudato Si, the Pope talks about the importance of community consultation in decision-making, whether it be environmental, social or economic: “The local population should have a special place [in consultation…] being fully informed about such projects and their different risks and possibilities” (183).
We have a responsibility to care for asylum seekers and refugees and to treat them with dignity, in line with the UN Global Compacts. Improvements in living conditions in direct provision centres are used to deflect from the unacceptable application processing duration that asylum seekers must endure while living in these facilities. This is the key injustice of the asylum system which leaves people in limbo and stuck in centres for extended periods of time. An issue not being adequately addressed by the media or politicians. Why would any community tolerate the presence of such a system in their midst?
