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 knowledge 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 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
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 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