第五章 羅興亞離散解析：以馬來西亞安邦羅興亞社群為例
第一節 難民與社群
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
第五章 羅興亞離散解析：以馬來西亞安邦羅興亞社群為
例
第一節 難民與社群
1951 年難民公約及聯合國難民署相關工作手冊(如 UNHCR Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status, 1979)並未針對「迫 害」(persecution)一詞做出明確定義，在難民公約頒布時，僅對西方思想中
「自由權利典範」(liberal rights paradigm)受迫害者加以定義，並未納入其他 如飢荒、戰爭及環境災害等因素。聯合國難民署在 2017 年之年度預算約 80 億美金，1分配在馬來西亞地區的預算為一千八百萬美元。2
Gillian 認為政府也可能是迫害的行使者，而難民則是受政府迫害下的 受害者或目標之個人，鑒於難民必須是「急需救援」的個人，因此難民並不 包括為躲避戰禍的群眾，或者是遭受不平等之個人或群體。3 必須逃離家園 躲避迫害。1951 年難民公約是立基於二次大戰後及冷戰時期的西方觀點及 社會環境，當時西方世界面臨蘇聯等極權及共產主義威脅，難民通常是遭受 政府高度組織性迫害的個人，4 然而 Shacknove 主張「迫害」無法精準呈現
1 聯合國難民署 2017 年預算分配以非洲地區二十八億九千六百萬為最多，西亞地區二十一
億一千四百萬次之，歐洲地區八億兩千八百萬，亞洲地區為五億四千五百萬，及中南美 洲一億四千七百萬為最少，“Global Focus,” UNHCR,
http://reporting.unhcr.org/financial ，檢索日期：2017 年 4 月 12 日。
2 “UNHCR 2017 Planning Summary,” 2 December 2017,
http://reporting.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/pdfsummaries/GA2017-Malaysia-eng.pdf,UNHC R，檢索日期：2017 年 1 月 13。
3 Gillian McFadyen, 2012, “The Contemporary Refugee: Persecution, Semantics and
Universality,”, eShop, Special Issue The 1951 UN Refugee Convention-60 Years On: 9-35.
4 Andrew E. Shacknove, 1985, “Who is Refugee ?,” Ethnic 95(2):274-84.
‧
6 Gil Loescher, 2001, The UNHCR and World Politics: A Perilous Path, Oxford: Oxford University Press, p.61.
7 David J. Whittaker, 2011, Asylum Seeker and Refugees in the Contemporary, London:
Routledge, p.3.
8 Michael Dummett, 2001, On Immigration and Refugee, New York: Routledge, p.8.
9 Janna Wessels, 2011, “ Sexual Orientation in Refugee Status Determination,” Refugee Studies Centre Working Paper Series No.73: 31-2.
10 Bonnie Doherty and Tyler Gianni, 2009, “Confronting a Rising Tide: A Proposal for a Convention on Climate Change Refugees, ” Harvard Environmental Law Review 33(2):
349-403.
11 Matthew E. Price, 2010, “Rethinking Asylum: History, Purpose and Limits,” Journal of Refugee Studies 23(3):402.
‧
(immigrant organisation)、特殊族群組織 ( ethno-specific organisation)及族群 社群型組織(ethnic community-based community)。根據澳洲難民委員會 (Refugee Council of Australia, RCOA)定義，14 與提供難民社群所需之社會服 務的安置機構目的及組成分子不同，難民社群組織係指由難民及人道移入者 為了其自我定義的文化社群之利益，所建立之團體、協會或組織。然而在形 成難民社群組織的過程中，原先的社群可能因語言、宗教或特定區域等因 素，而分裂成數個小社群組織；相反地，亦可能因為接納其他不同的語言及
12 UNHCR,1998, The Wall Behind Which Refugee can Shelter: The 1951 Geneva Convention, Refugees. Geneva: UNHCR, p.11.
13 Matthew E. Price, 2006, “Persecution Complex: Justifying Asylum Laws Preference for Persecuted People,” Harvard International Law Journal 47(2): 413-66.
14 文化社群(cultural community)的定義隨該社群對於成員之組成是否應嚴格遵守並延續其
特有的語言、宗教、種族、性別、年齡及地域性，或採彈性開放的態度可容許跨種族等 限制，而有動態定義。Walter Santagata, Enrico Bertacchini, Giangcomo Bravo and Massimo Marrelli, 2011, “Cultural Commons and Cultural Communities,”
https://dlc.dlib.indiana.edu/dlc/bitstream/handle/10535/7359/297.pdf?sequence=1，檢索日 期：2017 年 3 月 1 日。
‧
(Department of Immigration and Citizenship, DIAC)委託研究指出，在 2011 年 有 21.4%的人道移入者及新移民在抵達澳洲初期曾接受文化組織及社群團15 “The Strength Within: The role of refugee community organizations in settlement,” Refugee Council of Australia (RCOA) 2014 ,
http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/r/rpt/1405_StrengthWithin.pdf,，檢索日期：2017 年 3 月 1 日。
16 美國法典(U.CA): Code Title-20, 20§ 7801(6),
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title20/pdf/USCODE-2011-title20-chap70-su bchapIX-partA-sec7801.pdf，檢索日期：2017 年 3 月 2 日。
17http://www.dhcs.ca.gov/services/medi-cal/eligibility/Pages/Community-Based-Organizations-(
CBOs).aspx , The term “community-based organization” means a public or private nonprofic organization of demonstrated effectiveness that (A) is representative of a community or significant segements of a community or (B) provide educational or related services to individuals in the community，檢索日期：2017 年 3 月 2 日。
18 “Settlement Outcomes of New Arrivals: Report of findings-Study for Department of Immigration and Citizenship, ” Australian Survey Research Group (ASRG), April 2011, Canberra: DIAC Settlement Outcomes, p.2.
19 Graeme Hugo (ed.), 2011, “Economic, Social and Civic Contributions of First and Second Generation Humanitarian Entrants,” Final Report to Australia Government Department of Immigration and Citizenship- Canberra, p.21.
‧
20 Amy A. Smith, 2012, “In Search of Survival and Sanctuary in the City: Refugees from Myanmar / Burma in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia,” London: International Rescue Committee, pp.11-2
21 Jeremy Hein, 1993, “Refugees, Immigrants, and the State,” Annual Review of Sociology 19:43-59.
22 Alice Bloch, 2001, “The Importance of Convention Status: A Case Study of the UK,” Social Research Oline 6(1) :8-10.
23 Alice Bloch , 2002, “Refugees Opportunities and Barriers in Employment and Training,”
Department for Work and Pensions, Research Report No.179: 3-4.
24 Alice Bloch, May 2004, “Making It Work: Refugee Employment in the UK,” Institue for Public Policy Research Asylum and Migration, Working Paper 2: 18-9.
25 Karen L, Duke, 1996, “The Resettlement Experiences of Refugees in UK: Main Findings from an Interview Study,” Journal of ethnic and Migration studies 22(3): 461-78.
‧
響。27若移民或難民結構性融合(structural integration)即教育、就業及良好經 濟，而社會融合有助移民及難民發展社會網絡，相反地，族群內的社會網絡26 Jenny Carey-Wood, Karen Duke, Valerie Kam, Tony Marshall, 1995, “The Settlement of Refugees in Britain,” Home Office Research Study 141: 56.
27 Alastair Ager and Alison Strang, 2008, “Understanding Integration: A Conceptual Framework,” Journal of Refugee Studies 21(2): 166-91.
28 Davide Azzolini and Raffaele Guetto, April 2017, “The Impact of Citizenship on Intermarriage: Quasi-experimental Evidence from Two European Union Eastern Enlargements,” Demographic Research 36(43): 1299-336.
‧
29 Sarah J. Feldman, 2007, “Development Assisted Integration: A Viable alternative to Long Term Residence in Refugee Camps ?” The Fletcher Journal of Human Security XXII: 49-68.
30 Donald M. Kerwin, 2016, “How Robust Refugee Protection Policies Can Strength Human and National Security,” Journal on Migration and Human Security 4(3) :83-140.
31 Alastair Ager, Alison Strang and Behailu Abebe, “Conceptualizing Community Development in War-affected Population: Illustrations from Tigray,” in Gary Craig, Keith Popple and Maw Shaw(eds.), 2008, Community Development in Theory and Practice : An International Reader, Nottingham: Spokesman, pp. 338-40.