A Discussion with Stefan Leonescu

 Stefan Leonescu is Senior Legal Advisor and Advocacy Expert of Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) Romania. He has been working in the field of migration and asylum for over 20 years, being involved in advocacy and project coordination activities. Mr. Leonescu is currently a contributing expert on borders, asylum, and migration at the European Agency for Fundamental Rights. He has contributed to several publications with migration practitioners on asylum and return. He has also been involved in the analysis of migrant trafficking and human trafficking from the perspective of national regulations and related judicial practices.

Motto: “Inhumanity is the poorest servant” (Mutiny on Bounty)

Alessandra Greceanu: Thank you for your time Stefan. Would you please give us a short introduction about JRS Romania and yourself?

Stefan Leonescu: JRS Romania is one of the international organizations aiming to accompany, serve, and advocate for refugees and other forcibly displaced persons. We offer comprehensive assistance for foreigners throughout all the migration phases – arrival at the borders, asylum and integration, detention, toleration, or repatriation. This was developed through the documented-based advocacy approach, successfully implemented in the last decade. In Romania, JRS was established in 2000, with more than 80 staff members – the majority of them being recruited due to the Ukrainian crisis – and supported by more than 150 volunteers. I am personally involved in advocacy, project management, training delivery, and legal counselling.

Greceanu: On 24 February 2022, an armed conflict started between Russia and Ukraine which continues to be the center of international news. For the refugees leaving Ukraine with their lives packed only in one suitcase, bag or backpack, life stopped because their beloved remained home, but at the same time continued. The tears, pain, and hope of the ones coming to Romania became our tears, pain, and hope and we are counting together the days and nights trying to distinguish the line between a dream and a nightmare. Because their dreams are now our dreams, and their nightmares are now ours. Because the stars, like our hearts, don’t know any language, but every language. Because God and faith never abandon us.  Please, can you share with us some of the most emotional situations of the Ukrainian refugees that you assisted lately?

Leonescu: Initially, we provided psychological support mainly to children, as they are the most vulnerable ones. Teachers seemed to be the easiest front-line people to work with them as they can help identify and alleviate some of the effects of war. We had examples of children hiding under their desks in the classrooms when they heard helicopters or ambulances in Bucharest. But then we realized that some teachers had the same fear responses – they were also affected and needed even more emotional support, since they are first refugees with their individual problems, and then caregivers for the children. Emotional trauma was also evident amongst refugees who we supported to move from collective facilities to individual apartments – they were scared of the idea of living in an unknown community.

Greceanu: Please give us an assessment of the social, cultural, and educational impact created by the humanitarian crisis in Ukraine.

Leonescu: Romania was one of the main gates open to Ukrainian refugees. Our experience could be used as a model for how to organize an adequate response. In Romania, this unprecedented crisis demanded specialized legal support, accompaniment during transit, and support with integration (mainly for housing and education). The conflict in Ukraine separated families: refugees arriving in Romania were mainly mothers with children (as fathers could not leave Ukraine).

We offered assistance for separated Ukrainian families as well as non-Ukrainians coming from Ukraine, and sometimes even for their pets. We had the opportunity to assist the entry of groups of separated children, some of whom were at great risk because they did not have passports. Also, we provided a large group of Roma entering with many children with donations, material assistance and housing. They initially were living through begging as they were unable to change Ukrainian Hryvnia currency into Romanian Leu.

For those refugees who decided to remain in Romania, integration became a need. While adults could be asked to find jobs, this was not possible as long as they could not find a proper education system to enroll their children. JRS Romania, together with Plan International, identified the possibility of supporting a pool of 60 Ukrainian teachers and around 1,000 children who could continue their national educational system while in Romania. But the trauma of war remains, as it continues next to the borders, across Black Sea, and widespread on media channels.

Greceanu: Taking into consideration the complexity of the current crisis, what legal and infrastructural innovative approach was implemented in Romania and what are the challenges identified during the process?

Leonescu: Romania developed a new model of humanitarian assistance with three actors. In addition to governmental and UN coordination mechanisms set up soon after the outbreak of the conflict, civil society mobilized very quickly and gave immediate support at the borders or inside the country. These three actors managed to complement each other. The authorities and UN had to scale their response or funding based often on missing data about the population to be assisted. This was mainly due to the transitional, on-the-move refugee cases and expectations that the government would be able to get exact figures (almost impossible). Therefore, civil society organizations, acting at both national or local levels, were able to organize and provide individualized response on a small scale by offering information, transport, housing, or financial support. However, the price paid for this unclear increased number of Ukrainians lacking adequate legal and practical information is unknown. Many people, if not assisted timely and properly, may be at risk of becoming victims of trafficking as both Ukraine and Romania are among the main producing countries of such victims for their own nationals. Recently, EUROPOL investigated how refugees were web targeted by traffickers.

The broad use of the temporary protection tool as a regional European response in refugee crisis raised a number of legal questions. Although regulated by the asylum law at the national level, it is not considered as a form of protection, but as a mere procedure, although it has a status attached to it. One of the main rights attached to it – financial support – has not been provided. The government stated that it cannot estimate the total number of beneficiaries, and even so, such assistance might lead to the collapse of the national social system. This deficiency, together with the lack of funds, affected mainly children who could not receive even the child allowance that should be granted on a non-discriminatory basis, irrespective of the child’s legal status. Finally, the temporary residence documentation did not mention a specific residence in Romania, as Ukrainians were in transit and moved from one city to another. Place of residence is fundamental for registration with authorities so we faced a situation where at least 40,000 people could not prove dwelling residence in Romania, and thus lack proper assistance. It should be mentioned that the absence of residence in the temporary protection document was initially considered to be in their benefit, otherwise with each move, a new document had to be released.

The issue of asylum seeking was unexpectedly not considered by people coming from Ukraine because of the 90 days EU visa-free regime. Very few of them applied for asylum (less than 1%), and those who did were mainly people who were undocumented at arrival. The outcome was that some of them were channeled to the temporary protection regime, and very few got recognition of international protection. Their stories could not convince authorities to grant them protection status, especially if they were former USSR nationals of Ukrainian/Romanian origin with Russian passports – they were rejected based on the fact that they could go back home to Russia, despite the risk that they will be considered as pro-Ukrainians. The judiciary would be called to finally decide on such cases if appealed.

Greceanu: International humanitarian law, including refugee law, is constantly changing in order to provide a complete application and/or interpretation resulting in a better response to the new and complex reality worldwide. Which areas of improvement and/or interpretation do you want to mention?

Leonescu: From the international refugee law perspective, people coming from Ukraine should be considered as war refugees (noticing that some of them came directly from Mariupol or Donbas) – they are not included in the standard definition of refugee. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) mentions that persons compelled to leave their country of origin as a result of international or national armed conflicts are not normally considered refugees under the 1951 Convention and 1967 Protocol. The UN Convention should be considered in an extensive way; but so far, the national authorities could not do so. In the absence of financial support for those granted temporary protection, some Ukrainians have considered the possibility to apply for asylum in order to receive a minimum wage. Thus, they remained in a de facto limbo situation, without a clear perspective for integration.

Additionally, in the absence of any possibility of return, integration is the key. In the first two months everyone hoped that the war would end soon and they would be able to return home. This was only a dream for non-combatants. The war continues on. Cities, schools, hospitals are destroyed and the prospects for repatriation are far off. So, all the eyes are turned towards the assistance for integration. The authorities’ long-term response seems to be related to a national strategy comprising of six areas of intervention; however, it is still under bureaucratic debates. And so people have to wait without clear prospects or information. The lack of information is prolonging their trauma as the future becomes more unsettled.

This is mainly the context in nutshell. The organizations providing assistance are forced to work without clear data, piloting or doing small scale interventions for smaller groups at local levels. Various practices on integration (either good or bad) have been developed, while refugees are still looking for solutions, a decent life, or at least not be forced to return if they are not willing. Their story continues, rescued from war and waiting to get both general and tailored support in finding long-term housing, jobs, education for children, possibility to learn the Romanian language etc., and hopefully as soon as possible to reunite with their fathers, who are still fighting for their liberty.

Greceanu: How can the international community and/or other international NGOs’ support JRS Romania in its prompt response to the Ukrainian refugee crisis?

Leonescu: The response of the international community to the Ukrainian crisis has been generous, mainly in the emergency phase, when an influx of refugees was recorded in the first months after the outbreak of the conflict. This was mainly a transitory phase towards integration for those who decided to remain in Romania. For them, normally, the response of the state and experienced organizations could be enough, but they cannot, by themselves, cope with the enormous overall scale of refugee problems arising from this war. Further interventions continue to be needed to cover education, housing, and employment, as key components for integration, as well as mental health and psychological support for individuals in need. Funds for integration have turned out to be insufficient and some of the refugees preferred to repatriate. Therefore, a prompt response is still required from organizations that have the necessary experience in offering support for integration. Unfortunately, sometimes delays, coordination issues or demands for an exact scaling up of any intervention may have a negative impact towards humanitarian interventions.

Greceanu: Thank you Stefan and JRS Romania for working together as a family with dedication and care for the refugees. Thank you for your strong conviction in generous principles of human rights, for giving help, voice, and power to the helpless, voiceless, and powerless and for inspiring each and every one of us to join your heroic, yet humble work.

About the Author:

Alessandra Greceanu is a Harvard Advanced Leadership Initiative Senior Fellow, retired career judge and an expert in international humanitarian law, employment law, comparative law, intellectual property law, mediation/ arbitration, and refugee law with over 25 years of experience. Ms. Greceanu was elected and appointed by the UN General Assembly as judge at the UN Dispute Tribunal in 2012 and prior she has served as a judge in the Romanian justice system, most notably at the Court of Appeal of Bucharest for 16 years. Ms. Greceanu continues to serve as a judge trainer in labor and European Union law at Romania’s National Institute of Magistracy, was a national judge trainer in refugee law, an independent expert of the European Commission in civil and refugee law, and worked in the field of international legal procedure, standards, and instruments both in Romania and in the EU.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.