Send message to Author

Paper short abstract:

This paper presents a case study from Palabek Refugee Settlement, northern Uganda, to describe when and why humanitarian actors pay attention to counting (or not counting) the movement of refugees and cases of COVID-19.

Paper long abstract:

On a warm September morning, I sat surrounded by brightly branded humanitarian polo-shirts in an inter-agency meeting in Palabek Refugee Settlement (PRS) northern Uganda, my PhD field-site. In this paper I present a case study of this meeting, describing when and why differing pictures of refugee movements are made visible in humanitarian reporting, and when and why attention is paid to counting (or not counting) COVID-19.

Uganda’s ‘open door policy’ for refugees has been complicated by COVID-19. During this time international borders and reception centres have been officially closed. In PRS, however, refugees, continue to arrive. Utilising ‘porous borders’ from South Sudan, they make their way to the settlement. Humanitarian and national actors are tasked with providing mandated care to ‘new arrivals’, registering them as refugees, whilst considering the ‘risks’ of COVID-19 transmission associated with the movement of people. At specific points, decisions to count are made: refugees are registered, screened for COVID-19, and cases quarantined. Until formal processing, however, their presence in the settlement and implications for COVID-19 transmission, remain absent in official reporting.

‘Settled’ refugees in PRS continue to make regular (usually unofficial) journeys to and from South Sudan, for farming, economic opportunities, or personal relationships. These movements, however, are difficult to acknowledge officially, going against UN regulations, so remain absent, or minimised, in official narratives. COVID-19 relating to these journeys is rarely directly counted in the same way as with ‘new arrivals’, but rather, ignorance to this movement - in official rhetoric at least - is maintained.