During the past two years Greek migration policy has seen important developments concerning the legislative framework for irregular migration/asylum management and migrant integration. Given that several among these developments are related to the transposition of related EU directives, one obvious answer might be that of Europeanization: these developments had less to do with the Greek government’s plans about migration, rather they were the direct impact of Europeanization; Greece simply transposed relevant EU directives. I am arguing here for a more careful reading of the Europeanization effect which not only distinguishes the differential impact of Europeanization on policies and discourses, but also actually shows how Europeanization tendencies at different level can contrast one another. The findings of this paper contribute to a better understanding of Europeanization processes. They highlight that Europeanization involves also resistance to Europe especially at times of crisis.
During the past year the temporary holding centre for irregular migrants in Lampedusa, Italy’s southernmost island, has been repeatedly denounced for instances of procedural irregularities and alleged human rights violations. The degrading treatment of third-country nationals, the difficulty in gaining access to the asylum determination process and the large scale expulsions to Libya, brought Lampedusa to the attention of European and international institutions. The European Parliament, the European Court of Human Rights and the United Nations’ Human Rights Committee all called on Italy to refrain from collective expulsions of asylum seekers and irregular migrants to Libya and to respect asylum seekers’ right to international protection. Using the material provided by the Italian authorities, European institutions and the NGOs, this study presents an overview of events and policies implemented by the Italian and Libyan Governments, the European Union and the International Organization for Migration and outlines the contentions surrounding these policies. The paper argues that the implementation of the detention and return schemes, commonly discussed in terms of the externalization of asylum, does not actually relocate the asylum procedures outside the EU’s external borders but rather deprives asylum seekers of the possibility of accessing asylum determination procedure. My analysis of migratory patterns in Libya further suggests that these policies, implemented to deter irregular migratory flows into Europe and combat smuggling in migrants, might paradoxically result in ‘illegalizing’ the movement of migrants between Libya and the neighbouring African states and in increasing the involvement of smuggling networks. The study ends by raising the issue of the political responsibility of all actors involved, whether they are Governments, supranational bodies or agencies, and putting forward policy recommendations for an effective EU framework forthe protection of asylum seekers.
Assisted voluntary return (AVR) is a new approach to return of irregular immigrants aiming at combating unlawful migration, and thus strengthening national immigration systems. AVR lowers risks of the violation of human rights and preserves migrants’ dignity and safety. In addition, it carries fewer political and financial costs. AVR of irregular immigrants is an integral part of migration management in some European countries, including the Slovak Republic. This paper provides a general understanding of the issue of irregular migration and an analysis of policies and practices in assisted voluntary return of irregular migrants in the Slovak Republic. The paper concludes with a discussion of the major issues that need to be addressed in order to achieve sustainable and effective AVR management.
Based on ethnographic fieldwork among undocumented migrants (including asylum seekers) in Stockholm between 2004 and 2006, additional interviews with police officers, deportation escorts and staff at Swedish detention centres and some fieldwork in Tehran in June 2005 and August 2007, this article examines the impact of Sweden’s more restrictive asylum policy since the beginning of the decade. From a condition of ‘deportability’ to incarceration in detention centres and then removal from Sweden, asylum seekers have been increasingly criminalised – their confinement and removal being seen as mechanisms for preserving national security. Focusing, in particular, on the techniques used by the detention apparatus to ‘humanise’ and ‘rationalise’ the confinement and expulsion of asylum seekers, it is argued that a discourse of ‘caring’ and ‘saving’ works, in effect, as a disciplinary mechanism that presents asylum seekers as responsible for their own detention and deportation.
This EMN Country Factsheet provides a factual overview of the main policy developments in migration and international protection in Cyprus during 2012, including latest statistics. It has been prepared in conjunction with the European Commission’s 4th Annual Report on Migration and Asylum (2012).
‘Voluntary returns’ for rejected asylum seekers, foreign national prisoners, illegal entrants and overstayers are increasingly being promoted by European governments without due regard for the safety and preparedness of the returnee. In addition, the voluntariness of such returns has to be questioned. Among the UK schemes examined here are the Voluntary Assisted Return and Reintegration Programme (VARRP), Assisted Voluntary Return of Irregular Migrants (AVRIM), Assisted Voluntary Return for Families and Children (AVRFC), the Facilitated Returns Scheme (FRS) and the now discontinued ‘Explore and Prepare’ schemes.
The expulsion of irregular migrants has become a political priority in many (northern) EU member states. In countries such as Germany and the Netherlands this has resulted in a rather puzzling situation in which the capacity for the administrative detention of irregular migrants is increasing, while the number of effective expulsions seems to be decreasing. In this article two theoretical perspectives are used to analyse these developments: a perspective emanating from the criminological framework of the ‘new penology’ and one resulting from the ‘migration control literature’. These perspectives combined offer explanations for this paradoxical situation – by highlighting the importanc of identification and the frustration thereof by irregular migrants and countries of origin – and for the apparent irrationality of the use of, sometimes very lengthy, administrative detention of irregular migrants.
Powered by Phoca Download