Eu asylum finished

Prepared by the researche: Hasan daneef shershab, Low college of sumer university, Irak
Democratic Arabic Center
Journal of Political Science and Law : Forty-second Issue – December 2024
A Periodical International Journal published by the “Democratic Arab Center” Germany – Berlin
Nationales ISSN-Zentrum für Deutschland
Journal of Political Science and Law
:To download the pdf version of the research papers, please visit the following link
Do the developments from 2009- 2012 mean that the Common European Asylum System has collapsed? Illustrate with examples taken from the practice of at least two member states
This essay will discuss important events of the last three years and how they have changed the Common European Asylum system; the main events that will be studied are the financial crisis and the Arab spring, both causing influxes of asylum-seekers into the EU. Examples of Greece and Italy will be used in order to gain greater clarity on the events and their repercussions.
Introduction
The European Union (EU) is made up of 27 members and is both a political and an economic entity, helping to create growth and stability through trade agreements and standardised laws. The EU has three major legislative ‘pillars’ relating to the standards for asylum, which are to: “bring more harmonisation to standards of protection by further aligning the Member States’ asylum legislation, effective and well supported practical cooperation, and increased solidarity and sense of responsibility among EU states, and between the EU and non-EU countries.[EU, 2012].” As the European Union has helped to create stability and until recently prospering economies, amongst its members, there are many people from the poorer and developing countries that want to live within its boundaries, this includes those that are fleeing from persecution and other human rights abuses.
Asylum and immigration policies are very different: Hatton (2012) clarifies the distinction, saying that: “Immigration policy is often framed with reference to the (net) benefit to host populations, either to specific individuals, as in the case of family reunification, or to the economy, as in the case of labour migration.” Asylum policies in contrast relate to those that benefit the individual who is claiming refugee status and therefore are often viewed negatively by the populace of certain countries, the reasons for the asylum are often soon forgotten and replaced with fears over employment levels and problems with integration of asylum seekers.
Since 2009 there have been a number of issues around the world that have increased the numbers of asylum seekers looking to gain access to the EU, the two main issues that will be focused on in this essay are the ‘Arab Spring’ and the ‘Credit Crunch’ or financial crisis.
The ‘Arab Spring’ refers to the numerous revolutions and uprisings against oppressive regimes and dictatorships in the Arabic world. Grant (2012) describes the ‘Arab Spring’ as the: “third wave of democratisation, following Latin America in the 1980s and Eastern Europe in the 1990s.” Countries to date that have had regime change include: Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and Yemen, with major demonstrations and conflict in Bahrain and Syria. While there have been a lot of celebrations around the world for the overthrowing of undemocratic regimes in the Arabic world, the period of change causes many other problems for the people of the area. Egypt, Yemen and Tunisia witnessed waves of violence following the mass protests of 2011, Libya forced Colonel Gaddafi’s overthrow though an armed rebellion (aided by UN forces), while Bahrain and Syrian leaders cling to power with ever increasing acts of repression against their citizens. Following the unrest in the region many people have been forced to flee, not only those who were caught up in areas of fighting but the supporters of both sides wanting to escape retribution and violence. Italy and Greece have become important countries for asylum seekers fleeing from violence due to their positioning on the Mediterranean.
The global financial crisis which has been witnessed in the last 3 years has been said to be the worst financial disaster since the 1930s and the ‘Great Depression’. In the EU the problem has mostly revolved around the levels of sovereign debt in many countries which has led to mass austerity projects attempting to cut public spending and reduce debt. While all countries in the EU zone have been affected, Greece has been the focus of the most recent events which have led to the Greek government attempting to borrow hundreds of billions of euros in order to meet debt payments, this has led to many believing Greece will soon pull out of the single European currency.
Importance of Immigration
The ‘Arab Spring’ combined with other events around the world have meant that while millions of people are looking towards the EU to provide them with a prosperous, safe and stable life, many EU countries having been effected heavily by the financial crisis are attempting to halt asylum acceptance. Politicians are quick to use asylum seekers as a source of blame for issues in a country, this is especially true of right leaning parties and sees a varying level of support throughout Europe. Zetter (2009) says that asylum seeker laws in Europe and “national political imperatives to protect domestic labour markets and to tighten the management of migration, will undoubtedly have negative impacts on refugee claims. Increasingly, those seeking asylum will find it harder to lodge their claims as bona fide refugees [Zetter, 2009].” In order to help ease debt burdens it is increasingly likely that EU states will look to refuse refugees entry and avoid costs that come with setting up camps and providing services for those in need. International law protects the rights of refugees and guards against their unfair repatriation, yet more and more governments are seeking to circumvent European asylum policy.
The International Migration Organisation (IMO) states that: “the predicted global mismatch between labour supply and demand may result in a further increase in irregular migration, with more people moving to find work than will be facilitated by labour mobility agreements. [IMO, 2010]” The number of illegal immigrants helps to increase public dislike for asylum seekers and gives political parties the mandate to cut down on refugee acceptance, which in turn leads to more illegal immigrants as other ways of entering the EU decrease. Governments often look to protect the unskilled job market from an increase in migrant workers, most refugees are without language skills and education therefore unskilled work is dominated by them, especially as they are likely to accept lower wages and often live in worse conditions that indigenous people. De Haas (2012) discusses how in liberal countries there is often a need to allow immigrants into the country in order to fulfil menial labour jobs, such as in agriculture and factories. This is often the opposite of popular policy and politicians that are aware of the importance of immigrants but their: “tough talk about reducing immigration is usually nothing more than a smokescreen to hide their inability and unwillingness to stop immigration. [De Haas, 2012]”
Zetter (2009) argues that the financial crisis will lead to a massive reduction in accepted refugees as aid agencies have their budgets cut through government austerity measures and falls in donations from the public. A lack of humanitarian spending will, according to Zetter, mean that “the first effect of the financial crisis will almost certainly be a reduction in the official number of refugees world-wide [Zetter, 2009].” When nations have to save money in order to pay off their debts it is likely that charity will drop significantly, as the people with the electoral power are the most important for any democratic government and dictatorial regimes are often the least likely to accept refugees. The European Union relies on foreign workers for filling vacancies in skilled sectors as well as unskilled, the United Nations (UN) reports that the health, science and technology sectors are all manned by a large percentage of immigrants and the population growth of the EU was made up by migrants: “contributing 0.9 million people or 62 % of total population growth in 2010. [UN, 2011]”
The ‘Arab Spring’
The ‘Arab Spring’ has not only had a major impact on Africa and Asia but also on the number of asylum seekers making their way into the EU. Asylum seekers from Northern Africa numbered in their thousands following the events in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya of 2010 and 2011. The scale of the situation is highlighted by the number of people crossing the Mediterranean in dangerously un-seaworthy boats, leading to estimates from the UN of “at least 1,400 people died crossing the Mediterranean in the first seven months of 2011, most as they tried to flee Libya [Human Rights Watch, 2012].“ The Guardian (2011) claims that the figure of those drowned crossing the Mediterranean to Europe is around 2000 and blamed EU countries for refusing to rescue some of them [Guardian, 2011}. In many cases there are reports that arguments about where to disembark those rescued put them at additional risk, the countries that performed the rescues often not wanting to land the people on their land as it would lead them to having responsibility over their refugee claims. Italy is one of the countries that has been heavily affected by the recent financial crisis and therefore is less likely to volunteer refugee status for thousands of North Africans, especially when there are many of other immigrant groups in Italy that are facing persecution and widespread protests from the right-wing elements of Italian society.
Right-wing political parties have been gaining in popularity in Europe over the last few years as the liberal political groups are blamed for failures of capitalism and the perceived openness towards immigration and refugees. In the French presidential election of 2012 Marine Le Pen, who represented the far right National Front, gained 17.9 percent of the popular vote, which was around 6.5 million votes in total, two thirds of the total of the standing President Nicolas Sarkozy. Although the French National Front failed to reach the second round of the votes, their number of votes shows the importance that immigration issues have on politics in one of Europe’s most liberal countries.
Italy’s geographical closeness to Tunisia and Libya, especially in their outlying islands such as Lampedusa, mean that they are the obvious landing point for refugees from Northern African states experiencing upheaval. Lampedusa received “Over 55,000 boat migrants, including at least 3,700 unaccompanied children, [Human Rights Watch, 2012]” in the first half of 2011, the normal population of Lampedusa is 4500 therefore meaning more than ten times the population arrived at the port in a very small amount of time. The Italian authorities appealed for help with resettlement of the thousands of refugees especially as the openness of the European Union means that once an asylum seeker has made it to the shores they are able to settle down in any of the countries, the President of Italy, Giorgio Napolitano, is quoted as saying, in response to the influx of North African immigrants that: “The recent, sad events in the Mediterranean demonstrate that the EU has to complete the unfinished job of settling up a common space of freedom, security and justice, by, inter alia, defining rules on asylum seekers and refugees protection [Napolitano, 2011].”
Many of the North African refugees attempted to make their way to France to join relatives yet the French government refused to accept their arrival, this led to discussions between the French and Italian governments about removing the right to passport free travel between European countries [Guardian, 2011].
Discussions between the EU and North African countries which are responsible for the majority of asylum seekers have taken place, it is essential that asylum seekers are encouraged to return to their homes and that it is safe for them to do so without persecution. Supporters of the overthrown governments are unlikely to want to return to their countries as they could face prosecution or threats of violence from their local communities who may want revenge for previous injustices against them.
A common EU policy
The most cited reason for the EU to have a common asylum policy is that the freedom of movement between countries is such that once someone is inside they are able to move freely between countries and thus it is not always the original entry point which is their target but just a way in. Kyrieri and Pahladsingh (2010) believe that the two main focuses of a common asylum system should be: “to ensure the maintenance of human rights within its territory and achieve common standards to avoid secondary refugee movements [Kyrieri and Pahladsingh, 2010].” It is often forgotten that asylum policies are needed to help the people who are claiming refugee status, many people focus on the negative aspects of keeping people out, while ignoring the humanitarian side. EU states need to have similar legal responses to asylum seekers to make sure that certain countries are not targeted as more lenient than others and therefore face more asylum seekers, it is also important to make sure that all countries follow the Geneva Conventions and the rights of the refugees in order to protect those who are rightfully escaping from persecution, torture or violence.
If members of the EU have different asylum policies it is likely that some will be weaker and not function as well as others, countries on the edge of the euro zone are the likely entrance points for asylum seekers yet they are rarely the areas with most refugees or illegal immigrants. The more prosperous nations such as France and Germany are often where non-EU citizens want to get to in order for their standard of living to be the highest, it is therefore in the interests of the richer nations to strengthen all of Europe’s border controls in order to stop mass influx into their countries. It is also important to keep checks on immigrants strict in order to improve national security and guard against the entry of terrorist agents following the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and continued animosity between some members of the EU and perceived threats such as Iran and North Korea. While the threat of terrorists is a real issue and has been shown in attacks in some of the largest cities in Europe, including London and Madrid, the fear of terrorism is often used as an excuse for tightening border controls so much that refugees are sent home to face torture and death and not given the proper protection they require.
Arimatsu and Samson (2011) argue that refugees are often let down by EU member states and are not met with the protection that should be afforded to them under the terms of the Geneva Conventions. They relate that: “Inadequate structures and processes in many European states have left refugees homeless, destitute and relying on charitable hand-outs or, alternatively, incarcerated for prolonged periods in detention centres, with little concern for their physical and mental welfare [Arimatsu and Samson, 2011].”
In order to help create a strong and standardised asylum system for the whole of Europe there was a fund created by the EU which has: “has helped Member States to increase the capacity of their asylum systems. For example, it helped Italy to put in place an asylum reception system [European Commission, 2011].” In 2014 there will be an improved fund that will attempt to add stability to EU immigration policies.
Italy
The Italian protection system for asylum seekers and refugees is based upon the European asylum system and has been in place since 2008. The main criticisms of the Italian system revolves around the provision for migrants that arrive into Italian sovereign land by sea, this often involves small islands with low populations, including Lampedusa. Romano (2009) states that: “there is not much clarity on which kind of information is given to these people, especially when they reach the isle of Lampedusa. There, they are kept in a centre for the time necessary for their identification and are then sent back to their home countries, unless they apply for international protection [Romano, 2009].” She seems to suggest that Italian agencies attempt to keep asylum seekers unaware of their rights so that they can be returned to their native country without being able to apply for residency in Italy, saving the taxpayers money. Romano claims that in 2009, before the mass influx of Libyan refugees, Italy had in place an agreement with Libya to send back those who were attempting to land upon Italian soil without questioning them to the reasons why they were attempting to leave their country, ignoring any issues of protection and human rights abuses that they may have faced upon return.
Sigona (2011) claims that the issues that Italy experienced in Lampedusa and the mass overcrowding of arriving asylum seekers was perhaps wanted by the Italian government in order for it to be able to push through strict immigration laws and to detract away from corruption and scandal that affected top politicians.
Italian immigration issues have not solely involved the fall-out from the ‘Arab Spring’, other problems include the treatment of Roma and Sinti in camps and widespread racism against these groups. The Italian government created emergency powers in order to evict thousands of Roma from their camps around Rome and other regions of Italy. While many of the Roma in the camps have legal residency in Italy, many having the right to free travel in the EU since Romania became a member, Italian politicians have claimed that they pose a security risk and therefore must be dealt with by the police. This blatant disregard of human rights for a group of society that has long been stigmatised in many different countries shows how Italian politics is strongly against immigration and use immigrant groups as scapegoats for the countries problems, even when they make up a small percentage of the population. The Italian council of state has recently ruled the emergency powers unlawful, which has been appealed by the government. The Italian issues with relatively small ethnic groups that are already settled in their country has shown that there is still a level of miss-trust between member states of the EU and their neighbours, this means that shared policies such as the common asylum system together are unlikely to last for the long-term. The UN has been critical of Italy’s approach to Roma citizens, however France has also recently evicted thousands of Roma, helping to add to the racist labelling of a section of society as troublemakers and criminals.
Greece
Greece has been the country in the Eurozone which has been worst hit by the recent economic crisis, mass protests against the government and a failure, following a new election, to create a strong coalition of parties are amongst their problems. Greece has widely been tipped to be the first country to pull out of the Euro due to their crippling debt and widespread protests against austerity plans. Greece is also one of the slowest countries to implement EU policy and: “is frequently characterized as a laggard in the implementation of EU policy [Dimitrakopoulos, 2011].” In order to form a consensus among the EU member states it is important that the policies are transposed in a rapid fashion, allowing for a standard across Europe. Dimitrakopoulos (2011) blames some of the problems for lack of implementation of EU policies in the vague nature of the agreements themselves, with so many member states having to agree on principles it is often only possible to form a directive when the idea is left open to certain national considerations. Many other issues have been highlighted by Linos (2007) who claims that coalition governments implement EU policy slower than single party regimes, this is mostly due to having to placate all members of the coalition whereas a party with an overall majority can force through whatever policies it likes.
Greek asylum regulations are some of the toughest in Europe and therefore they are an important target for the common asylum system: in 2008, according to the European Institute of Public Administration (EIPA), the Greek government “only granted asylum to 379 people out of nearly 20,000 requests; one of the lowest acceptance rates in the EU [EIPA, 2010].” Due to this low rate of acceptance and the European wide allowance to return asylum seekers to the member state in which the first arrived in Europe, many of the EU countries are reluctant to send asylum seekers to Greece as they are unlikely to allow them to stay, no matter the circumstances that they face back home. The Greek hard-line approach to asylum seekers means that not all states trust their approach to the issue; this weakens the chances for a common system. Arimatsu and Samson (2011) report that: “the United Kingdom, Iceland, Sweden and Germany announced that they would suspend the return of asylum-seekers to Greece. Since then, other EU states including Denmark, Finland, Switzerland, Norway and Belgium have followed suit [Arimatsu and Samson, 2011].” The option to transfer asylum seekers to back to the place of entry is not mandatory, therefore while it shows lack of trust in Greece’s ability to fairly judge the case of refugees it does not go against the principles of the EU. The more worrying aspect is that some of the EU member states do not believe that Greece is following the principles of the Geneva Convention. The legality of returning asylum seekers to their entrance point means that the onus for border control is put upon the countries on the edges of Europe; in the case of Greece they have clearly decided to prioritise removal of asylum seekers over stronger border controls and legal access, financial constraints mean that Greece cannot necessarily afford to make the ideal actions in dealing with asylum seekers.
The strict nature of Greek asylum policy is proven in the example of Iraqi nationals, of which 0% received subsidiary protection in 2007, compared to Sweden giving recognition to 73% of claimants [Arimatsu and Samson, 2011].
The Greek asylum policy is criticised on many points, The European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) reports that conditions in detention centres in Evros (a major entry point for asylum seekers) are: “inhuman [FRA, 2011].” The FRA continues to describe how overcrowding affects many of the detention centres as well as poor medical conditions and lack of legal aid [FRA, 2011]. In a time of economic crisis for Greece it is unlikely that the Greek government will prioritise spending on asylum seekers, they are hugely unpopular with the Greek people who are themselves suffering from austerity cuts which have reduced wages and left many living on the poverty line. It is unlikely that the situation with asylum seekers will be addressed soon by Greece and this leaves them far behind the policies of other European states and leaves them the possibility of exiting the EU as well as the single currency. The UNHCR reports that there are over 500,000 migrants living in Greece without a legal status, giving them no access to basic health care and many other services.
A particular legal case which highlights the plight of some of the asylum seekers in Greek Territory is SD vs. Greece in 2009. The applicant claimed that he had been subjected to inhumane treatment since his arrival in Greece in 2007. He was unable to make phone calls or leave his room in order to exercise and was only given the most basic of amenities and no access to cleaning items. It is likely that because of his education as a journalist in Turkey he was aware of his legal rights and therefore unlike many others without a comparable education he was able to take his complaints to court. He attempted on three occasions to have his request for asylum registered but it was ignored each time [European Court of Human rights, 2011]. This is just one isolated case that has managed to make its way to the European court on human rights whereas many thousands of asylum seekers in Greece are removed without proper legal counsel or any attempt to register their asylum requests.
Conclusion
In conclusion it is likely that the EU will have to move away from passport free travel between its member states as countries with weaker asylum policies and standards are not trusted by the majority. While this may only be a short-term cessation of free travel it is imperative that the EU remains supportive to the members that are facing financial hardships, none more so than Greece. EU money needs to be moved towards the countries where the majority of asylum seekers land, in order to allow speedy but fair resolution of refugee claims and negate the need of other European countries to enact the Dublin regulation and send asylum seekers back to their first entry point.
The economy of countries such as Italy and Greece have been weakened severely in the last few years following the global recession, this has meant that asylum seekers have become victimised and used as scapegoats for many of the issues in society, this is a pattern that is often found at times of financial crisis, a perfect example being the German reaction to the ‘Great Depression’ of the 1930’s and their anti-Semitic policies. While the Italian and Greek governments have not seen events to anywhere near the extremes of Nazi Germany the parallels are in the growing popularity for tighter border controls and moving away towards a more Euro-sceptic future. At times when money is in short supply and the governments of many European countries are cutting back on infrastructure and civil servants it is always likely that asylum seekers will find themselves abandoned and evicted at a greater rate than before, their poverty and lack of political say means that they are easy to remove and the protests of human rights groups are often over shadowed by the need to reduce debt and raise taxes.
The European Commissioner for Home Affairs released a statement in response to the allegations of poor conditions in Greece for asylum seekers, in 2011. It is clear from her statement that she believes that Greece needs to work to improve its human rights record and allow proper legal representation for the thousands of refugees that they process each year. Malmstrom (2011) declared that: “The EU’s commitment to continue its humanitarian tradition in providing shelter to those in need of international protection can only be fulfilled if all its Member States contribute and take their responsibilities [Malmstrom, 2011].” This makes it clear that the EU expects all of their members to be working towards the same goals and while doing so to uphold the humanitarian rights that everyone should enjoy, it is up to the EU to make sure that national economies are strong and through trade agreements ensure that some members are not left behind and unable to face challenges that affect the whole of Europe. Failures in a few of the members states of the EU mean that the entire system of common asylum policies are unsuccessful. The EU needs strong governance and a popular mandate in order to help convince the constituents of Europe that working together as a group allows all the countries to prosper together and not just to benefit the larger economies such as France and Germany.
Bibliography
- Arimatsu and Samson 2011 The UN Refugee Convention at 60: The Challenge for Europe International Law | March 2011 | IL BP 2011/01 http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CFMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fkms1.isn.ethz.ch%2Fserviceengine%2FFiles%2FISN%2F127840%2Fipublicationdocument_singledocument%2F22b5ba93-cd8b-4c8b-90f7-62a788d2b520%2Fen%2F18860_0311bp_arimatsu_samson.pdf&ei=NzHPT4WzA-Oy0QW_x8HJCw&usg=AFQjCNHYANkQAbxYZq974WC9W2acUqsdVA
- De Haas Hein, 2012, migration its economy stupid, Retrieved on 24 May 2012: http://heindehaas.blogspot.co.uk/
- Dimitrakopoulos Dionyssis Journal of European Public Policy 8, Iss. 4, 2001 http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080%2F1350176011006410
- European Commission, Asylum – Building a common area of protection and solidarity, retrieved on 1 June 2012
- http://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/policies/asylum/asylum_intro_en.htm
- European Commission, 2011, on enhanced intra-EU solidarity in the field of asylum, Brussels
- http://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/news/intro/docs/201112/1_EN_ACT_part1_v6.pdf
- European Court of Human rights 2011, CHAMBER JUDGMENT
- D. v. GREECE
- http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/view.asp?action=html&documentId=851175&portal=hbkm&source=externalbydocnumber&table=F69A27FD8FB86142BF01C1166DEA398649
- Gran Mark Lyall, 2012, The UN’s Response to the Arab Spring – One Year On, Retrieved on 1 June 2012
- http://ukun.fco.gov.uk/en/news/?view=PressS&id=730248882 Grant 2012
- Eur-Lex, Access to European Union law, retrieved on 29 May 2012
- http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52011DC0743:EN:NOT
- Hooper J, Traynor I, 2011, the Guardian, Sarkozy and Berlusconi to call for return of border controls in Europe, Retrieved on 29 May 2012
- http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/25/sarkozy-berlusconi-border-controls-europe
- Human Rights Watch, 2012, World Report 2012: European Union, Retrieved on 29 May 2012
- http://www.hrw.org/world-report-2012/world-report-2012-european-union
- Kyrieri K-M and Pahladsingh A, 2010, the European Asylum System
- and Minimum Standards: ‘Suggestions for practice and policy’
- http://www.eipa.eu/files/repository/product/20100625093148_Workingpaper2010_W_02.pdf
- Lucht Hans, 2011, the Guardian, Greece must not leave asylum seekers at the mercy of extremists, Retrieved on 29 May 2012
- http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/dec/29/greece-asylum-seekers-extremists
- Malmstrom Cecilia, 2011, European Commissioner for Home Affairs, following the judgement of the European Court of Human Rights on the transfer of asylum seekers under the EU Dublin Regulation
- http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/11/35&type=HTML
- Romano Maria Cristina, 2009, The Italian asylum procedure – some problematic aspects, retrieved on 29 May 2012
- http://www.legalaidboard.ie/lab/publishing.nsf/content/The_Researcher_June_2009_Article_6#_ftn7
- Sigona Nando, 2011, Lampedusa and the spectacle of the invasion, retrieved on 29 May 2012
- http://nandosigona.wordpress.com/2011/04/01/lampedusa-and-the-spectacle-of-the-invasion/
- Yang Fang, 2011, Xinhua news, Ripple effect of unrest in Mideast, North Africa, Retrieved on 29 May 2012
- http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/indepth/2011-03/06/c_13763941.htm
- Zetter, R. 2009. Forced migration in an era of global financial crisis – what will happen to refugees? University of Oxford, Refugee Studies Centre. Retrieved on 5 June 2012
- http://www.age-of-migration.com/uk/financialcrisis/updates/1b.pdf