Research
Database

The main objective of this report is to analyze Azerbaijani legislation in the field of integration of foreigners, stateless persons and forced migrants, in order to see if it complies with international documents that Azerbaijan has signed. The authors also examine the application of this legislation and identify key public agencies and positions dealing with different aspects of integration. They also offer recommendations on how to resolve existing problems. It is established that Azerbaijan has signed key international ocuments and that legal framework has been formed to regulate foreigners’ entry to, departure from, and residence in Azerbaijan, as well as acquisition of Azerbaijani citizenship.

This paper is based on the information included in the twenty-one explanatory notes from CARIM East network members, covering the demo-economic, legal and socio-political aspects of the situation of asylum seekers, refugees and IDPs in individual countries of the CARIM East region. This paper gives an overview of the basic facts concerning populations in need of protection in the Eastern Partnership countries, who are defined as asylum seekers, refugees and IDPs. It focuses especially on their recognition, social protection and integration.

Efficient NII (non-intrusive inspection) of containerised freight is critical to trade and society. Freight containers are potential means for smuggling (e.g. tobacco), illegal immigration, trafficking of drugs, mis-declared goods and dangerous illicit substances, including explosives, nuclear material, chemical and biological warfare agents and radioactively contaminated goods. One inspection NII technology cannot cope with all these targets. The C-BORD Toolbox and Framework will address all these targets and enable customs to deploy comprehensive cost-effective container NII solutions to potentially protect all EU sea- and land-borders, satisfying a large range of container NII needs. The C-BORD Toolbox will include 5 complementary innovative detection technologies: delivering improved X-rays, Target Neutron Interrogation, Photofission, Sniffing and Passive Detection. User interfaces and data will be integrated to optimise effectiveness and efficiency of end-users and systems. The C-BORD Framework will help customs analyse their needs, design integrated solutions, and optimise the container inspection chain; it will address detection levels, false alarm levels, throughput, health & safety, logistics and cost & benefits. C-BORD will increase the probability of finding illicit or dangerous content with at least equal throughput of containers per time unit, reduce the need for costly, time-consuming and dangerous manual container inspections by customs officials, and in case a container is opened, increase the probability of finding illicit materials. C-BORD involves stakeholders from 8 EU countries, as partners (5) and advisory group members (3). On 3 custom sites integrated solutions will be trialled, respectively addressing the needs of big seaports, small seaports and mobile land-borders. To optimise sustainable impact, C-BORD will actively engage with a large community, will support policy implementation, evolution and start early exploitation planning.

. The main direct impacts of visa liberalisation included an immediate increase in shortterm travel to the countries of destination from visa-free countries and an immediate reduction in the workload of consulate staff. The new visa-free regime also led to an increase in border control activities by EU Member States and Norway to avoid the misuse of visa liberalisation. 2. One of the main indirect impacts of visa liberalisation related to the facilitation of access to the labour market in specific Member States. Following visa liberalisation, which has made it easier for third-country nationals to travel to the EU and Norway to explore employment opportunities, there has been an increase in the number of residence permits issued to nationals of the eight visa-free countries (mostly for remunerated activities). Another indirect impact relates to higher levels of cooperation during return and readmission procedures with visa-free countries. 3. Following visa liberalisation, there has been an overall increase in the number of asylum applicants from visa-free countries, most of which have received a negative decision. Some of the measures adopted by Member States to cope with the high number of asylum applications included the designation of visa-free countries as safe countries of origin (allowing an accelerated asylum procedure), information campaigns and cooperation with the national authorities of visa-free countries. 4. There has been an increase in the number of nationals from visa-free countries detected as overstaying their maximum period allowed after visa liberalisation and 12 Member States reported this as a challenge. However, it was not possible to establish a clear link between visa liberalisation, irregular stay and overstay and less than half of the Member States implemented any specific measures to combat this phenomenon. 5. Most Member States did not report any specific challenges in the area of illegal employment after visa liberalisation was introduced. Only a few Member States adopted measures specifically targeting nationals from visa-free countries. 6. There was little evidence of a link between visa liberalisation and the facilitation of irregular migration. Several Member States adopted additional or new measures to counter the activities of facilitators after visa liberalisation, including reinforcing bilateral cooperation, strengthening penalties for facilitation of irregular migration and setting up joint police investigations. Similarly, available data cannot establish a clear link between visa liberalisation and any increases in smuggling and trafficking in human beings. 7. After visa liberalisation was introduced, several Member States observed an increase in criminal activities. All eight visa-free countries were asked to reinforce their actions to fight against such activities, particularly against organised crime groups. This phenomenon is closely monitored and failure to cooperate with EU Member States and Norway in this area could lead to the suspension of the visa-free travel to nationals from the eight countries subject of this study.

'Research in the field of Ethnic and Migration Studies has predominantly focused on immigrants (and their children) with poor educational credentials and the lowest labor market positions. A relative blind spot has been the surge and role of new elites within these populations. The central aim of the ELITES project is to examine the formation of new elites among the Turkish second generation in eight European cities (European cities with large Turkish communities) and a comparison group of elite members of native parentage of lower class background. The ELITES project analyzes differences in the pathways, resources and individual strategies that have contributed to attaining an elite position. The project looks at the impact of these new elites upon the Turkish communities, and to what extent they take up leadership positions in mainstream organisations. For this second part of the ELITES project we focus on the networks of the elite members. The Turkish second generation elite is compared with an elite of native parentage to see if findings for the second generation Turks are specific or are part of a more general pattern. For the ELITES project we use both quantitative and qualitative research methods. We will interview in-dept 240 elites members in eight European cities. The two PhD students will investigate in their subprojects the importance of respectively ethnicity and gender in the elite formation of the two groups. In the second part of the project (sub project 3) we gather information about the closest and most crucial (for their elite position) network members of the respondents. From these network members we will also gather information about their network contacts. The resulting elites network information will be analyzed quantitatively and compared across the eight research sites. In subproject 4 we make a synthesis of the information about elite formation gathered in the two qualitative subprojects and information of the network project.'

The law with the greatest legal effect on the territory of the Republic of Azerbaijan (RA) is the RA Constitution.1 Granting political asylum is provided for by Article 70 of the RA Constitution that stipulates that ?in accordance with universally accepted norms of the international law, [RA] grants political asylum to foreign nationals and stateless persons

For some years there has been considerable criticism of the uneven distribution across the member states of the European Union (EU) of asylum applications and the responsibilities related to them. There are substantial differences between member states in the number of asylum applications received, both in absolute and relative terms. Furthermore, the way the member states deal with asylum seekers and asylum applications varies. This is remarkable, considering that the standards governing the treatment of asylum applications are identical in the majority of member states, and are laid down in binding EU directives. The uneven distribution of responsibilities has led to tensions within the EU. For this reason the State Secretary for Security and Justice asked the Advisory Committee on Migration Affairs (ACVZ) for advice on how the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) could be transformed into a system based on solidarity, in which the responsibilities of the member states vis-à-vis asylum seekers and permit holders can be shared fairly among them. In its report, the ACVZ proposes a permanent mechanism enabling member states to share asylum responsibilities. The Advisory Committee understands the term ‘asylum responsibilities’ as including not only the responsibility for processing asylum applications and providing reception during the application process, but also for the integration of asylum seekers whose application is accepted and for returning or dealing with those whose application is dismissed. As a result of the large number of asylum seekers arriving in the EU this year, the debate on the unequal distribution of asylum responsibilities has flared up, leading to the introduction of several measures at EU level. One example is the decision of the European Council to reallocate a total of 160,000 asylum seekers whose asylum application has a good chance of success from Italy and Greece to other member states. However, the implementation of these measures has not been without difficulties and is responsible for even greater tension between member states. It is therefore highly questionable whether this advisory report can count on broad political support in all EU countries. Nonetheless, the ACVZ deems the creation of a permanent responsibility-sharing mechanism to be inevitable. It has therefore attempted to forge a proposal that is both legally viable and practically feasible.

The European challenges in the field of migration have an impact on society, since the division between them opposed to newcomers and welcoming them has been continuously increasing. The project addresses the perceptions of the Belgian and European population about refugees/migrants and vice versa as well as their interactions with the policy agenda of asylum and migration with a European comparative perspective and a specific focus on Belgium. As Europe face important migratory challenges and political difficulties we have seen an increase of the public opinion’s polarisation regarding asylum and refugees, it is important to address this question. Including teams from our project will analyse this polarisation and its links to policies, as it is necessary for a better understanding of the current debate on migration in Europe and Belgium. The 2015 asylum crisis will be considered as indicative of the general European and Belgian citizens’ reactions about migration. The focus is then on attitudes, representations, discourses and practices about refugees, on the interactions at the local level between the majority populations and newly arrived migrants. The project will follow two objectives. First studying public opinion towards asylum seekers and refugees with a European cross- national perspective but also how these groups perceive Belgium, its asylum system and its reception policies. The second objective is to analyse the polarisation of the public opinion by focussing on pro and anti-refugees’ actions at the local level. This will allow understanding the links between public opinion and the implementation of asylum and reception policies. In order to fulfil these objectives, our project is based on 5 Work Packages that each focus on a specific dimension. The first two ones aim at developing a European comparative perspective on perceptions towards migrants, refugees and asylum seekers. This then includes a quantitative analysis of public opinion’s perceptions towards new immigration flows as well as a comparison of 5 European case studies (Sweden, Italy, Grece, Hungary and Germany). The three other work packages aim at a deep analysis of the Belgian situation. First, they consist of understanding actions and reactions towards asylum seekers and refugees at a local level. This implies to study the opposite reactions with an in-depth analysis of their content, justifications and determinants but also to focus on interactions between social groups (pro vs. anti migrants groups; ional citizens & refugees) as well as the interactions between the population’s reaction and the implementation of asylum and receptions policies. Second, studying the Belgian situation implies to analyse asylum seekers and refugees perceptions regarding the country’s asylum and reception policies. Lastly, it implies to realise a policy evaluation of those policies. The aim of this project and the main questions it addresses focus more on the relations and on the dynamics existing between the citizens and the migrants, asylum seekers and refugees. Hence, we propose to broaden the scope of what is usually done by extending the focus on actors that are often not implied in migration studies: the majority population and the impact of new migration waves on social cohesion. The expected results concerns: 1) an in-depth and comparative knowledge of attitudes towards migrants and refugees in Europe; 2) an analysis of the factors influencing the attitudes of rejections, disregards and support; 3) an in-depth analysis of the specificities of the current wave of migration compared to the last ones; 4) an in-depth analysis of citizens’ and migrants’ discourses, representation and practices and of their reaction on social cohesion at a local level;