Research
Database

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.

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;

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.

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 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.

"TIES (The Integration of the European Second Generation) nahm seinen Anfang im Jahr 2005 als Forschungsprojekt zur zweiten Generation in acht EU-Staaten unter der Leitung des Institute for Migration and Ethnic Studies (IMES) der Universität Amsterdam und des Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute (NIDI). Die TIES-Studie richtet sich auf die Nachkommen von Einwanderern aus der Türkei, Jugoslawien (Nachkommen jugoslawischer „Gastarbeiter“) und Marokko, wobei die „zweite Generation“ gefasst wird als die Kinder von Einwanderern, die im Einwanderungsland der Eltern geboren wurden und leben. Zum Zeitpunkt der Erhebung waren die Befragten zwischen 18 und 35 Jahre alt. Daneben wurde eine Kontrollgruppe von Probanden „nicht-migrantischer“ Herkunft interviewt. Da es sich bei Migration um ein größtenteils urbanes Phänomen handelt, wurde die Studie in 15 Städten in acht EU-Ländern durchgeführt: Paris und Straßburg in Frankreich, Berlin und Frankfurt am Main in Deutschland, Madrid und Barcelona in Spanien, Wien und Linz in Österreich, Amsterdam und Rotterdam in den Niederlanden, Brüssel und Antwerpen in Belgien, Zürich und Basel in der Schweiz und Stockholm in Schweden. In fast allen Städten wurden jeweils drei verschiedene Gruppen unterschiedlicher ethnisch-nationaler Herkunft befragt, namentlich zwei Gruppen der zweiten Generation und eine Kontrollgruppe autochthoner Herkunft. Die jeweiligen Gruppen der zweiten Generation waren türkischer und marokkanischer Herkunft in den Niederlanden und Belgien sowie türkischer und jugoslawischer Herkunft in Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz. In Frankreich und Schweden wurde nur die zweite Generation türkischer Herkunft und die Kontrollgruppe untersucht, in Spanien nur Marokkaner der zweiten Generation und die Kontrollgruppe. Die TIES-Studiengruppe bestand aus neun nationalen Partnern und einer internationalen Koordinationseinheit. Die deutsche Volkswagen-Stiftung stellte die Mittel für eine Kernuntersuchung unter Türken zweiter Generation in fünf Ländern zur Verfügung stellte. Zusätzliche nationale und internationale Förderung insbesondere durch ESF ECRP und die Bertelsmann-Stiftung gestattete die Ausweitung der TIES-Erhebung auf drei weitere Länder und die Einbeziehung zweier weiterer Befragtengruppen."

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

Sinds eind 2017 is het mogelijk om overlastgevende asielzoekers een maatregel op te leggen en hen te plaatsen in een zogenaamde extra begeleiding en toezichtlocatie (ebtl). De ebtl-maatregel is te beschouwen als een aanvulling op de al bestaande maatregelen die het Centraal Orgaan opvang asielzoekers (COA) kan opleggen. De ebtl-maatregel is vormgegeven als een pilot voor twee jaar en is binnen deze termijn geëvalueerd. De voor u liggende rapportage is het resultaat van deze evaluatie. De evaluatie valt uiteen in een plan-, een proces- en een effectevaluatie. Binnen de planevaluatie is gekeken wat de oorspronkelijk bedoelde doelen, doelgroep, werkzame bestanddelen en randvoorwaarden waren en is een oordeel gegeven of in vier elementen voldoende is voorzien. De procesevaluatie richtte zich op de daadwerkelijke invulling van deze elementen in de praktijk en de effectevaluatie op de daadwerkelijke resultaten van de ebtl-maatregel.

De afgelopen jaren is veel kritiek geuit op de onevenwichtige verdeling van het aantal asielverzoeken en de daarmee samenhangende verantwoordelijkheden tussen de lidstaten van de Europese Unie (EU). Niet alleen verschilt het aantal asielaanvragen -zowel in absolute als relatieve zin- tussen de lidstaten sterk, ook de wijze waarop lidstaten omgaan met asielzoekers en asielverzoeken loopt uiteen. Dit is des te opvallender omdat de normen in de EU gelijk zijn en zijn vervat in bindende Europese richtlijnen. De onevenwichtige verdeling van asielverzoeken levert spanningen op in de EU. Om die reden heeft de staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie aan de Adviescommissie voor Vreemdelingenzaken (ACVZ) gevraagd hem te adviseren over de vraag hoe het Gemeenschappelijk Europees Asielsysteem (GEAS) zich kan ontwikkelen tot een solidair systeem, waarin de verantwoordelijkheden van lidstaten van de EU ten aanzien van asielzoekers en statushouders billijk worden verdeeld. De ACVZ beantwoordt deze vraag door een voorstel te doen voor een permanent verdelingsmechanisme van asielverantwoordelijkheden. Onder de term asielverantwoordelijkheden verstaat de ACVZ niet alleen de behandeling van asielverzoeken en de daaraan gekoppelde opvang, maar ook de integratie van toegelaten asielzoekers en de terugkeer van, of het omgaan met asielzoekers wier verzoek is afgewezen. Door de grote aantallen asielzoekers die dit jaar naar de EU zijn gekomen, is de discussie over de ongelijke verdeling van asielverantwoordelijkheden in een stroomversnelling terechtgekomen en zijn er in Europees verband verschillende maatregelen getroffen om de komst van deze asielzoekers in goede banen te leiden. Ook wordt gepoogd om de verantwoordelijkheden billijker over de lidstaten te verdelen, bijvoorbeeld door in totaal 160.000 asielzoekers met een hoge kans op een verblijfsvergunning te herplaatsen uit Italië en Griekenland naar de overige lidstaten. De uitvoering van deze maatregelen komt echter maar moeizaam van de grond en leidt tot verdere spanningen tussen de lidstaten. Het is dus zeer de vraag of een advies over een permanent verdelingsmechanisme op dit moment op breed politiek draagvlak kan rekenen in alle lidstaten. Een dergelijk mechanisme is volgens de ACVZ in de toekomst echter onontkoombaar. Daarom heeft de ACVZ gepoogd een advies te schrijven dat zowel juridisch haalbaar, als praktisch uitvoerbaar is

. 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.

The objectives are to address the knowledge and implementation gap concerning alternatives to detention for asylum seekers in the EU, paying particular attention to vulnerable asylum seekers, to assist Member States in the transposition of the recast Reception Conditions Directive and to enhance the use of alternatives to detention complying with EU and international legal standards.

In this 2019 MEDAM Assessment Report, we present insights from MEDAM research and policy dialogue since 2016 to explain how closer cooperation among EU member states and with countries of origin and transit can improve outcomes for all stakeholders. Crucially, short of establishing a new Iron Curtain on the EU’s external border or continuing to tolerate abuses, there is no way that either individual member states or the EU as a whole can insulate themselves from irregular migrants and asylum seekers. Yet, if crossing the EU border enabled all irregular migrants to remain in the EU for good, the integrity of EU visa and asylum policies would be undermined. Thus, close cooperation with countries of origin for the return and readmission of their citizens who have no right to remain in the EU is crucial. Still, it is typically not in the interest of countries of origin to limit the mobility of their citizens. Cooperation between the EU and countries of origin must therefore cover a wide enough range of policies to ensure that all parties consistently benefit from the policy package and have a strong incentive to meet their commitments. We emphasize more EU support for refugees hosted by low- and middle-income countries and more legal employment opportunities for non-EU citizens in the EU. Rethinking EU asylum and migration policies along these lines requires extensive consultations and negotiations among stakeholders in Europe and in countries of origin and transit. Our ‘insights’ are meant to inform and stimulate such conversations. However, sustainable reforms will come only as the result of stakeholders working out the details and developing a sense of ownership of the necessary reforms. Our first set of insights relates to popular attitudes toward immigration and the structure of public preferences for asylum and refugee protection policies (section 2 of this report). Next, we explain how the EU and countries of origin and transit can all benefit from cooperating on border management, refugee protection, and expanding legal labor migration to the EU (section 3). Finally, we consider the implications for cooperation among EU member states and the long-standing plans for reform of the European asylum system (section 4).