Research
Database

More than 51 million people worldwide are forcibly displaced today as refugees, asylum seekers, or internally displaced persons. According to the 1951 Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, to be recognized legally as a refugee, an individual must be fleeing persecution on the basis of religion, race, political opinion, nationality, or membership in a particular social group, and must be outside the country of nationality. However, the contemporary drivers of displacement are complex and multilayered, making protection based on a strict definition of persecution increasingly problematic and challenging to implement. Many forced migrants now fall outside the recognized refugee and asylum apparatus. Much displacement today is driven by a combination of intrastate conflict, poor governance and political instability, environmental change, and resource scarcity. These conditions, while falling outside traditionally defined persecution, leave individuals highly vulnerable to danger and uncertain of the future, compelling them to leave their homes in search of greater security. In addition, the blurring of lines between voluntary and forced migration, as seen in mixed migration flows, together with the expansion of irregular migration, further complicates today's global displacement picture. This report details the increasing mismatch between the legal and normative frameworks that define the existing protection regime and the contemporary patterns of forced displacement. It analyzes contemporary drivers and emerging trends of population displacement, noting that the majority of forcibly displaced people – some 33.3 million – remain within their own countries, and that more than 50 percent of the displaced live in urban areas. The author then outlines and assesses key areas where the international protection system is under the most pressure, and finally examines the key implications of these trends for policymakers and the international community, outlining some possible policy directions for reform.

In het asielrecht is het in eerste instantie aan de asielzoeker om aannemelijk te maken dat hij bescherming nodig heeft van de Nederlandse overheid. De Nederlandse overheid beoordeelt de aannemelijkheid van het asielrelaas op basis van de gesprekken die medewerkers van de Immigratie- en Naturalisatiedienst (IND) voeren met de asielzoeker en algemene informatie over het land van herkomst. Naast deze informatie wordt in sommige gevallen medisch onderzoek gebruikt om stellingen van de asielzoeker te onderbouwen, of juist te weerleggen. Dit type medisch onderzoek vormt het onderwerp van dit advies. In het asielrecht werd jarenlang het uitgangspunt gehanteerd dat bij de beoordeling van asielverzoeken medische aspecten in beginsel geen rol kunnen spelen. De verantwoordelijke bewindspersonen hebben de afgelopen jaren steeds het standpunt ingenomen dat er medisch gezien (meestal) geen zekere uitspraken kunnen worden gedaan over de oorzaak van littekens, fysieke en psychische klachten. Dit standpunt is niet onomstreden. Al in 1999 stelde een groot aantal deskundigen een handleiding op voor onderzoek naar de gevolgen van marteling en andere wrede, onmenselijke of vernederende behandeling of bestraffing. Deze handleiding wordt ook wel het Istanbul Protocol genoemd. In dit protocol is expliciet neergelegd hoe de waarschijnlijkheid van een causale relatie tussen littekens, lichamelijke en psychische klachten en de gestelde oorzaak daarvan, kan worden onderzocht. Ook in de praktijk bij de IND wordt het standpunt dat medische aspecten in beginsel geen rol kunnen spelen genuanceerd. Als de asielzoeker een medische rapportage indient die conform de richtlijnen van het Istanbul Protocol is opgesteld, wordt deze door medewerkers van de IND betrokken bij de beoordeling van de asielaanvraag. Voor het verkrijgen van dit type medisch onderzoek zijn asielzoekers tot op heden afhankelijk van particuliere organisaties, met name van het instituut voor Mensenrechten en Medisch Onderzoek (iMMO). Aanleiding voor het advies en adviesvraag Met het oog op verdere harmonisering van het Europese asielstelsel is op 26 juni 2013 de herziene Procedurerichtlijn gepubliceerd. Deze richtlijn bevat minimumnormen waaraan alle asielprocedures in de lidstaten van de Europese Unie moeten voldoen. De richtlijn dient uiterlijk op 20 juli 2015 te zijn geïmplementeerd in nationale wet- en regelgeving. Artikel 18 van de herziene richtlijn bevat een nieuwe bepaling die specifiek ziet op medisch onderzoek betreffende aanwijzingen van vroegere vervolging of ernstige schade. Het gevolg van de richtlijn is dat littekens en psychische of fysieke klachten een element zullen gaan vormen waarmee de staatssecretaris bij de beoordeling van asielaanvragen rekening zal moeten gaan houden en waar hij ook op eigen initiatief onderzoek naar zal moeten gaan doen. De staatssecretaris heeft de Adviescommissie voor Vreemdelingenzaken (ACVZ) op 21 maart 2014 gevraagd hoe artikel 18 in de asielprocedure kan worden vormgegeven. De adviesvraag die door de ACVZ is gehanteerd luidt: “Hoe moet de implementatie van artikel 18 van de Procedurerichtlijn betreffende medisch onderzoek in regelgeving en in de asielprocedure worden vormgegeven?” In het advies wordt nagegaan in welke gevallen medisch onderzoek moet worden verricht, aan welke normen het medisch onderzoek moet voldoen, hoe het medisch onderzoek procedureel kan worden ingericht en hoe het onderzoek moet worden meegewogen in de beoordeling van een asielverzoek. Daarnaast is nagegaan hoe immigratiediensten van andere landen omgaan met dit type medisch onderzoek.

Although over 450,000 Syrians fled to countries nearby Syria, numbers seeking refuge within the EU remain small. In 2011, a total of 8,920 Syrians applied for asylum within EU borders, while in the first three quarters of 2012 applications increased slightly, reaching a total of 11,573. Only 1,490 irregular entries of Syrians were recorded during the last three quarters of 2011, which rose to 2,739 in the first two quarters of 2012. Numbers of Syrians applying for immigration have also remained negligible. In light of the overall magnitude of the crisis compared with the actual numbers reaching Europe, this paper reviews EU’s response to the crisis. First, it presents the facts: a historical review of displacements from Syria, the numbers, and the route of travel for Syrian refugees, migrants, and asylum seekers to Europe. This is followed by a review of European responses to the Syrian crisis. Finally, the paper concludes with recommendations for addressing the Syrian refugee crisis. In short, the EU could consider: establishing a Regional Protection Programme (RPP) with a large increase of Syrian refugee resettlement as a required component; increasing refugee resettlement for those who have been affected by the Syrian crisis and are the most in need; continue positive asylum procedures throughout the EU, and grant prima facie recognition including provision of sufficient assistance to Syrian asylum seekers; encourage visa facilitation and family reunification for Syrians; and continue to work with its international partners to find a political and humanitarian solution to the Syrian crisis.

With regards to modalities, TRESSPASS project includes air, maritime and land (including car and train) border crossing points, and specifically also travel routes that combine different modalities. It excludes border crossings outside of border crossing points, such as happens with boats of refugees on the Mediterranean. With regards to threats, this includes smuggling, irregular immigration, cross border crime, and terrorism, including threats to the transport itself (so, including e.g. aviation security – per the topic text). It excludes other threats such as posed by state-actors. This proposal includes all tiers of the four-tier access model: (1) measures undertaken in, or jointly with third countries or service providers; (2) cooperation with neighbouring countries; (3) border control and counter-smuggling measures, and (4) control measures within the area of free movement. TRESSPASS will (1) develop a single cohesive risk-based border management concept (2) develop three pivoting pilot demonstrators (3) demonstrate the validity of the single cohesive risk-based border management concept by using red teaming and simulations (4) prepare for the further development of this concept beyond this project by linking to other known risk-based border management projects (in- and outside EU, within EU research frameworks and on national levels), and describe how their results contribute to a single cohesive risk-based border management concept

The Constitution of the Republic of Belarus stipulates1 that foreign citizens and stateless persons enjoy the same rights and freedoms as citizens of Belarus on the territory of the country, unless laws and international agreements provide otherwise. In view of the above, it is noteworthy that the key legal statutory act that regulates rights and obligations of foreign citizens and stateless persons (further on ? foreign citizens) on the territory of the Republic of Belarus is the Law of the Republic of Belarus of January 4, 2010 No. 105-? ?On the Legal Status of Foreign citizens and Stateless Persons in the Republic of Belarus? 2 (further on ? the Law).

Western countries have significant concerns about the increasing number of undocumented migrants and asylum seekers crossing international borders. The European Agenda for Migration includes a set of priorities that address this complex and nuanced problem. Core values of European societies, such as solidarity and human rights, are being tested by irregular migration pressure and the related difficulties of immigration detention. The escalating number of detainees released into host communities instead of being deported has raised new questions about how this population is being managed. This project uses two case studies: Spain and Canada to analyze how the governance of irregular migrants and asylum seekers occurs in two complementary ways. First, at the level of discourse, this research will assess how irregular migration has been represented in the political process by focusing on how immigration detention has emerged as a response to this issue. Second, the project will examine the impact of detention in those released and supervised in the community. This study will also focus on how different actors participant in the governance of migrants and how gender, race and nationality influence this process. Theoretically, this research builds on the governmentality and border control scholarship. Policy analysis and interviews are the primary methods of data collection. This study builds on existing scholarship and will provide a comprehensive and comparative analysis of irregular immigration and detention that can inform various types of immigration policy. The research project will be structured to ensure the applicant receives a high quality and comprehensive training program that includes academic milestones and the management, communication and dissemination competences. This study project is built on the collaboration of several institutions and academics to guarantee the international relevance of the project and the academic excellence of the researcher.

The project investigates the notion of ‘demand’ for trafficking in human beings (THB) from a range of scientific perspectives and develops an integrated framework that comprehensively addresses and relates demand with alternative framings where appropriate. The findings provide empirical evidence to concrete policy questions on the EU agenda and lay-out the full range of promising policy options. The project consortium engages in continuous, intensive communication efforts with the objective of ensuring a good take-up of research results by policy-makers, other stakeholders and the wider society. Work will proceed in three phases: • Phase 1 involves a comprehensive analysis of theoretical and empirical literature as well as an overview over debates with regard to trafficking for different purposes (commercial sex, labor exploitation, child begging, forced marriages, organ removal and criminal activities), and a mapping of demand related policy measures in different countries. On this basis, a joint conceptual approach will be developed. • Phase 2 involves five in-depth empirical case studies. Three of them address specific fields with systematic differences with regard to the type of demand linked to trafficking: Domestic work, prostitution and imported goods which are provided through global supply chains. Two case studies investigate specifically relevant policy approaches (law enforcement and raising awareness through campaigns). • Phase 3 integrates insights from both phases into a coherent framework and intensifies dissemination which is informed by continuous, systematic stakeholder communication throughout the project.

Summarizes replies received from Governments and concerned intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations on measures taken to deal with slavery-like practices such as trafficking in human beings, sexual exploitation of children and forced labour.