Legal analysis (laws)

The project builds on the assumption that barriers to the exercise of fundamental rights, in this case free movement, cannot be addressed unless accurately identified. When these deal with specific population groups, such as young people, this is all the more relevant. The obstacles that young people face with respect to legislation, access to finance and resources, to name but a few, are very different from other age groups. Complementing the existing knowledge through this perspective enriches the understanding of existing barriers and obstacles to free movement in a targeted way. The project adopts a unique methodology that operates on several levels and allows for the collection, analysis and synthesis of information in a way that it sheds light into aspects of free movement that have not been explored. It uses a mixed-method approach that combines: a) empirical field research through structured interviews with young people and national authorities in the participating countries b) data collection and targeted legal research in all partner countries; c) socio-legal analysis of the data collected and d) comparative analysis of the findings. Further, the project will raise awareness at national and EU level on barriers to free movement.

The International Migration Policy And Law Analysis (IMPALA) Database is a cross-national, cross-institutional, cross-disciplinary project on comparative immigration policy. The pilot database version covers 10 years and 9 country cases including Australia, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Spain, Switzerland, United Kingdom, and the United States of America. It covers The focus is admission policy, although the authors include also acquisition of citizenship, which is generally understood as being part of ‘immigrant policies’, namely what happens after admission. The project classifies and measures tracks of entry associated with five migration categories: economic migration, family reunification, asylum and humanitarian migration, and student migration, as well as acquisition of citizenship. It is the product of an international collaboration between researchers from George Mason University, Harvard University, London School of Economics and Political Science, Paris School of Economics, University of Amsterdam, University of Luxembourg, and University of Sydney.

This project explores law-making in the domain of migration in the Maghreb as a result of interaction between diverse exogenous and endogenous normative factors. It builds and tests an innovative approach to reforms undertaken since 2003 in three countries, namely Tunisia, Morocco and Mauritania, to improve the knowledge and understanding of legal development in the Maghreb. It unfolds the plurality of interactions that result in the law being reformed in these countries and the country-specificity of law-making in a field where law is being globalised. Drawing on comparative law, international law, sociology of law, human geography and political science, the project examines how recent regulations affecting migration (entry and stay in a territory, exit from the territory, citizenship and asylum) have been thought, elaborated and adopted in each of the three Maghreb countries covered by the project. It therefore goes into the details and mechanisms of law-making and leads to designing a comparative model of normative interactions in national law-making. This project provides an unprecedented analysis of legal development in the Maghreb and a valuable contribution to the understanding of normative interactions in the field of migration. Innovative from theoretical, empirical and methodological perspectives, it develops a coherent analytical framework of law-making, aimed to be replicable across policy and geographical areas. It is hosted in a research centre at Aix-Marseille University, France, which combines excellence in legal research and a unique multidisciplinary academic pool rooted in the Mediterranean. It resorts to field research in Morocco, Tunisia and Mauritania and a network of partners in these countries to benefit from local input and favour knowledge-sharing. This project provides supportive policy tools to strengthen the external dimension of EU’s immigration and asylum policy and a renewed partnership between the EU and its Southern Neighbourhood.

DEMOS is built on the assumption that populism is symptomatic of a disconnect between how democratic polities operate and how citizens perceive their own aspirations, needs and identities within the political system. As such, DEMOS explores the practical value of ’democratic efficacy’ as the condition of political engagement needed to address the challenge of populism. The concept combines attitudinal features (political efficacy), political skills, knowledge, and democratic opportunity structures. In order to better understand populism DEMOS addresses its hitherto under-researched aspects at micro-, meso-, and macro-levels: its socio-psychological roots, social actors’ responses to the populist challenge, and populism’s effects on governance. DEMOS focuses not only on the polity, but equally on citizens’ perspectives: how they are affected by, and how they react to, populism. Politically underrepresented groups and those targeted by populist politics are a particular focus, e.g. youth, women, and migrants. As populism has varying socially embedded manifestations, DEMOS aims at contextualising it through comparative analysis on the variety of populisms across Europe, including their historical, cultural, and socioeconomic roots, manifestations, and impacts. DEMOS develops indicators and predictors of populism and elaborates scenarios on the interactions of populism with social actors and institutions both at the national and the EU levels. Unifying 15 partners from 10 disciplines, DEMOS combines in-depth research on populism and democratic efficacy with action research and pilot projects in order to develop lasting tools and timely policy recommendations; project methods include experiments, deliberative polling, text mining, surveys, and legal analysis. DEMOS places strong emphasis on communication and productive interactions with a variety of stakeholders throughout the project, including policymakers, journalists, students, and the general public.

Should the people be allowed to vote on the adoption of immigration restrictions that violate international law? Should it be permissible to launch a citizens’ initiative demanding the reintroduction of the death penalty? May a proposal be put to a popular vote despite the fact that voters are not properly informed about its effects? With the mushrooming of direct-democratic instruments throughout Europe and the introduction of the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI), the relationship between popular sovereignty and the rule of law is set to become one of the defining political issues of our time. Yet despite their great practical relevance, the questions of where the legal limits of direct democracy should be drawn and how compliance with these limits should be reviewed have remained almost completely unexplored. This leaves a major gap in the research that has serious repercussions for the functionality and legitimacy of direct democracy. It is the ambitious objective of LIDD to provide the scientific basis for resolving this urgent challenge. By innovatively combining comparative legal analysis with both qualitative and quantitative methods from other social sciences, the project builds on the experience made with various direct-democratic mechanisms in order to develop general conclusions. Part 1 of LIDD distils a core of issues that is regarded as being beyond the reach of direct democracy across all European states and elaborates best practices that will help states define and apply the limits of direct democracy in a sensible way. Part 2 identifies common European minimum standards that institutional and procedural systems for reviewing compliance with these limits must satisfy and makes suggestions for improving these systems. Part 3 applies the findings from Parts 1 and 2 to the EU level; it shows how the admissibility requirements that an ECI must meet should be adapted and clarified and how the admissibility procedure could be improved.

This project is a study of the regulation of ‘mixture’(‘interracial’ sex, relationships and marriage) in Europe’s past and present. Informed by critical race and critical mixed race studies, it challenges the common assumption that Europe never had ‘anti-miscegenation’ laws comparable to those in the United States. In exploring if, when, how and why forms of regulation aiming to prevent or restrict ‘interracial mixture’ developed in Europe in certain times and places, the project delivers a vital contribution to our knowledge of the development of racial thinking in Europe. The concept of ‘mixture’ provides an eminently suitable approach to the construction of ‘race’, since ‘mixture’ confuses and destabilizes racialized categories that seem fixed and essentialized in specific times and places, such as ‘black/white’. The project consist of a historical and a contemporary part. The historical part looks at the regulation of ‘mixture’ in four European countries: France, Italy, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom, in their African colonies, and wartime Europe. The contemporary part explores whether and how, in spite of norms of formal equality and colour-blindness, ‘race’ and ‘monoracial family norms’ still play a part in European law and the lived experiences of ‘interracial’ couples with law in their everyday lives. Through archival research, legal analysis and interviews with modern-day ‘mixed’ couples and families, this approach helps us understand what lawmakers and enforcers believed ‘race’ was, what they believed ‘mixture’ was, how this was translated into legal practices, and how targeted couples responded. Theoretically, the project delivers a groundbreaking contribution to the genealogy of racial thinking in Europe, especially in addressing the understudied role of law and legal scholarship in the social construction of ‘race’ and ‘mixture’ in a increasingly diverse Europe.

This project begins with the basic premise that refugees are migrants: by legal definition and political conception, they have left their home countries to seek refuge. This project aims to re-assess refugee protection through a lens of mobility and migration, locating the study of refugee law in the context of the refugee regime. It examines the three key aspects of refugee law – access to protection, refugee status determination, and refugee rights – bringing them into conversation with the refugee regime’s norms and practices on responsibility-sharing and solutions. Crucially, the project takes a long and broad view of refugee protection, in order to open up new possibilities and trajectories. It also integrates a legal assessment of the role of non-state actors in refugee protection. Using the broad notion of ‘intermediary’ in the migration process, it will assess the regulatory environment on access to protection, so-called ‘secondary movement’ and onward migration. It will provide an important legal assessment of the role of the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) and the duties of humanitarian actors in refugee protection. It addresses the EU, not as a singularity, but as an actor in the global regime. The project is methodologically ground-breaking. It identifies practices that determine access to and the quality of refugee protection, and how these practices have developed across jurisdictions and over time, thereby historicizing and reframing the practices in question. As well as rigorous doctrinal (‘black letter’) legal analysis, it will use go beyond doctrine, and draw on theoretical conceptions of legality to explore the particular modes of regulating mobility and migration that are now central to refugee protection. It will also develop new inter-disciplinary methods, using comparative legal, historical and political-scientific tools.

With Brexit and the abandonment of the free movement and residence principle, the UK will define its new immigration policy concerning EU nationals. The new immigration policies will aim to control and circumscribe the mobility of the citizens of the EU member states, currently free to travel, live and work in the UK. They may also be returned or deported only under very specific circumstances. Following Brexit, those who will not comply with the new regulations will become deportable. The aim of the project is to research the implementation of the new UK deportation system concerning EU nationals. The fellow will propose a comprehensive approach to the UK deportation regime, taking into account its various components: (1) immigration policies, (2) agencies that enforce them, (3) public debate that accompanies changes in migration policies and their implementation, (4) migrants that become deportable and are deported, as well as (5) return migrants and stayers back in sending countries who consider migrating to the UK and who adjust their (im)mobility strategies according to, or resisting, migration policies. The project assumes that the deportation regime is a transnational phenomenon, since it concerns not only people in migrant-receiving countries, but also in migrant-sending counties. The research offers an analysis of the largest migrant group in the UK, the Poles. The case of the Polish migrants will offer an insight into how the transnational UK deportation regime becomes rooted among migrants and develops back in their hometown communities. The project draws upon interdisciplinary qualitative methodologies, including multi-sited ethnography, Critical Discourse Analysis of media, and legal analysis. Its outcomes will reach EU, UK and Polish policy makers, influential think tanks, the academic community and the general public.

"Motivation Um über Grenzen nach Deutschland zu gelangen, setzen sich flüchtende Menschen großen Risiken aus. Beispiels-weise werden sie von kriminellen Schleusern auf der Ladefläche von LKW zusammengepfercht, wie im Januar 2017 in Oberbayern, als ein Schleuser einen Transporter mit 19 Asylsuchenden bei Temperaturen von minus 20 Grad auf einer unbeheizten Ladefläche alleine ließ. Angesichts dieser Problemstellung gilt es, die Gefah-ren für Flüchtlinge zu minimieren. Gleichzeitig muss unkontrollierter Menschenschmuggel, auch im Interesse einer geregelten Flüchtlingspolitik, erfasst und unter-bunden werden.Ziele und VorgehenIn STRATUM werden die praktische Machbarkeit sowie die ethische und rechtliche Vertretbarkeit des Einsat-zes mobiler Detektionsmethoden für eine Aufdeckung illegaler Grenzübertritte in Fahrzeugen untersucht. Dazu sollen u. a. Wärmebild- sowie Terahertzkameras zum Einsatz kommen und auf ihre Eignung untersucht werden, im fließenden Straßenverkehr Fahrzeuge auf versteckte Personen zu detektieren. Flankierend werden alle technischen Entwicklungen und Untersuchungen im Hinblick auf Rechtskonformität und Datenschutz begleitet.Innovationen und PerspektivenDerzeit können Fahrzeuge nur durch aufwändige stationäre Einzelkontrollen auf mögliche Schleusungs-opfer untersucht werden. Die Schleuser kennen häufig die Standorte stationärer Kontrollen und umfahren diese. Durch den mobilen Einsatz der neuen Detekti-onsmethoden im fließenden Straßenverkehr werden Schleusungstäter schneller gefasst und deren Opfer aus gefährlichen Verstecken befreit. Zudem kann dem illega-len Grenzübertritt besser begegnet werden."

The main goal of the present study is to analyze the legal aspects of labour migration governance in Georgia. For this purpose, an analysis of national legal instruments related to labour migration governance has been carried out. And an overview is given of those international agreements, which are of relevance for Georgia. The study is carried out in the following main directions: First, there is an overview of existing legislative mechanisms; second, an analysis of the coherence of these mechanisms; and, third, a survey of gaps and challenges and recommendations. The content of the study is mainly based on the analysis of legal documents. However, it should be noted that the number of legislative acts and other official documents related to labour migration is very limited. This is due to the liberalization of migration policy, which is a reflection of the extremely liberal policy of the current Georgian government. As a consequence, Georgian legislation does not provide for the overseas employment of Georgian citizens in any form. And as to the access of aliens to the Georgian labour market, there are only some limited mechanisms, which in practice do not have a visible regulatory effect. Namely, legislation does not impose any obligation for aliens to obtain a work permit before starting work. Thus, the Georgian labour market is wide open to citizens of foreign countries. It is recommended that the state changes to a model of labour migration governance which would be both efficient and active. This model should be based on a consideration of economic and demographic effects and it should be developed on the basis of migration flow analysis.

In recent years changes in Hungarian citizenship policy and legislation have aroused public interest. The efforts of the Hungarian government to facilitate the naturalisation of ethnic Hungarians particularly encountered esistance from neighbouring countries,1 and was also viewed critically by some scholars.2 At the same time, the issue of unaccompanied minors has been high on the political agenda in EU Member States, including Hungary. Various EU institutions and bodies have commissioned studies and reports to analyse the situation in the European Union3 and an Action Plan was launched in order to ensure greater coherence and cooperation and to improve the protection offered to this vulnerable group.4 Nevertheless, a group of unaccompanied minor children, who do not fit into the traditional definition of unaccompanied minors in Europe, has been neglected. These children were born in Hungary of a foreign national, but of a Hungarian speaking and presumably ethnic Hungarian mother who subsequently abandoned the child in hospital shortly after birth. Despite liberal citizenship policy and an existing legal framework for the protection of unaccompanied minors, these children do not, for various reasons, obtain any nationality at or after birth and remain in a legal limbo for many months or even years. The aim of this paper is to explore the legal situation of these children in three areas: citizenship, immigration status and reception and care, and to analyse to what extent the current practices of the Guardianship Office and the Office of Immigration and Nationality is in compliance with Hungary’s international legal obligations, with Community law and, indeed, with domestic law. Particular attention will be paid to the obligations of Hungary as set out in the Convention of the Rights of the Child, the Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons and the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness. As an unclear citizenship status constitutes the main reason for their peculiar situation, we will also look at the possibility of granting Hungarian citizenship or stateless status.

... Eine rechtsethnologische Untersuchung des Aufeinandertreffens von migrantischen Lebensentwürfen und rechtlicher Systembildung in verwaltungsgerichtlichen Streitfällen "Hypothese ist, dass zwischen Migranten und staatlichen Akteuren eine Interaktionssituation entsteht, von der auch jenseits des Gesetzgebungsprozesses Impulse für eine Rechtsentwicklung ausgehen. Zentrale Fragen sind, wie Migranten als Akteure die Möglichkeiten verwaltungsgerichtlichen Rechtsschutzes erleben, wie Rechtsanwender in ihrem Arbeitsalltag Migrationsdynamiken und -folgen bearbeiten und welche Auswirkungen diese soziale Praxis auf das Verwaltungsrecht und die Rechtsstaatsvorstellungen der beteiligten Akteure hat. Dr. Vetters geht von der Hypothese aus, dass zwischen Migranten und staatlichen Akteuren eine Interaktionssituation entsteht, von der in der Rechtswirklichkeit auch jenseits des Gesetzgebungsprozesses intendierte und unintendierte Impulse für eine Rechtsentwicklung und eine Transformation von Rechtsstaatsvorstellungen ausgehen. In einer empirischen Untersuchung wird diese Interaktionsdynamik einschließlich der aus ihr resultierenden Prozesse der Rechtsfortbildung und -transformation systematisch erfasst und im Hinblick auf die Ausgestaltung von Rechtsstaatlichkeit unter Bedingungen soziokultureller Pluralisierung in Deutschland eingeordnet. Zunächst wird hierfür eine Datengrundlage in Form einer Falldatenbank mit mindestens 200 Fällen geschaffen, die bislang fehlt, da insbesondere die Justizstatistik keine Daten über den Migrationshintergrund enthält. Dazu werden zunächst explorative Interviews mit Migranten geführt, um so Rechtsgebiete zu identifizieren, die – neben den klassischen Gebieten wie dem Ausländer- und Asylrecht – für die migrantische Biographie von besonderer Relevanz sind bzw. in denen der Migrationshintergrund eine Rolle spielt. Für diese Referenzgebiete sollen dann weitere Daten durch teilnehmende Beobachtung, Interviews und Analyse schriftlicher Quellen in den Akteursfeldern „Migranten“, „Anwalt/Rechtsberatungsorganisation“, „Verwaltungsgericht“ und „Behörden“ erhoben werden. Aus dieser Falldatenbank sollen dann solche Fälle ausgewählt werden, in denen sich unterschiedliche Aspekte der Rechtsentwicklung und Transformationen von Rechtsstaatsvorstellungen andeuten. Auf dieser Grundlage ist geplant, 12 bis 16 detaillierte Einzelfallstudien zu bilden, anhand derer unterschiedliche Aspekte der Rechtsentwicklung und Transformation von Rechtsstaatsvorstellungen dokumentiert und analysiert werden können. Anhand verschiedener Teilfragen werden dabei die beiden großen Teilbereiche untersucht, welche Transformationen der Ordnungsidee der Rechtsstaatlichkeit in der Rechtswirklichkeit als Ergebnis von Interaktionen zwischen den am verwaltungsgerichtlichen Verfahren beteiligten Akteuren zu beobachten sind und inwiefern transformierte Rechtsstaatsvorstellungen der Akteure auf die Rechtsanwendung und -entwicklung zurückwirken."

This report compares two important corridor migrations to Belgium in order to better understand the variation in several dimensions of Turkish and Moroccan immigrants’ integration – in particular, labour market, education and citizenship. It is based on an original methodology combining three different data sources (an analysis of the legal and political frameworks, a quantitative analysis, and a survey). It aims to test the INTERACT project’s main hypothesis which conceives of integration as a three-way process. This report provides insight on integration from the immigration country perspective but also from the countries of origin; it appraises the impact that Turkey and Morocco may have on the integration of their migrants in Belgium. The main findings are the following. Firstly, the countries of origin may have an impact on integration when emigration starts. Secondly, countries of origin may have a positive or negative impact on some integration dimensions (citizenship) but no obvious impact on others (education and labour market). In their efforts to maintain and develop links and to protect migrants’ rights abroad, countries of origin can thus facilitate integration, but indirectly.

This report compares two quite different corridor migrations to the Netherlands. Turkish immigration is larger and more recent than Chinese immigration, which goes back to the beginning of the 20th century. The report aims to better understand the variation in several dimensions of Turkish and Chinese immigrants’ integration – in particular, the labour market, education and citizenship. It is based on an original methodology combining different data sources (the existing literature, an analysis of the legal and political frameworks, a quantitative analysis, and a survey). It aims to test the INTERACT project’s main hypothesis which conceives of integration as a three-way process. This report provides insight on the integration policy developed in the Netherlands (ethnic minorities policies) and links it to Turkish and Chinese diaspora policies. It tries to shed light on the impact that Turkey and China may have on the integration of their diasporas in the Netherlands. The main findings are the following: firstly, the countries of origin are concerned about their migrants abroad and develop policies accordingly. Secondly, Turkish and Chinese migrants’ integration in the Netherlands present different characteristics and the interaction between the Dutch integration policy and their respective diaspora policies is a complex one. Thirdly, the impact that Turkey and China have on integration is different with regard to the different dimensions of integration. And finally, non-state actors based in the countries of origin may also have a significant impact on migrants’ integration.

‘Consistency’ is regularly cited as a desirable attribute of border control, but it has received little critical social scientific attention. This inter-disciplinary project, at the inter-face between critical human geography, border studies and law, will scrutinise the consistency of European asylum adjudication in order to develop richer theoretical understanding of this lynchpin concept. It will move beyond the administrative legal concepts of substantive and procedural consistency by advancing a three-fold conceptualisation of consistency – as everyday practice, discursive deployment of facts and disciplinary technique. In order to generate productive intellectual tension it will also employ an explicitly antagonistic conceptualisation of the relationship between geography and law that views law as seeking to constrain and systematise lived space. The project will employ an innovative combination of methodologies that will produce unique and rich data sets including quantitative analysis, multi-sited legal ethnography, discourse analysis and interviews, and the findings are likely to be of interest both to academic communities like geographers, legal and border scholars and to policy makers and activists working in border control settings. In 2013 the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) was launched to standardise the procedures of asylum determination. But as yet no sustained multi-methodological assessment of the claims of consistency inherent to the CEAS has been carried out. This project offers not only the opportunity to assess progress towards harmonisation of asylum determination processes in Europe, but will also provide a new conceptual framework with which to approach the dilemmas and risks of inconsistency in an area of law fraught with political controversy and uncertainty around the world. Most fundamentally, the project promises to debunk the myths surrounding the possibility of fair and consistent border controls in Europe and elsewhere.

‘Consistency’ is regularly cited as a desirable attribute of border control, but it has received little critical social scientific attention. This inter-disciplinary project, at the inter-face between critical human geography, border studies and law, will scrutinise the consistency of European asylum adjudication in order to develop richer theoretical understanding of this lynchpin concept. It will move beyond the administrative legal concepts of substantive and procedural consistency by advancing a three-fold conceptualisation of consistency – as everyday practice, discursive deployment of facts and disciplinary technique. In order to generate productive intellectual tension it will also employ an explicitly antagonistic conceptualisation of the relationship between geography and law that views law as seeking to constrain and systematise lived space. The project will employ an innovative combination of methodologies that will produce unique and rich data sets including quantitative analysis, multi-sited legal ethnography, discourse analysis and interviews, and the findings are likely to be of interest both to academic communities like geographers, legal and border scholars and to policy makers and activists working in border control settings. In 2013 the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) was launched to standardise the procedures of asylum determination. But as yet no sustained multi-methodological assessment of the claims of consistency inherent to the CEAS has been carried out. This project offers not only the opportunity to assess progress towards harmonisation of asylum determination processes in Europe, but will also provide a new conceptual framework with which to approach the dilemmas and risks of inconsistency in an area of law fraught with political controversy and uncertainty around the world. Most fundamentally, the project promises to debunk the myths surrounding the possibility of fair and consistent border controls in Europe and elsewhere.

This project will investigate the interaction between Turkey's accession to the European Union (EU) and industrial transformation of the EU with a focus on Turkey’s three developing cities: Denizli, Kayseri, and Gaziantep. The Customs Union Agreement of 1995 between EU and Turkey generated a massive growth in Turkey’s industrial exports. Although Denizli, Kayseri, and Gaziantep are not located within the older industrial regions of the country, they managed to surpass national growth rates within this period. Their performance signifies a regional redistribution of industries and justifies the following research question: How has the accession process since 1995 been shaping the regional distribution of manufacturing industries in Turkey? The project will focus on national, local, and enterprise-level dynamics respectively: 1) Changes in National Policymaking: This phase will be composed of interviews with government agencies and non-governmental organizations and the analysis of the legal documents and secondary data in Ankara; capital of Turkey. The aim is to illustrate the changes in industrial policymaking since 1995. 2) Local Industrial and Urban Developments: The field research in Denizli, Gaziantep, and Kayseri will focus on migration, capital movements, urban transformation, and agglomeration effects since 1995. The aim is to analyze the local interactions between accession-related policies and industrial dynamics. 3) Enterprise-Level Dynamics: Company monographs will focus on the growth strategy of selected enterprises, changes in their shop floor relations, and profile of their customers and subsidiaries. The aim is to investigate the impact of accession-related policymaking on the performance of industrial enterprises in these cities. The project findings will illustrate the actual consequences of the current industrial policymaking in Turkey at the local level and make policy suggestions for an effective EU-wide industrial and innovation strategy.

(En) Understanding the legal framework in force in the SEM countries is of paramount importance in order to grasp the functioning of the labour market and the influence that it can have on migration. The analysis presented here focuses on 11 countries (Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia, Turkey) and deals with those aspects of the legal regulation in force which can be considered responsible for shaping the employment relationship in term of rigidity or flexibility. The Report is divided in a series of country-studies where the various legal components of the labour market are presented and critically analysed following the same structure for each one in order to enhance comparability: rules concerning hiring, flexible contracts, working time, dismissals, and work inspections. The results, which draw mainly upon international organisations’ sources and upon the analysis of legal texts and laws in these countries, are preliminary. In the concluding remarks, it is explained that if the most valuable research output of this report is to provide cross-comparative analysis to a vast legal material critically organised, the main limitation resides in the fact that it is mainly cantered on the black-letters of the rules and therefore further research must be done on the multifaceted aspects that contribute to shaping a labour market, namely the social dialogue, the case-law and the actual functioning of labour market institutions such as labour inspections, employment agencies, social security, in order to mange to paint the full picture of the SEM countries’ labour market. A preliminary critical assessment of the labour markets is however provided, combining the data on the legal framework in force with the analysis of the independent international reports prepared by various international institutions and NGOs on labour rights’ violations. (Fr)Il est de toute première importance de bien comprendre le cadre légal en vigueur dans les pays du Sud et de l’Est de la Méditerranée (SEM) afin d’y saisir le fonctionnement du marché du travail et son influence potentielle sur les flux migratoires. L’étude porte sur 11 de ces pays soit l’Algérie, l’Egypte, Israël, la Jordanie, le Liban, la Libye, la Mauritanie, le Maroc, la Syrie, la Tunisie et enfin la Turquie. C’est principalement, les éléments juridiques qui affectent les relations de travail en termes de rigidité et de flexibilité qui sont analysés. Ce rapport s’appuie sur une série de cas d’étude nationaux. Les aspects juridiques du marché du travail y sont décrits et analysés dans une perspective critique. Chacun des systèmes légaux nationaux a été soumis à la même grille d’analyse afin d’assurer la comparabilité des données. Sont donc envisagées de manière systématiques: les dispositions relatives à l’engagement, à la flexibilité des contrats, au temps de travail, aux préavis et aux inspections du travail. Les conclusions formulées, sont à ce stade tout à fait préliminaires. L’un des intérêts manifestes de cette recherche est de rendre accessible en Anglais, de manière systématique et critique, un large éventail de dispositions juridiques. La principale limite de cette étude est certainement son aspect formel puisque les modalités de mise en œuvre de ces dispositions et la pratique des relations de travail échappent, en grande partie à la perception son auteur. De plus amples recherches devraient être menées sur les divers facteurs qui contribuent à déterminer les dynamiques du marché du travail dans les SEM, soit le dialogue social, la jurisprudence et le fonctionnement réel des institutions de régulation du marché du travail telles que l’Inspection du Travail, les Agences pour l’Emploi et la Sécurité Sociale. Ce rapport suggère néanmoins une première évaluation critique résultant de la combinaison des données juridiques recueillies et de l’analyse des rapports internationaux élaborés par diverses institutions internationales et des ONG actives dans le domaine de la violation des droits du travail.

In 2005 the European Commission adopted the "Scientific Visa" package to make scientific careers more attractive and open up the Community to third-country nationals who might be admitted for the purposes of research. The package includes Directive 2005/71/EC on a specific procedure for admitting third-country nationals for the purposes of scientific research and Recommendation 2005/761/EC aiming to facilitate the issue by the Member States of uniform short-stay visas for researchers from third countries travelling within the Community for the purpose of carrying out scientific research. This ICMPD study, commissioned by the European Commission, covers the implementation and impact of the aspects of the package covered in the Directive and the Recommendation in all 27 EU member states. This forms part of a broader study on human resource policies and practices in research, on the “Scientific Visa” package and on the implementation of pan-EU pension schemes targeted at researchers. This is to provide support for a monitoring system on national policies on human resources in research and on their effects at the level of research organisations, foreseen in the 2009 People Specific Programme of the 7th Framework Programme. This should lead to improved knowledge of policy developments and actions on human resources in the European Research Area and their effects at the level of research organisations and improve the knowledge base for future policy developments. Specific aims • to conduct a conformity analysis of the legal and administrative framework in the 27 EU Member States for implementation of the Directive and Recommendation • to analyse the institutional set-up and implementation in practice of the provisions of the two legal instruments in the 27 EU Member States • to evaluate the impact of the research residence permits and visas on the basis of both quantitative and qualitative data and research • to identify any potential difficulties in implementation and suggestions for improvement • to identify good practices in relation to the implementation of the Directive and the Recommendation Outcomes Comparative report on Directive 2005/71/EC in 27 EU Member States: • Conformity analysis of how Member States have transposed the Directive into national law • Statistical analysis illustrating the impact of the Directive in quantitative terms • Assessment of the impact of the Directive, and identification of difficulties and good practices in its implementation, through extensive national and EU-level research and questionnaires Comparative report on Recommendation 2005/761/EC in 27 EU Member States • Analysis of the national legal and/or administrative frameworks relating to the Recommendation • Account of the authorities responsible and the institutional and procedural set-up for the implementation of these provisions • Assessment of the impact of the Recommendation, and identification of difficulties and good practices in its implementation, through extensive national and EU-level research and questionnaires