Migrants and refugees flooding into Europe have presented
European leaders and policymakers with their greatest challenge
since the debt crisis. The International Organization for Migration
calls Europe the most dangerous destination for irregular migration
in the world, and the Mediterranean the world’s most dangerous
border crossing.
Distinguishing migrants from
asylum seekers and refugees is not always a clear-cut process, yet
it is a crucial designation because these groups are entitled to
different levels of assistance and protection under international
law.
An asylum seeker is defined as a person fleeing persecution or
conflict, and therefore seeking international protection under the
1951 Refugee Convention on the Status of Refugees; a refugee is an
asylum seeker whose claim has been approved. However, the UN
considers migrants fleeing war or persecution to be refugees, even
before they officially receive asylum. (Syrian and Eritrean
nationals, for example, enjoy prima facie refugee status.) An
economic migrant, by contrast, is person whose primary motivation
for leaving his or her home country is economic gain. The term
migrant is seen as an umbrella term for all three groups. Said
another way: all refugees are migrants, but not all migrants are
refugees.
Both the burden and the sharing are in the eye of the beholder.
I don’t know if any EU country will ever find the equity that is
being sought
Migrant detention centers across the continent, including in
France, Greece, and Italy have all invited charges of abuse and
neglect over the years. Many rights groups contend that a number of
these detention centers violate Article III (PDF) of the European
Convention on Human Rights, which prohibits inhuman or degrading
treatment.
In contrast, migrants in the
richer north and west find comparatively well-run asylum centers
and generous resettlement policies. But these harder-to-reach
countries often cater to migrants who have the wherewithal to
navigate entry-point states with safe air passage with the
assistance of smugglers.
These countries still remain inaccessible to many migrants
seeking international protection. As with the sovereign debt
crisis, national interests have consistently trumped a common
European response to this migrant influx.
Some experts say the block’s increasingly polarized political
climate, in which many nationalist, anti-immigrant parties are
gaining traction, is partially to blame for the muted humanitarian
response from some states. France and Denmark have also cited
security concerns as justification for their reluctance in
accepting migrants from the Middle East and North Africa,
particularly in the wake of the Paris and Copenhagen terrorist
shootings.
The backdrop is the difficulty that many European countries have
in integrating minorities into the social mainstream”
Underscoring this point, leaders of eastern European states like
Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic have all recently
expressed a strong preference for non-Muslim migrants. In August
2015, Slovakia announced that it would only accept Christian
refugees from Syria. While selecting migrants based on religion is
in clear violation of the EU’s non-discrimination laws, these
leaders have defended their policies by pointing to their own
constituencies discomfort with growing Muslim communities.
The recent economic crisis has also spurred a demographic shift
across the continent, with citizens of crisis-hit member states
migrating to the north and west in record numbers in search of
work. Some experts say Germany and Sweden’s open immigration
policies also make economic sense, given Europe’s demographic
trajectory (PDF) of declining birth rates and ageing populations.
Migrants, they argue, could boost Europe’s economies as workers,
taxpayers, and consumers, and help shore up its famed social safety
nets.
In August 2015, Germany announced that it was suspending Dublin
for Syrian asylum seekers, which effectively stopped deportations
of Syrians back to their European country of entry. This move by
the block’s largest and wealthiest member country was seen as an
important gesture of solidarity with entry-point states. However,
German Chancellor Angela Merkel also warned that the future of
Schengen was at risk unless all EU member states did their part to
find a more equitable distribution of migrants.
Germany reinstated temporary
border controls along its border with Austria in September 2015,
after receiving an estimated forty thousand migrants over one
weekend. Implemented on the eve of an emergency migration summit,
this move was seen by many experts as a signal to other member
states about the pressing need for an EU-wide quota system.
Austria, the Netherlands, and Slovakia soon followed with their own
border controls. These developments have been called the greatest
blow to Schengen in its twenty-year existence.
In September 2015, the European Commission President Jean-Claude
Juncker announced plans to revisit a migrant quota system for the
block’s twenty-two participating members.
Some policymakers have called for asylum centers to be built in
North Africa and the Middle East to enable refugees to apply for
asylum without undertaking perilous journeys across the
Mediterranean, as well as cutting down on the number of irregular
migrants arriving on European shores. However, critics of this plan
argue that the sheer number of applicants expected at such hot
spots could further destabilize already fragile states.
Other policies floated by the European Commission include
drawing up a common safe-countries list that would help countries
expedite asylum applications and, where needed, deportations. Most
vulnerable to this procedural change are migrants from the Balkans,
which lodged 40 percent of the total asylum applications received
by Germany in the first six months of 2015. However, some human
rights groups have questioned the methodology used by several
countries in drawing up these lists and, more critically, cautioned
that such lists could violate asylum seekers rights.
Subscribe ToNairalaw News!
Read more british-women-have-bad-life-expectancy/
Abdulrahaman
abdulrazak
Kwara Understudies Trader-Moni to Fight
Poverty
The Kwara State Government is understudying the TraderMoni
programme of the Federal Government to extend soft loans to traders
and reduce mass poverty in the state.
“On Friday, Governor AbdulRahman AbdulRazaq visited the Abuja
headquarters of the Government Enterprise and Empowerment Programme
(GEEP), the implementers of the TraderMoni initiative, with a view
to replicate same in Kwara,” spokesman Rafiu Ajakaye said in a
statement.
GEEP, which is supervised by the Bank of Industry, is one of the
four sub-programmes of the National Social Investment Office
(NSIO).
The statement said the visit was for AbdulRazaq to discuss
partnership with GEEP handlers on how Kwarans can further access
the micro loans and lift thousands of people out of poverty.
Accompanied by Mrs Uwais, former Special Adviser to the
president on Social Investments, the governor listened to details
of the initiative, including the challenge of implementing it in
Kwara and how it could help fight poverty, the statement added.
“After learning the back-end processes involved, we are looking
at the possibility of starting the Kwara version of Trader-Moni
later this year after appropriate legislations and budgetary
provisions,” according to the statement.
The visit came two days after AbdulRazaq visited the
headquarters of the National Primary Healthcare Development Agency
to seek partnership on how to revive the state’s comatose health
sector.
Rafiu Ajakaye
Chief Press Secretary to the Governor
2 August, 2019.