Search results

Migration and Hybrid Political Regimes: Navigating the Legal Landscape in Russia by Rustram Urinboyev (University of California Press 2021) is reviewed by Anna-Liisa Heusala, of the University of Helsinki, Aleksanteri Institute - Finnish Centre for Russian and East European Studies.

The article analyzes the evolution of Russian migration policy vis-à-vis national security thinking in a historical perspective. The idea put forward is that Russian migration policy is built on the early Soviet experiences of population control, in which 'national security' was an essential component of policy developments. In today's conditions, the interconnectedness of transnational security challenges, such as large-scale migration, is an important factor that officially motivates Russia to emphasize pragmatic institutional choices. Russia has followed the global trend of securitization of legislation and administrative policies underlying the re-emergence of national security as an important policy framework. This ambitious framework is constrained by unfinished institutional changes and legacies rooted in the Soviet past. Migration continues to be an arena of policy-making where different interests override each other. Russian migration policy can best be described as an attempt to find a balance between economic incentives and security concerns, or between institutional pathologies and recycled dysfunctions and the need for modernization.

The article analyzes the evolution of Russian migration policy vis-à-vis national security thinking in a historical perspective. The idea put forward is that Russian migration policy is built on the early Soviet experiences of population control, in which 'national security' was an essential component of policy developments. In today's conditions, the interconnectedness of transnational security challenges, such as large-scale migration, is an important factor that officially motivates Russia to emphasize pragmatic institutional choices. Russia has followed the global trend of securitization of legislation and administrative policies underlying the re-emergence of national security as an important policy framework. This ambitious framework is constrained by unfinished institutional changes and legacies rooted in the Soviet past. Migration continues to be an arena of policy-making where different interests override each other. Russian migration policy can best be described as an attempt to find a balance between economic incentives and security concerns, or between institutional pathologies and recycled dysfunctions and the need for modernization. ; Peer reviewed

This article discusses the dynamics of transitions and security within the framework of the development of administrative accountability in Russia. It considers both the legal and administrative culture in Russia on the basis of the formation of administrative accountability and challenges found in this process. During the three periods of Russian transitions under study in this article, administrative accountability has developed as a result of attempts to institutionalize new ideals in an old administrative culture. The article shows that, during these transitions, uncertainties and unintended effects of administrative changes have intensified traditional security concerns that have exceeded other considerations in the implementation of reforms. As a result, the institutionalization of new professional practices and ways of thinking has been diffuse and administrative accountability remains legalistic. ; Peer reviewed

Russia has a very large pool of economic migrants, up to 25% of the workforce according to some estimates. Although many migrants, many from former Soviet countries which are now independent, entered Russia legally, they frequently face bureaucratic obstacles to legal employment and Russian citizenship, factors which have led to a very large shadow economy. This book presents a comprehensive examination of migrant labour in Russia. It describes the nature of migrant labour, explores the shadow economy and its unfortunate consequences, and discusses the rise of popular sentiment against migrants and the likely impact. The book also sets the Russian experiences of migrant labour in context, comparing the situation in Russia with that in other countries with significant migrant labour workforces.

Le présent article illustre la dynamique de la coopération transfrontalière bilatérale entre deux partenaires juridico-administratifs très différents. L'analyse s'appuie sur les résultats empiriques d'une étude de cas concernant la coopération bilatérale entre la Finlande et la Russie en matière de prévention de la criminalité. À l'heure actuelle, les différences entre les législations nationales, ainsi que l'évolution rapide de l'environnement administratif, rendent cette coopération difficile. L'étude de cas a montré que la coopération bilatérale, qui est la forme dominante de coopération entre les États membres de l'UE et la Russie, est actuellement affectée par des structures multilatérales et bilatérales disjointes voire concurrentes, des différences en matière de droit pénal et de procédure pénale, des écarts entre les traités internationaux et la législation nationale, des variations locales et régionales des pratiques, une confiance institutionnelle faible et des changements soudains de politique. Les résultats indiquent que l'efficacité des réseaux transfrontaliers ne peut être évaluée strictement en termes de résultats quantitatifs. Le développement à long terme de la coopération exige à la fois une compréhension réaliste des contraintes juridico-administratives et un engagement fort au niveau politique national et supranational. Remarques à l'intention des praticiens Le développement futur à long terme de la coopération transfrontalière en matière de prévention de la criminalité entre les États membres de l'UE et la Fédération de Russie nécessite des instruments de prévention de la criminalité plus souples et l'institutionnalisation d'équipes communes d'enquête. Le modèle optimal d'enquêtes criminelles conjointes avec les autorités russes pourrait être un modèle où les preuves du protocole d'enquête préliminaire pourraient être acquises par le biais de connexions régionales directes entre les autorités. Concrètement, cela nécessite une confiance pratique beaucoup plus forte entre les différents niveaux d'autorités des États membres de l'UE et de la Fédération de Russie, la réconciliation des différences dans les législations nationales et un engagement politique à long terme au plus haut niveau.

Artikkeli julkaistu ranskankielisenä käännöksenä: Règles du jeu dans la coopération transfrontalière: différence juridico-administratives dans la prévention de la criminalité entre la Finlande et al Russie (Revue internationale des sciences administratives 2018 vol. 84, 2, p. 363-379) ; The article illuminates the dynamics of bilateral cross-border cooperation between two vastly different legal-administrative partners. The analysis utilizes empirical findings of a case study on bilateral Finnish–Russian crime prevention cooperation. Currently, both the differences in national legislations and the fast-changing administrative environment make this cooperation challenging. The case study showed that bilateral cooperation, which is the dominant form of cooperation between EU member states and Russia, is currently affected by disjointed and even competing multilateral and bilateral structures, differences in criminal law and procedure, gaps between international treaties and national legislation, local and regional variations of practices, weak institutional trust and abrupt policy changes. The results indicate that the effectiveness of cross-border networks cannot be assessed strictly in terms of quantitative outcomes. Further long-term development of the cooperation requires both realistic understanding of legal-administrative constraints and strong commitment at the national and supranational political levels. ; Peer reviewed

The article illuminates the dynamics of bilateral cross-border cooperation between two vastly different legal-administrative partners. The analysis utilizes empirical findings of a case study on bilateral Finnish–Russian crime prevention cooperation. Currently, both the differences in national legislations and the fast-changing administrative environment make this cooperation challenging. The case study showed that bilateral cooperation, which is the dominant form of cooperation between EU member states and Russia, is currently affected by disjointed and even competing multilateral and bilateral structures, differences in criminal law and procedure, gaps between international treaties and national legislation, local and regional variations of practices, weak institutional trust and abrupt policy changes. The results indicate that the effectiveness of cross-border networks cannot be assessed strictly in terms of quantitative outcomes. Further long-term development of the cooperation requires both realistic understanding of legal-administrative constraints and strong commitment at the national and supranational political levels. Points for practitioners Future long-term development of cross-border crime prevention cooperation between EU member countries and the Russian Federation requires more flexible crime prevention instruments and institutionalization of joint investigation teams. The optimal model in joint criminal investigations with Russian authorities could be one where the evidence of the protocol of the preliminary investigation could be acquired through direct regional connections between authorities. In practice, this requires a much stronger practical trust between different levels of authorities in the EU member countries and the Russian Federation, reconciliation of differences in national legislations and long-term political commitment at the highest level.