Suchergebnisse

The International University College of Turin (IUC) in cooperation with the Faculties of Law of the University of Turin and the Eastern Piedmont University in Alessandria and in partnership with the Associazione Studi Giuridici sull'Immigrazione (ASGI) is conducting a study on the detention conditions of migrants in the Centre for Identification and Expulsion (CIE) of Turin. The CIE Research Project is part of a clinical legal training program (Human Rights and Migration Law Clinic) and is currently involving six graduate and undergraduate students of the IUC, the University of Turin and the Eastern Piedmont University under the supervision of IUC faculty staff and ASGI lawyers. The research began in January 2012 and is limited to experiences of detention that occurred between January 2011 and April 2012. The objective is to investigate and analyse whether the treatment of immigration detainees in Turin's CIE meets Italian, European and international human rights standards. The project also aims to inquire into systemic and individual problems faced by detainees, their families and people who work in CIE or have contact with CIE in a professional or voluntary capacity. The study consists in a qualitative survey (mainly interviews) aimed at collecting and presenting holistic information about experiences of immigration detention in Turin. Therefore interviews are targeted at a broad cross-­‐section of subjects, such as: current and former detainees, their family members, lawyers, journalists, religious personnel, CIE staff, medical personnel, government officials, judges and so on. The information gathering stage of the CIE Research Project has only recently begun, therefore conclusions cannot be drawn yet. Nevertheless, a number of relevant issues have already emerged from the first interviews both to CIE detainees and to professionals and volunteers who have contact with CIE. This introductory paper aims to highlight some of these issues, including but not limited to: the problem of understanding what CIE is; ...

"This book provides a comparative overview of asylum seekers' reception throughout Europe by adopting a theoretical framework based on an analytical approach to the notion of multilevel governance.
It challenges the tendency of the multilevel governance literature to overlook political controversies and conflicts and questions the assumption that it represents the best policymaking arrangement for promoting policy convergence. In doing so, it explores the functioning of the reception component of the Common European Asylum System in centralised states and federal/regional states and analyses its implementation at both national and local levels. The book reveals the heterogeneous development of reception policies not only across Member States but also within each country where solutions adopted at the local level generally diverge substantially. Furthermore, the overall centralization of policymaking on reception regardless the institutional structure, seems to leave little room for MLG arrangements tailored to specific localities and triggers tensions between central governments and local authorities.
This book will be of key interest to scholars and students of migration and asylum studies, immigration, (multilevel) global governance and more broadly to comparative politics, European studies/politics, and public policy."

Within the European Union (EU), Italy is one of the main countries of transit and destination for migrants coming from Africa and Asia, including a significant component of forced migrants and protection seekers. In particular, Italy is the first European country of arrival for many migrants and asylum seekers crossing the Mediterranean from North Africa (mainly but not exclusively from Libya and Tunisia). Along with maritime migration flows, Italy has been receiving growing numbers of (forced) migrants entering the country through its Eastern land borders, mainly coming from Pakistan and Afghanistan, and transiting through Greece and the Balkans. These persons often find themselves in situations of protracted precariousness, vulnerability and marginalisation, both in terms of their legal status, attached rights and socio-economic conditions. Such situations of protracted displacement are largely (although not exclusively) determined by the legal and policy structures governing migration, asylum and mobility. This internal report analyses the regulatory framework which applies in Italy, and which impacts on the daily lives and future aspirations of protractedly displaced people. This report contributed to the formulation of TRAFIG Working Paper no. 3 "Governing Protracted Displacement: An analysis across global, regional and domestic contexts".

People that are forced to live away from their homes for five years or more – such as refugees or internally displaced persons (IDPs) – are said to live in a situation of protracted displacement. In 2018 it was reported that 78% of all refugees live in protracted displacement. This is a very challenging state. Most are vulnerable and highly dependent on external support from governments, NGOs or relatives. They also have insecure legal statuses and don't have the ability – or opportunity – to rebuild their lives because of scarce economic resources, the legal framework that regulates their lives or societies that don't welcome them. In many cases, they can neither return home nor move on to other countries, nor really integrate in the country of reception. We've been carrying out research that explores the experiences and solutions for protracted displaced populations around the world. Specifically, we examine the rules that dictate people's ability to work, where they live, options for family reunification, and access to accommodation, education and health care. We found that international and host country policies don't adequately address the challenges posed by forced displacement across the world.

This paper is a supplement to the International University College of Turin's September 2012 report Betwixt and Between: Turin's CIE. A human rights investigation into Turin's immigration detention centre, which considered the findings of an interview-based study of Turin's immigration detention centre in terms of international, European and Italian human rights and migration law. The Betwixt and Between report examined Turin's Centro di Identificazione ed Espulsione (Turin's CIE) by considering both individual and systemic problems faced by detainees, their families and people who have direct contact with Turin's CIE in a professional or voluntary capacity. On 12 November 2012 the researchers met with the Director of Turin's CIE (Italian Red Cross – Military Section) and senior representatives from the Questura di Torino – Ufficio Immigrazione (Immigration Office) and Prefettura di Torino in order to conduct a lengthy interview about issues raised in theBe twixt and Between research study. This paper analyses the information received during this interview with the authorities in response to the allegations made by interviewees of the September 2012 Betwixt and Between report in relation to conditions of detention inside Turin's CIE and related judicial and legal processes.

Angesichts der Corona-Krise rückt die europäische Flüchtlingspolitik derzeit in den Hintergrund. Doch die Situation der Geflüchteten an der EU-Außengrenze, auf den Inseln der Ägäis und an anderen Orten an den Rändern Europas verschlechtert sich zunehmend, verstärkt durch die globale Pandemie. Benjamin Etzold vom Bonner Friedens- und Konfliktforschungsinstitut BICC und weitere Forscherinnen und Forscher des EU-geförderten Projekt TRAFIG sind nicht nur über die humanitäre Situation, sondern auch über die Politik der EU zutiefst besorgt. Nachdrücklich fordern sie EU-Maßnahmen zum Schutz der Geflüchteten – und nicht vor ihnen.

The information contained in this document was produced to introduce university students to Italian and European migration law. Part I. Italian law on immigration detention. Part II. European Union law on immigration detention. Part III: International and Council of Europe human rights law. Glossary. Useful websites and articles on migration and immigration detention in Europe.

This report investigates the extent to which Italian, European and international human rights and migration law is applied in Turin's centro di identificazione ed espulsione (Turin's CIE) - an immigration detention centre in northern Italy. This study was motivated by the fact that a number of institutions and organisations at local, national and international level have expressed concern about the current praxis of administrative detention of irregular migrants in Italy. The inconsistency between the explicit and implicit aims of immigration detention centers is of particular concern because it gives rise to a situation that is a fertile ground for abuse, inefficiencies and shocking human rights violations. In order to evaluate the application of human rights law in Turin's CIE, the CIE Research Project considers both individual and systemic problems faced by detainees, their families and people who have direct contact with the centre in a professional or voluntary capacity. These problems are analysed in terms of the conditions of detention as well as the judicial and legal processes that surround immigration detention. Throughout the research a concerted attempt was made to give voice to the lived experience of interviewed migrants; an element which is unfortunately all too often missing from research on immigration in Italy. The research was limited to experiences of detention in Turin's CIE in the period January 2011 - June 2012 inclusive. As part of this research project, twenty-nine recorded interviews of between forty and ninety minutes were conducted with current and former immigration detainees and experienced lawyers, NGO workers, religious volunteers and a journalist. The interviews were semi structured and different but comparable interview forms were used with different categories of interviewees. These forms were designed in a manner that aimed to reveal information necessary to evaluate the application of civil and political rights, as well as economic, cultural and social rights. Moreover, in ...

This working paper is based on empirical research on the Translocal Figurations of Displacement in Greece and Italy. The authors aim to compare protracted displacement in Greece and Italy, looking at the structural forces shaping it and their interactions with migrants' mobility and connectivity. This comparison is based on the analysis of the relations between two contextual variables (governance regimes and host population) and three key variables (mobility, connectivity and marginalisation). In this paper, they present findings from three study sites in Greece and four research locations in Italy. Findings show that protracted legal and socio-economic marginalisation is a key feature characterising the lives of displaced people in southern European countries. It confirms the hypothesis that protracted displacement does not end when forced migrants reach Greece or Italy. Restrictive governance regimes at the national and EU level severely limit mobility opportunities within Greece and Italy and across the European Union (EU). To cope with and resist marginalising and immobilising policies, displaced migrants in Italy and Greece put in place several strategies, ranging from adapting to governance regimes and taking the most out of them to resisting them and finding ways to avoid, bypass or overcome such regimes. In this framework, mobility and connectivity emerge as a resource and a trap for displaced migrants in southern Europe. On the one hand, migrants' strategies of intra-national and intra-EU mobility may help them out of protracted displacement, while on the other, certain types of mobility (hyper-, circular, paradoxical) can entrap, rather than free them. Similarly, local, translocal and transnational networks emerge as a crucial resource for displaced people in Greece and Italy. At the same time, family and co-ethnic networks may also be experienced as disabling, hampering one's aspirations to get out of protracted displacement. Fieldwork in both countries highlighted common factors shaping the ...

This working paper is based on empirical research on the Translocal Figurations of Displacement in Greece and Italy. The authors aim to compare protracted displacement in Greece and Italy, looking at the structural forces shaping it and their interactions with migrants' mobility and connectivity. This comparison is based on the analysis of the relations between two contextual variables (governance regimes and host population) and three key variables (mobility, connectivity and marginalisation). In this paper, they present findings from three study sites in Greece and four research locations in Italy. Findings show that protracted legal and socio-economic marginalisation is a key feature characterising the lives of displaced people in southern European countries. It confirms the hypothesis that protracted displacement does not end when forced migrants reach Greece or Italy. Restrictive governance regimes at the national and EU level severely limit mobility opportunities within Greece and Italy and across the European Union (EU). To cope with and resist marginalising and immobilising policies, displaced migrants in Italy and Greece put in place several strategies, ranging from adapting to governance regimes and taking the most out of them to resisting them and finding ways to avoid, bypass or overcome such regimes. In this framework, mobility and connectivity emerge as a resource and a trap for displaced migrants in southern Europe. On the one hand, migrants' strategies of intra-national and intra-EU mobility may help them out of protracted displacement, while on the other, certain types of mobility (hyper-, circular, paradoxical) can entrap, rather than free them. Similarly, local, translocal and transnational networks emerge as a crucial resource for displaced people in Greece and Italy. At the same time, family and co-ethnic networks may also be experienced as disabling, hampering one's aspirations to get out of protracted displacement. Fieldwork in both countries highlighted common factors shaping the relationships between displaced migrants and host communities. We also observed different facets of intergroup relations, ranging from indifference to friendship. The paper concludes by highlighting similarities and differences on the findings from both countries, based on qualitative and quantitative data.

This working paper explores the governance of protracted displacement across global, regional and domestic levels in the context of the project "Transnational Figurations of Displacement" (TRAFIG). The multiple contemporary crises that have led to forced displacement show not only the limits of a tight definition of 'refugee', but also highlight the gaps in international protection frameworks. A significant number of those forcibly displaced are in protracted displacement situations. This paper is an effort to make sense of the legislative and policy frameworks of protection that apply globally, regionally and domestically, and the way in which these frameworks facilitate or hinder solutions for people in protracted displacement. We evaluate how these frameworks contribute (directly or indirectly) to resolving or creating protracted displacement, assess how they contribute to relevant policy developments and identify engagement trends and (unintended) effects. Along the way, we also draw comparative insights across different global, regional and domestic levels, including eight different countries that host large groups of displaced people and are the focus of the TRAFIG project: Greece, Germany and Italy in Europe; Ethiopia, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Tanzania in Africa; and Jordan and Pakistan in Asia. We explore some selected gaps in the current systems of governance of displacement, while concentrating on three key perspectives: governing protection, exercising rights and accessing services, and mobility and transnational dimensions of displacement. We conclude with ten key messages regarding the shortcomings of the current governance system of displacement. They highlight the need for stronger stakeholder collaboration, integration of global and local policies, enhanced focus on IDPs, investment in progressive regional policies, redesign of EU policies to avoid promotion of protracted displacement, greater ownership of processes and resources, de-politicisation of displacement policies, alignment of durable solutions with development-oriented interventions, realisation of the development potential of refugee integration. They also focus on mobility and translocal connectivity as a fourth durable solution to protracted displacement.

This working paper explores the governance of protracted displacement across global, regional and domestic levels in the context of the project "Transnational Figurations of Displacement" (TRAFIG). Themultiple contemporary crises that have led to forced displacement show not only the limits of a tight definition of 'refugee' but also highlight the gaps in international protection frameworks. A significant number of those forcibly displaced are in protracted displacement situations. This paper is an effort to make sense of the legislative and policy frameworks of protection that apply globally, regionally and domestically, and the way in which these frameworks facilitate or hinder solutions for people in protracted displacement. We evaluate how these frameworks contribute (directly or indirectly) to resolving or creating protracted displacement, assess how they contribute to relevant policy developments and identify engagement trends and (unintended) effects. Along the way, we also draw comparative insights across different global, regional and domestic levels, including eight different countries that host large groups of displaced people and are the focus of the TRAFIG project: Greece, Germany and Italy in Europe; Ethiopia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Tanzania in Africa; and Jordan and Pakistan in Asia. We explore some selected gaps in the current systems of governance of displacement while concentrating on three key perspectives: governing protection, exercising rights and accessing services, and mobility and transnational dimensions of displacement. We conclude with ten key messages regarding the shortcomings of the current governance system of displacement. They highlight the need for stronger stakeholder collaboration, integration of global and local policies, enhanced focus on IDPs, investment in progressive regional policies, redesign of EU policies to avoid promotion of protracted displacement, greater ownership of processes and resources, de-politicisation of displacement policies, ...