Prime Minister Juha Sipilä’s hardline asylum and immigration policy reminded me of the 1980s when former Aliens Office director Eila Kännö’s tough line against migrants turned against her. I see the same thing happening today with the government’s asylum and immigration policy.
People react when a system is impractical and unfair. It is precisely what happened in the 1980s and what is happening today when an Iraqi asylum seeker called Ali was killed in Iraq.
Other Iraqis have suffered similar fates as reported in 2016.
How can the Finnish Immigration Service continue to claim that countries like Iraq and Afghanistan are safe when they’re not.
In the 1980s and earlier, migrants, who were called “aliens,” had to get residence and work permit for each job.
We all know that the tightening of present immigration policy has the signature of the Perussuomalaiset (PS)* and Blue Reform parties. The strategy is ineffective because it hinges on myths and prejudices which end up falling flat on their faces.
In order for immigration to work you need effective and fair policies. The ones we have in Finland now are shameful to put it lightly. One of these is the government’s decision to do away with residence permits on humanitarian grounds, which have forced the number of undocumented migrants to soar manyfold as a result.
Not only are there signs that matters are turning against the government’s asylum and immigration policy, but abroad as well. A French court ruled that it could not send an asylum seeker back to Finland because it returned them to Iraq and put in harm’s way.
Back in the good old racist days of the 1980s, laws such as the Restricting Act of 1939 (law 219/1939), which became redundant in 1992, prohibited foreigners from owning real estate and acquiring a majority stake in Finnish companies—limiting this to 20% normally and 40% under special permission. The Restricting Act stipulated that foreigners could not own shares in sectors like forestry, securities trading, transportation, mining, real estate and shipping. Foreigners weren’t allowed to establish newspapers, never mind organize demonstrations and be politically active.
Were such restrictions effective? What role did they play in keeping Finland a closed country to the outside world? Were they in conflict with our sense of justice and fairness?
