Migrants’ Rights Network: Border controls against Greece? Be afraid – be very afraid……

Posted on by Migrant Tales

By Don Flynn

The sun has been brilliant over (most) of the UK for four whole days in a row and we are all extraordinarily happy. But if there’s an inkling of truth in the weekend’s news that emergency border control plans are being prepared against the arrival of Greek citizens, abandon hope for the balmy days of summer for years to come…..

The news, circulated over the last few days, that the Home Office is preparing contingency plans to control borders in the event of Greek exit from the euro can be read as evidence of just how bad the government thinks the crisis has the potential to become.

The only circumstances in which such a measure would be permissible under the terms of EU law are if a situation threatening basic public security arises. This has been permitted on limited occasions in the past, for example with the threat of public disorder instigated by travelling football hooligans, as during the European football championship in Germany in 2000, or the actions against anti-globalisation protestors intending to visit Genoa, Italy, in 2001 during the time of a G8 summit in the city.

More recent attempts to limit movement rights across EU frontiers have been intensely controversial.  In  April 2011 complaints were made against the French government’s alleged  violation of rules of the Schengen Agreementwhen it reintroduced visa checks at its border with Italy with the intention of preventing the entry of North African nationals. The accusation here was that France had acted against its duty of solidarity with the Italian authorities by failing to undertake any assessment of the situation in Italy as a consequence of refugee movements induced by the ‘Arab Spring’ in Tunisia, and by not working in collaboration with its partners to deal with any issues arising.

Pity the poor middle classes

Schengen issues don’t arise in the context of what the Home Office is reporting to be considering in relation to Greece.  Furthermore, the matter here is reported as being pressures arising from the movement of Greek citizens, rather than third country nationals, as in the French-Italian affair.

What can be expected if Greece does exit from the eurozone at any time in the near future, or even in the less dramatic case of continued super-austerity in the country?  It can be expected that any person with euro-denominated assets to protect will want to ensure they are safely out the country if a ‘Grexit’ becomes inevitable. The UK’s readiness to convert crisis-hit euros into sterling will justify the cost of a trip to London for those who can still afford it.  But the prospect of even longer queues to clear passport control at Heathrow seems feeble enough justification for not helping out the Greek middle classes in their hour of need, particularly when it is likely to be on terms of exchange considerably to the advantage of UK financial services.

The prospect of waves of currency transfers on the part of the Hellenic petty bourgeoisie doesn’t seem to be the scenario Mrs May is most in fear of during these next few months however.  More likely she has in mind the flight of workers seeking opportunities to earn a wage given that this will not be possible for very many in their own country.  The UK will doubtless be attractive to some of  these refugees from economic disaster as they contemplate life outside their Mediterranean homeland.

Us, or Germany?

There are an estimated 300,000 Greek citizens already in Britain, and with 10.7 million left in Greece there’s some scope for growing that part of the UK’s population.  Don’t raise your hopes too high though – a similar sized community is also established in Germany and with the economy of that country now enjoying growth and sucking in migrants at 16-year record levels, we can expect a fair bit of competition in terms of getting ‘the brightest and the best’.

Let’s get back to the fundamental question is whether EU law will even allow the Brits to put up the shutters against the arrival of Greek nationals.  As explained above, in the absence of a plausible argument that they are coming here to consume large quantities of lager and riot over either the fortunes of their football team or the iniquities of global capitalism, the answer has to be no.

EU Directives make it absolutely clear however that restrictions on the right of free movement across frontiers “shall not be invoked to service economic ends.” This means that it will be a non-starter for the Home Office to argue that any exceptional measures are need to limited the rights of Greek citizens to come to the UK grounds in order to protect the jobs market for people already here.

End of the world as we know it?

But then again we are talking about circumstances that will arise from a disaster of such proportions – a Greek exit – that contamination will rip right the way across the southern European countries and savage the viability of every national economy on the continent for a decade to come.  All bets are off on just about any issue in these circumstances.  Whole chunks of European integration are likely to be thrown into reverse as borders are reinvented and nations begin to argue with one another about the proper way to divide up the assets which have accrued in a now-failed European single market.  Nothing can be ruled out if this happens, including, for anyone who knows anything about the history of this region of the world, the re-emergence of national rivalry, rising political and economic tension, and even war between states.

It is dangers of this order which make the business of getting a united Europeto work again of absolutely critical importance to us all.  Maintaining the right of free movement across national frontiers for citizens (and indeed, extending this to the entire region’s non-citizen residents) is a big part of what has to be preserved if things are not to take further turns for the worse.  Because of this the UK government should be told to stop its irresponsible talk of curtailing free movement rights and get us back on track to escape austerity and return to growth.

Read original story here.

This piece was reprinted by Migrant Tales with permission.

Finland’s mini Breivik: gunman kills two and wounds seven

Posted on by Migrant Tales

What motivates a young man to take the law in his own hands and kill indiscriminately defenseless people? While we still don’t know the motives behind the killings in Hyvinkää, the suspect’s “likes” on Facebook may offer us some clues. 

Writes YLE in English: ”Police in the town of Hyvinkää, some 50km north of Helsinki, say a young man dressed in military fatigues began shooting with a rifle from the roof of a building in the city centre at 1:53am Saturday…

An 18-year-old woman was killed. Another victim, a 19-year-old man, died later in a hospital. Seven other people have been hospitalised with gunshot wounds, including a 23-year-old woman police trainee, who has critical injuries.”

Human rights activist and writer, Jussi K. Niemelä, states that the suspect’s “likes” on Facebook suggest the usual far-right ideology. Some of the suspect’s “likes” include the anti-immigration Perussuomalaiset party, Bundeswher, the German Defense Force, and Simo Häyhä, a Finnish sniper nicknamed “White Death” by the Red Army during the Winter War (1939-40).

Some have called the gunman Finland’s Anders Breivik, who killed 77 victims in Norway.

While we have to wait for the final report by the police to know the killer’s probable motives, one matter is certain: The attack was senseless and reveals the illness that has inflicted our society today.  It is the same ogre that we saw kill innocent victims in Jokela and Kauhajoki.

Migrant Tales offers its heartfelt condolences to the families of the victims.

Finland’s future recipe for success is based on social equality, mutual acceptance, respect and equal opportunities

Posted on by Migrant Tales

Why would any political party seriously care about immigrants and their children if these newcomers form part of a fragmented group that has little political and economic power? Should they be concerned about high unemployment and ever-growing social inequality among such groups in Finland? 

Our success story as a society was never based on social inequality but on social equality, or tasa-arvo.  If you disagree, look at our violent history between 1918 and 1945. The crucial fuel that fed the wheels of internal and external strife back then was suspicion of other groups and nations.

Despite our rocky start as an independent nation, we have built today a model society that is the envy of other nations. Another welcome characteristic of our society is its strong sense of community and belonging. Not everyone, however, enjoys being part of such a great family. Some of these are  visible minorities like the Roma, Saami, non-white Finns, homosexuals and other groups.

As we race deeper into the depths of the new century, we need more than ever those tools that turned us into a successful nation and helped mend our differences as a society. We especially need values such as inclusion to rub off on those that form part of our ever-growing culturally diverse nation.

Are we putting Finland in harm’s way again by reviving those same class divisions, inequality and loathing that once impoverished us? Are those very values that fueled strife now entering our society through the back door as anti-immigrant sentiment and intolerance?

You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to understand that humans are social animals and that our successful Nordic welfare society is based on social equality.  Social vices like greed, apathy and even racism therefore constitute today the greatest threat to our society.

Some politicians in Finland and Europe naively believe that they can revive these above-mentioned social ills and control them with a short leash. Nothing could be further from the truth. The mass killings in Norway that we witnessed last year are tragic proof of the contrary. What attacked Norway wasn’t a mass killer called Anders Breivik but his racist values and fear.

Political parties are playing with fire if they fuel class divisions and hatred of other groups like immigrants and visible minorities.

It is an encouraging sign, however, that more politicians, political parties and common Finns are finding the courage to openly question racism and all forms of discrimination.

A lot more work is still needed on this front. We should hear more than ever those values, together with new ones, that turned us into what we are today:  social equality for all based on mutual acceptance, respect and equal opportunities.

 

University of Helsinki seeks research participants who are of Finnish descent and migrated to Finland as adults

Posted on by Migrant Tales

Do you have Finnish roots and currently live in Finland, but were born and raised abroad? Participants are needed for a research study on people of Finnish descent who migrate to Finland in adulthood. In particular, those who have moved from Canada, the United States, Sweden and Russia are sought.

If this sounds like you, you are warmly invited to participate in this study by attending an interview, joining a group discussion and/or writing about your experiences. Please visit the study’s website (http://blogs.helsinki.fi/kjurva) for more information and to sign up. You can also contact the researcher, Katrina Jurva, directly for more details ([email protected]).

Recruitment for this study is ongoing so please feel free to share this information if you know someone else who may be interested!

 

Amnesty International Annual Report 2012 criticizes Finland for accelerated asylum procedures

Posted on by Migrant Tales

Amnesty International (AI) has criticized Finland in its Annual Report 2012 for accelerated asylum procedures, which include forced returns to Baghdad, according to YLE.  The report noted as well that Finland was unable to provide figures on how many irregular migrants and asylum-seekers it detained during the year.

AI reports: “However, there were concerns that many of those being detained were held in police detention facilities, contrary to international standards. In these cases, many were detained in mixed-sex facilities, together with individuals suspected of crime. Children seeking asylum, including unaccompanied children were also detained.”

The report said Finland provides inadequate protection for asylum-seekers and their right of appeal.

Migrant Tales understands that the Finnish authorities forcibly return asylum-seekers back to their original country if their request has been rejected 2-3 times.

“I know of some asylum-seekers who have been deported [from Finland] to Iraq, Afghanistan, Russia, Chechnya, Angola, Guinea-Bissau and Cameroon,” said a former asylum-seeker, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “If the first country that took your fingerprints is Sweden, they can deport you to that country [as stipulated in the Dublin Agreement].”

The former asylum-seeker said that the Finnish police have three ways of deporting you.

“One is by letter informing you that they will pick you up at a certain day and time, the second is by surprise incarceration after being requested to appear at a police station,” he said. “The third is by detaining you at the refugee center without any warning.”

 

 

MTV3 poll shows support for PS to have plummeted to 5%

Posted on by Migrant Tales

If the municipal election of October were held today, only 5% would vote for the right-wing populist Perussuomalaiset (PS) party, according to a poll published Wednesday by MTV3. The latest poll is further proof that support for the PS continues to plummet compared with the impressive gains it made in last year’s election.

In the April 2011 election, the PS won 19.1% (39 seats) of the vote compared with 4.05% (5 seats) in 2007.

The biggest winner in the MTV3 poll is the National Coalition Party (23%) followed by the Social Democrats (21%) and Center Party (20%), which has made an impressive comeback after its disastrous election result in 2011. The Greens and Left Alliance would get 9% apiece.

The MTV3 poll published today shows the National Coalition Party, Social Democrats and Center Party making the biggest gains if the October 28 municipal elections were held today.  

Migrant Rights’ Network of the UK: The Elephant in the Workplace – Why it’s time we talked about migration and labour exploitation

Posted on by Migrant Tales

 

 

 

 

Dr Sam Scott*

Certainly, it is rare for evidence of worker mistreatment to come to the fore but this does not mean, in our opinion, that it is ipso facto rare. Partly, the challenge is one of identifying workplace exploitation and persuading victims to come forward with evidence. Partly, it is about how as a society we define workplace exploitation, how it is legislated against, and how this legislation is policed. 

Trade Union membership is as low today as it was in the 1940s. Amidst the various worker protests against austerity measures, it has tended to be white-collar professionals, principally in the public services, who have been able to exert collective will, via union or professional group membership, in an attempt to protect eroding rights. Those in vulnerable employment in the UK – an estimated 2 million workers according to the TUC – do not to join unions in the main and so struggle to protect themselves from exploitative employers.

The cleaners, farm workers, production line operatives, au pairs, domestic servants, car washers, waiters and waitresses, the list could go on, are largely cast adrift, atomised and struggling to carve out a living at the bottom of the UK labour market. Their labour is not on the label, is not even evident when we look behind the label, and, in fact, has largely been written out of the social history of the late twentieth and early twenty-first century. The invisible hand of the market is now the low-wage worker and, interestingly, since the mid-1990s, this hand has become increasing migrant in origin.

New research funded by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation identifies this link between workplace exploitation and immigration via a case study of the UK food industry. Using evidence from 62 migrant workers (mainly Polish, Chinese, Latvian and Lithuanian) spread across five areas of the UK (London, Liverpool, South-West England, Lincolnshire and east-Central Scotland) the report highlights why migrants are at particular risk of exploitation. Specifically, it is their constrained economic circumstances, limited English, widespread use of tied housing, and reliance on gangmasters that renders migrants vulnerable to severe forms of exploitation: what we term ‘forced labour’.

If I had known English, I would have gone to find a new job, I would have looked for anything, but it was the beginning here and I really did not have any other options. (Sally, woman, 32, Polish)

What do we mean by forced labour? Well the JRF report identifies 14 ‘practices’ that we consider to be part of the forced labour crime (forced labour has been a criminal offence since 2009). Some of the most noteworthy practices are as follows:

  • Upfront fees/debt bondage­ – many migrants paid fees to gangmasters to travel to the UK and to secure work. This often indebted migrants and/or led them into exploitative work and housing.
  • Productivity targets and surveillance –  targets and monitoring gave workers little opportunity for social interaction at work. Pressure was intense: “It was completely crazy, rushing, shouting constantly … they can stand behind your back with a stopwatch and see how many chickens you are packing per minute … Here you are a robot, a machine.” (Izabela, woman, 44, Polish)
  • Non-/under-payment of wages – this was remarkably common, and migrants seemed unable to get back pay they were owed. A popular tactic was to deduct a few hours’ pay each week: “The boss was very, very stingy. When I worked ten hours, he would note it down as six or seven hours. Always a few hours less … Every week when the payday came, we had to argue with the boss … ”. (Li Xia, man, 42, Chinese)
  • Underwork/indebtedness – LMIs recruited even when work was scarce, because they charged workers fees for finding work, however limited, and/or for travel, accommodation and other bills. The more workers they had, the more charges they could levy; it could be in LMIs’ interests to provide workers with just enough hours to pay these charges. This left migrants with no spare money to escape their exploiters, furthering dependency.
  • Tied Accommodation – poor accommodation was often linked to exploitation. Interviewees talked of overcrowded (e.g. five people in one caravan), sub-standard, overpriced housing. “I was shocked … the caravan is for 5 people … One of the girls sleeps in the living room …” (Victoria, woman, 21, Bulgarian).

The research clearly shows that the bottom of the labour market can be a truly inhospitable place. Fear and a sense of powerlessness are pervasive and there is no collective union engagement to alleviate this and push for improvements, quite the contrary. The question then is whether we could do more to prevent forced labour and more to empower low-wage migrant workers in an attempt to halt any decline in workplace standards?

A starting point may be to think about why news headlines concerned with improving workers’ rights are so rare and why the issue of tackling workplace exploitation is so infrequently raised in policy speeches? Regrettably, it usually takes a shocking event – i.e. death at work – for people to take note. However, the reality for most victims is that forced labour is about everyday and often quite incremental forms of exploitation that only collectively and cumulatively combine to constitute a criminal act. The elephant in the workplace is not, in other words, as simple as might be implied when we glimpse its occasional monolithic shadow.

*Dr Sam Scott is an associate lecturer at the Department of Geography, University of Exeter. He has been researching international migration for the past decade and has published work on both skilled and low-wage labour migration, mainly from within the European Union. His latest research – with Professor Gary Craig (Wilbeforce Institute) and Dr Alistair Geddes (University of Dundee) – looks at experiences of forced labour in the UK food industry.

Read original story here.

This piece was reprinted by Migrant Tales with permission.

Kyllä neuvonnalle, ei kriminalisoinnille ympärileikkausasiassa

Posted on by Migrant Tales

Husein Muhammed

Vihreät päätti viikonloppuna puoluekokouksessaan, että poikien ei-lääketieteellisistä syistä tehtävistä ympärileikkauksista pitää päästä eroon neuvonnan keinoin. Vihreän miesliikkeen aloite, että ympärileikkauksen kieltoa pitäisi alkaa ajamaan välittömästi, kuitenkin hylättiin. Poikien ympärileikkaus ei ole missään maassa kiellettyä.

Myös seksuaalisuuden ja ihmissuhteiden asiantuntijana toimiva Sexpo-säätiö on aloittamassa Ehjä-nimisen hankkeen, jonka tarkoituksena on ehkäistä kulttuurisista tai uskonnollisista syistä tehtäviä poikien ympärileikkauksia. Säätiö järjestää syksyllä Helsingissä
myös kansainvälisen konferenssi aiheesta.

Aikataulusyistä en päässyt Vihreiden puoluekokoukseen. Mutta olen mielelläni käytettävissä puolueen lopullisen kannan muodostumisessa. Olen myös kutsuttu luennoimaan aiheesta Sexpon seminaariin.

Suomessa juutalaiset ja tataarit ovat jo 1800-luvulta lähtien tehneet poikien ympärileikkauksia ilman viranomaisten puuttumista asiaan. Viime vuosina jotkut ympärileikkaukset ovat johtaneet pahoinpitelysyytteisiin, joskin monissa tapauksissa syyttäjä on myös päätynyt syyttämättäjättämispäätökseen.

Viimeksi vuonna 2008 Suomen korkein oikeus katsoi, että uskonnollisista tai kulttuurisista syistä tehty poikien ympärileikkaus on sallittua, mikäli se tehdään asiallisesti. Poikien ympärileikkaus ei tiettävästi ole kielletty missään maassa. Toisaalta Suomessa viimeksi joulukuussa kahdessa tapauksessa vanhemmat olivat käräjillä ympärileikkauksen vuoksi.

Sosiaali- ja terveysministeriössä oli vuonna 2008 valmisteilla laki, jolla uskonnollisista ja kulttuurisista syistä suoritettava poikien ympärileikkaus olisi nimenomaisesti laillistettu. Ympärileikkauksen suorittajan olisi tullut olla ammattilääkäri, ja vähävaraiset perheet olisivat voineet teettää sen julkisessa terveydenhuollossa maksutta.

Ilmeisesti poliittisista syistä ministeriö jäädytti hankkeen. Ympärileikkauksen laillistamista ja teettämistä myös julkisin varoin on puoltanut muun muassa Ihmisoikeusliitto. Sen sijaan esimerkiksi Lääkäriliitto on vastustanut sitä.

Uusi peruspalveluministeri on luvannut selvittää uuden lain tarpeen (HS 21.12.). Todennäköisesti uusikaan selvitys ei poliittisista erimielisyyksistä johtuen saa aikaan tarvittavaa lakia.

Lainsäädännön puuttuminen on ongelmallista. Vanhemmat ja lääkärit joutuvat elämään epätietoisuudessa siitä, saako operaatiota tehdä vai tuleeko syyte pahoinpitelystä.

Suomalaiset lääkärit ovat omantunnonsyistä tai pahoinpitelysyytteiden pelossa lähes kokonaan kieltäytyneet uskonnollisista ympärileikkauksista. Juutalaiset ja tataarit ovat teettäneet ympärileikkaukset omilla lääkäreillään. Ongelmalliseksi on muodostunut maahanmuuttajien ympärileikkaus, sillä niihin ei yleensä ole löytynyt ammattitaitoista lääkäriä. Osa vanhemmista on joutunut käyttämään poikansa kotimaassaan ympärileikkauksessa, toiset ovat turvautuneet puoskareihin.

Poikien ympärileikkaus on vain vähäinen toimenpide, joka oikein suoritettuna ei aiheuta mitään varsinaista vammaa tai seksuaalista kyvyttömyyttä. Maahanmuuttajavastaisten piirissä ympärileikkausta on demonisoitu ihan muista syistä kuin lapsen terveyden vuoksi: Samat niin kutsutut maahanmuuttokriitikot, jotka muualla vaativat maahanmuuttajien palauttamista kotimaihinsa, vaikka nämä olisivat vaarassa joutua teloitetuiksi tai kidutetuiksi poliittisten tai uskonnollisten mielipiteidensä vuoksi, väittävät vastustavansa ympärileikkausta sen vuoksi, että ovat huolissaan muslimipoikien terveydestä.

Juuri terveydellisistä syistä ympärileikkaus tulee sallia valvotuissa olosuhteissa. Kielto altistaisi lapsen ammattitaidottoman henkilön suorittamalle ympärileikkaukselle, mistä lapselle voi aiheutua vakaviakin vammoja.

Jos ympärileikkaus kriminalisoitaisiin, osa vanhemmista kuitenkin ympärileikkauttaisi lapsensa. Ympärileikkauksen epäonnistuessa he eivät pahoinpitelysyytteiden pelossa uskaltaisi viedä lastaan lääkäriin. Tämä olisi lapsen kannalta kaikkein vaarallisinta.

Ympärileikkausta on vastustettu myös sen vuoksi, ettei lääketieteellisesti turhaa toimenpidettä tulisi kustantaa verorahoilla. Ympärileikkaus on kuitenkin mahdollista laillistaa ilman, että se suoritettaisiin julkisin varoin. Varakkaat vanhemmat maksaisivat poikansa ympärileikkauksen joka tapauksessa.

Vähävaraisille toimenpiteen on sen sijaan syytä olla ilmaista. Muuten lapsi saatetaan ympärileikkauttaa ammattitaidottomalla henkilöllä, mikä saattaa paitsi vaarantaa lapsen terveyden, myös tulla epäonnistuneen ympärileikkauksen vuoksi suoritettavina lääketieteellisinä toimenpiteinä julkiselle terveydenhuollolle kalliimmaksi kuin jos ympärileikkauksen olisi alun perin tehnyt ammattitaitoinen lääkäri.

Ympärileikkausta koskevaa neuvontaa olisi syytä tarjota vanhemmille neuvoloissa jo ennen lapsen syntymistä. Tällöin on tähdennettävä, että tyttöjen sukupuolielinten silpominen on erittäin vaarallista ja myös ankarasti kiellettyä. Myös poikien ympärileikkaukseen liittyvät sinänsä harvinaiset riskit on kerrottava. On myös esitettävä mahdollisuus siirtää ympärileikkaus aikuisuuteen ja asianosaisen itsensä päätettäväksi. Viime kädessä vanhemmille on annettava myös mahdollisuus ympärileikkauttaa poika turvallisissa oloissa.

Alkuperäisen blogikirjoituksen voi lukea tästä.

Tämä blogikirjoitus julkaistiin Migrant Talesissä luvalla.


 

 

Family reunification: Interior Ministry calls for comments

Posted on by JusticeDemon

The Finnish Ministry of the Interior recently published a working group report on the present state of family reunification of refugees and displaced persons in Finland. This report seeks to clarify the background to family reunification and to examine the prospects for amending the associated regulations.

The report was prepared in response to the programme of the Katainen government, which envisages harmonisation of family reunification practices in Finland with those of the other Nordic countries. The working group was an internal committee of civil servants from the Ministry’s Immigration Department.

There is nothing objectionable in principle about a closed ministerial committee preparing a preliminary factual review. However, this report also includes one very important “proposal” that is, to all intents and purposes, a policy recommendation. This is described in the abstract as follows:

Selvityksessä ehdotetaan, että asetetaan hanke ulkomaalaislain perhesidelupia koskevien säännösten muuttamiseksi tavoitteena Suomessa jo käytössä olevan toimeentuloedellytyksen laajentaminen koskemaan myös humanitaarista suojelua saavien perheen yhdistämistilanteita.

“The report proposes a project to amend the provisions of the Aliens Act governing permits issued on family grounds, with a view to extending the income condition already applied in Finland to include reunification of the families of recipients of humanitarian protection.”

This would scrap the exemption that humanitarian immigrants currently enjoy from the income condition that otherwise governs family reunification.

It is interesting that this exemption would nevertheless continue to apply to the families of citizens of Finland and other Nordic countries.

In concrete terms, and applying current rates, this means that a person displaced by civil war, for example, would have to demonstrate a net monthly income of EUR 1,530 to bring a spouse to Finland plus a further EUR 450 for each additional child. The national average monthly wage in Finland is currently just over EUR 3,000 before taxes and contributions.

The Interior Ministry has requested comments on the report by no later than 6 July 2012.