The report was created during the one-year work of competent organizations for migration issues and deals with key aspects of the implementation of migration policies, which with their (non)functioning also affect the asylum system and became visible due to exposure to a mixed migration flow.
The report contains a number of recommendations. The introduction of a more effective mechanism for the collection and statistical monitoring of data in the field of migration, primarily by taking fingerprints at the first contact with migrants, and the promotion of cooperation and more effective implementation of the Readmission Agreement with countries in the region, especially with Macedonia, stand out as key.
Here we present a report from the conference "Asylum System and Migration: Two Stories" where, among other things, the Report was presented on September 26 in Belgrade.
REPORT: Miroslava Jelačić, legal analyst of Group 484, said at the beginning of her presentation that in the past few years, the behavior of most actors, primarily competent authorities, towards migrants was based on the concept of a "divided world" between asylum seekers and irregular, economic migrants. "Consequently, steps were taken that only partially and in the short term gave results and contributed to the strengthening of the perception that only refugees and باحسن نیت asylum seekers have certain guaranteed rights. The fact that basic human rights must also be guaranteed to irregular migrants was often neglected and forgotten," said Miroslava Jelačić and reminded that the imperative for every state must be to ensure the enjoyment of basic human rights to every asylum seeker and migrant, and bearing in mind the reasons why they come to Serbia and specific rights guaranteed by instruments of international law and internal legal order. Also, it should be borne in mind that the phenomenon of migration is accompanied by the increasingly pronounced smuggling of migrants as well as the exploitation of the shortcomings of the asylum system by economic migrants.
What makes it difficult to improve the system is the inadequate mechanism for monitoring and analyzing migration in Serbia. The assessment is further complicated by the fact that a certain number of irregular migrants are never registered and thus remain without any institutional support, that is, outside the system. On the other hand, a number of migrants went through several different institutions in the country, and those institutions never exchanged and compared the collected files. The problem is that the MUP of Serbia did not regularly deal with identity determination. On the other hand, when that action was carried out, it was not carried out in a way that ensures the reliability of the data obtained.
"We believe that, first of all, the reliability of the data obtained in the process of establishing identity could be ensured by foreseeing the obligation to take fingerprints in the first contact with migrants in Serbia." In all the procedures/actions they undertake, the competent authorities would identify the migrant based on the personal data he provided during the first contact/implementation of the action. This would mean the establishment of the so-called of the 'internal / process identity' of the migrant. The prerequisite is to provide all the necessary infrastructural, material-technical and personnel conditions," said Miroslava Jelačić.
As one of the proofs of the weakness of the current parameters for monitoring migration in Serbia, the speaker cited the example that the Regional Center for Croatia, which is part of the Border Police Directorate of the RS MUP, includes in its statistical data on its work the number of misdemeanor reports filed due to illegal crossing border, while in the consolidated statistics submitted by the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the RS to the research team, there is no such data.
There is also the problem of misuse of certificates of expressed intention to seek asylum. Namely, due to the fact that there is no photograph of the asylum seeker on the certificate itself, the paper can change owners several times. That is, there is room for asylum seekers to exchange certificates with each other, which are the basis for applying and staying in one of the asylum centers.
The connection between controlled and uncontrolled migration flow can be cited as an example of the treatment of migrants who cannot be voluntarily returned or forcibly removed from Serbia, so they are released after a stay in the reception center for foreigners or penal correctional institutions. "During a visit to the District Prison in Subotica, the warden told us that if a group of migrants is less than 20, they are automatically released after serving their prison sentence for illegal entry and/or stay," said Miroslava Jelačić and concluded: "Consequences these practices are: the risk of abuse of the asylum system by the fact that people return to the system several times; the risk of violations and loss of rights, and most often the inability to ensure the protection of fundamental human rights, which puts Serbia at risk of potential violations of generally accepted standards and responsibility before the ECtHR and other supervisory bodies; security risk for Serbia; the financial effect of this kind of situation where large resources are spent on this kind of system."
As explained in the Report itself, the term "mixed migration flow" is used for those "movements in which persons motivated by different reasons and circumstances move together, either within or across international borders" without valid documents and not meeting the legal requirements for stay in the territory of the country through which they move. Attention is also paid to irregular/illegal migratory movements of various categories such as refugees, asylum seekers, economic migrants, victims of human trafficking, smuggled migrants and other vulnerable categories, including women, children and unaccompanied minors.
The report "Challenges of the Asylum System: Responding to Mixed Migration Flows" also deals with the readmission of third-country nationals and stateless persons. When it comes to cooperation with the competent authorities of the Republic of Hungary, in a situation where Serbia is accepted as a country, in 2013, Hungary sent 2837 requests for readmission. Consent was given for 2746 requests. When it comes to the shortened procedure, all the requests that the Republic of Serbia received came from the competent authorities of Croatia - 885 requests, and all requests were answered positively.
The biggest challenge for Serbia is the implementation of the Readmission Agreement with Macedonia. In 2013, a total of 19 requests for acceptance were sent, of which 11 were approved. According to the abbreviated procedure, 140 requests for acceptance were sent, and only nine were approved.
If these data are correlated with the data that 2013 attempts to illegally cross the state border were recorded in 4682, the question can be raised as to how successfully the agreement with Macedonia is being implemented. The small number of submitted requests, as well as the small number of consents given, is debatable.
The cooperation that the RS authorities have with the Bulgarian authorities is the only functional return mechanism that Serbia has. It is specific that the returns are carried out on the basis of the agreement between the SFRY and Bulgaria on the method of investigation and resolution of border violations occurring on the Yugoslav-Bulgarian border, even though an agreement on the return and acceptance of persons illegally staying on the territory of the two countries was concluded, as well as the Single Agreement with the EU which can also be applied. However, what calls for special caution is UNHCR's position on the asylum system in Bulgaria: during every return, the state should make an individual assessment, especially if it concerns persons with special needs or particularly vulnerable categories.
"We would especially like to emphasize that strengthening only certain components of the asylum system and the migration management system, without simultaneously developing other components, contributes to strengthening push and pull factors that will encourage further irregular movements. The most important thing for Serbia is the establishment of a mechanism for the collection and statistical monitoring of data in the area of migration. With such a mechanism, we will be able to see the scope of this phenomenon more realistically, but also plan measures and resources in a better way," said Miroslava Jelačić from Group 484.
According to Miroslava Jelačić, the legal analyst of Group 484 who managed the research on the basis of which the report was created, the main thesis of the research is the impact of the mixed migration flow on the asylum system in Serbia.
The researchers focused their attention on the places where the so-called dividing line between asylum seekers and other categories of migrants: treatment of migrants at the border, punishment of irregular migrants, i.e. respect for the principle of non-punishment of asylum seekers and refugees; the ways in which a difference is made between migrants and asylum seekers during their stay in institutions for the execution of criminal sanctions, the reception center for foreigners and during their stay in the vicinity of asylum centers were also analyzed; a significant part of the research is devoted to the implementation of readmission agreements when it comes to citizens of third countries and stateless persons; special attention is paid to three particularly vulnerable categories among asylum seekers and migrants - unaccompanied minors, victims of human trafficking and victims of torture.
Civil society organization ASTRA - Action against Human Trafficking, Balkan Center for Migration and Humanitarian Activities, Belgrade Center for Human Rights, Humanitarian Center for Integration and Tolerance, International Aid Network, Initiative for Development and Cooperation with the coordination of Group 484 participated in the preparation of the report.
The publication is part of the project "Networking and Capacity Building for a More Effective Migration Policy in Serbia" which Group 484 is implementing thanks to the support of the Royal Norwegian Embassy in Belgrade and the Open Society Foundation Serbia.
The project is being implemented in partnership with the Belgrade Center for Human Rights and the Belgrade Center for Security Policy.
