#Vintimeglia, a day field trip was an opportunity to visit border areas, understand social life at border and look new forms of border.
On 18th February, 2020, students of Master in Migration Studies had an opportunity to go Ventimiglia, a field-visit organized by our Professor. Ventimiglia is a border town, last Italian city before the French border and located in northern Italy, and reached in 55 minutes by train that runs from Nice Centre Ville train station. Ventimiglia is a beautiful small city and is a vital crossing point for migrants who want to enter France.
We took the morning train from Centre Ville, Nice and get down at the train station in Ventimiglia. The train station when we arrived was not so crowded. Then, we headed toward the local neighbours discussing among us about the place and migrants flow here in 2016 to till the date. We stopped at the bridge to riverbed which was fenced. We stood in the parking area in front of bridge, this same place used to host migrants. This place was once the gathering point of migrants and in this place, they could meet translators, smugglers, etc. to make further arrangement to continue their journey to France. Near the river basin there are shops where people can have breakfast, charge their phone and also get translation and legal facilities. The early comers after waiting long days to cross the border are likely to spend money so they asked money from the new comers in exchange of the information about the city and border activities.
This area is more than just a meeting point for the migrants, because it is also the place to be rounded up by the police, lucrative market for people’s smugglers to sell their border crossing services. The wall is now fenced and can be considered as an act of control to migrants, to prevent them to go to river beds or make tents and stay. However, in the wall we could see the writing which informs how the migrants can seek local help, where to get food and there we could see pictures writing in different language reminding that humanity is the greatest religion. From there, we went toward Saint Anthony’s Church which is located in the popular neighbourhood of Gianchette in Ventimiglia.
Saint Anthony’s church had hosted many irregular migrants after the housing at the Ventimiglia train station closed. According to ( Lamarche & Trucco, n.d.), around 13 thousands migrants have been hosted in Saint Anthony’s church from May 31st 2016 to August 14th 2017. For 440 days, the church basement, front and back yard, and the nave itself, were transformed in an emergency reception centre. However, initially they provided shelter to everyone, later due to the limited reception capacity of the Church, the services were reserved to women, families, and minors. At the initiative of the local bishop and priest, and with the coordination of the local Caritas association, the project called con-fine solidale (solidarity border) mobilized more than a hundred volunteers, functioned as an operational head quarter for NGOs, attracted media and political attention, and deeply overturned the entire neighbourhood. The neighbours were showing solidarity acts such as providing foods and cloths, the NGOs and Muslim association from Nice were cooperating with them and travelling to Ventimiglia for arrangements of fooding and clothing to those migrants. Later on the growing attention of the media, local people, and also due to increasing influx of migrants in Ventimiglia, there is increasing concern about the need to manage this influx in proper place and finally on August 2017, Saint Anthony’s Church was completely close for migrants.
Later, Roya Camp was started as a immediate solution to host migrants. In the beginning, Roya Camp had only 80 places and later increased to 800 places. Teenagers were not hosted so they stayed in the riverbed and many organizations came for aid of minors. With the decision of prefecture and Redcross, Roya camp was opened. Now Roya Camp is a reception centre and it is for single men, women, families, minors, children. It is unique in term of hosting nature, it is not hosting specific age groups or gender but the mix of all. It can be considered as reception center, hotspot, center for asylum etc. It acts like assisting people in transit even though transit is not legal. There was also increased arguments in the local politics about the migrants and also there was an interdiction to give food and other services to migrants outside camp.
Caritas Center is there helping migrants who are in difficulties. Many migrants cross difficult journey from Libya or many war affected regions hoping secure life in Europe. We heard experience of some migrants about their dangerous journey. They said they felt lucky when they arrived Italy live when some of their friends never reached Italy and lost life on the journey. Even if they are safe in Italy after this difficult journey, it is in fact not a happy ending because they could not go to visit their family and they have to follow the rules and regulation of Italy and required to follow deadlines in order to follow the asylum application decision.
We then went walking across the popular neighborhood and had lunch in the restaurant. The restaurant owner shared her own experience of how she helped migrants and she was also explaining that with the increased number of migrants in her restaurant, the local people stopped coming to the restaurant or visit less and by that way disturbing her business. We also get opportunity to interact with the activists from NGOs on how they are helping the migrants and advocating for their rights. The story of NGOs in fact was full of challenge, struggle and motivation to help migrants. They are working even though their activities to help irregular migrants are disturbed several times due to the government's restrictive policy for irregular migration.
After understanding the reality of the migrants condition in Ventimiglia, we can simply say that point at the border where they are forced to stop and to not cross another European border is not the dangerous part of their journey from Africa or middle east. Honestly speaking, control here creates confusion in migrants about the border. Migrants can travel to France by taking train from train station in Vengtimilia to Nice but they may be stopped by border control authorities in Menton, the first French city from Ventimiglia. Police checked train and dragged them out and taken to police station and kept in detention and afterwards, pushed back to Italy. Thousands of people, fleeing war and persecution, are accumulated in Italian border. According to the Dublin regulation, the responsibility for dealing with the asylum application rest with the first EU country receiving migrants and Italy states that they could no longer cope with the increasing numbers.
At the border, we can also assume Red Cross as border. This new form of border have different experience for migrants. This camp is assumed as transit camp but infact, transit is considered illegal. Also, this reception centers can be assumed to minimize the migrants mobility as mentioned in the article by Tazzioli, (2019). While talking with the representatives from Red cross camp, she explained that the migrants who stayed has given fingerprints during the first entry, then they will be assigned unique number and the card. This information will be recorded and accessed throughout EU. Red-cross camp are getting monetary assistance based on the number of cards, number of card denotes the number of migrants living there. Red-cross is providing them IT training so that people can use the skills later. Similarly, they provided daily French/Italian classes for all migrants. For women and girls, they provide beauty training session and the Red cross representatives talks that this is a way to encourage them to talk and interact by which they can know the background since many women came as a victim of trafficking, prostitution and some are prone to it.
As mentioned in (Carrera, Guild, Merlino, & Parkin, 2011), Schengen area brings together 22 EU member states and four non EU member states and the Schengen Border Code(SBC) is introduced in 2006, which is the mechanism to create harmonize rules within the Schengen area. The main principle of Schengen area is that the travel authority given to third country national by one member states means that the person can travel freely within the schengen territory without any control. Schengen system is considered equivalent to internal space and it also means absence of any control on person independent of their nationality. When talking about EU border legislation, it is different to Schengen concept in a way that EU measure is more related to solidarity, fair sharing of responsibility and cooperation.
Italy lies in the external border to European Union and is receiving many undocumented and irregular migrants fleeing the war and hostile in North Africa. Starting on April 2011, Italy provided irregular migrants with the temporary resident permit who arrived in Italy before January 1, 2011 so that they can freely travel within EU member states. In addition to this initiation of Italy for humanitarian protection of irregular migrants, the Interior ministry of Italy, Roberto Maroni calling for European solidarity to handle and manage irregular migrants. These expression of interest of the Italian government has been criticized by EU member state. Following the decision of Italy to grant temporary resident permit to irregular migrants, France introduced internal border check between Italy and France resulting in strict check in the trains and any transport traveling to France from Italy. However, other EU member states do not put internal border control with Italy, their reaction to the irregular immigrants coming from Italy and crossing their border was not friendly or in cooperation to Italy’s work of migration management. These activities also raised concerns on the assessment of the political legitimacy of the Schengen area. According to the Schengen regime, every member state should cooperate to manage EU external border and while allowing free movement of people within their internal territory (Carrera, Guild, Merlino, & Parkin, 2011).
The control measure in the French-Italian border by French authorities is a practical scenario to understand the consistency between the Schengen border code and the national immigration measures. We can also understand the Schengen Border Code giving lawfulness for people to travel freely within Schengen member states after getting the temporary resident permit in Italy and at the same time, the limiting or blocking the flow through the introduction of the internal border control by France.
As mentioned in (Carrera, Guild, Merlino, & Parkin, 2011), bilateral agreement signed on 5 April 2011 by the Italian government with the Tunisian authorities for the swift repatriation of the migrants from Italian border to Tunisia. These deferred pushback were against the Returns Directive (2008/115/EC) as well as fundamental human rights. The circulars published on April 2011 by French authority was to block the settlement of Tunisian migrants in France who holds Italian temporary resident permit. Other member of Schengen Area accused Italy destroying the spirit of Schengen regime. EU commission and member states argue that Italy should consider the first entry conditions of the Schengen Border Code(SBC) and put positive comment on France’s action, introducing internal border control backing the argument on the article 5 of SBC. Not only this, the decree published by Italian government states that the temporary resident permit would be issued to citizens of the North African Countries who entered Italy between 1 January to 5 April 2011 without clearly explaining which countries are included in the list, the same decree states that the people without temporary resident permit will be considered socially dangerous person and will be pushed back. Commission states that Italy informed Commision about their decree and comply their obligation respecting the decision 2006/688/EC of European commission to communicate about their national measures in the areas of asylum and immigration.
Italy’s action has been hugely criticized by other member states arguing that Italy issued the temporary resident permit without respecting the criteria to grant it and they did it to allow migrants travel to other member states. In response to this action, France has adopted strict border control which results in the pushback of many migrants back to Italy as well as blocked movement of NGOs representatives in the French-Italian borders. This is not the first France’s action to discouage irregular migrants. In April 2011, France passed new immigration law and based on this law, 25,500 irregular immigrants had been removed from French territory and French government refused to take undocumented Tunisian migrants.
SBC prohibits the use of the police power at the borders. But the French national legislation grants policy authorities, within an area of 20 km from the land border of a Schengen member state, to check the identity of any person not ‘at the borders’ but rather circulating within its national territory.Also, SBC states that the internal border control can be prolonged for more than 30 days only in the case that the serious threats continue to increase. Article 24 and 25 of the Schengen code states that country can apply internal border countrol in the matter of serious threats. EU Temporary Protection Directive (2001/55/EC) has been adopted to provide temporary protection to people in case when there is large influx of displaced people from third country. Italy has submitted the decree to the commission about issuing temporary resident permit on the ground of humanitarian purpose. France too need to do so and French government states that the reason of blocking the humanitarian organization and NGOs at the border is because they have not informed them earlier.
Among the first entry requirements to get temporary resdient permit, France authority was looking into the means of substinence, 31 Euro per day. The main target of border guard at French-Italian border were the undocumented North African migrants holding Italian Temporary residence permit with tunisian origin. This action shows discrimination at the border. The action of French authority at the French-Italian border gives message to the world that EU lacks solidarity. There is clear evidence that sincere and loyal cooperation is required between member states in migration management.
Tazzioli, (2019) mentioned about asymmetric functioning of border and migration policies because EU member states are using the word migration crisis or refugee crisis to explain the influx of people fleeing to Europe, fleeing war and seeking protection in EU. There is discrimination based on the types of mobilities and based on the migrants. Irregular mobilities are subjected to discrimination, arrest, detent, abuse. There are invisible and unofficial strategies to make migrants undergo difficult situation, for instance to undertake the same journey multiple times. There are also forced displacement which prevents irregular migrants to keep moving and these has created negative stereotypes about irregular migrants. Mobility is tied to political discourse, data extraction, technology and so on. It means the mobility of people is shaped by political discourse of the country and the technology is used to keep track of who is travelling, in which location and based on this information shaping the strategies to divert, deaccelerate and trouble their movements. Mobility is also connected to the governments politics for continuing social and economic phenomena. The concepts of mobility used in the migration context is different to what the scholars of the mobility studies relate to as. Mobility in migration context means disruption, containment, interruption, categories as good and bad circulations rather than autonomous movement and circulations. The difficulty faced by Italy to manage migration and the pressure it is getting from EU to abide by the Dublin regulation is infact the important point to consider. Two Italian cities, one border to France, Ventimiglia and the other border with Switzerland, Como city; these two cities are the tough cities for the migrants to cross border. Migrants used to take train from Italy straight to Switzerland and France before France introduced border control in April 2011 and Swiss authorities introduced border control in June 2016. Therefore, we can see the forced mobility of migrants travelling from Italy and bounced back to Italy from Switzerland and France. Strict border control can be considered as migration control rather than migration management. The reality seen in the French-Italian border and Swiss-Italian border is that daily many migrations attempts to cross border and many of they are sooner or later pushed-back to Italy without notifying them of expulsion. In 2016, the first internal deportation of migrants in Italy from Ventimiglia and Como to the Southern city of Italy has been the weekly media coverage in EU. This internal deportation was intended to divert their journey and to increase the duration of journey to cross the border. Italian border authority states the internal deportation is to empty critical border zones and infact, this is to avoid visibility and potential demonstrations at the border. The dispersal strategy of migrants is seen in Italy as well as France and Switzerland (Tazzioli,2019).
As mentioned in Colombeau (2019), the reintroduction of the border checks in the Schengen member states is considered as the Schengen crisis because this action prohibits the free movement of the people. France reported to the European Council that the reintroduction of the border control is for migration management but later they explained that border control is in for security concerns. In 2008-2009, deportation of migrants from France to Italy was made without informing Italian authority and without following the correct procedure since the cooperation between the authorities of two countries are difficult in the deportation context. For the humanitarian reason Italian Red Cross was opened in 2015 to provide shelter to the increasing number of undocumented migrants in Italian border. The French-Italian affairs shows that nations decision is supreme over EU decision regarding border control. The reintroduction of border control by France in 2011 and 2015 targets undocumented third country nationals and it also gives the message that the decision about closing and opening border is vested on the interest of the member states and their administrations.
My analysis on this French-Italian border affairs through field visit is more related to what is explained in the above articles. When migrants are blocked at the border, it seems that there is Schengen crisis. We can also see that EU countries are not showing solidarity in handling migration influx rather they considered it as migration crisis. Dublin regulation while making particular state responsible for accessing application of the asylum seekers, the recent refugee’s crisis at the border countries shows the pressure to this country also to stop irregular migrants and at the same time take responsibility to manage all the incoming migrants. There are many criticisms on this system and this system is not in the best expression of the interest of refugees. Insisting on the system that does not work has a high cost and Europe require common policy to address the current refugee’s crisis. As per the Dublin regulation, all asylum seekers do not get same treatment from the authorities dealing their application. Dublin regulation is not sufficient to address the application lodged in the particular country and it is not able to address the transfer decision (mascarenas, 2015). Therefore, the Dublin regulation should be revised and should amend to include broader content rather than confining in each amendment on the first country of arrival rule.
Map showing Schengen Area
Six EU countries introducing border control are France, Demark, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Austria. The border controls disrupt the free flow of people, goods and services across the EU. It mainly affects 1.7 million people crossing the border every day to work in another EU country, tourists and transport companies. In addition there are administrative and infrastructure costs associated with border control (European Parliament, 2018). Migration management is crucial to address the increasing number of migrants in EU. They need to cooperate with members states as well as bilateral partners in migration management. Therefore, it requires cooperation between member states of EU and Schengen area as well as with different countries in the African continents and Middle East to increase awareness about this difficult journey, about smugglers and EU’s interest on cooperating to management of irregular migrants already at the border.
References
Lamarche, D., & Trucco, D. (n.d.). Challenging the Borders between Mobilizations: the Sheltering Experience at St Anthony’s Church in Ventimiglia. Retrieved from New nationalism in an Open World: https://wc2020.ipsa.org/wc/paper/challenging-borders-between-mobilizations-sheltering-experience-st-anthonys-church
Carrera, S., Guild, E., Merlino, M., & Parkin, J. (2011). A Race Against Solidarity The Schengen regime and the Franco-Italian Border. The CEPS "Liberty and Security" in Europe, 1-25.
European Parliament. (2018). EU asylum,border and External cooperation on migration. European Parliamentary Research service.
Sara Casella Colombeau (2019): Crisis of Schengen? The effect of two ‘migrant crises’ (2011 and 2015) on the free movement of people at an internal Schengen border, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, DOI: 10.1080/1369183X.2019.159678
Tazzioli, M. (2019). Governing migrant mobility through mobility: Containment and dispersal at the internal frontiers of Europe. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 239965441983906 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2399654419839065
Kommentare