• Inde : l’État du #Kerala refuse à son tour d’appliquer la loi sur la citoyenneté

    Ce sont désormais les États qui refusent la loi sur la citoyenneté, jugée discriminatoire contre les musulmans. Après le #Bengale-Occidental et le #Punjab, le Kerala a annoncé qu’il n’appliquera pas cette mesure. Le #Maharashtra menace lui aussi de rejoindre ces États rebelles.

    Après les citoyens, les dirigeants ? Plusieurs États Indiens ont annoncé qu’ils refusaient la loi sur la citoyenneté facilitant l’accueil de réfugiés non-musulmans. C’est le cas du Bengale-Occidental, directement concerné puisque voisin du Bangladesh, du Punjab, frontalier du Pakistan, mais aussi à la pointe sud de l’Inde, du Kerala.

    Avec ses 35 millions d’habitants, cet État est connu pour être dirigé par des partis de gauche à forte tradition laïque. Jeudi dernier, son ministre en chef a été clair : « Cette loi fait partie d’un plan pour communautariser l’Inde. Elle n’a pas sa place au Kerala et n’y sera pas implémentée. »

    Le Kerala abrite une proportion de musulmans importante et les manifestations y sont particulièrement violentes. Ce mardi, 230 personnes ont été arrêtées par la police. Dans la foulée, 20 stars du cinéma Kéralais ont exprimé leur soutien à ces opposants

    Après le Kerala, le Maharashtra ?

    Les regards sont maintenant tournés vers l’État du Maharashtra, avec 115 millions d’habitants et la capitale économique Bombay. Son ministre en Chef a déclaré ce mardi qu’il pourrait bien lui aussi ne pas appliquer la loi.

    La confusion règne cependant sur ces déclarations de rébellion politique : il est en principe impossible pour un État de ne pas appliquer une loi votée par le Parlement national.

    http://www.rfi.fr/asie-pacifique/20191218-inde-etat-kerala-refuse-son-tour-appliquer-loi-citoyennete?ref=tw_i

    #résistance #Inde #xénophobie #islamophobie #citoyenneté #nationalité #apatridie

    –-------

    Les manifestations et résistance des citoyens :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/815991

    La source des protestations : le « Citizenship (Amendment) Act » :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/799546

  • How India is resisting #Citizenship_Amendment_Bill (#CAB) : A story in powerful pictures

    One of the pictures that have come to define the protests is of three girls standing on a wall and addressing a sea of protesters at Jamia Millia Islamia.

    India is currently witnessing two kinds of protests against CAA or the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019. In the northeast states of India, the protest is against the Act’s implementation in their areas, as many fear it will cause a rush of immigrants that may alter their demographic and linguistic uniqueness. In the rest of India, like in Kerala, West Bengal and New Delhi, people are protesting against the exclusion of Muslims, alleging it to be against the values of the Constitution.

    The protests erupted across the country after the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill was passed by both houses of Parliament and received Presidential assent soon after. The Act, which gives citizenship to non-Muslim refugees who escaped religious persecution in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan and entered the country before December 31, 2014, has been widely criticised. The amended Act has put the entire Northeast region and West Bengal on the boil as people fear that it might exacerbate the problem of illegal immigration.

    Violent protests were seen in New Delhi’s Jamia Millia Islamia; parts of Assam are on lockdown; several peaceful demonstrations against the Act were held in various parts of the country; and more have been planned in the coming days across the country.

    While registering their protests, the protesters have been shouting slogans, singing songs and reading the Constitution as well.

    One of the pictures that have come to define the protests is of three girls standing on a wall and addressing a sea of protesters at Jamia Millia Islamia. But there are several other powerful pictures of the protests across the country that underscore why people from all sections of society consider the Act unconstitutional.

    https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/how-india-resisting-cab-story-powerful-pictures-114137
    #protestation #manifestations #résistance #Inde #xénophobie #islamophobie #citoyenneté #nationalité #apatridie

    –-------

    La source des protestations : le « Citizenship (Amendment) Act » :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/799546

    ping @odilon

    • Inde : cinq morts dans des manifestations contre la loi sur les réfugiés

      Cinq personnes ont péri depuis le début des manifestations dans le nord-est de l’Inde contre une loi facilitant l’obtention de la nationalité indienne par des réfugiés à condition qu’ils ne soient pas musulmans, ont annoncé dimanche les autorités.

      Dans certaines zones, internet a été coupé et un couvre-feu a été imposé pour tenter d’endiguer la contestation.

      La tension demeurait forte dans la plus grande ville de l’Etat d’Assam, où une nouvelle manifestation était attendue dimanche.

      La nouvelle loi facilite l’attribution de la citoyenneté indienne aux réfugiés d’Afghanistan, du Bangladesh et du Pakistan, à condition qu’ils ne soient pas musulmans. Elle concerne des minorités religieuses dont les hindous et les sikhs.

      En Assam, trois personnes sont décédées à l’hôpital après avoir été touchées par des balles tirées par la police. Une quatrième a péri dans l’échoppe où il dormait qui a été incendiée. Une cinquième personne a été battue à mort, selon les autorités.

      La circulation des trains a été suspendue dans certaines parties de l’est du pays à la suite de violences dans l’Etat du Bengale occidental où des manifestants ont incendié des trains et des cars.

      Le ministre de l’Intérieur Amit Shah a de nouveau lancé dimanche un appel au calme en affirmant que les cultures locales des Etats du Nord-Est n’étaient pas menacés, alors que certains redoutent un afflux d’immigrants du Bangladesh.

      « La culture, la langue, l’identité sociale et les droits politiques de nos frères et soeurs du Nord-Est demeureront », a déclaré M. Shah lors d’un rassemblement dans l’Etat de Jharkhand, selon la chaîne de télévision News18.

      L’opposition et des organisations de défense des droits de l’homme estiment que cette loi fait partie du programme nationaliste de M. Modi visant selon elles à marginaliser les 200 millions d’Indiens musulmans.

      Le vote de la loi a donné lieu cette semaine à des flambées de colère dans les deux chambres du parlement, un député allant jusqu’à la comparer aux lois anti-juives promulguées par le régime nazi en Allemagne dans les années 1930.

      https://www.courrierinternational.com/depeche/inde-cinq-morts-dans-des-manifestations-contre-la-loi-sur-les

  • En #Côte_d’Ivoire, une vie suspendue dans le temps pour les éleveurs peuls

    Dans la chaleur de l’après-midi, une dame âgée se penche en avant dans la pièce sombre.

    « On me considère comme une étrangère ici. C’est très désagréable, mais que faire ? »

    Aminata Sidibé calcule son âge en se basant sur l’année de son mariage et celle de l’indépendance de la Côte d’Ivoire. Les deux événements ont eu lieu en 1960. Elle pense qu’elle avait 15 ans à l’époque. Elle serait donc aujourd’hui âgée de 74 ans, ou plus.

    Aminata ne connaît peut-être pas son âge exact mais, à sa manière, elle a ses certitudes : « je suis née, je me suis mariée et j’ai eu mes enfants ici. Et c’est ici que j’ai des petits-enfants et même des arrière-petits-enfants. »

    « On me considère comme une étrangère ici. C’est très désagréable, mais que faire ? »

    Aminata Sidibé et sa famille sont des Peuls, un groupe ethnique d’éleveurs de bétail disséminés dans une douzaine de pays d’Afrique. Bien qu’elle soit la matriarche d’une famille élargie de 45 personnes dont les racines remontent à plusieurs générations en Côte d’Ivoire, pour le pays où vit Aminata, elle et les siens sont des étrangers.

    Le problème de sa famille s’explique par l’absence de citoyenneté que la Côte d’Ivoire ne reconnait que par le droit du sang en réclamant qu’au moins l’un des parents soit ivoirien. Il ne suffit pas d’être né en Côte d’Ivoire. Officiellement, Aminata et le reste de sa famille sont des « Burkinabés », des descendants de ressortissants du Burkina Faso voisin, une distinction qui les expose aux risques de l’apatridie. Du fait que plusieurs générations aient vécu hors du territoire, le Burkina Faso ne peut pas non plus les reconnaître en tant que citoyens.

    « Nous n’avons pas notre place ici », explique le fils d’Animata, Seydou Tall, 56 ans, né en Côte d’Ivoire et titulaire d’un certificat de naissance. Seydou possède un large troupeau. « Je ne veux pas d’une carte consulaire disant que je suis du Burkina Faso. Je ne le suis pas. Je veux avoir la nationalité de mon pays. »

    Dans le monde entier, on recense des millions de personnes sans nationalité. Toute leur vie, les apatrides sont confrontés à des inégalités et à des obstacles qui les empêchent d’exercer leurs droits fondamentaux tels que l’éducation, les soins de santé, l’emploi et la libre circulation.

    En Côte d’Ivoire, le nombre de personnes dépourvues de documents d’identité et risquant l’apatridie - comme les Peuls - est préoccupant. La Côte d’Ivoire a évalué sa population apatride à près de 700 000 personnes à la fin 2017. Cependant, une étude détaillée actuellement en préparation devrait permettre d’obtenir un nombre plus précis et beaucoup plus élevé de personnes apatrides ou risquant l’apatridie.

    Seydou explique qu’avec la nationalité ivoirienne, les membres de sa famille pourraient trouver des emplois qualifiés. Sans certificat de nationalité, ils ne peuvent pas postuler à un emploi formel, ni ouvrir un compte bancaire ou obtenir un permis de conduire.

    Les Peuls sont éleveurs de bétail, sans avoir le droit d’acheter des terres. Le droit de la famille qui s’applique à leurs terres dépend d’un accord privé avec l’ancien propriétaire qui ne leur confère aucune prérogative légale.

    Pour la famille, le chemin vers la citoyenneté est long. Monique Saraka, secrétaire générale de l’Association ivoirienne des femmes juristes, s’est rendue dans la petite ville pour dispenser des conseils à la famille sur leur statut.

    « Beaucoup de Peuls n’ont pas reçu d’éducation formelle et craignent de s’adresser aux autorités », déclare-t-elle. « La plupart n’ont même pas de certificat de naissance. »

    Monique Saraka prédit que, malheureusement, leur chemin vers la nationalité sera difficile ; les membres de la famille devraient déposer une demande de naturalisation.

    « C’est un processus long et lent », concède-t-elle. « Les personnes qui soumettent une demande peuvent attendre 10 ans, ou davantage encore. De plus, il y a la question du coût. Donc, les personnes, surtout dans les régions rurales, sont confrontées à tout cela et se découragent. Elles abandonnent. »

    Son association, avec l’appui du HCR, l’Agence des Nations Unies pour les réfugiés, plaide depuis 2015 pour que des changements soient apportés au système de demande de naturalisation. Le premier objectif est de faciliter l’obtention des documents de base, comme les certificats de naissance. Le gouvernement est sur le point d’adopter une loi rendant le processus gratuit pendant un an.

    Lever les obstacles à l’obtention de la nationalité ivoirienne prendra beaucoup plus de temps. Une loi temporaire ivoirienne facilitant la naturalisation a expiré en 2016.

    « Nous espérons que cette loi sera réintroduite et ajoutée à celle portant sur la nationalité. Ces personnes sont en Côte d’Ivoire depuis quatre générations », explique Monique Saraka. « Il est difficile de les imaginer avec une autre nationalité qu’ivoirienne. »

    La bonne nouvelle, c’est qu’à l’exception d’Aminata qui a perdu ses papiers après le décès de son mari, toutes les générations de sa famille ont un certificat de naissance. Alors que leur quête de citoyenneté ivoirienne se poursuit, les plus jeunes enfants peuvent au moins aller à l’école et s’imaginer un avenir avec les avantages d’une nationalité.

    « J’aime l’histoire, j’aime apprendre le passé », s’enthousiasme Boukary, 15 ans, qui va à l’école depuis cinq ans. « J’aimerais être policier. Je veux parler aux gens et séparer les bons des mauvais. »

    Adiba et Aïsha ont respectivement 13 et 12 ans, et toutes deux veulent devenir enseignantes. Cependant, sans document d’identité, elles ne peuvent pas poursuivre leurs études au-delà de l’enseignement secondaire.

    Dans sa chambre, Aminata, la matriarche, semble résignée à son statut actuel mais elle garde espoir.

    « Je laisse à mes fils le soin de prendre les décisions concernant les papiers », partage-t-elle. « Les gens peuvent dire ce qu’ils veulent, je ne me suis jamais sentie menacée. Même s’ils disent que je suis une étrangère, je leur pardonne. Je m’en remets à Dieu. »

    https://www.unhcr.org/fr/news/stories/2019/5/5cd52d4fa/cote-divoire-vie-suspendue-temps-eleveurs-peuls.html
    #apatridie #peuls #éleveurs #nationalité #citoyenneté

  • When Home Won’t Let You Stay

    When Home Won’t Let You Stay: Migration through Contemporary Art considers how contemporary artists are responding to the migration, immigration, and displacement of peoples today. We are currently witnessing the highest levels of movement on record—the United Nations estimates that one out of every seven people in the world is an international or internal migrant who moves by choice or by force, with great success or great struggle. When Home Won’t Let You Stay borrows its title from a poem by Warsan Shire, a Somali-British poet who gives voice to the experiences of refugees. Through artworks made since 2000 by twenty artists from more than a dozen countries — such as Colombia, Cuba, France, India, Iraq, Mexico, Morocco, Nigeria, Palestine, South Korea, the United Kingdom, and the United States — this exhibition highlights diverse artistic responses to migration ranging from personal accounts to poetic meditations, and features a range of mediums, including sculpture, installation, painting, and video. Artists in the exhibition include Kader Attia, Tania Bruguera, Isaac Julien, Hayv Kahraman, Reena Saini Kallat, Richard Mosse, Carlos Motta, Yinka Shonibare, Xaviera Simmons, and Do-Ho Suh, among others. A fully illustrated catalogue accompanies the exhibition, with an essay by Eva Respini and Ruth Erickson and texts by prominent scholars Aruna D’Souza, Okwui Enwezor, Thomas Keenan, Peggy Levitt, and Uday Singh Mehta, among others.

    https://www.icaboston.org/exhibitions/when-home-won%E2%80%99t-let-you-stay-migration-through-contemporary-art
    #asile #migrations #frontières #réfugiés #monde #art_et_politique #exposition

  • The two contrasting sides of German refugee policy

    ‘They try to integrate some people while really try to get rid of others.’

    Four years after Chancellor Angela Merkel opened the doors to around one million refugees and asylum seekers, Germany continues to mull over the long-term consequences of its great welcome. It still grapples with fundamental questions about how refugees should integrate and, for the tens of thousands of asylum seekers whose futures remain in limbo, who should be allowed to stay and who will be returned home?

    Mohammad Zarzorie, a Syrian engineer, counts himself a success story. After fleeing to Germany via Greece and the Balkans in 2015, he received his refugee status within months, quickly learned to speak German, and through an employment fair soon found his job at a chromium plating manufacturer on the outskirts of Munich.

    Two years later, his wife followed him, and although a housing crisis means they must live in an apartment attached to the factory, he has found peace and contentment here in the industrial heartland of Bavaria, in southern Germany.

    “From a land that’s under war to (there) being nothing difficult for you to start your life in another safe country, it wasn’t difficult for me,” says Zarzorie, a university teaching assistant before conflict erupted in Syria.

    “There was no challenge,” Zarzorie says. “Here in Germany they have this benefits system. They help you a lot to start integrating with society.”

    Returning to the engineering work he was pursuing in Syria has been the foundation on which he has built a new life, and he eagerly wants more Syrians in Germany to enter employment. “I think they must (work) because you can’t start your life if you don’t work,” he says.

    But not all new arrivals to Germany share his good fortune and have the opportunity to work.

    Bavaria, Zarzorie’s new home, is consistently one of the most conservative and anti-migrant states in Germany. It has deported more than 1,700 people so far this year, and drawn severe criticism from human rights groups for continuing to send hundreds of migrants to Afghanistan, which no other German state considers a safe country for return.

    “The image is deliberately created that refugees do not want to work, or are inactive, and this increases resentment against refugees.”

    “Sometimes you need to make things clear to people who are naive and confused and think that migration is nothing more than making things a bit more multicultural,” Bavaria’s Interior Minister Joachim Herrmann said in August. “Asylum law applies, but we cannot accept everyone. Because that overburdens us.”

    “It’s paradoxical,” says Gülseren Demirel, responsible for migration and integration for the Bavarian Green Party, which opposes Herrmann’s Christian Social Union. “The Bavarian economy is strong and also offers jobs that can’t be staffed. The chambers of commerce and civil society groups try to integrate the refugees, but the political conditions do not allow this.

    “The consequence is that refugees are not allowed to work and can’t develop any perspectives,” she adds. “The image is deliberately created that refugees do not want to work, or are inactive, and this increases resentment against refugees.”
    Rejected, but ‘tolerated’

    Bringing new arrivals into the workforce has been the cornerstone of Germany’s integration efforts since 2015.

    The benefits are two-fold: they can become self-dependent and assimilate socially, while at the same time plugging the country’s severe labour shortage, which has left almost 1.4 million positions vacant and will require 250,000 immigrants per year to address.

    The results have exceeded expectations. Around 36 percent of refugees between 15 and 60 – around 380,000 to 400,000 people – are now in employment, according to Germany’s Institute for Employment Research, which expects that number to rise to around 40 percent before the end of the year. While many remain in low-wage work as cleaners or security personnel, half are in skilled professions.

    But around a quarter of a million migrants who have had their asylum cases rejected remain in the country, despite being required to leave. Of these, 191,000 have been granted a ‘toleration’ – a temporary status meaning their deportation has been postponed for reasons such as illness, family ties to a person with residency, or a lack of travel documents.

    Around 11,500 failed asylum seekers were deported in the first half of this year – a slight decline on 2018. But the possibility of deportation remains a very real fear for those with ‘tolerations’, which are usually provided on a rolling basis, lasting only a few weeks or months at a time.

    Even if they attempt to find work and learn the language, they often find themselves subject to arbitrary decisions at the hands of Germany’s formidable bureaucracy.

    The decision on whether to grant asylum is made at a national level, but once a person’s claim has been rejected what follows is largely determined by state or local administrations, which are granted wide discretion, leading to wildly divergent situations depending on where a person is located.

    “(Local offices) often decide whether you can get a work permit, and you need a work permit for getting an apprenticeship permit, which then is very often the way for consolidating your right to stay,” explains Simon Sperling, a researcher at the University of Osnabruck’s Institute of Migration Research and Intercultural Studies.
    ‘It’s not how I was before’

    Like Zarzorie, Johnson Nsiah, from Ghana, also arrived in Germany after crossing the Mediterranean in 2015. He was sent to live in Kempten, a large town in Bavaria around two hours drive west of Munich.

    After fleeing his home when a local dispute threatened his life, he crossed the Sahara to Libya, where he worked as a builder and painter for two years. There, he met Julia*, a Nigerian woman, and helped her escape from her abusive employer. The employer then threatened to kill them both, forcing them to pay for space aboard an inflatable boat, which was intercepted by an Italian navy ship that brought them to Europe.

    The couple are now married. Julia, along with their two children – a four-year-old born in Italy and a two-year old born in Kempten – have the right to remain in Germany, but Nsiah’s asylum claim has been rejected and he is required to leave the country.

    Because of his family, Nsiah has been granted a ‘toleration’, in the form of a paper slip, valid for six months, which fixes the boundaries of his life. It does not permit him to work, travel outside Bavaria, or live outside the apartment block in which his family resides – a former mental hospital repurposed to house over 100 asylum seekers and refugees.

    The local administrative office has demanded Nsiah return to Ghana to obtain a passport, which he says is financially impossible and would amount to a death sentence due to the continued threats made against him. The restrictions have put a heavy toll on his mental and physical health. Stress has contributed to painful migraines that caused him to drop out of language classes.

    “It’s not how I was before,” he says, gesturing towards the hearing aids protruding from both his ears. “Because of stress, all those things, they make me like this.”

    Nsiah believes his many years of experience should easily lead to a job in construction or painting, and it angers him that that he is limited to cleaning the apartment building for 60c an hour while other Ghanaians he met in 2015 have been working freely in Hamburg and Stuttgart for years.
    Separation by nationality

    In June, the German parliament approved a raft of new asylum laws, including some measures to strengthen the rights of rejected asylum seekers in steady jobs, but also others that lengthened maximum stays in detention centres and streamlined deportations.

    For Sperling, the origins of this contradictory approach date back to 2015, when German authorities quietly began to separate arrivals based on their nationality, which greatly influences their chances of a successful asylum application.

    “The politics is very ambivalent in this sense: they try to integrate some people while really try to get rid of others.”

    Syrians, Iraqis, and Eritreans were all deemed to have good prospects and shuffled quickly into courses to help them integrate and find work. Others, especially those from West Africa and the Balkans, had a less favourable outlook, and so received minimal assistance.

    “Germany invested in language courses and things like that, but at the same time also really pushed forward to isolate and disintegrate certain groups, especially people who are said to not have have good prospects to stay,” he says.

    “The politics is very ambivalent in this sense: they try to integrate some people while really try to get rid of others.”

    But while some have undeniably built new lives of great promise, the lives of many of those 2015 arrivals remain in limbo.

    On the street, Nsiah says, Germans have racially abused him and berated him for refusing to work, a bitter irony not lost on him.

    “It’s not our fault. No refugee here doesn’t want to work,” he says, his voice smarting.

    “The only thing I need to be happy... (is) to work and take care of my family, to live with my family, because my wife doesn’t have anybody and I cannot leave her alone with these children.”
    The two extremes

    The local immigration office in Bavaria has shown a reluctance to grant permits for work or to access to three-year apprenticeships, which if pursued by someone like Nsiah would almost certainly lead to a job offer and a secure residence permit.

    It also frequently imposes restrictions on movement with breaches punishable by heavy fines. An Iraqi man in Kempten showed The New Humanitarian a picture of his seriously ill wife lying on a hospital bed in Saxony, whom he cannot visit because his pass restricts him to Bavaria; while an Iranian man said that for eight years his pass did not permit him to stray beyond the town boundary.

    Moving to another district or state might be beneficial, but these onerous stipulations, combined with a chronic shortage of rental accommodation throughout Bavaria, make it nearly impossible for those on low or non-existent incomes.

    Zarzorie, meanwhile, hopes to find his own house in Munich, raise children and finish the master’s degree he first embarked upon in Aleppo.

    There is still adjusting to do, to what he calls the different “life-cycle” in Munich. Unlike his memories of Syria, in which cafés and streets buzzed with chatter until the early hours of the morning, the boulevards here fall quiet long before midnight.

    That’s why he’s drawn most evenings to Marienplatz, a square in the city’s old quarter where its historic town hall overlooks modern cafes and restaurants, and the crowds stay out late enough that it almost reminds him of home.

    https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news-feature/2019/11/11/German-refugee-integration-policy
    #Allemagne #intégration #asile #migrations #réfugiés #renvois #machine_à_expulser #politique_d'asile #réfugiés_syriens #catégorisation #nationalité #réfugiés_irakiens #réfugiés_érythréens #réfugiés_afghans #renvois #expulsion

    ping @_kg_

  • Par le sol et par le sang. Le droit de la nationalité dans le monde

    Quels pays facilitent, quels pays entravent l’acquisition de la nationalité pour les enfants d’immigrés ? Cet essai dresse un état des lieux contrasté, selon l’application du droit du sol ou du sang, avec des conditions ou discriminations particulières.


    https://laviedesidees.fr/Par-le-sol-et-par-le-sang.html
    #ius_soli #jus_sanguinis #nationalité #monde #droit #citoyenneté #droit_du_sang #droit_du_sol #cartographie #visualisation

    ping @karine4

  • En #Inde, près de deux millions de citoyens, la plupart #musulmans, déchus de leur #nationalité

    La Cour suprême exclut de nombreux citoyens des registres d’état civil de l’#Etat_de_l’Assam.


    https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2019/08/31/en-inde-pres-de-deux-millions-de-citoyens-la-plupart-musulmans-dechus-de-leu
    #citoyenneté #apatridie #Assam #apatrides

    –---------

    En 2018, le Courrier international titrait :
    Inde. Quatre millions d’habitants de l’Assam considérés comme apatrides
    https://seenthis.net/messages/712102

    • India builds detention camps for up to 1.9m people ‘stripped of citizenship’ in Assam

      Ten centres ‘planned’ across northeastern state after national register published
      The Indian government is building mass detention camps after almost two million people were told they could be effectively stripped of citizenship.

      Around 1.9m people in the north-eastern state of Assam were excluded when India published the state’s final National Register of Citizens (NRC) list in August.

      Those excluded from the register will have to appeal to prove they are citizens. The UN and other international rights groups have expressed concern that many could be rendered stateless.

      The citizenship list is part of a drive to detect illegal immigrants in Assam.

      The Indian government claims that the migrants have arrived from neighbouring Muslim-majority Bangladesh.

      Critics say that the register has upended the lives of Muslims who have lived legally in the state for decades.

      Record keeping in parts of rural India is poor and many, including those building the camps, have been caught out by the NRC’s stringent requirements.

      “We don’t have birth certificates,” Malati Hajong, one of the labourers working at a site near the village of Goalpara, told the Reuters news agency.

      The Goalpara camp is one of at least 10 planned detention centres, according to local media reports.

      It is around the size of seven football pitches and designed to hold 3,000 people.

      Officials plan to have a school and hospital at the centre, as well as a high boundary wall and watchtowers for the security forces.

      Critics have accused the Modi administration of using the NRC to target Assam’s large Muslim community.

      But the government says it is simply complying with an order from India’s Supreme Court, which said the NRC had been delayed for too long and set a strict deadline for its completion.

      Government sources say those excluded from the list retain their rights and have 120 days to appeal at local “Foreigners Tribunals”. If that fails, they can take their cases to the High Court of Assam and ultimately the Supreme Court. What happens to those who fail at all levels of appeal is yet to be decided, they said.

      Last month the local chapter of India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party expressed dismay after it became apparent that many Hindus had also been excluded from the list.

      Officials said the government may pass legislation to protect legitimate citizens.

      The government is already in the process of bringing legislation to grant citizenship to Hindu, Sikh and Buddhist immigrants from neighbouring countries.

      Muslim immigrants are not included in the law.

      The nationalist, hardline Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) group also called for genuine citizens to be included in the list after it emerged that Hindus had been affected. The RSS and BJP are closely affiliated.

      https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/assam-india-detention-camps-bangladesh-nrc-list-a9099251.html

      #camps_de_détention #détention

    • India Takes Step Toward Blocking Naturalization for Muslims

      A bill establishing a religious test for immigrants has passed the lower house of Parliament, a major step for Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu-nationalist agenda.

      India took a major step toward the official marginalization of Muslims on Tuesday as one house of Parliament passed a bill that would establish a religious test for migrants who want to become citizens, solidifying Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu-nationalist agenda.

      The measure would give migrants of all of South Asia’s major religions a clear path to Indian citizenship — except Islam. It is the most significant move yet to profoundly alter India’s secular nature enshrined by its founding leaders when the country gained independence in 1947.

      The bill passed in the lower house, the Lok Sabha, a few minutes after midnight, following a few hours of debate. The vote was 311 to 80. The measure now moves to the upper house, the Rajya Sabha, where Mr. Modi seems to have enough allies that most analysts predict it will soon become law.

      Muslim Indians are deeply unsettled. They see the new measure, called the Citizenship Amendment Bill, as the first step by the governing party to make second-class citizens of India’s 200 million Muslims, one of the largest Muslim populations in the world, and render many of them stateless.
      Sign up for The Interpreter

      Subscribe for original insights, commentary and discussions on the major news stories of the week, from columnists Max Fisher and Amanda Taub.

      “We are heading toward totalitarianism, a fascist state,” said Asaduddin Owaisi, a Muslim lawmaker, who on Monday dramatically tore up a copy of the bill while giving a speech in Parliament. “We are making India a theocratic country.”

      The legislation goes hand in hand with a contentious program that began in the northeastern state of Assam this year, in which all 33 million residents of the state had to prove, with documentary evidence, that they or their ancestors were Indian citizens. Approximately two million people — many of them Muslims, and many of them lifelong residents of India — were left off the state’s citizenship rolls after that exercise.

      Now, Mr. Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party, or B.J.P., is hoping to expand that kind of citizenship test to other states. And the new legislation would become a guiding principle for who could hope to call themselves Indians.

      Mr. Modi and his party are deeply rooted in an ideology that sees India as a Hindu nation. And since the B.J.P.’s landslide re-election win in May, Mr. Modi’s administration has celebrated one Hindu nationalist victory after another, each a demoralizing drumbeat for Muslims.
      Editors’ Picks
      ‘Spotting a Young Man, I Asked If He Had a Grandmother’
      The Curious Case of Aurelius Capital v. Puerto Rico
      ‘The Ferrante Effect’: In Italy, Women Writers Are Ascendant

      First came the Assam citizenship tests. Then Mr. Modi stripped away autonomy and statehood for Kashmir, which used to be India’s only Muslim-majority state. And last month, Hindu fundamentalists scored a big court victory allowing them to build a new temple over the ruins of a demolished mosque in the flash point city of Ayodhya.

      With the new citizenship bill, Mr. Modi’s party says it is simply trying to protect persecuted Hindus, Buddhists and Christians (and members of a few smaller religions) who migrate from predominantly Muslim countries such as Pakistan or Afghanistan.

      But the legislation would also make it easier to incarcerate and deport Muslim residents, even those whose families have been in India for generations, if they cannot produce proof of citizenship.

      Under Mr. Modi’s leadership, anti-Muslim sentiment has become blatantly more mainstream and public. Intimidation and attacks against Muslim communities have increased in recent years. And overt displays of Hindu piety and nationalism have become central in pop culture and politics.

      Mr. Modi’s fellow lawmakers in the B.J.P. are unapologetic about their pro-Hindu position.

      “There are Muslim countries, there are Jew countries, everybody has their own identity. And we are a billion-plus, right? We must have one identity,” said Ravi Kishan, a famous action-film hero and member of Parliament who is a central supporter of the citizenship legislation.

      When asked if he was trying to turn India into a Hindu nation, he laughed. “India has always been a Hindu nation,” he said. “The Muslims also are Hindus.” (This is a common Hindu nationalist belief: that India’s Muslims are relatively recent converts, even though Islam arrived in India hundreds of years ago.)

      Even before lawmakers in the Lok Sabha voted, protests were breaking out.

      In Assam, where the citizenship program began last summer, thousands of people have marched in the streets, hoisting placards and torches and shouting out their opposition to the bill.

      People are talking of mass fasts and boycotts of schools and markets. On Monday, some hanged effigies of Mr. Modi and his right-hand man, Amit Shah, the home minister.

      The leaders of the opposition Indian National Congress party are trying to paint the bill as a danger to India’s democracy. After India won its independence, its founding leaders, Mohandas K. Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru among them, made a clear decision: Even though the country was 80 percent Hindu, it would not be an officially Hindu nation. Minorities, especially Muslims, would be treated equally.

      Rahul Gandhi, a party leader and great-grandson of Mr. Nehru, said, “India belongs to everybody — all communities, all religions, all cultures.” Shashi Tharoor, the party’s intellectual heavyweight, called the bill an “all-out assault on the very idea of India.”

      But the Congress party is at a low point in its 100-year-plus history. And Mr. Modi’s party has the numbers: With allies, it controls nearly two-thirds of the seats in the lower house.

      Some of Mr. Modi’s critics believe the bill is serving to distract the public from another pressing issue: the economy. For the first time in decades, India’s economy is slowing significantly. It is still huge, but several big industries, like car and motorcycle manufacturing, have seen sales plummet like never before.

      “The economy is in tatters,” said Aman Wadud, a human rights lawyer in Assam. The bill, he said, was “the only issue left to polarize the country and distract people.”

      But forging India into an overtly Hindu nation has been a core goal of Mr. Modi’s party and of the R.S.S., a right-wing volunteer group whose ranks Mr. Modi rose up through and which provides him a backbone of support. And India’s recent moves in Kashmir, along with the Ayodhya temple ruling and the Assam citizenship tests, have been hugely popular with the prime minister’s base.

      Earlier this year, Mr. Modi’s government tried to push similar citizenship legislation. The bill sailed through the lower house but stalled after many politicians in Assam said they did not like the religious dimension the B.J.P. was injecting — or the possibility that a large number of Hindu Bengalis would be made citizens and would be able to legally acquire land in Assam.

      The bill gathered new momentum this fall, after the citizenship test in Assam. Assam has witnessed waves of migration over the years, and many of those people whose citizenship was being questioned were migrants, both Hindus and Muslims, from neighboring Bangladesh.

      Mr. Shah, the home minister and architect of the B.J.P.’s recent political victories, promised to protect the Hindus and other non-Muslims. He has called illegal migrants from Bangladesh “termites,” and along with his other statements made clear that Muslims were his target. Mr. Shah has also promised to impose the citizenship test from Assam on the entire country.

      The citizenship bill is a piece of the campaign to identify and deport Muslims who have been living in India for years, critics of the bill say. It lays out a path to Indian citizenship for migrants from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan if they can prove they have been in India for at least five years and ascribe to the specified religions.

      To overcome the resistance from politicians in Assam, who do not want Hindu or Muslim migrants taking their land, the new version of the bill carves out special protections for areas predominated by indigenous people.

      Mr. Modi’s supporters employ a certain logic when defending the bill’s exclusion of Muslims. They say Muslims are not persecuted in Pakistan, Bangladesh or Afghanistan, which is mostly true. They also say that when India and Pakistan were granted independence in 1947, the British carved out Pakistan as a haven for Muslims, while India remained predominantly Hindu. To them, the extension of that process is to ask illegal Muslims migrants to leave India and seek refuge in neighboring, mainly Muslim nations.

      Article 25 of the Indian Constitution says, “All persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practice and propagate religion.” Given that, many opponents of the bill say the citizenship legislation is patently unconstitutional. But the Hindu nationalists have an answer for that, as well.

      “We are not talking about citizens,” said Ramesh Shinde, a spokesman for the Hindu Janajagruti Samiti, a Hindu organization that is considered a far-right group. “We are talking about migrants.”

      Both sides agree on one thing: The bill could have far-reaching consequences.

      The Indian government is already racing to build an enormous network of prisons to house thousands of migrants. If immigration law is applied selectively, Hindu migrants who are swept up in raids may be released and allowed to apply for citizenship, while Muslim migrants could instead be sent to detention camps, opponents say.

      “In every state, Muslims are running around for papers,” said Mr. Wadud, the human rights lawyer in Assam. “An environment of fear has been created.”

      Mr. Kishan, the action hero turned politician, said he would next push to change India’s name to Bharat, the traditional Hindi word for India. But he said that he was not anti-Muslim, and that Muslims living in India legally had nothing to fear.

      “How can I be anti-Muslim? My staff in Mumbai is Muslim,” he said.

      “Hindus and Muslims in India are like this,” he said, interlacing his fingers. “But,” he added with a big smile, “I love Hindus.”

      https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/09/world/asia/india-muslims-citizenship-narendra-modi.html

  • Interior minister says 92,000 Syrians granted Turkish citizenship

    A total of 92,280 Syrians have been naturalized in Turkey, according to a statement from Turkish Interior Minister Süleyman Soylu.

    The minister, who spoke to representatives from Turkish media outlets at the ministry on Friday, said 47,000 of the naturalized Syrians are adults while 45,280 of them are children.

    According to a statement from Soylu in February, 3,644,342 Syrians had fled to Turkey since the start of the civil war in the neighboring country.

    During Friday’s meeting the minister said most Syrians want to return to Syria the moment the country becomes a safe place to live.

    “Some 65 to 70 percent of Syrians, according to surveys, say they will return to Syria if the country becomes safe again. This shows that they will return. For those who want to stay in Turkey, I don’t think there will be a problems for them,” said Soylu.

    In recent weeks Turkish media have reported that some Syrian refugees in the country are being deported even if they are registered. These Syrians are allegedly being forced sign a document saying they are leaving Turkey of their own accord.

    In a move that unsettled Syrian refugees, the İstanbul Governor’s Office on July 22 directed Syrians who are not registered in İstanbul to leave the city by Aug. 20 and return to the cities where they registered and gained temporary protection status.

    The governor’s office said those who do not leave İstanbul by Aug. 20 will be sent back to the cities of their registration in line with an order from the Interior Ministry.

    On Wednesday, Abdullah Ayaz, who heads the Turkish Interior Ministry’s migration management department, denied reports about the deportation of some Syrians from Turkey, saying that such an act would be legally impossible.

    The ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) government is said to have tightened its policy on Syrian refugees following its loss of İstanbul in the mayoral election held in June to an opposition candidate. Many say the public’s unease with the Syrian refugees is one of the reasons for the AKP’s election loss in İstanbul and some other major cities.

    https://www.turkishminute.com/2019/08/02/interior-minister-says-92000-syrians-granted-turkish-citizenship
    #asile #migrations #réfugiés_syriens #nationalité #Turquie #citoyenneté

    v. aussi les annonces de Erdogan à partir de 2016 sur ce sujet :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/505950
    https://seenthis.net/messages/508084

    Et à mettre en lien avec les renvois de Syriens en Syrie :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/617415

  • La guerre de l’État contre les étrangers. Un extrait du livre de Karine Parrot
    https://www.contretemps.eu/guerre-etat-migrants

    À la rubrique des mécanismes déloyaux déployés contre les pauvres qui arrivent jusqu’en Europe, le «  système #Dublin  » est sans doute un des plus féroces et des plus élaborés. Il montre jusqu’où peut aller le fantasme gestionnaire des gouvernants, cette idée qu’il serait possible de traiter certaines personnes exactement comme des flux, alimentant des stocks à transférer, à se répartir, à tarir. À aucun moment dans le mécanisme Dublin, les personnes ne sont véritablement prises en considération, si ce n’est au prisme de leur volonté présumée de contourner les règles.

    #migration #Union_européenne

    • Carte blanche. L’Etat contre les étrangers

      L’actualité la plus récente a donné à voir une #fracture au sein de la gauche et des forces d’émancipation : on parle d’un côté des « no border », accusés d’angélisme face à la « pression migratoire », et d’un autre côté il y a les « souverainistes », attachés aux #frontières et partisans d’une « gestion humaine des flux migratoires ». Ce débat se résume bien souvent à des principes humanistes d’une part (avec pour argument qu’il n’y a pas de crise migratoire mais une crise de l’accueil des migrants) opposés à un principe de « réalité » (qui se prévaut d’une légitimité soi-disant « populaire », selon laquelle l’accueil ne peut que détériorer le niveau de vie, les salaires, les lieux de vie des habitants du pays). Dans ce cinglant essai, Karine Parrot, juriste et membre du GISTI (Groupe d’information et de soutien des immigrés), met en lumière un aspect souvent ignoré de ce débat : à quoi servent au juste les frontières ? qu’est-ce que la nationalité ? Sur la base du droit, Karine Parrot montre que la frontière et la restriction des circulations humaines, sont indissociables d’une #hiérarchie_sociale des peuples à l’échelle mondiale. La #frontière signifie aux plus aisés que, pour eux, aucune frontière n’est infranchissable, tandis qu’elle dit aux autres que, pauvres, hommes, femmes, enfants devront voyager au péril de leur vie, de leur santé, de leur dignité. De l’invention de la #nationalité comme mode de gestion et de #criminalisation des populations (et notamment des pauvres, des « indigents », des vagabonds) jusqu’à la facilitation de la #rétention, en passant par le durcissement des conditions d’#asile et de séjour, ou encore les noyades de masse orchestrées par les gouvernements, l’Union européenne et leur officine semi-privée et militarisée (#Frontex), Karine Parrot révèle qu’il n’y a aucune raison vertueuse ou conforme au « #bien_commun » qui justifie les frontières actuelles des États. Le droit de l’immigration ne vise qu’à entériner la loi du plus fort entre le Nord et le Sud ; il n’a d’autre fin que conditionner, incarcérer, asservir et mettre à mort les populations surnuméraires que la « #mondialisation_armée » n’a de cesse reproduire à l’échelle du monde.


      https://lafabrique.fr/carte-blanche
      #Karine_Parrot #livre #migrations #frontières_nationales
      ping @karine4

  • Taire la nationalité des prévenus ?

    Afin d’éviter les amalgames, une majorité du parlement est favorable à interdire à la #police genevoise de communiquer à la presse la nationalité des délinquants présumés.

    La #motion, soutenue par la majorité des partis, a de grandes chances d’être adoptée par le parlement cantonal. Elle vise à modifier la pratique de la police genevoise lorsqu’elle communique avec la presse sur des délits commis à Genève ou sur des interpellations.

    A l’avenir, la nationalité des délinquants présumés pourrait ne plus du tout être mentionnée. L’auteure de la motion, la députée verte Delphine Klopfenstein Broggini, entend ainsi lutter contre les amalgames xénophobes.

    Le texte est aussi soutenu par Ensemble à gauche, le PS et le PDC, et doit encore être voté en séance plénière. « La nationalité n’apporte pas d’informations pertinentes sur la question du délit », a justifié Delphine Klopfenstein Broggini en commission.

    Elle cite une étude, menée par le professeur en criminologie André Kuhn, qui montre que des facteurs comme l’âge, le niveau socio-économique, le sexe ou encore le niveau de formation sont les plus déterminants. « La mention de la nationalité ne fait qu’attiser la haine », poursuit l’élue écologiste. Elle estime que ces données peuvent être instrumentalisées par certains groupes à des fins politiques.
    La pratique actuelle

    La motion s’inspire de la pratique mise en place dans les villes de Zurich et de Berne. Elle prévoit des exceptions « si cette information est pertinente dans une situation spécifique ». Delphine Klopfenstein Broggini précise que la police genevoise serait tenue de taire la nationalité, non seulement dans ses communiqués, mais également si des journalistes questionnent son service de presse. « Il faut avoir un cadre strict. »

    Actuellement, la publication de la nationalité des prévenus dans les communiqués de la police est la norme, suivant les recommandations de la Conférence des commandants des polices cantonales de Suisse. Il mentionne aussi l’année de naissance et le sexe des personnes. « Sur demande, il est possible de confirmer une origine étrangère », précise aussi le Service de presse de la police genevoise.

    Toutefois, ce dernier ne communique de loin pas sur toutes les affaires. Dans son bulletin journalier, il fournit des informations sur les cas « de moindre importance », le plus souvent en rapport avec des vols, des infractions à la loi sur les stupéfiants ou au code de la route.

    La police s’abstient lorsqu’il s’agit de délits plus graves, comme les homicides, ou des affaires qui se déroulent dans la sphère privée ou qui concernent des mineurs. Cette communication partielle n’est pas anodine : dans certains domaines, comme celui du trafic de drogues, la part des infractions répertoriées impliquant des étrangers est plus élevée.
    Une proposition « contre-productive »

    La proposition des Verts ne fait pas l’unanimité au Grand Conseil. En commission, les groupes de l’UDC, du MCG et du PLR s’y sont opposés. Pour le député UDC Marc Fuhrmann, dont le parti est connu pour pointer le lien entre populations étrangères et criminalité, « il s’agit d’une obstruction à la liberté de la presse ».

    Il estime que la population a le droit, au nom de la transparence, de connaître ce type d’informations. « Cette motion veut manipuler le public afin de le détourner de la réalité », écrit le député. Il relève notamment que les prisons suisses sont occupées majoritairement par des détenus étrangers. Un constat qui doit être expliqué en prenant en compte d’autres critères (comme l’âge, le sexe, ou la situation socio-économique), rétorque Delphine Klopfenstein Broggini.

    Pour beaucoup d’opposants, le fait de taire l’information de la nationalité serait contre-productif. Une partie du public pourrait avoir l’impression qu’on lui cache quelque chose, ce qui renforcerait des sentiments xénophobes. « Notre culture du fait divers est à revoir, répond Delphine Klopfenstein Broggini. Si une partie de la population recherche ces informations, c’est aussi que les médias les ont fournies pendant longtemps. C’est pour cette raison que la pratique doit changer et que les mentalités doivent évoluer. »

    https://lecourrier.ch/2019/06/18/taire-la-nationalite-des-prevenus
    #nationalité #presse #criminalité #médias #Genève

    Et Le Courrier met quoi comme image ? Photo d’un homme noir...

  • Immigration Checks Used In Schools To De-Prioritise Children Of Undocumented Migrants

    Children in a line, outside the classroom door with their passport in hand, waiting one by one to be checked and let in. Teachers checking pupils’ passports, one by one, wondering when the right to free education started being determined by nationality and place of birth.

    This is not the start to a dystopian novel. This was the original vision of the Home Secretary in 2015, as revealed in leaked cabinet letters, for teachers to conduct immigration checks in the classroom.

    As part of the #hostile_environment master plan, immigration checks in schools were to be deployed to de-prioritise the children of undocumented migrants for school places.

    As this first plan didn’t gain sufficient consensus, the government folded and opted for a simpler and less ‘in the open’ option: collecting pupils’ nationality and country of birth data via the school census.

    https://rightsinfo.org/immigration-checks-in-schools-deployed-to-de-prioritise-children-of-undo
    #écoles #frontières_mobiles #migrations #enfants #enfance #sans-papiers #contrôles_frontaliers #UK #Angleterre #it_has_begun #nationalité

  • New Iraqi citizenship law stirs controversy
    https://gulfnews.com/world/mena/new-iraqi-citizenship-law-stirs-controversy-1.1552822828380

    Dubai - As soon as the Iraqi parliament passed a bill to amend the Nationality Law last week, many Iraqis have taken to social media to express their anger.

    The new law states that any person who enters the country legally — and resides in it for a year legally — can get the Iraqi passport.

    Iraqis saw it as a new “disaster” for their country.

    Iraq, they said, had already suffered so much from the scourge of war and corruption.

    Some see it as a way to change the demography and population of Iraq.

    Others see that the Iraqi identity, which is already suffering from years of war, is being jeoprodised.

    Most of the comments on social media accuses the government of passing the law because of the Iranian influence.

    Le commentaire est écrit à Dubaï... Mais cet autre (https://www.raialyoum.com/index.php/%d9%87%d9%84-%d9%8a%d8%aa%d8%b3%d8%a7%d9%87%d9%84-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%b9%d9%9), en arabe et depuis Amman, va dans le même sens .

    #irak #nationalité #croissant_chiite #iran

  • Acquisitions de nationalité dans l’UE – Les États membres de l’UE ont octroyé la nationalité à plus de 800 000 personnes en 2017 – Les Marocains, les Albanais et les Indiens en ont été les principaux bénéficiaires

    En 2017, quelque 825 000 personnes ont acquis la nationalité d’un État membre de l’Union européenne (UE), un chiffre en baisse par rapport à 2016 (où il s’établissait à 995 000) et à 2015 (841 000). Si, parmi les personnes devenues citoyens de l’un des États membres de l’UE en 2017, 17% étaient auparavant citoyens d’un autre État membre de l’UE, la majorité était des ressortissants de pays tiers ou des apatrides.


    https://migrationsansfrontieres.com/2019/03/17/acquisitions-de-nationalite-dans-lue-les-etats-membres-de-l
    #Europe #citoyenneté #nationalité #naturalisation #statistiques #chiffres #Eurostat

    v. communiqué Eurostat :
    https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/2995521/9641781/3-06032019-AP-EN.pdf/2236b272-24b1-4b59-ade4-748361331b18

  • À #Mayotte, près d’un habitant sur deux est de nationalité étrangère - Insee Première - 1737
    https://www.insee.fr/fr/statistiques/3713016

    En 2017, 256 500 personnes vivent à Mayotte. Depuis 2012, la croissance de la population est particulièrement dynamique et s’est renforcée (+ 3,8 % par an en moyenne après + 2,7 % sur la période 2007-2012). Elle est principalement portée par un fort excédent des naissances sur les décès (+ 7 700 personnes par an en moyenne). Avec 5,0 enfants par femme à Mayotte, la fécondité augmente et dépasse toujours largement la moyenne métropolitaine (1,9 enfant par femme).

    L’excédent migratoire, redevenu positif, contribue également à l’augmentation de la population (+ 1 100 personnes par an entre 2012 et 2017). D’un côté, de nombreux adultes et leurs enfants arrivent des Comores. De l’autre, de nombreux jeunes de 15 à 24 ans, natifs de Mayotte, partent vers le reste de la France, essentiellement en métropole.

    Du fait de ces flux importants, et en augmentation, la population de nationalité étrangère progresse fortement : près de la moitié de la population de Mayotte ne possède pas la #nationalité française, mais un tiers des étrangers sont nés à Mayotte. Dans les communes du Nord-Est de Mayotte autour de Mamoudzou, la croissance démographique est particulièrement élevée, avec l’arrivée de nombreux habitants originaires des #Comores. La population de Mayotte reste jeune : la moitié des habitants ont moins de 18 ans.

    Le confort global des #logements a moins progressé qu’entre 2007 et 2012 : quatre ménages sur dix vivent encore à Mayotte dans un logement en tôle ou en végétal, et trois sur dix n’ont pas l’eau courante.

    #démographie

  • #Shamima_Begum: Isis Briton faces move to revoke citizenship

    The Guardian understands the home secretary thinks section 40(2) of the British Nationality Act 1981 gives him the power to strip Begum of her UK citizenship.

    He wrote to her family informing them he had made such an order, believing the fact her parents are of Bangladeshi heritage means she can apply for citizenship of that country – though Begum says she has never visited it.

    This is crucial because, while the law bars him from making a person stateless, it allows him to remove citizenship if he can show Begum has behaved “in a manner which is seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the UK” and he has “reasonable grounds for believing that the person is able, under the law of a country or territory outside the UK, to become a national of such a country or territory”.


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/19/isis-briton-shamima-begum-to-have-uk-citizenship-revoked?CMP=Share_Andr
    #citoyenneté #UK #Angleterre #apatridie #révocation #terrorisme #ISIS #EI #Etat_islamique #nationalité #déchéance_de_nationalité

    • What do we know about citizenship stripping?

      The Bureau began investigating the Government’s powers to deprive individuals of their British citizenship two years ago.

      The project has involved countless hours spent in court, deep and detailed use of the freedom of information act and the input of respected academics, lawyers and politicians.

      The Counter-Terrorism Bill was presented to Parliament two weeks ago. New powers to remove passports from terror suspects and temporarily exclude suspected jihadists from the UK have focused attention on the Government’s citizenship stripping powers, which have been part of the government’s counter-terrorism tools for nearly a decade.

      A deprivation order can be made where the home secretary believes that it is ‘not conducive’ to the public good for the individual to remain in the country, or where citizenship is believed to have been obtained fraudulently. The Bureau focuses on cases based on ‘not conducive’ grounds, which are related to national security and suspected terrorist activity.

      Until earlier this year, the Government was only able to remove the citizenship of British nationals where doing so wouldn’t leave them stateless. However, in July an amendment to the British Nationality Act (BNA) came into force and powers to deprive a person of their citizenship were expanded. Foreign-born, naturalised individuals can now be stripped of their UK citizenship on national security grounds even if it renders them stateless, a practice described by a former director of public prosecutions as being “beloved of the world’s worst regimes during the 20th century”.

      So what do we know about how these powers are used?
      The numbers

      53 people have been stripped of their British citizenship since 2002 – this includes both people who were considered to have gained their citizenship fraudulently, as well as those who have lost it for national security reasons.
      48 of these were under the Coalition government.
      Since 2006, 27 people have lost their citizenship on national security grounds; 24 of these were under the current Coalition government.
      In 2013, home secretary Theresa May stripped 20 individuals of their British citizenship – more than in all the preceding years of the Coalition put together.
      The Bureau has identified 18 of the 53 cases, 17 of which were deprived of their citizenship on national security grounds.
      15 of the individuals identified by the Bureau who lost their citizenship on national security grounds were abroad at the time of the deprivation order.
      At least five of those who have lost their nationality were born in the UK.
      The previous Labour government used deprivation orders just five times in four years.
      Hilal Al-Jedda was the first individual whose deprivation of citizenship case made it to the Supreme Court. The home secretary lost her appeal as the Supreme Court justices unanimously ruled her deprivation order against Al-Jedda had made him illegally stateless. Instead of returning his passport, just three weeks later the home secretary issued a second deprivation order against him.
      This was one of two deprivation of citizenship cases to have made it to the Supreme Court, Britain’s uppermost court, to date.
      In November 2014 deprivation of citizenship case number two reached the Supreme Court, with the appellant, Minh Pham, also arguing that the deprivation order against him made him unlawfully stateless.
      Two of those stripped of their British citizenship by Theresa May in 2010, London-born Mohamed Sakr and his childhood friend Bilal al Berjawi, were later killed by US drone strikes in Somalia.
      One of the individuals identified by the Bureau, Mahdi Hashi, was the subject of rendition to the US, where he was held in secret for over a month and now faces terror charges.
      Only one individual, Iraqi-born Hilal al-Jedda, is currently known to have been stripped of his British citizenship twice.
      Number of Bureau Q&As on deprivation of citizenship: one.

      https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2014-12-10/what-do-we-know-about-citizenship-stripping
      #statistiques #chiffres

    • ‘My British citizenship was everything to me. Now I am nobody’ – A former British citizen speaks out

      When a British man took a holiday to visit relatives in Pakistan in January 2012 he had every reason to look forward to returning home. He worked full time at the mobile phone shop beneath his flat in southeast London, he had a busy social life and preparations for his family’s visit to the UK were in full flow.

      Two years later, the man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is stranded in Pakistan, and claims he is under threat from the Taliban and unable to find work to support his wife and three children.

      He is one of 27 British nationals since 2006 who have had their citizenship removed under secretive government orders on the grounds that their presence in the UK is ‘not conducive to the public good’. He is the first to speak publicly about his ordeal.

      ‘My British citizenship was everything to me. I could travel around the world freely,’ he told the Bureau. ‘That was my identity but now I am nobody.’

      Under current legislation, the Home Secretary, Theresa May, has the power to strip dual nationals of their British citizenship if she deems their presence in the UK ‘not conducive to the public good’, or if their nationality was gained on fraudulent grounds. May recently won a Commons vote paving the way to allow her to strip the citizenship of foreign-born or naturalised UK nationals even if it rendered them stateless. Amendments to the Immigration Bill – including the controversial Article 60 concerning statelessness – are being tabled this week in the House of Lords.

      A Bureau investigation in December 2013 revealed 20 British nationals were stripped of their citizenship last year – more than in all previous years under the Coalition combined. Twelve of these were later revealed to have been cases where an individual had gained citizenship by fraud; the remaining eight are on ‘conducive’ grounds.

      Since 2006 when the current laws entered force, 27 orders have been made on ‘conducive’ grounds, issued in practice against individuals suspected of involvement in extremist activities. The Home Secretary often makes her decision when the individual concerned is outside the UK, and, in at least one case, deliberately waited for a British national to go on holiday before revoking his citizenship.

      The only legal recourse to these decisions, which are taken without judicial approval, is for the individual affected to submit a formal appeal to the Special Immigration and Asylum Committee (Siac), where evidence can be heard in secret, within 28 days of the order being given. These appeals can take years to conclude, leaving individuals – the vast majority of whom have never been charged with an offence – stranded abroad.

      The process has been compared to ‘medieval exile’ by leading human rights lawyer Gareth Peirce.

      The man, who is referred to in court documents as E2, was born in Afghanistan and still holds Afghan citizenship. He claimed asylum in Britain in 1999 after fleeing the Taliban regime in Kabul, and was granted indefinite leave to remain. In 2009 he became a British citizen.

      While his immediate family remained in Pakistan, E2 came to London, where he worked and integrated in the local community. Although this interview was conducted in his native Pashto, E2 can speak some English.

      ‘I worked and I learned English,’ he says. ‘Even now I see myself as a British. If anyone asks me, I tell them that I am British.’

      But, as of March 28 2012, E2 is no longer a British citizen. After E2 boarded a flight to Kabul in January 2012 to visit relatives in Afghanistan and his wife and children in Pakistan, a letter containing May’s signature was sent to his southeast London address from the UK Border Agency, stating he had been deprived of his British nationality. In evidence that remains secret even from him, E2 was accused of involvement in ‘Islamist extremism’ and deemed a national security threat. He denies the allegation and says he has never participated in extremist activity.

      In the letter the Home Secretary wrote: ‘My decision has been taken in part reliance on information which, in my opinion should not be made public in the interest of national security and because disclosure would be contrary to the public interest.’

      E2 says he had no way of knowing his citizenship had been removed and that the first he heard of the decision was when he was met by a British embassy official at Dubai airport on May 25 2012, when he was on his way back to the UK and well after his appeal window shut.

      E2’s lawyer appealed anyway, and submitted to Siac that: ‘Save for written correspondence to the Appellant’s last known address in the UK expressly stating that he has 28 days to appeal, i.e. acknowledging that he was not in the UK, no steps were taken to contact the Appellant by email, telephone or in person until an official from the British Embassy met him at Dubai airport and took his passport from him.’

      The submission noted that ‘it is clear from this [decision] that the [Home Secretary] knew that the Appellant [E2] is out of the country as the deadline referred to is 28 days.’

      The Home Office disputed that E2 was unaware of the order against him, and a judge ruled that he was satisfied ‘on the balance of probabilities’ that E2 did know about the removal of his citizenship. ‘[W]e do not believe his statement,’ the judge added.

      His British passport was confiscated and, after spending 18 hours in an airport cell, E2 was made to board a flight back to Kabul. He has remained in Afghanistan and Pakistan ever since. It is from Pakistan that he agreed to speak to the Bureau last month.

      Daniel Carey, who is representing E2 in a fresh appeal to Siac, says: ‘The practice of waiting until a citizen leaves the UK before depriving them of citizenship, and then opposing them when they appeal out of time, is an intentional attack on citizens’ due process rights.

      ‘By bending an unfair system to its will the government is getting worryingly close to a system of citizenship by executive fiat.’

      While rules governing hearings at Siac mean some evidence against E2 cannot be disclosed on grounds of national security, the Bureau has been able to corroborate key aspects of E2’s version of events, including his best guess as to why his citizenship was stripped. His story revolves around an incident that occurred thousands of miles away from his London home and several years before he saw it for the last time.

      In November 2008, Afghan national Zia ul-Haq Ahadi was kidnapped as he left the home of his infirmed mother in Peshawar, Pakistan. The event might have gone unnoticed were he not the brother of Afghanistan’s then finance minister and former presidential hopeful Anwar ul-Haq Ahadi. Anwar intervened, and after 13 months of tortuous negotiations with the kidnappers, a ransom was paid and Zia was released. E2 claims to have been the man who drove a key negotiator to Zia’s kidnappers.

      While the Bureau has not yet been able to confirm whether E2 had played the role he claimed in the release, a source with detailed knowledge of the kidnapping told the Bureau he was ‘willing to give [E2] some benefit of the doubt because there are elements of truth [in his version of events].’

      The source confirmed a man matching E2’s description was involved in the negotiations.

      ‘We didn’t know officially who the group was, but they were the kidnappers. I didn’t know whether they were with the Pakistani or Afghan Taliban,’ E2 says. ‘After releasing the abducted person I came back to London.’

      E2 guesses – since not even his lawyers have seen specific evidence against him – that it was this activity that brought him to the attention of British intelligence services. After this point, he was repeatedly stopped as he travelled to and from London and Afghanistan and Pakistan to visit relatives four times between the end of 2009 and the beginning of 2012.

      ‘MI5 questioned me for three or four hours each time I came to London at Heathrow airport,’ he says. ‘They said people like me [Pashtun Afghans] go to Waziristan and from there you start fighting with British and US soldiers.

      ‘The very last time [I was questioned] was years after the [kidnapping]. I was asked to a Metropolitan Police station in London. They showed me pictures of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar [former Afghan prime minister and militant with links to the Pakistani Taliban (TTP)] along with other leaders and Taliban commanders. They said: ‘You know these guys.’

      He claims he was shown a photo of his wife – a highly intrusive action in conservative Pashtun culture – as well as one of someone he was told was Sirajuddin Haqqani, commander of the Haqqani Network, one of the most lethal TTP-allied groups.

      ‘They said I met him, that I was talking to him and I have connections with him. I said that’s wrong. I told [my interrogator] that you can call [Anwar al-Ahady] and he will explain that he sent me to Waziristan and that I found and released his brother,’ E2 says.

      ‘I don’t know Sirajuddin Haqqani and I didn’t meet him.’

      The Haqqani Network, which operates in Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas and across the border in Afghanistan, was designated as a terrorist organisation by the United States in September 2012. It has claimed responsibility for a score of attacks against Afghan, Pakistani and NATO security forces in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The UN accuses Sirajuddin Haqqani of being ‘actively involved in the planning and execution of attacks targeting International Security Assistance Forces (ISAF), Afghan officials and civilians.’

      E2 says he has no idea whether Haqqani was involved in Zia’s kidnapping, but he believes the security services may have started investigating him when he met the imam of a mosque he visited in North Waziristan.

      ‘The imam had lunch with us and he was with me while I was waiting for my father-in-law. I didn’t take his number but I gave him mine. That imam often called me on my shop’s BT telephone line [in London]. These calls put me in trouble,’ he says.

      If E2’s version of events is accurate, it would mean he gained his British citizenship while he was negotiating Zia’s release. He lost it less than three years later.

      The Home Office offered a boilerplate response to the Bureau’s questions: ‘The Home Secretary will remove British citizenship from individuals where she feels it is conducive to the public good to do so.’

      When challenged specifically on allegations made by E2, the spokesman said the Home Office does not comment on individual cases.

      E2 says he now lives in fear for his safety in Pakistan. Since word has spread that he lost his UK nationality, locals assume he is guilty, which he says puts him at risk of attack from the Pakistani security forces. In addition, he says his family has received threats from the Taliban for his interaction with MI5.

      ‘People back in Afghanistan know that my British passport was revoked because I was accused of working with the Taliban. I can’t visit my relatives and I am an easy target to others,’ he said. ‘Without the British passport here, whether [by] the government or Taliban, we can be executed easily.’

      E2 is not alone in fearing for his life after being exiled from Britain. Two British nationals stripped of their citizenship in 2010 were killed a year later by a US drone strike in Somalia. A third Briton, Mahdi Hashi, disappeared from east Africa after having his citizenship revoked in June 2012 only to appear in a US court after being rendered from Djibouti.

      E2 says if the government was so certain of his involvement in extremism they should allow him to stand trial in a criminal court.

      ‘When somebody’s citizenship is revoked if he is criminal he should be put in jail, otherwise he should be free and should have his passport returned,’ he says.

      ‘My message [to Theresa May] is that my citizenship was revoked illegally. It’s wrong that only by sending a letter that your citizenship is revoked. What kind of democracy is it that?’

      https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2014-03-17/my-british-citizenship-was-everything-to-me-now-i-am-nobody-a

  • Data Doubles: Wie Regierungen und Firmen mit unseren digitalen Doppelgängern umgehen
    https://berlinergazette.de/data-doubles-wie-regierungen-und-firmen-mit-unseren-digitalen-doppel

    Algorithmische Staatsbürgerschaft und digitale Staatenlosigkeit: Zum Projekt “Citizen Ex”
    https://berlinergazette.de/algorithmische-staatsbuergerschaft-und-digitale-staatenlosigkeit

    Staatsangehörigkeitsrecht ist eigenartig und komplex, mit einer Reihe von Ausnahmen und Auslassungen, die die gemeinhin gültige Ansicht, dass eine Staatsbürgerschaft im Globalen Norden etwas Stabiles und Absolutes ist, untergräbt. So ist zum Beispiel im Vereinten Königreich die Staatsbürgerschaft erst seit dem frühen 20. Jahrhundert juristisch definiert, und die Geschichte ihrer Definition ist in erster Linie eine des Ausschlusses und der Aberkennung. Denn zunächst trachtete der britische Staat danach, seine Grenzen zu stärken. Danach wurden die früheren (und nun nicht mehr britischen) Untertanen vom Festland vertrieben. Und schließlich “entledigte” man sich jener Menschen, deren scheinbar abscheuliches Verhalten dazu führte, ihnen rechtsstaatliche Verfahren zu versagen. Wie Hannah Arendt in einem berühmt gewordenen Satz sagte: Staatsbürgerschaft sei “das Recht, Rechte zu haben”. Eine Garantie, auf der alle anderen Schutzmaßnahmen beruhen. Daher lohnt es sich, das Staatsbürgerschaftsrecht und seine Anwendungen genauer zu betrachten – als Lackmutest für demokratische Freiheiten.

    Neue Formen der Staatsbürgerschaft im Netz

    Heute gerät das Konzept der Staatsbürgerschaft zunehmend unter Druck. Einer der Orte, an denen man das besonders gut beobachten kann, ist das Internet. Im Netz mit seinen scheinbar grenzenlosen Weiten, fließen Information und Daten fast ohne Einschränkungen über die Grenzen hinweg, von Staat zu Staat. Als Staatsbürger werden unsere Rechte und Absicherungen immer weniger unseren physischen Körpern zugeordnet, sondern unseren digitalen Profilen. Also jenen Datensätzen, die unsere Stellvertreter geworden sind hinsichtlich unserer Beziehungen zu Staaten, Banken und Firmen. Somit entstehen an transnationalen, digitalen Knotenpunkten neue Formen der Staatsbürgerschaft.

    “Ius algoritmi” ist ein Begriff, den John Cheney-Lippold prägte, um damit eine neue, vom Überwachungsstaat hervorgebrachte, Staatsbürgerschaft zu beschreiben.

    Digitale Schnitte: Warum und auf welche Art wir uns von unseren Data-Doubles trennen sollten
    https://berlinergazette.de/warum-wir-uns-von-unseren-data-doubles-trennen-sollten

    Digitale Schnitte können Data Doubles und Datenschatten von verkörperten Subjekten abtrennen oder Schnitte oder Teilungen innerhalb von Data Doubles vollziehen und sie in Datenflüsse verwandeln. Mit dem Konzept der digitalen Schnitte lassen sich sowohl Phänomene beschreiben, in denen diese Aufspaltungen willentlich und wissentlich vonstatten gehen, als auch solche wie die Einspeisung biometrischer Information in Datenbanken der Migrationskontrolle, bei denen von Freiwilligkeit keine Rede sein kann.

    Digitale Schnitte können von menschlichen und nicht-menschlichen AkteurInnen (wie künstlichen Intelligenzen) durchgeführt werden. Mithilfe der Schnitte können Fleisch-Technologie-Informations-Amalgame verschiedenen rechtlichen, technologischen oder biopolitischen Regimen untergeordnet und in deren jeweiligen Logiken weiterverarbeitet werden. Neben landläufigen Akzentuierungen von Hybridität oder Amalgamierung gilt es ebenso zu untersuchen, wo und mit welchen Konsequenzen diese Kopplungen wieder aufgebrochen werden: In manchen Fällen, wie z. B. den quer durch Europa reisenden biometrischen Daten in Hotspots festsitzender MigrantInnen, bleibt mit dem Schnitt eine Referenz auf ein konkretes Individuum erhalten, in anderen, wenn z.B. Potenzialitäten verhandelt werden, ist die Loslösung von konkreten Subjekten programmatisch.

    Antiterrorbekämpfung mittels „risk alerts“ kann hierfür als Beispiel gelten: In deren Rahmen können spezifische Nachnamen, die Religionszugehörigkeit, Sprachkenntnisse oder Reiserouten etc. zu Risikopotenzialen werden. Es sind daher nicht konkrete Individuen, die im Namen von Sicherheit fokussiert werden, sondern fragmentierte Elemente eines angeblichen Risikos. Das potenziell gefährliche, dividuierte Subjekt wird also aus einem Amalgam von Teilelementen anderer Subjekte und Objekte zusammengesetzt, wie Louise Amoore betont.

    In einigen Situationen erweisen sich die Schnittstellen zwischen verkörpertem Subjekt und Data Double gleichzeitig auch als Schnitt-Stelle, als Instanz, die Schnitte durchführt, in anderen – z. B. bei der geheimdienstlichen Überwachung oder der Social-Network-Analyse der Drohnenkriege – haben Interfaces wie soziale Medien selbst wenig mit den Schnitten zu tun. Teilweise liegen agentische Schnitte in der Eigenlogik der jeweiligen Technologien begründet, z. B. entstehen die von Bridle beschriebenen algorithmischen StaatsbürgerInnenschaften aus der Logik des Routings heraus. Ihre Auswirkungen reichen von existenzbedrohenden Einschnitten in die Gestaltbarkeit des einzelnen Lebens bis hin zur banalen Film- oder Produktempfehlung auf Netflix oder Amazon.

    #politique #internet #état #nationalité

  • Cigarettes et bas nylon

    Fin 1944, en Normandie, Jeannette, Marie-Thérèse et Mireille, trois jeunes Françaises mariées à des soldats américains, arrivent dans un « camp cigarettes ». Là, elles se voient offrir cigarettes et bas nylon avant de recevoir une formation pour devenir de bonnes épouses américaines. Dans ce cantonnement qui porte le nom d’un manufacturier de tabac américain, ces dernières se lient d’amitié...


    https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cigarettes_et_bas_nylon

    #film #conjointes_étrangères #USA #histoire #Etats-Unis #femmes #épouses #France #mariage #nationalité #citoyenneté #épouses_françaises #migrations #exil #guerre #armée

  • #Les_Mohamed

    #Jérôme_Ruillier nous fait (re)découvrir l’#histoire de l’#immigration maghrébine à travers des témoignages poignants (en trois parties : les pères, les mères, les enfants), qui rendent compte de la quête d’identité et des effets au quotidien du racisme.

    – Comme il y a un après Maus d’Art Spiegelman qui a révolutionné les consciences, il y aura désormais un après Les Mohamed
    – Une réflexion sur la France d’aujourd’hui, ses évolutions, son métissage, ses peurs, ses nouvelles revendications d’égalité et de justice sociale
    – Un regard d’auteur courageux dans lequel Ruillier n’hésite pas à se mettre en scène avec ses propres doutes, ses interrogations


    http://editions-sarbacane.com/les-mohamed
    #BD #livre #migrations #Algérie #guerre_d'Algérie #France #accords_d'Evian #travailleurs_immigrés #enracinement #contingents #OS #ouvriers_spécialisés #boucs_émissaires #colonialisme #colonialisme #regroupement_familial #solitude #Renault #industrie_automobile #île_Seguin #chaîne_de_montage #syndicat #alphabétisation #analphabétisme #indifférence #retraite #aide_au_retour #nationalité #citoyenneté #second@s #Algérie #Maroc #Douai #Houillère #extractivisme #charbon #mines #Sagenorpa #logement #baraquements #baraques #travail #accidents_de_travail #souffrance #solitude #Givors #guerre_d'Algérie #loi_Stoléru #identité #ZUP #foyer #foyer_de_célibataires #Montfermeil #violence_domestique #sexualité #liberté #arabophobie #discriminations #racisme #xénophobie #mariage_forcé #alphabétisation #cours_d'alphabétisation #cité_de_transit #barbelé #frontières_urbaines #frontières_intra-urbaines #brigade_spéciale #HLM #Nanterre #bidonville #voile #aide_au_retour #17_octobre #police #violences_policières #marche_des_beurs #résistance

  • Israël et ses expatriés : un rapport difficile
    22 septembre 2018 Par La rédaction de Mediapart
    https://www.mediapart.fr/journal/international/220918/israel-et-ses-expatries-un-rapport-difficile?onglet=full

    Plus de 15 000 Israéliens ont quitté l’État hébreu en 2017. C’est près de 6 300 de plus que d’Israéliens revenant dans le pays. Ce déficit tend certes à s’affaiblir, mais dans un pays qui se veut le refuge des Juifs du monde entier, ces expatriés soulèvent bien des questions en Israël. Le quotidien suisse Neue Zürcher Zeitung publie une enquête sur ce phénomène. Les raisons de partir sont nombreuses : elles peuvent être économiques, liées à la formation ou plus politiques, par rejet de la politique gouvernementale ou par désespoir de voir un jour la paix régner dans la région.

    Beaucoup en Israël estiment que ces départs nuisent à l’image d’un pays qui se veut performant sur le plan économique et à la pointe de la technologie. D’autres critiquent une forme de trahison vis-à-vis du seul État juif, d’autres encore redoutent la fuite des cerveaux. Mais les réactions de la société israélienne face aux expatriés sont complexes et paradoxales. Ainsi, la droite souhaitait accorder le droit de vote aux Israéliens de l’étranger sur leur lieu de résidence, pensant que ces derniers soutiendraient plutôt la politique de Benjamin Netanyahou. La gauche s’y opposait, estimant qu’il était injuste de donner le droit de vote à ceux qui ne subissent pas directement cette politique. Puis, la droite a fait marche arrière devant la crainte de voir les Juifs de gauche étasuniens, par exemple, faire un aliya par correspondance en demandant un passeport sans jamais résider en Israël, et en votant… à gauche.

    En lire plus dans la NZZ : https://www.nzz.ch/international/der-kampf-um-die-abgestiegenen-seelen-ld.1422166

    • nzz.ch, siehe oben

      [...]

      (Die) Bemerkungen lösten in Israel eine riesige Debatte aus. Und starker Tobak ist es fürwahr – auch hippe Israeli in Berlin werden nicht gerne pauschal beschuldigt, ihr Land «wegzuwerfen». Lapid wurde heftig angegriffen, aber in den sozialen Netzwerken ergriffen auch viele Partei für ihn und warfen den Expats Fahnenflucht, mangelnden Patriotismus und Schlimmeres vor. Die Linke schlug zurück und diagnostizierte einen andauernden Exodus, der Ausdruck von Verdruss und Verzweiflung über die dominierende Politik der Rechten sei. Joseph Chamie und Barry Mirkin, zwei amerikanische Wissenschafter, schrieben 2011 in der Zeitschrift «Foreign Policy» einen Artikel mit dem Titel «The Million Missing Israelis» und behaupteten, bis zu eine Million Israeli lebten im Ausland. Das seien rund 13 Prozent, ein für OECD-Länder hoher Wert. 1980 hätten lediglich 270 000 Israeli im Ausland gelebt.

      [...]

      ... das Wesentliche, die Begründung der Auswanderung. Für ... war es nicht nur das, was weglockte, die angeblich bessere Bildung im Ausland, die bessere Lebensqualität, das Einkommen und die tollen Berufschancen. Nein, sie fanden auch Faktoren, die die Menschen wegtrieben. Die Politik der Regierung. Der offene Rassismus in breiten Volksschichten. Die fehlenden Friedensaussichten. Die allgemeine Niedergeschlagenheit. «The question is not why we left, but why it took us so long to do so.» Und ahnungsvoll wurde festgestellt, dass viele Expats bereits Doppelbürger waren oder es werden wollten. Rund 100 000 Israeli hätten bereits den deutschen Pass, in den USA gebe es denselben Trend. Die Israeli im Ausland seien tendenziell gescheiter, gebildeter, wohlhabender, säkularer als der Durchschnitt, hiess es weiter. Angesichts dieses Exodus werde die Lage in Israel langsam schwierig. Die Emigration stärke die Ultraorthodoxen und die Araber. Damit gefährde sie das zionistische Projekt.

      [...]

    • The million missing Israelis | Foreign Policy 2011

      https://foreignpolicy.com/2011/07/05/the-million-missing-israelis

      [...]

      At the lower end is the official estimate of 750,000 Israeli emigrants — 10 percent of the population — issued by the Israeli Ministry of Immigrant Absorption, which is about the same as that for Mexico, Morocco, and Sri Lanka. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government places the current number of Israeli citizens living abroad in the range of 800,000 to 1 million, representing up to 13 percent of the population, which is relatively high among OECD countries. Consistent with this latter figure is the estimated 1 million Israelis in the Diaspora reported at the first-ever global conference of Israelis living abroad, held in this January.

      Current estimates of Israelis living abroad are substantially higher than those for the past. During Israel’s first decade, some 100,000 Jews are believed to have emigrated from Israel. By 1980, Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics estimated some 270,000 Israelis living abroad for more than a year, or 7 percent of the population. Several decades later, the number of Israeli emigrants had swelled to about 550,000 — or almost double the proportion at the end of the 1950s.

      Of the Israelis currently residing abroad, roughly 60 percent are believed to have settled in North America, a quarter in Europe, and 15 percent distributed across the rest of the world. It is estimated that about 45 percent of the adult Israeli expatriates have completed at least a university degree, in contrast to 22 percent of the Israeli population. The Israeli emigrants are deemed to be disproportionately secular, liberal, and cosmopolitan. Furthermore, the emigrants are generally younger than the immigrants to Israel, especially those from the former Soviet Union, hastening the aging of Israel’s population.

      The often-cited reasons for Israeli emigration center on seeking better living and financial conditions, employment and professional opportunities, and higher education, as well as pessimism regarding prospects for peace. Consistent with these motives, one of the most frequently given explanations for leaving Israel is: “The question is not why we left, but why it took us so long to do so.” And recent opinion polls find that almost half of Israeli youth would prefer to live somewhere else if they had the chance. Again, the most often-cited reason to emigrate is because the situation in Israel is viewed as “not good.”

      Another important factor contributing to the outflow of Jewish Israelis is previous emigration experience. As 40 percent of Jewish Israelis are foreign-born, emigration is nothing new for many in the country. Moreover, as Israeli emigrants cannot yet vote from abroad, they are likely to feel marginalized from mainstream Israeli society, further contributing to their decision to remain abroad as well as attracting others to do the same. Whether the Netanyahu government’s effort in the Knesset to approve a bill granting voting rights to Israelis living abroad will slow the trend is uncertain.

      Adding to emigration pressures, many Israelis have already taken preliminary steps to eventually leaving. One survey found close to 60 percent of Israelis had approached or were intending to approach a foreign embassy to ask for citizenship and a passport. An estimated 100,000 Israelis have German passports, while more are applying for passports based on their German ancestry. And a large number of Israelis have dual nationality, including an estimated 500,000 Israelis holding U.S. passports (with close to a quarter-million pending applications).

      [...]

  • Le projet de passeport autrichien pour ses germanophones fâche l’Italie Belga - 7 Septembre 2018 - RTBF
    https://www.rtbf.be/info/monde/detail_le-projet-de-passeport-autrichien-pour-ses-germanophones-fache-l-italie?

    Le ministère italien des Affaires étrangères a dénoncé vendredi soir la poursuite du projet de Vienne d’offrir un passeport autrichien aux habitants germanophones de la province de Bolzano, dans le nord-est de la péninsule.

    Le ministère a annoncé avoir appris l’existence à Vienne d’une commission gouvernementale chargée de préparer un projet de loi pour sur l’instauration de cette double nationalité.

    « Cette initiative est inopportune en raison de sa portée potentiellement perturbatrice », a insisté le ministère.



    « Il est surtout singulier que le gouvernement assurant la présidence tournante de l’Union européenne, plutôt que de se concentrer sur des actions qui unissent et favorisent la concorde réciproque entre les pays, cultive des projets de loi susceptibles de fomenter la discorde », a-t-il ajouté.

    « Une telle initiative est de plus vraiment curieuse si l’on considère que pour unir les citoyens des différents pays membres de l’UE, il existe déjà la citoyenneté européenne, comme le stipulent les passeports délivrés par chaque Etat » membre, a poursuivi le ministère.

    Province autonome
    La province de #Bolzano, une région montagneuse appelée Alto Adige (Haut-Adige) en italien et Südtirol en allemand, a été principalement autrichienne pendant des siècles, avant d’être intégrée après la Première guerre mondiale à l’Italie, où elle bénéficie d’un régime d’autonomie particulier.

    Au dernier recensement en 2011, 70% de ses habitants s’y sont déclarés germanophones, 26% italophones et 4% ladinophones, une langue rare locale d’origine romane. Le programme du gouvernement autrichien prévoit de proposer un passeport aux germanophones et aux ladinophones.

    Lors de l’annonce du projet fin 2017, les responsables de la province autonome de Bolzano s’étaient réjouis de cette opportunité tout en réaffirmant leur ancrage européen, tandis que leurs voisins également germanophones du Trentin avaient regretté de ne pas figurer dans les plans de Vienne.

    #nationalité #citoyenneté #identité #Sudètes #germanophones #frontières #minorités #nationalisme #UE #union_européenne #Autriche #Italie #passeport #patrie

  • Lessons from Tanzania’s Historic Bid to Turn Refugees to Citizens

    Tanzania was lauded for offering citizenship to 200,000 Burundians, the largest-ever mass naturalization of refugees. But a political stalemate emerged between humanitarians and the government, leaving refugees stuck in the middle, explains researcher Amelia Kuch.

    During Europe’s so-called migrant crisis of 2015, the Tanzanian government gave over 200,000 Burundian refugees a choice between repatriation – returning to Burundi – and naturalization – obtaining Tanzanian citizenship.

    Given the choice, 79 percent of the refugees – 171,600 people – opted for Tanzanian citizenship. It is understood to be the first time in history any state has naturalized such a large group of refugees under the protection of the U.N. refugee agency (UNHCR) in a single move.

    This group of refugees had fled Burundi following ethnic violence and killings in 1972 and now live in three rural settlements in Tanzania: Katumba, Mishamo and Ulyankulu. Since the 1970s, these settlements had transformed into towns: People made improvements to their homes, electricity poles were laid out and the local markets began to expand.

    Research has shown that access to citizenship is an important means of resolving long-term displacement. Yet in most countries, granting citizenship to refugees is still politically unthinkable.

    Tanzania has long been held up as a safe haven for refugees in the region, giving shelter to some 315,000 mainly Burundian and Congolese refugees. The naturalization of Burundian refugees was hailed as a model for progressive solutions to displacement. Yet it has led to a political stalemate between humanitarian organizations and the government, with the “refugees-turned-citizens” stuck in the middle.

    Last month, the Tanzanian government halted the naturalization of another group of more recently arrived Burundian refugees and has since pulled out of the U.N.’s Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework, citing lack of international funding.

    During my research in the former Burundian refugee camps in Western Tanzania since 2014, I have spoken with many former refugees about the naturalization process, as well as NGO employees and government officials.

    The difficulties in Tanzania are important to understanding the challenges of mass naturalization. It is not easy to turn a camp of refugees into a settlement of citizens. They also demonstrate how important it is for refugees to be able to hold both governments and humanitarian organizations accountable when things go wrong.
    A Progressive Solution is Born

    Negotiations around Tanzania’s naturalization policy began in 2007. They resulted in the Tanzania Comprehensive Solution Strategy (TANCOSS), which was adopted that year by the governments of Tanzania and Burundi in partnership with UNHCR. The agreement had three pillars: repatriation to Burundi, granting citizenship to those who opted to pursue naturalization and relocation of naturalized refugees from the settlements to other regions of Tanzania.

    Major investments were promised to facilitate the process. Some $103 million was earmarked for relocation and integration of naturalized refugees in the 2011-15 United Nations Development Assistant Plan (UNDAP).

    Eventually, the resettlement pillar was abandoned because of logistical problems and local resistance to resettling refugees. As a result, the new citizens were permitted to remain in the areas of the settlements in which they had lived for the past four decades. They can now vote in national elections and join political parties.

    “Obtaining citizenship and being allowed to stay here brought peace into my heart. Before I lived in fear,” said one former refugee named Daniel.
    Left in Limbo

    Yet the initial TANCOSS agreement did not include any detailed plans for the refugee settlements after the naturalization of their residents. As a consequence, today the area remains in a governance limbo.

    Every refugee camp had a settlement officer who represented the Ministry of Home Affairs and was responsible for governing the area. Settlement officers remain in power in all three settlements, and they continue to act as the highest authority and arbiters of conflicts.

    “Naturalization certificates are important because they allow us to move, but opening of this space is crucial and still needs to happen,” said one church leader in Ulyankulu, referring to the full integration of the settlements. “As long as we still have a settlement officer and a closed space, the process is not complete.”

    It remains unclear when and how a transition to local governance will take place and what rights to the land the new citizens have. The Tanzania Strategy for Local Integration Program for the New Citizens (TANSPLI), drafted in 2016, stipulates the creation of a master land use plan for the settlements and the surrounding areas, followed by the registration of villages in each settlement and provision of documentation for land rights.

    However, the timeline for implementation is unclear. It “hinges on the availability of funding for the planned development projects,” according to Suleiman Mziray, who is assistant director of refugee services at Ministry of Home Affairs.

    “People here don’t have ownership, you can be taken off your land at any time,” said one elderly man from Kaswa village in Ulyankulu settlement. “It’s like a marriage with no certificate.”
    Lack of Accountability

    Some of these challenges have led to a political stalemate between humanitarian organizations and the government, with each claiming the other has not kept its promises. Meanwhile, residents of the settlements suffer the consequences, as they wait for citizenship documents and investment in infrastructure like access to clean water.

    Due to major delays in the distribution of citizenship certificates by the government, international funding for the promised development projects was redirected to other emergencies. Some of the aid was initially meant for resettlement, so once the refugees were allowed to stay in the former camps, funds were reallocated. Now that they are no longer refugees but citizens, they fall into a responsibility gap. “We have done our part,” a UNHCR official told me on condition of anonymity.

    On the other side is the Tanzanian government: frustrated and disillusioned. They say they were promised that major investments will follow the distribution of citizenship but they never arrived. “We kept our part of the deal and distributed citizenship. But none of the promises materialized,” said an official at the Ministry of Home Affairs.

    The government says it does not intend to invest in the settlements for now, as they are still hoping that international funding might come through eventually.

    Earlier agreements left it ambiguous who would be responsible for implementing the administrative, developmental and social programs that were designed to turn former refugee settlements into properly integrated towns and villages. Without accountability mechanisms, it is hard for former refugees to hold humanitarian organizations or the government to their initial promises.
    Three Lessons from Tanzania

    Clearly, the design and implementation of the naturalization policy was far from perfect. The experience of Tanzania offers a few important lessons.

    First, if similar mass naturalization policies are to be implemented elsewhere, it is key that they are drafted as binding documents, where the parties dedicated to the process (both national governments and international organizations) can be held accountable if they do not deliver on the promises and commitments made within an agreed timeline.

    Second, such policies should be more carefully drafted, incorporating provisions on post-naturalization arrangements regarding local governance and land ownership.

    Finally, despite the pitfalls and unforeseen challenges, my interviews with former refugees shows that naturalization is very important to them. They are acutely aware that citizenship is not a panacea, but firmly maintain that access to legal status provides them with a sense of security and the right to remain in the country, allaying fears of forced repatriation and deportation.

    https://www.newsdeeply.com/refugees/community/2018/02/22/lessons-from-tanzanias-historic-bid-to-turn-refugees-to-citizens?platfor
    #naturalisation #citoyenneté #nationalité #modèle_tanzanien #Tanzanie #asile #migrations #réfugiés #réfugiés_burundais

    v. aussi le #modèle_ougandais qui donne un lopin de terre aux réfugiés