• 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

    • Un bon article de #Matteo_Villa qui résume ces questions, paru en septembre 2018 :

      Outsourcing European Border Control : Recent Trends in Departures, Deaths and Search and Rescue Activities in the Central Mediterranean

      In our previous blog post ‘Border Deaths in the Mediterranean: what we can learn from the latest data?’ on Border Criminologies (March 2017) we discussed the existing data sources on Mediterranean Sea migration and provided an analysis of key patterns and trends. We found that Search and Rescue (SAR) has little or no effect on the number of arrivals, and it is rather the absence of SAR that leads to more deaths. These results, which are in line with other research, were covered by various European media outlets and also resulted in a peer reviewed publication in Sociology (also available as a free preprint).

      These findings covered the period until December 2016. Since then, however, the context of European border policy has changed considerably:

      Through a mix of political pressure, financial incentives and military assistance, the EU has tried to induce transit countries in the Sahel to close their borders to Europe-bound migrants. According to European parliament president Tajani, this resulted in a 95% drop in crossings through Niger, a key transition point for migrants on the way to Libya, although it cannot be excluded that migrants are taking different, more dangerous routes in order to reach Northern African countries (either via Niger or through Algeria).
      From the beginning of 2017 onwards, the Italian government backed by the EU has increasingly cooperated with Libyan authorities to block depatures in exchange for financial and logistical support. The UN-backed government in Libya in turn, has allegedly forged deals with a number of militias.
      Increased European support for the Libyan Coast Guard (LCG), resulting in an increase in interceptions and the declaration of a Libyan SAR zone.
      Increasing legal and political attacks on NGOs engaged in SAR have culminated in Italy’s decision to declare its ports to be “closed” to NGO vessels and (temporarily) to EU rescue ships in June 2018.

      Each of these developments can be seen as part of a broader strategy to close the European borders by externalizing border control to third countries, a practice that was tried earlier with Turkey, and to relax commitments enshrined in international law, such as search and rescue at sea and non refoulement.

      In view of these recent developments, we document estimated trends in arrivals, deaths, mortality rates and rescue activities covering the most recent period, between January 2016 and July 2018. In doing so, we strongly rely on detailed statistical analyses conducted by the Italian research institute ISPI. Our analyses are based on publicly available data from the IOM and the UNHCR for arrivals and interceptions, and IOM’s Missing Migrants Project for deaths. It is important to note that recorded deaths are a lower bound estimate of the actual death toll, because some deaths are likely to remain unreported. We provide an extensive discussion of data sources, data quality and challenges for their interpretation in our academic article on the issue. Since most of the above developments relate to the situation in Libya, we focus on migrants departing from that country. Libya is also the only Northern African country where interceptions at sea by the Coast Guard are independently monitored by both IOM and UNHCR personnel at disembarkation points.

      Although each of these individual developments have been reported elsewhere, together they paint a picture of Europe’s resolve to close its external borders and deter irregular migration, regardless of the (human) cost.

      Trend #1: A sharp drop in departures

      Figure 1 plots trends in the number of migrants departing irregularly from Libya by sea since January 2016. Until mid-2017, migrant departures show a remarkably regular seasonal pattern, with around 20,000 departures during the summer months. As of July 2017, however, the number of arrivals dropped dramatically, and it has stayed at comparatively low levels up to the present. The decrease in arrivals occurred after alleged ’deals’ between Libyan authorities and the militias in Western Libya that control the smuggling networks, and a few months after the signing of a memorandum of understanding between Italy and Libya. Convergent diplomatic action induced some militias to switch from smuggling to preventing departures. Other factors, such as the activity of the LCG, private and public SAR providers, or dynamics in the rate of dead and missing along the route, are relevant per se but appear to play no significant role in the decrease in arrivals to Europe. Europe’s efforts to block migrants passing though transit countries may have played a role as well, but evidence is still too sparse to be reliably assessed.

      Trend #2: An increased risk of interception by the Libyan Coast Guard

      The Libyan Coast Guard plays a pivotal role in Europe’s strategy of externalizing migration control to third countries. A report by Human Rights Watch suggests that in recent months “the Italian Maritime Rescue Coordination Center (IMRCC) has routinized a practice, tested since at least May 2017, of transferring responsibility to Libyan coast guard forces in international waters even when there are other, better-equipped vessels, including its own patrol boats or Italian navy vessels, closer to the scene.” This practice has been termed ’refoulement by proxy’ because the LCG is financed, equipped and instructed by the Italian and European authorities, as described in this recent investigative report. Migrants who are forcibly returned to Libya are imprisoned in detention centres for indefinite periods, and they face systematic violence—including torture and rape—as has been documented in numerous reports.

      The new Italian government intensified and formalized the policy of transferring responsibility to the LCG. Since June, it has instructed ships undertaking rescues in the Libyan SAR zone to refer all emergency calls to the Libyan authorities, who will then arrange their interception and pull-back to Libya. The declarations that Italian ports are “closed” to NGO ships are also part of this strategy, as their operations are considered to interfere with LCG interceptions. In late July, this practice resulted in the first instance of a non-Libyan vessel, the Asso Ventotto, being instructed to coordinate with the Tripoli Joint Rescue Co-ordination Centre (JRCC). The ship ultimately disembarked the rescued persons on Libyan territory and thus effectively engaged in refoulement and collective expulsion of migrants.

      The practice of outsourcing European border control to the Libyan Coast Guard has brought about a sharp increase in its activity: by the end of July 2018, the LCG had intercepted 12,490 migrants at sea compared to 8,851 during the same period in the previous year, which amounts to a 41% increase. In combination with the drop in departures, this policy has resulted in a rapid increase in the risk of interception. To illustrate this fact, in July 2017 just 6% of migrants leaving Libya by sea ended up being caught and brought back, while almost 94% made it to Europe. In July 2018, instead, 71% of migrants leaving Libya’s shores were intercepted and brought back, while just 24% arrived safely in a European country (see Figure 2).

      Trend #3: An increase in the absolute and relative mortality rate between mid-June and July 2018

      In this section, we look at trends in absolute mortality (the number of dead and missing people at sea) and relative mortality (the risk of crossing) of migrants departing from Libya. In particular, we analyse the widely reported spike in deaths that occurred in late June 2018, after virtually all SAR NGOs had been prevented from operating as a result of policies introduced by the new Italian Minister of Interior Salvini from the far-right Lega and the continued denial by the Maltese authorities to offer Valetta as a port of entry. On June 10, Italy unilaterally decided to declare its ports to be “closed” to NGO rescue ships, as well as (temporarily) to commercial and EU vessels carrying rescued migrants. Also Malta tightened its position on rescue activities and cracked down on two SAR NGOs in early July. Since then, rescue operations close to the Libyan coast have been almost entirely delegated to the LCG.

      First, we look at trends in the absolute mortality rate. Figure 3 shows a reduction in the monthly number of deaths since July 2017, commensurate with the reduction in the number of departures described above. For example, 20 deaths were recorded in April 2018, and 11 in May (Figure 3). In June, however, an estimated 451 migrants died on their way from Libya to Europe—of which 370 between 16 and 30 June. It is important to note that these deaths occurred during a time when departures were comparatively low. As a result, the risk of crossing has increased from 2.8% in the previous months to a staggering 7% since mid-June 2018 (Figure 4). These findings are also robust to using different time frames for the pre-NGO absence period, including the entire period since the drop of arrivals in July 2017 until the NGO ban. Whereas relative mortality has fluctuated in recent years, 7% constitute an extraordinary spike.

      Figure 5 maps shipwreck events occurring between 16 June and 31 July 2018 with at least estimated 15 dead or missing persons, using geocoded data provided by IOM’s Missing Migrants Project. While the precise location of each shipwreck is only an estimate, as “precise locations are not often known” (as explained in the “Methodology” section of the Missing Migrants Project), such estimates do provide an indication of where such shipwrecks have taken place. In particular, IOM data shows that shipwrecks between 16 June and 31 July took place well within 50 nautical miles from Libya’s shores, an area which used to be patrolled by either the LCG or NGO vessels. Yet, during the time when deaths spiked, only two NGO vessels had been operating, and only discontinuously.

      These observations are reminiscent of what happened in 2015, when the withdrawal of competent SAR providers (the Italian mission Mare Nostrum) similarly created the conditions for avoidable loss of life. Although these findings are based on a relatively short time period, they are suggestive of the risk of leaving the Libyan SAR zone to the operations of the LCG alone. Continuous monitoring of the situation remains of utmost importance.

      Conclusion

      In combination, the three trends described above highlight the harsh realities of recent European migration policies, which seek to limit irregular migration regardless of the moral, legal and humanitarian consequences. The current European obsession with reducing migration at all costs is even less comprehensible when considering that arrivals decreased drastically prior to the most recent escalation of rhetoric and externalization of migration control. Arrivals to Italy in the first half of 2018 were down by 79% compared to the same time frame in 2017. Although increasingly inhumane policies are often cloaked in a rhetoric about reducing deaths at sea, it is important to remember that those who are prevented from crossing or forcibly returned are generally not safe but remain subject to precarious and often lethal conditions in countries of transit. Rather than providing a sustainable response to the complex challenges involved in irregular migration, Europe has outsourced the management of its migration ’problem’ to countries like Libya and Niger, where violence and death often remains hidden from the public view.

      https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/research-subject-groups/centre-criminology/centreborder-criminologies/blog/2018/09/outsourcing

    • Arrivées en Europe via la Méditerranée :
      2018 :
      https://seenthis.net/messages/705781
      Arrivées en Europe toute frontière confondue :
      https://seenthis.net/messages/739902
      –-> attention, c’est les « crossings »... rappelez-vous de la question des doubles/triples contages des passages :
      https://seenthis.net/messages/705957

      Pour #2016 #2017 et #2018, chiffres de Matteo Villa :
      https://seenthis.net/messages/768142
      database : https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ncHxOHIx4ptt4YFXgGi9TIbwd53HaR3oFbrfBm67ak4/edit#gid=0
      #base_de_données #database

    • Arrivées par la #Méditerranée en #2019 :
      Europe : plus de 21.000 migrants et réfugiés arrivés par la Méditerranée depuis janvier

      Selon l’Agence des Nations Unies pour les migrations (OIM ), les arrivées de migrants en Méditerranée ont dépassé le seuil des 21.000, ce qui constitue une baisse d’environ un tiers par rapport aux 32.070 arrivés au cours de la même période l’an dernier.

      Ce sont exactement 21.301 migrants et réfugiés qui sont entrés en Europe par voie maritime à la date du 29 mai. Les arrivées en Espagne et en Grèce représentent 85% du total des arrivées, le reste des migrants et réfugiés de cette année ont pris la direction de l’Italie, de Malte et de Chypre.

      La Grèce a désormais surpassé l’Espagne au titre de première destination des migrants et des réfugiés rejoignant l’Europe via la Méditerranée. Selon l’Organisation internationale pour les migrations (OIM), le nombre total d’arrivées par mer cette année est de 10.200 dont 2.483 arrivées signalées entre le 1er et le 29 mai dernier.

      Le Bureau de l’OIM en Grèce a indiqué mercredi dernier que les garde-côtes helléniques ont confirmé que pendant plus de 48 heures entre le 28 et le 29 mai, il y eu sept incidents nécessitant des opérations de recherche et sauvetage au large des îles de Lesbos, Leros, Samos, Symi Kos et le port d’Alexandroupolis. Ils ont ainsi sauvé 191 migrants qui ont été transférés par la suite dans les ports respectifs grecs.

      De plus, à la date du 30 avril, ce sont 3.497 migrants qui ont réussi à atteindre la Grèce via sa frontière terrestre avec la Turquie.
      519 décès de migrants, dont plus de la moitié sur la route de la Méditerranée centrale

      L’Espagne reste la deuxième porte d’entrée des réfugiés en Méditerranée, avec 7.876 arrivées dont 1.160 hommes, femmes et enfants pour le seul mois de mai. Sur la même période l’an dernier, Madrid a comptabilisé 8.150 migrants et réfugiés ayant réussi à franchir la route de la Méditerranée occidentale. En outre, plus de 2.100 ont atteint l’Espagne via sa frontière terrestre avec le Maroc.

      Par ailleurs, l’OIM rappelle que les arrivées ont considérablement baissé en Italie où seuls 1.561 migrants ont réussi à franchir les côtes siciliennes.

      Mais la route de la Méditerranée centrale (Italie et Malte) reste tout de même la plus meurtrière avec 321 décès, soit plus de la moitié du total de migrants et réfugiés ayant péri en tentant d’atteindre l’Europe. Les décès enregistrés sur les trois principales routes de la mer Méditerranée pendant près de cinq mois en 2019 s’élèvent à 519 personnes, soit un quart de moins que les 662 décès confirmés au cours de la même période en 2018.

      A cet égard, l’OIM rappelle que dans l’ouest de la Méditerranée, l’organisation non gouvernementale Alarme Phone a signalé qu’un jeune Camerounais avait disparu le 21 mai dernier. Selon les témoignages des huit survivants qui l’accompagnaient, il serait tombé en mer avant que leur navire ne soit intercepté par la marine marocaine. Son corps n’a pas été retrouvé.

      En Méditerranée centrale, des migrants interceptés et renvoyés en Libye le 23 mai ont également indiqué aux équipes de l’OIM que cinq hommes s’étaient noyés au cours de leur voyage. « Aucun autre détail concernant l’identité, le pays d’origine ou d’autres informations personnelles concernant les disparus n’est disponible », a souligné l’OIM dans une note à la presse.

      https://news.un.org/fr/story/2019/05/1044671

  • Magnifique ! Mais en #napolitain.
    Un petit texte d’un certain #Luca_Fiorentino, qui est juste tellement #logique, mais tellement rare dans ces temps dominés par le populisme...

    Une #ode à la #libre_circulation.

    ma fatemi capi na cosa.
    io non ne capisco assai di diritto.

    ma veramente è legittimo che na persona, nata in un preciso metro quadro di terra, poi cresce, e spinta da curiosità o da cazzi suoi, magari si vuole vedere un altro posto, e allo’ si mette in viaggio, cammina, e bell e buono lo possono bloccare e gli possono dire ueue ma arò vai, non vedi il recinto, le ferriate, il muro, qua non ci puoi entrare.

    cioè perché.

    ma scusate, ma sto fatto che la terra se la so’ divisa co righello e squadretta quando io ero ancora nelle palle di mio padre, ma perché io, o chiunque altro, dovremmo automaticamente sottostare alle spartenze di costoro.
    io non l’ho mai accettata, né sottoscritta, ’sta gestione.

    e se mio padre ha firmato qualche carta al comune, io non sono mica mio padre.

    tu puoi dire che ok, vengo da lui.
    e allo’ mio padre viene da suo padre, e suo padre da suo padre, fino ad adamo o chi per lui.
    siamo tutti matriosche del primo spaccimmino, nonché fratelli.

    e quindi, caro fratello briatore, fammi salire sullo yacht e fammi prendere una porchiacca dal tuo frigo, capì.

    e invece a quanto pare ci sarebbero zone della terra dove io posso entrare solo a tempo, o che non posso proprio vedere, a seconda della mia nazionalità.

    la nazionalità.
    sentirsi un’appartenenza forte ad altre persone, alle quali sarei legato da tradizioni storiche, lingua, costumi.

    le tradizioni si trasformano, tra cento anni il mac donald sarà tradizione.
    la lingua, un codice labilissimo che permette di fare inciuci e supercazzole, ma non di capirci.
    i costumi, che poi fossero i mocassini, i pinocchietti e i top fluo, sinceramente non mi appartengono.

    è vero, sono sbucato da una fessa in un posto preciso.
    ma non vedo perché ciò dovrebbe schedarmi.

    cioè che ho fatto io per sbucare da quella fessa, in quel buco di culo.
    a dicere ’a verità, proprio niente.

    e quindi forse sarebbe più giusto applicare il concetto dello zero.
    che tutti dovremmo partire da zero.

    e invece la fessa da cui sei sbucato è importante.
    così come quel metro quadro dove quella fessa ha sgravato.

    solo che lo sai che succede in questo modo.
    mo te lo dico io.
    succede che i tuoi diritti, i tuoi privilegi, o tutti i soprusi e le uallere in testa che subisci quotidianamente, essi dipendono solo da na cosa.
    e quella cosa, ’o ssai che rè.
    chella cosa è ’a fess ’e mammt.
    ciao.

    https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10215981009185452&id=1454544772
    #ouverture_des_frontières #migrations #frontières #liberté_de_mouvement #nationalité #citoyenneté #hasard #traditions #culture #Etat-nation #lieu_de_naissance #injustice

    cc @albertocampiphoto

    • ’National day of shame’ : #David_Lammy criticises treatment of Windrush generation

      Labour MP says situation has come about because of the hostile environment that begun under Theresa May, as he blames a climate of far-right rhetoric. People who came to the UK in the 1950s and 60s are now concerned about whether they have a legal right to remain in the country. The government has admitted that some people from the Windrush generation had been deported in error, as Theresa May appeared to make a U-turn on the issue Some Windrush immigrants wrongly deported, UK admits.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfy1mDdNtEQ

    • Amber Rudd’s resignation letter in full and the Prime Minister’s response

      Amber Rudd has resigned as home secretary amid increasing pressure over the way the Home Office handled immigration policy.

      Her resignation came after leaked documents undermined her claims she was unaware of the deportation targets her officers were using.

      Downing Street confirmed Theresa May had accepted Ms Rudd’s resignation on Sunday night. She is the fifth cabinet minister to have left their position since the Prime Minister called the snap election in June 2017.

      https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/amber-rudd-resignation-letter-full-transcript-windrush-scandal-theres

    • Black history is still largely ignored, 70 years after Empire Windrush reached Britain

      Now, 70 years and three to four generations later, the legacy of those who arrived on the Windrush and the ships that followed is being rightly remembered – albeit in a way which calls into question how much their presence, sacrifices and contributions are valued in Britain.

      https://theconversation.com/black-history-is-still-largely-ignored-70-years-after-empire-windru
      #histoire #mémoire

    • Chased into ’self-deportation’: the most disturbing Windrush case so far

      As Amelia Gentleman reflects on reporting one of the UK’s worst immigration scandals, she reveals a new and tragic case.

      In the summer of 2013, the government launched the peculiarly named Operation Vaken, an initiative that saw vans drive around six London boroughs, carrying billboards that warned: “In the UK illegally? Go home or face arrest.” The billboards were decorated with pictures of handcuffs and the number of recent immigration arrests (“106 arrests last week in your area”). A line at the bottom adopted a softer tone: “We can help you to return home voluntarily without fear of arrest or detention.”

      The Conservatives’ 2010 manifesto promise to reduce migration to the tens of thousands had been going badly. It was time for ministers to develop new ways of scaring immigrants into leaving and for the government’s hostile environment policy to get teeth. More than 170,000 people, many of them living in this country legally, began receiving alarming texts, with warnings such as: “Message from the UK Border Agency: you are required to leave the UK as you no longer have the right to remain.”

      The hope was that the Home Office could get people to “self-deport”, frightening them into submission. In this, politicians appeared to have popular support: a YouGov poll at the time showed that 47% of the public approved of the “Go home” vans. The same year, Home Office vehicles began to be marked clearly with the words “Immigration Enforcement”, to alert people to the hovering presence of border guards.

      Operation Vaken ran for just one month, and its success was limited. A Home Office report later found that only 11 people left the country as a result; it also revealed that, of the 1,561 text messages sent to the government’s tip-off hotline, 1,034 were hoaxes – taking up 17 hours of staff time.

      Theresa May’s former adviser Nick Timothy later tried to argue that the vans had been opposed by the prime minister and were only approved while she was on holiday. But others who worked on the project insisted that May had seen the wording on the vans and requested that the language be toughened up. Meanwhile, the Immigration Enforcement vehicles stayed, with their yellow fluorescent stripes and black-and-white checks, a sinister presence circling areas of high migration. Gradually, the broader strategy of intimidation began to pay off. Some people were frightened into leaving.
      Guardian Today: the headlines, the analysis, the debate - sent direct to you
      Read more

      In my two years of reporting on what became known as the Windrush scandal, Joycelyn John’s experience was the most disturbing case I came across. Joycelyn arrived in London in 1963 at the age of four, travelling with her mother on a Grenadian passport as a British subject. She went to primary and secondary school in Hammersmith, west London, before working in hotels in the capital – including the Ritz and a Hilton.

      Some time around 2009, she lost her Grenadian passport, which contained the crucial stamp giving her indefinite leave to remain. She had trouble getting a new passport, because her mother had married and changed her daughter’s surname from Mitchell to John. Because she never registered the change, there was a discrepancy between Joycelyn’s birth certificate and the name she had used all her adult life. She spent several years attempting to sort out her papers, but by 2014, aged 55, she had been classified as living in Britain illegally. She lost her job and was unable to find new work. For a while, she lived in a homeless hostel, but she lost her bed, because the government does not normally fund places for people classified as illegal immigrants. She spent two years staying with relatives, sleeping on sofas or the floor.

      In that time, Joycelyn managed to gather 75 pages of evidence proving that she had spent a lifetime in the UK: bank statements, dentists’ records, medical files, tax records, letters from her primary school, letters from friends and family. But, inexplicably, this was not enough. Every letter she received from the Home Office warned her that she was liable to be deported to Grenada, a country she had left more than 50 years ago. She began to feel nervous about opening the door in case immigration officers were outside.

      A Home Office leaflet encouraging people to opt for a voluntary departure, illustrated with cheerful, brightly coloured planes and published about the same time as the “Go Home” vans were launched, said: “We know that many people living in the UK illegally want to go home, but feel scared of approaching the Home Office directly. They may fear being arrested and detained. For those returning voluntarily, there are these key benefits: they avoid being arrested and having to live in detention until a travel document can be obtained; they can leave the UK in a more dignified manner than if their removal is enforced.” This appeal to the desire for a dignified departure was a shrewd tactic; the idea of being forcibly taken away terrified Joycelyn, who saw the leaflets and knew of the vans. “There’s such stigma... I didn’t want to be taken off the plane in handcuffs,” she says. She was getting deeper into debt, borrowing money from a younger brother, and felt it was no longer fair to rely on him.

      When the hostile environment policy is working well, it exhausts people into submission. It piles up humiliations, stress and fear until people give up. In November 2016, Joycelyn finally decided that a “voluntary” departure would be easier than trying to survive inside the ever-tightening embrace of Home Office hostility. Officials booked her on a flight on Christmas Day; when she asked if she could spend a last Christmas with her brother and five sisters, staff rebooked her for Boxing Day. She was so desperate that she felt this was the best option. “I felt ground down,” she says. “I lost the will to go on fighting.”

      By that point, she estimated she must have attempted a dozen times to explain to Home Office staff – over the phone, in person, in writing – that they had made a mistake. “I don’t think they looked at the letters I wrote. I think they had a quota to fill – they needed to deport people.” She found it hard to understand why the government was prepared to pay for her expensive flight, but not to waive the application fee to regularise her status. A final letter told her: “You are a person who is liable to be detained... You must report with your baggage to Gatwick South Virgin Atlantic Airways check-in desk.” The letter resorted to the favoured Home Office technique of scaring people with capital letters, reminding her that in her last few weeks: “YOU MAY NOT ENTER EMPLOYMENT, PAID OR UNPAID, OR ENGAGE IN ANY BUSINESS OR PROFESSION.” It also informed her that her baggage allowance, after a lifetime in the UK, was 20kg – “and you will be expected to pay for any excess”.

      How do you pack for a journey to a country you left as a four-year-old? “I was on autopilot,” Joycelyn recalls. “I was feeling depressed, lonely and suicidal. I wasn’t able to think straight; at times, I was hysterical. I packed the morning I left, very last-minute. I’d been expecting a reprieve. I didn’t take a lot – just jeans and a few T-shirts, a toothbrush, some Colgate, a towel – it didn’t even fill the whole suitcase.” She had £60 to start a new life, given to her by an ex-boyfriend. She had decided not to tell her sisters she was going; she confided only in her brother. “I just didn’t want any fuss.” She didn’t expect she would ever be allowed to return to Britain.

      In Grenada, she found everything unfamiliar. She had to scrub her clothes by hand and struggled to cook with the local ingredients. “It’s just a completely different lifestyle. The culture is very different.” She was given no money to set her up and found getting work very difficult. “You’re very vulnerable if you’re a foreigner. There’s no support structure and no one wants to employ you. Once they hear an English accent – forget it. They’re suspicious. They think you must be a criminal if you’ve been deported.”

      Joycelyn recounts what happened to her in a very matter-of-fact way, only expressing her opinion about the Home Office’s consistent refusal to listen when I ask her to. But her analysis is succinct: “The way I was treated was disgusting.” I still find it hard to accept that the government threatened her until she felt she had no option but to relocate to an unfamiliar country 4,300 miles away. The outcome – a 57-year-old Londoner, jettisoned to an island off the coast of Venezuela, friendless and without money, trying to make a new life for herself – is as absurd as it is tragic.

      *

      In April 2018, the leaders of 52 countries arrived in London for the Commonwealth heads of government meeting. The Mall was decorated with flags; caterers at Buckingham Palace prepared for tea parties and state dinners. In normal times, this summit would have been regarded as a routine diplomatic event, heavy with ceremony and light on substance. But, with Brexit looming, the occasion was seen as an important opportunity to woo the countries on which Britain expected to become increasingly reliant.

      A week before the event, however, the 12 Caribbean high commissioners had gathered to ask the British government to adopt a more compassionate approach to people who had arrived in the UK as children and were never formally naturalised. “I am dismayed that people who gave their all to Britain could be discarded so matter-of-factly,” said Guy Hewitt, the Barbados high commissioner. “Seventy years after Windrush, we are again facing a new wave of hostility.”

      Hewitt revealed that a formal request to meet May had been declined. The rebuff convinced the Caribbean leaders that the British government had either failed to appreciate the scale and seriousness of what was happening or, worse, was aware, but did not view it as a priority. It smacked of racism.

      By then, I had been covering cases such as Joycelyn’s for six months. I had written about Paulette Wilson, a 61-year-old grandmother who had been detained by the Home Office twice and threatened with deportation to Jamaica, a country she had left half a century earlier; about Anthony Bryan, who after 50 years in the UK was wrongly detained for five weeks; and about Sylvester Marshall, who was denied the NHS radiotherapy he needed for prostate cancer and told to pay £54,000 for treatment, despite paying taxes here for decades. Yet no one in the government had seemed concerned.

      I contacted Downing Street on 15 April to ask if they could explain the refusal to meet the Caribbean delegation. An official called back to confirm that a meeting had not been set up; there would be other opportunities to meet the prime minister and discuss this “important issue”, she said.

      It was a huge mistake. An article about the diplomatic snub went on the Guardian’s front page and the political response was instantaneous. Suddenly, ministers who had shown no interest were falling over themselves to express profound sorrow. The brazen speed of the official turnaround was distasteful to watch. Amber Rudd, then the home secretary, spoke in parliament to express her regret. The Home Office would establish a new team to help people gather evidence of their right to be here, she announced; fees would be waived. The prime minister decided that she did, after all, need to schedule a meeting with her Caribbean colleagues.

      There were a number of factors that forced this abrupt shift. The campaigner Patrick Vernon, whose parents emigrated from Jamaica in the 50s, had made a critical connection between the scandal and the upcoming 70th anniversary of the arrival of the Empire Windrush at Tilbury Docks. A fortnight earlier, he had launched a petition that triggered a parliamentary debate, calling for an immigration amnesty for those who had arrived as British subjects between 1948 and 1971. For months, I had been describing these people as “Caribbean-born, retirement-age, long-term British residents”, a clunky categorisation that was hard to put in a headline. But Vernon’s petition succinctly called them the “Windrush generation” – a phrase that evoked the emotional response that people feel towards the pioneers of migration who arrived on that ship. Although it was a bit of a misnomer (those affected were the children of the Windrush generation), that branding became incredibly potent.

      After months of very little coverage, the BBC and other media outlets began to report on the issue. On 16 April, the Guardian reprinted the photographs and stories of everyone we had interviewed to date. The accounts were undeniable evidence of profound and widespread human suffering. It unleashed political chaos.

      *

      It was exciting to see the turmoil caused by the relentless publication of articles on a subject that no one had previously wanted to think about. Everyone has moments of existential doubt about whether what they do serves a purpose, but, for two weeks last April, the government was held to account and forced to act, demonstrating the enormous power of journalism to trigger change.

      At the Guardian’s offices in London, a team of reporters was allocated to interview the huge number of emerging Windrush voices. Politicians were contacted by constituents who had previously been nervous about giving their details to officials; they also belatedly looked through their constituency casebooks to see if there were Windrush people among their immigration caseload; finally, they began to speak up about the huge difficulties individuals were facing as a result of Home Office policy.

      Editors put the story on the front page, day after day. Any hope the government might have had of the issue quickly exhausting itself was dashed repeatedly by damaging new revelations. For a while, I was unable to get through my inbox, because there were too many unhappy stories about the government’s cruel, bureaucratic mishandling of cases to be able to read and process. Caroline Bannock, a senior journalist who runs the Guardian’s community team, created a database to collect people’s stories, and made sure that everyone who emailed got an answer, with information on where to go for advice and how to contact the Windrush Taskforce, set up by Rudd.

      I found the scale of the misery devastating. One morning, I came into work to find 24 messages on my answerphone from desperate people, each convinced I could help. I wanted to cry at my desk when I opened a letter from the mother of a young woman who had arrived in Britain from Jamaica in 1974, aged one. In 2015, after being classified as an illegal immigrant and sent to Yarl’s Wood detention centre, she had taken an overdose and died. “Without the time she spent in Yarl’s Wood, which we understand was extremely unpleasant, and the threat of deportation, my daughter would be alive today,” she wrote. The government had been aiming to bring down immigration at any cost, she continued. “One of the costs, as far as I am concerned, was my daughter’s life.”

      Alongside these upsetting calls and letters, there were many from readers offering financial support to the people we interviewed, and from lawyers offering pro bono assistance. A reader sent a shoebox full of chocolate bars, writing that he wanted to help reporters keep their energy levels up. At a time when the reputation of journalism can feel low, it was rewarding to help demonstrate why independent media organisations are so important.

      If the scene at the office was a smooth-running model of professionalism, at home it was chaos. I wrote until 2am and got up at 5am to catch up on reading. I tapped out so many articles over two weeks that my right arm began to ache, making it hard to sleep. My dictaphone overheated from overuse and one of its batteries exploded. I had to retreat entirely from family life, to make sure I poured out every bit of information I had. Shoes went missing, homework was left undone, meals were uncooked. There was an unexpected heatwave and I was aware of the arrival of a plague of ants, flies and fleas (and possibly nits), but there was no time to deal with it.

      I am married to Jo Johnson, who at the time was a minister in May’s government. As a news reporter, I have to be politically independent; I let him get on with his job and he doesn’t interfere in mine. Life is busy and mostly we focus on the day-to-day issues that come with having two children. Clearly, there are areas of disagreement, but we try to step around anything too contentious for the sake of family harmony.

      But the fact did not go unnoticed. One Sunday morning, Jo had to go on television to defend Rudd, returning home at lunchtime to look after the children so I could talk on the radio about how badly the government had got it wrong. I can see why it looks weird from the outside; that weekend it felt very weird. I had only one brief exchange about the issue with his brother Boris, who was then the foreign secretary, at a noisy family birthday party later in the year. He said: “You really fucked the Commonwealth summit.”

      *

      On 25 April, Rudd appeared in front of the home affairs select committee. She told MPs she had been shocked by the Home Office’s treatment of Paulette and others. Not long into the session, Rudd was thrown off course by a question put to her by the committee’s chair, Yvette Cooper. “Targets for removals. When were they set?”

      “We don’t have targets for removals,” she replied with easy confidence. It was an answer that ended her career as home secretary.

      In an earlier session, Lucy Moreton, the head of the Immigration Service Union, had explained how the Home Office target to bring net migration below 100,000 a year had triggered challenging objectives; each region had a removal target to meet, she said. Rudd’s denial seemed to indicate either that she was incompetent and unaware of how her own department worked, or that she was being dishonest. Moreton later told me that, as Rudd was giving evidence, colleagues were sending her selfies taken in front of their office targets boards.

      Rudd was forced back to parliament the next day. This time, she admitted that the Home Office had set local targets, but insisted: “I have never agreed there should be specific removal targets and I would never support a policy that puts targets ahead of people.” But, on 29 April, the Guardian published a private memo from Rudd to May, sent in early 2017, that revealed she had set an “ambitious but deliverable” target for an increase in enforced deportations. Later that evening, she resigned.

      When I heard the news, I felt ambivalent; Rudd hadn’t handled the crisis well, but she wasn’t responsible for the mess. She seemed to be resigning on a technicality, rather than admitting she had been negligent and that her department had behaved atrociously on her watch. The Windrush people I spoke to that night told me Rudd’s departure only shifted attention from the person who was really responsible: Theresa May.

      *

      Joycelyn John was issued with a plane ticket from Grenada to England in July 2018. “A bit of me was ecstatic, a bit of me was angry that no one had listened to me in the first place,” she told me when we met at her still-bare flat in June this year. She had been rehoused in September, but the flat was outside London, far from her family and empty; council officials didn’t think to provide any furniture. Friends gave her a bed and some chairs, but it was months before she was able to get a fridge.

      In late 2018, she received a letter of apology from the then home secretary, Sajid Javid. “People of the Windrush generation who came to Britain from the Commonwealth, as my parents did, have helped make this country what it is today,” he wrote. “The experiences faced by you and others have been completely unacceptable.” The letter made her cry, but not with relief. “I thought: ‘What good is a letter of apology now?’ They ruined my life completely. I came back to nothing. I have had to start rebuilding my life from scratch at the age of 58.”

      She still has nightmares that she is back in Grenada. “I can feel the heat, I can smell the food, I can actually taste the fish in the dream – in a good way. But mostly they are bad memories.” The experience has upended her sense of who she is. “Before this I felt British – I just did. I’m the sort of person who would watch every royal wedding on television. I feel less British now. I feel I don’t belong here, and I don’t belong there.”

      While a government compensation scheme has been announced, Joycelyn, like most of the Windrush generation, has yet to receive any money. Since the government apologised for its “appalling” treatment, 6,000 people have been given documents confirming their right to live in the UK. Joycelyn is one of them. But, although her right to be here is now official, she hasn’t yet got a passport – because she can’t afford the fee. And she remains frightened. “I’m still looking over my shoulder all the time. I’m a nervous wreck.”

      https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/sep/14/scale-misery-devastating-inside-story-reporting-windrush-scandal?CMP=sh

  • #La_loi_c'est_la_loi

    Le village d’#Assola est curieusement découpé par les méandres de la frontière franco-italienne. Le douanier français Ferdinand Pastorelli fait respecter la loi tandis que son ami d’enfance, le contrebandier Giuseppe La Paglia, ne cesse de la violer. De plus leur intimité est liée au fait que Giuseppe a épousé Antonietta la première femme de Ferdinand, lequel a convolé en secondes noces avec Hélène.

    Lorsque Giuseppe découvre que la pièce où est né Ferdinand est en Italie, il le fait savoir, ce qui met le douanier dans une singulière et fâcheuse situation : cela remet en cause son état civil et sa nationalité française. Considéré tour à tour comme bigame, déserteur ou apatride, il est obligé de prendre le maquis. Mais comme les contrebandiers ont toujours besoin des douaniers, Giuseppe, lorsqu’il l’apprendra fera éclater la vérité pour réhabiliter son ami Ferdinand : la pièce où Pastorelli est né n’était pas en Italie à l’époque mais bien en France. Aussitôt libéré, Ferdinand se mettra à pourchasser de plus belle Giuseppe car italien ou français, « la loi, c’est la loi ».

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TS6Tfduz8oo


    #frontières #frontières_naturelles #frontières_artificielles #ressources_pédagogiques #contrebande #Alpes_maritimes #Italie #France #géographie_politique #film #gardes-frontière #bornes #nationalité #citoyenneté #identité #frontières_mobiles

    #frontière_mobile :

  • Mayotte : de quoi la violence est-elle le nom ?
    Sophie Blanchy, Damien Riccio, Nicolas Roinsard et Juliette Sakoyan, Médiapart, le 24 avril 2018
    https://blogs.mediapart.fr/nicolas-roinsard/blog/240418/mayotte-de-quoi-la-violence-est-elle-le-nom-6

    Mayotte, le dernier-né des départements français, le plus méconnu aussi, a connu ces deux derniers mois un conflit social sans précédent. Trop souvent réduit à la seule question migratoire, ce conflit témoigne aussi et surtout d’une gouvernance postcoloniale qui (re)produit sa part de violence en dessinant de nouvelles divisions sociales et régionales.

    #France #Mayotte #Territoire_occupé #Comores #Discrimination #Nationalité #Racisme #Néocolonialsme #Outre-Mer

    Aussi :

    À Mayotte, l’éternel débat sur le droit du sol
    Pascal Charrier, La Croix, le 10 mars 2018
    https://seenthis.net/messages/676236

    « La situation à Mayotte est liée à la politique diplomatique de la France »
    Abdelhak El Idrissi, France Culture, le 13 mars 2018
    https://seenthis.net/messages/676245

  • À Mayotte, l’éternel débat sur le droit du sol
    Pascal Charrier, La Croix, le 10 mars 2018
    https://www.la-croix.com/France/Immigration/A-Mayotte-leternel-debat-droit-sol-2018-03-10-1200919700

    Le gouvernement réfléchit à la possibilité de donner à la maternité de Mamoudzou un statut extraterritorial, pour limiter la possibilité de devenir français en naissant dans le département d’outre-mer

    Il s’agirait d’un « hôpital où quand on y naît, on est ensuite déclaré (pour l’état civil) soit côté français, soit côté Comores, soit côté Madagascar ».

    Contrairement à ce qui est souvent énoncé, le droit du sol n’est pas absolu en France et le simple fait de naître dans la maternité de Mayotte ne suffit pas à faire d’un nouveau-né un « petit Français ». Un enfant mineur né en France de parents étrangers peut réclamer la nationalité française seulement à partir de treize ans et à la condition qu’il y ait eu sa résidence habituelle pendant cinq ans, à partir de l’âge de huit ans.

    Rappelons aussi que le rattachement à la France de Mayotte a été obtenu par un référendum illégal aux yeux de l’ONU, car à l’échelle des Comores c’est l’indépendance qui l’avait emporté...

    #France #Mayotte #Territoire_occupé #Comores #Discrimination #Maternité #Accouchements #Nationalité #Racisme #Néocolonialsme #Outre-Mer #sans_vergogne

  • SBARCHI, I DATI 2017. 120mila migranti giunti lo scorso anno in Italia

    Sono stati complessivamente poco più di 171mila nel 2017 i migranti giunti via mare sulle coste dei Paesi del Mediterraneo. Si tratta del numero più basso da quando ha avuto inizio nel 2014 il significativo flusso di ingressi via mare verso l’Europa. Il principale Paese di approdo nel Mediterraneo nel 2017 è stato l’Italia con quasi 120mila migranti sbarcati, il 70% di tutti gli arrivi via mare in Europa. Il 2015 fu invece l’anno della Grecia, che raccolse l’84% degli arrivi, mentre nel 2016 gli sbarchi sulle isole greche subirono un significativo ridimensionamento: Italia e Grecia accolsero rispettivamente 181mila (50%) e 174mila (48%) migranti. I dati emergono da un’analisi della Fondazione Ismu, Iniziative e studi sulla multietnicità di Milano.
    Il Paese del Mediterraneo che ha visto aumentare in modo rilevante gli arrivi nel 2017 è stato la Spagna, sulle cui coste sono approdati circa 21mila migranti, con un aumento del 160% rispetto al 2016. Per quanto riguarda la provenienza dei migranti arrivati via mare, tra le nazionalità dichiarate al momento dello sbarco in Italia nel 2017 hanno prevalso Nigeria, Guinea, Costa d’Avorio e Bangladesh. In Grecia sono giunti soprattutto siriani, iracheni e afghani. In Spagna, via mare e via terra, sono arrivati soprattutto migranti dal Marocco, dall’Algeria, dalla Costa d’Avorio e dalla Guinea.
    Anche nel 2017 è rimasto significativo il numero di persone che hanno perso la vita nel tentativo di raggiungere l’Europa via mare: si stimano 3.116 migranti morti o dispersi nelle acque del Mediterraneo e principalmente nella più pericolosa rotta del Mediterraneo Centrale dal Nord Africa-Libia all’Italia.

    Il quadro italiano
    Sono quasi 120mila i migranti sbarcati nel 2017 sulle coste italiane, di cui 15.731 minori stranieri non accompagnati. Rispetto all’anno precedente, quando sono stati registrati 181.436 sbarchi, v’è stato un calo del 34,2%. Le richieste d’asilo nel 2017 sono state 130mila, con un lieve aumento rispetto all’anno precedente (+5,4%); le istanze sono state presentate soprattutto da nigeriani, bangladesi, pakistani, gambiani e ivoriani. Le domande d’asilo esaminate sono state oltre 80mila, 10mila meno rispetto al 2016. Al 60% (47.839 casi) del totale richiedenti asilo non è stata riconosciuta alcuna forma di protezione. È cresciuto il numero di coloro che hanno ottenuto lo status di rifugiato, che nel 2017 ha costituito l’8,5% degli esiti, mentre si è fortemente ridimensionata la protezione sussidiaria, concessa nel 2016 a oltre 11mila migranti e nel 2017 a 5.800. Una domanda su quattro ha avuto come esito la protezione umanitaria.
    Al 31 dicembre 2017 sono stati trasferiti dall’Italia in un altro Paese UE 11.464 richiedenti protezione internazionale. I Paesi dove sono stati trasferiti sono Germania (dove è stato ricollocato il 43% dei migranti), Svezia (10,6%) e Svizzera (7,8%).

    http://www.cinformi.it/index.php/it/news_ed_eventi/archivio_news/anno_2018/sbarchi_i_dati_2017/(offset)/0/(limit)/4/(sb)/312
    #arrivées #statistiques #asile #migrations #Italie #chiffres #Méditerranée #Italie #2017

    v. aussi pour les mois/années précédents: http://seen.li/d6bt

    • Un tweet intéressant de l’#OIM / #IOM, 02.03.2018 :

      Migrant arrivals by #Mediterranean sea in Italy in 2018 are the lowest in 5 years, our @MillmanIOM says:

      https://twitter.com/UNmigration/status/969701973736947712

      La personne qui commente les chiffres dit que jamais les arrivées ont été si peu nombreuses... voici ce qu’il dit, je transcrit :

      “This is the lowest we have seen in the five years we have been compiling this data month by month with the Italian Ministry of Iterior. I can just tell you that in 2014, in the first two months almost 7700 people arrived. In 2015, in the first two months almost 7900. Over 9000 in 2016, over 13’000 in 2017. It’s pretty important I think, because Italians will vote this weekend. Immigration is a huge issue obviously, and to be able to report that arrivals are less than half of last year’s at this time and the lowest in five years I think it’s rather important. Our total for the year so far is 3’730. This week we took migrants back to #Benin, #Mali and #Niger. As I understood it we’ve done a total of 26 countries that we’ve returned from Libya this year, so I think that has had some impact on the flows to Italy.”

      (By the way, peut-être qu’un bref rappel des morts en Méditerranée et des conditions dégradantes en Libye auraient aussi été une bonne chose à rappeler... Mais mieux vaut se vanter des « #retours_volontaires » vers les pays d’origine)

      #renvois #expulsions #retour_volontaire

      cc @isskein

    • Demandes d’asile dans les États membres de l’UE - 650 000 primo-demandeurs d’asile enregistrés en 2017 - Syriens, Irakiens et Afghans demeurent les principaux demandeurs

      En 2017, 650 000 primo-demandeurs d’asile ont introduit une demande de protection internationale dans les États membres de l’Union européenne (UE), soit quasiment deux fois moins qu’en 2016, quand 1 206 500 primo-demandeurs d’asile ont été enregistrés, et à un niveau comparable à celui enregistré en 2014, avant les pics de 2015 et 2016.


      http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/2995521/8754398/3-20032018-AP-FR.pdf/f7bca4e4-ab6d-40cb-ae35-1b2e9e71017c

      Les statistiques dans le document pdf d’Eurostat :
      http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/2995521/8754398/3-20032018-AP-FR.pdf/f7bca4e4-ab6d-40cb-ae35-1b2e9e71017c

    • Commissione parlamentare di inchiesta sul sistema di accoglienza, di identificazione ed espulsione, nonchè sulle condizioni di trattamento dei migranti e sulle risorse pubbliche impegnate


      #nationalités #2016 #2017


      #régions

      #hotspots:

      #MNA #mineurs_non_accompagnés

      J’ai reçu ce rapport via email, que je ne trouve pas sur internet... mais j’ai fait des copies d’écran des graphiques.

    • « Voyages du désespoir », un rapport du HCR sur les mouvements de réfugiés en Europe

      Malgré la diminution globale du nombre de réfugiés et de migrants arrivés en Europe l’année dernière, les dangers auxquels nombreux d’entre eux sont confrontés dans certaines situations ont augmenté comme l’indique un nouveau rapport du HCR, l’Agence des Nations Unies pour les réfugiés, qui décrit l’évolution des tendances dans leurs déplacements.

      Selon le rapport « Voyages du désespoir », le nombre d’arrivées en Italie par la mer, principalement en provenance de la Libye, a considérablement diminué depuis juillet 2017. Cette tendance s’est poursuivie au cours du premier trimestre 2018, avec une baisse de 74 pour cent par rapport à l’année dernière.

      La traversée vers l’Italie s’est par contre révélée de plus en plus dangereuse et le taux de mortalité des candidats à la traversée depuis la Libye a grimpé à 1 personne sur 14 au cours du premier trimestre 2018, alors qu’il était de 1 sur 29 au cours de la même période en 2017.

      Par ailleurs, on a également observé au cours des derniers mois une détérioration très préoccupante de la santé des nouveaux arrivants en provenance de la Libye, avec un nombre plus important de personnes dans un état de grande faiblesse, amaigries et globalement en mauvais état de santé.

      Si le nombre total des traversées de la Méditerranée est resté bien en deçà de celui de 2016, le HCR a également constaté une recrudescence des arrivées en Espagne et en Grèce sur la fin de l’année 2017.

      En 2017, l’Espagne a observé une augmentation de 101 pour cent par rapport à 2016 et a recensé 28 000 nouveaux arrivants. Les premiers mois de 2018 indiquent une tendance similaire, avec une augmentation de 13 pour cent des arrivées par rapport à l’année dernière. Les Marocains et les Algériens constituent désormais les deux principales nationalités, mais les Syriens forment toujours l’essentiel des arrivées par les frontières terrestres de l’Espagne.

      En Grèce, le nombre total d’arrivées par la mer a diminué par rapport à 2016, mais on a cependant observé une recrudescence de 33 pour cent entre mai et décembre de l’année dernière, avec 24 600 arrivants par rapport à 18 300 au cours de la même période en 2016. La majorité d’entre eux étaient originaires de Syrie, d’Irak et d’Afghanistan, et comprenait un grand nombre de familles avec des enfants. Les demandeurs d’asile arrivés en Grèce par la mer ont vécu de longues périodes d’attente sur les îles grecques, dans des conditions de surpeuplement difficiles.

      Le renforcement des restrictions en Hongrie a poussé de nombreux réfugiés et migrants à emprunter d’autres routes pour traverser l’Europe, indique le rapport. Ainsi, certains passent de Serbie en Roumanie tandis que d’autres passent de la Grèce en Albanie, puis au Monténégro et en Bosnie-Herzégovine pour rallier la Croatie.

      « Les voyages des réfugiés et migrants vers l’Europe et à travers celle-ci restent parsemés de dangers », a déclaré Pascale Moreau, la Directrice du bureau du HCR pour l’Europe. On estime que plus de 3 100 personnes ont perdu la vie en mer l’année dernière pendant la traversée vers l’Europe, et ce chiffre était de 5 100 en 2016. Depuis le début de l’année 2018, 501 personnes se sont ajoutées à la liste des morts ou des disparus.

      À ceux qui ont péri en mer, s’ajoutent au moins 75 autres personnes décédées le long des routes terrestres qui suivent les frontières extérieures de l’Europe ou alors qu’elles traversaient l’Europe en 2017, et les rapports sur la poursuite des refoulements sont profondément préoccupants.

      « Il est vital pour les personnes qui nécessitent une protection internationale d’avoir accès au territoire ainsi qu’à des procédures de demande d’asile rapides, justes et efficaces. Gérer ses frontières et offrir une protection aux réfugiés conformément aux obligations internationales des États ne sont pas des objectifs qui s’excluent ou sont incompatibles », a ajouté Pascale Moreau.

      Le rapport du HCR souligne également les abus et les pratiques d’extorsion que subissent les réfugiés et migrants aux mains des trafiquants, des passeurs ou des groupes armés sur les différentes routes vers l’Europe.

      Les femmes, et surtout celles qui voyagent seules, ainsi que les enfants non accompagnés sont particulièrement exposés au risque de subir des violences sexuelles et sexistes sur les routes vers l’Europe, ainsi qu’à certains endroits au sein de l’Europe.

      Plus de 17 000 d’enfants non accompagnés sont arrivés en Europe en 2017. La plupart de ces enfants sont arrivés en Italie par la mer, et 13 pour cent d’entre eux étaient des enfants voyageant seuls, une tendance similaire à celle de 2016.

      Le rapport du HCR signale toutefois des progrès encourageants quant au nombre de personnes réinstallées en Europe l’année dernière, avec une augmentation de 54 pour cent par rapport à 2016. La majorité de ces 26 400 réfugiés étaient des Syriens (84 pour cent) réinstallés depuis la Turquie, le Liban et la Jordanie. Parmi les pays européens, ce sont le Royaume-Uni, la Suède et l’Allemagne qui en ont accueilli le plus grand nombre.

      Un autre développement positif à la fin de l’année dernière a vu le HCR commencer à faciliter l’évacuation de réfugiés vulnérables de la Libye vers le Niger et de la Libye vers l’Italie.

      « Les évacuations depuis la Libye et l’augmentation des opportunités de réinstallation que nous avons observées l’année dernière sont d’excellentes nouvelles. Il subsiste toutefois des obstacles significatifs qui entravent l’accès à des voies sûres et légales, dont le regroupement familial, pour les personnes nécessitant une protection internationale, et nous appelons à une plus grande solidarité », a déclaré Pascale Moreau.

      Le rapport formule également des recommandations supplémentaires quant à la nécessité de renforcer la solidarité entre les États au sein de l’Europe ainsi qu’avec les pays de premier asile et de transit, afin d’améliorer la qualité de l’accueil — tout particulièrement l’accueil des enfants séparés et non accompagnés, et de ceux qui ont survécu à la violence sexuelle et sexiste — et de mieux protéger les enfants.

      http://www.unhcr.org/fr/news/press/2018/4/5acf30b3a/voyages-desespoir-rapport-hcr-mouvements-refugies-europe.html
      #Grèce #Italie #Espagne #mortalité #mourir_aux_frontières #décès #femmes #réinstallation #MNA #mineurs_non_accompagnés #corridors_humanitaires #desperate_journeys

      Lien vers le #rapport :
      https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/63039


      #parcours_migratoires #routes_migratoires #Albanie #Monténégro #Bosnie

    • Calo degli arrivi: continuerà?

      Nei primi quattro mesi del 2018 sono sbarcati in Italia circa 9.300 migranti, il 75% in meno rispetto allo stesso periodo del 2017. Si tratta di un trend del tutto in linea con il calo verificatosi negli ultimi sei mesi del 2017 (-75% rispetto allo stesso periodo del 2016). I dati relativi ai primi mesi dell’anno (quelli invernali) risultano tuttavia poco indicativi del livello dei flussi nei mesi successivi. Gli sbarchi iniziano a crescere solo da aprile e raggiungono un picco tra giugno e agosto, seguendo un tipico trend stagionale.

      L’andamento degli sbarchi nel mese di aprile può dunque essere considerato un primo segnale di quanti arrivi potrebbero essere registrati nel corso di tutto l’anno. Particolare attenzione meritano, al riguardo, gli avvenimenti di metà aprile, quando in quattro giorni sono sbarcate 1.500 persone.

      È comunque necessaria un’ulteriore dose di prudenza, perché ai trend stagionali si affiancano anche le decisioni e le politiche degli attori coinvolti lungo la rotta. Il 2017 lo dimostra: fino al 15 luglio dell’anno scorso gli sbarchi sulle coste italiane erano stati circa il 30% in più rispetto al 2016, e proprio da metà luglio, nel periodo dell’anno in cui solitamente si registrano più arrivi, è iniziato il calo degli sbarchi che prosegue a tutt’oggi.

      https://www.ispionline.it/it/pubblicazione/fact-checking-migrazioni-2018-20415

    • Calo degli arrivi: meno morti in mare?

      Il calo delle partenze ha ridotto drasticamente il numero assoluto di persone che perde la vita durante la traversata: se la frequenza delle morti in mare dei primi sette mesi dell’anno scorso fosse rimasta invariata nella restante parte del 2017, a fine anno si sarebbero registrate 4.155 morti – un livello comparabile a quello degli anni precedenti. Al contrario, se la frequenza delle morti in mare nei nove mesi successivi al calo degli sbarchi restasse costante per altri tre mesi, si registrerebbero circa 1.250 morti in un anno: una riduzione del 70%.

      L’Organizzazione mondiale per le migrazioni ha tuttavia fatto notare come, tra gennaio e marzo 2018, il già alto rischio della traversata lungo la rotta del Mediterraneo Centrale sia quasi raddoppiato rispetto allo stesso periodo dell’anno precedente (dal 3,3% al 5,8%). Ma in realtà questo aumento sembra dipendere più dalle condizioni meteorologiche invernali e da singoli casi “eccezionali” che dagli avvenimenti e dalle politiche alla base del calo degli sbarchi. Infatti, estendendo il confronto all’intero periodo del calo degli sbarchi (16 luglio 2017 - 30 aprile 2018) e confrontandolo con lo stesso periodo dell’anno precedente si nota sì un incremento, ma molto meno significativo: dal 2,6% al 3,0%.


      https://www.ispionline.it/it/pubblicazione/fact-checking-migrazioni-2018-20415
      #mortalité

    • Que cache la baisse des arrivées de personnes migrantes en méditerranée centrale ?

      Les États membres de l’Union européenne se félicitent depuis quelques mois de la baisse des arrivées sur les côtes européennes et de celle du nombre de personnes migrantes mortes ou disparues en Méditerranée. Mais que cache cette chute spectaculaire ?

      https://www.lacimade.org/cache-baisse-arrivees-de-personnes-migrantes-mediterranee-centrale
      #Méditerranée_centrale

  • La Liberté | La police de Zurich ne communiquera plus la nationalité des auteurs de délits
    https://asile.ch/2017/11/14/liberte-police-de-zurich-ne-communiquera-plus-nationalite-auteurs-de-delits

    La semaine passé, un communiqué de la police de Zurich a crée des remous. La police municipale ne nommera plus dans ses communiqués de presse la nationalité des auteurs de délits. Issue d’une proposition législative déposée en 2015 par une socialiste et un Vert’libéraux, et son acceptation récente par le parlement de la ville, cette […]

    • Aucune envie de voir ce film qui ne m’intéresse pas du tout, mais de ce que j’en entend, il comprend en plus une grave erreur, puisqu’un.e français.e qui épouse un.e étrangèr.e de même sexe (contrairement à un couple hétéro) ne donne pas automatiquement la #nationalité à sa femme ou son mari. Egalité, mais faut pas exagérer quand même...

      #mariage

  • Bond du nombre de « #bébés_passeports » au #Canada

    De plus en plus de femmes originaires de pays étrangers viennent au Canada pour donner naissance à leurs bébés, dans le but d’obtenir pour leur progéniture un passeport canadien. Le Canada est, avec les États-Unis, un des rares pays qui pratiquent ce qu’on appelle « le #droit_du_sol ». Tout enfant né ici peut obtenir automatiquement la nationalité canadienne. Une situation qui inquiète des médecins en raison des risques que représente cette pratique pour la #santé des femmes.


    http://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1061584/explosion-nombre-bebes-passeports-canada

    voilà un nouveau mot @sinehebdo : bébé passeport !
    #migrations #nationalité #citoyenneté #ius_soli

  • Statelessness and the trouble with citizenship-as-nationality

    Being stateless means lacking citizenship of any country on earth. A stateless person is not a citizen anywhere. But the word ‘citizenship’ arises surprisingly rarely in both academic and non-academic definitions of statelessness. Rather, it’s far more common to define stateless people as lacking nationality of anywhere on earth. I explore the use of nationality as a proxy for citizenship in the field of statelessness, and argue that addressing statelessness successfully rests on a more radical troubling of this ‘citizenship-as-nationality’ model.

    http://discoversociety.org/2017/09/05/statelessness-and-the-trouble-with-citizenship-as-nationality
    #citoyenneté #nationalité #apatridie

  • We’ve hit peak injustice: a world without borders, but only for the super-rich

    Revelations about the wealthy buying citizenships confirm a sorry truth: the migration door, closed to the poor, swings open to those with vast fortunes

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/18/peak-injustice-world-without-borders-super-rich-buying-citizenship-migr

    #injustice #discriminations #frontières #liberté_de_circulation #liberté_de_mouvement #monde_sans_frontières #pauvreté #inégalités #richesse #citoyenneté #Chypre #nationalité #naturalisation

  • La cittadinanza come protezione

    Nel nostro Paese la questione dello ius soli ha dato vita non solo a un imbarazzante iter parlamentare (ben documentato in un recente intervento su questo sito), ma anche a una singolare altalena di sentimenti e disposizioni d’animo da parte del pubblico, almeno a stare a quanto riportano i media e i numerosi sondaggi che si sono susseguiti negli anni. Queste oscillazioni non sono dovute solo all’inevitabile intreccio con i difficili equilibri politici degli ultimi mesi e alla forza d’urto dei flussi migratori che continuano a interessare l’Italia. Gli atteggiamenti sono ondivaghi anche perché gran parte della discussione, da una parte e dall’altra, è basata su sentimenti ed emozioni che per loro natura sono altamente instabili e volatili.

    https://www.rivistailmulino.it/news/newsitem/index/Item/News:NEWS_ITEM:4068#undefined.uxfs
    #migrations #citoyenneté #ius_soli #Italie #protection #nationalité