• Finally, Good News for Asylum Seekers in Italy. New Decree Rolls Back Some of the Worst Aspects of Immigration Policy

    It pledged last year to do so, and now the Italian government has restored some humanity to its immigration and asylum system. This week, the council of ministers adopted a decree that reverses many of the worst policies imposed by the previous interior minister and current leader of the anti-immigrant League Party, Matteo Salvini.

    The decree isn’t perfect, but it’s a step in the right direction.

    The decree, adopted October 5, essentially re-establishes in Italian law the residency permit on humanitarian grounds that Salvini abolished in 2018, now called “special protection.” This two-year permit is for people who don’t qualify for asylum, but who shouldn’t be sent away because they would face a risk of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment. The permit is also for people who have family and social links in Italy, or who suffer from serious physical or mental health issues. By one estimate, more than 37,000 people became undocumented since 2018 because humanitarian permits were abolished.

    Crucially, the decree allows people to convert this and other short-term residency permits into longer-term residency permits based on employment. This will help prevent people falling into undocumented status. The decree reduces detention pending deportation to three months from six.

    While the previous government restricted the nation’s reception system to recognized refugees and unaccompanied children, the new decree opens the doors to asylum seekers awaiting a decision. It also ensures asylum seekers have the right to register with the city hall where they live, since a Constitutional Court ruling this past July found the denial of this right made it “unjustifiably difficult for asylum seekers to access the services to which they are entitled.”

    One large blot on the decree is the failure to take a clear stand against criminalization of humanitarian activities. The government chose to reduce from 1 million to 50,000 euros, rather than eliminate, the noxious fines on ships that perform search-and-rescue at sea. Last year, six United Nations human rights authorities called on Italy to incentivize rather than discourage shipmasters from fulfilling their moral and legal obligation to respond to ships in distress. The current government has delayed disembarkations and impounded rescue vessels on administrative grounds.

    Parliament will have a chance to correct that, and make other improvements, when the decree is submitted for parliamentary oversight.

    https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/10/07/finally-good-news-asylum-seekers-italy

    #nouveau_décret #décret_salvini #Italie #asile #migrations #réfugiés #Italie #130/2020 #decreto_immigrazione #décret #SPRAR #accueil #permis_de_séjour #protection_internationale #travail #protection_spéciale #protection_humanitaire #réfugiés_environnementaux #réfugiés_climatiques #sauvetage #Méditerranée #citoyenneté #naturalisation #SIPROIMI #hébergement

    ping @karine4 @isskein

    • In vigore il nuovo decreto in materia di immigrazione (D.L. n. 130 del 21 ottobre 2020): luci e ombre

      Oggi, 22 ottobre, è entrato in vigore il Decreto-legge n. 130/2020, pubblicato in Gazzetta ufficiale il 21 ottobre 2020 e recante “Disposizioni urgenti in materia di immigrazione, protezione internazionale e complementare, modifiche agli articoli 131-bis,391-bis, 391-ter e 588 del codice penale, nonché misure in materia di divieto di accesso agli esercizi pubblici ed ai locali di pubblico trattenimento, di contrasto all’utilizzo distorto del web e di disciplina del Garante nazionale dei diritti delle persone private della libertà personale.

      Atteso da svariati mesi e noto all’opinione pubblica come “decreto immigrazione”, il decreto interviene in svariate materie, modificando anzitutto i c.d. decreti sicurezza del 2018 e 2019, che avevano a loro volta modificato alcune norme contenute nel Testo unico sull’immigrazione (D. Lgs. n. 286/1998), nonché la legge n. 91/1992 in materia di cittadinanza e i D. Lgs. n. 25/2008 e D. Lgs. n. 142/2015 (attuativi della direttiva UE c.d. Procedure e della direttiva UE c.d. Accoglienza del Sistema europeo comune di asilo).

      In altre parole, il c.d. nuovo decreto immigrazione prevede una serie di modifiche, apportate a diverse fonti normative, su tematiche sensibili, che non si limitano alla disciplina in materia d’immigrazione, ma riguardano anche la protezione internazionale e nuove ipotesi di protezione speciale, il soccorso in mare, degli aspetti relativi alla disciplina in materia di cittadinanza e all’accoglienza dei richiedenti asilo.

      In materia di immigrazione, il decreto è intervenuto, anzitutto, sui permessi di soggiorno per motivi di lavoro. Alle categorie di permessi già convertibili, sono state aggiunte le nuove ipotesi permesso per protezione speciale, calamità, residenza elettiva, acquisto della cittadinanza o dello stato di apolide, attività sportiva, lavoro di tipo artistico, motivi religiosi e assistenza ai minori.

      Quanto poi alla protezione internazionale, il nuovo decreto ha stabilito delle modifiche procedurali e sostanziali alla previgente disciplina. Le prime hanno modificato le modalità di svolgimento degli esami prioritari, delle procedure accelerate, nonché della gestione delle domande reiterate in fase di esecuzione di un provvedimento di allontanamento. Sul piano sostanziale

      Inoltre, sono estese le categorie di soggetti che possono beneficiare di permessi di soggiorno per protezione speciale, che costituirà una sorta di nuova categoria residuale di protezione rispetto alle due forme di protezione internazionale (lo status di rifugiato e la protezione internazionale), tanto da far parlare, nei primi commenti, di un sostanziale ritorno alla categoria della precedente protezione umanitaria, pur sotto altra veste terminologica.

      Nella specie, la nuova normativa prevede che non possa essere espulso o respinto e piuttosto meriti protezione, per l’appunto speciale, non solo, come già era previsto sino ad oggi, la persona che rischiava di subire torture, ma anche due nuove ipotesi: i) chi rischia di subire trattamenti inumani o degradanti nel paese d’origine e ii) chi rischia la violazione del diritto al rispetto della propria vita privata e familiare nel territorio nazionale. Inoltre la durata del permesso di soggiorno per protezione speciale è stata ampliata da 1 anno a 2 anni.

      Infine, sempre in materia di protezione complementare, è stata ampliata la nozione del permesso di soggiorno per calamità naturale: attuale presupposto per la concessione del permesso è adesso la semplice esistenza di una situazione di “grave” calamità. In altre parole, non si richiede più che lo stato di calamità sia eccezionale e transitorio come in precedenza, in un probabile tentativo di apertura alla protezione dei c.d. migranti ambientali (normando quanto già preconizzato dalla giurisprudenza della Corte di Cassazione).

      Tra le note positive, viene altresì espressamente prevista l’iscrizione del richiedente protezione internazionale nell’anagrafe della popolazione residente.

      Quanto alla questione del soccorso in mare, in seguito alle pesanti critiche ricevute sul punto dal secondo decreto sicurezza, la nuova disciplina è intervenuta modificando il quadro dei divieti e dei limiti di navigazione per le imbarcazioni delle ONG. In particolare, il Ministro dell’interno, di concerto con il Ministro della difesa e dei trasporti ed informato il Presidente del Consiglio, può ancora limitare o vietare l’ingresso e il transito in acque territoriali a navi non militari o governative non commerciali. Tuttavia, il decreto prevede una deroga a tale divieto o limite di navigazione, nell’ipotesi di navi che abbiano effettuato soccorsi a norma delle convenzioni internazionali, e che abbiano comunicato le operazioni alle autorità competenti nazionali o del loro stato di bandiera.

      Negli altri casi, invece, di “inosservanza del divieto o del limite di navigazione”, è prevista la comminazione di multe che vanno da 10mila a 50mila euro. Si ricorda che, precedentemente al nuovo decreto, in caso di violazione del divieto di cui sopra, era prevista un’ammenda amministrativa, con un limite superiore all’attuale multa (fino a un milione per chi avesse salvato i migranti in mare). Infine, con il nuovo decreto, non è più previsto il sequestro dell’imbarcazione entrata in acque territoriali in maniera irregolare.

      Per quanto riguarda la normativa in materia di cittadinanza, il decreto ha modificato la legge n.91 del 1992, riducendo il tempo di attesa della risposta alla domanda per l’acquisto della cittadinanza italiana da quattro a tre anni, un risultato comunque insoddisfacente alla luce del fatto che la formulazione originaria della legge del 1992 stabiliva una durata di due anni (ed era stato aumentato a quattro anni dal decreto sicurezza del 2018 sopramenzionato). Inoltre non è abrogata la norma che prevede la revoca della cittadinanza per chi l’ha acquisita, in caso di condanna definitiva per reati collegati al terrorismo, creando una discriminazione odiosa rispetto a chi è cittadino italiano iure sanguinis.

      Infine, in materia di accoglienza, è stato creato il nuovo Sistema di accoglienza e integrazione, che sostituisce il SIPROIMI (Sistema di protezione per titolari di protezione internazionale e per minori stranieri non accompagnati), ritornando a un sistema simile ai vecchi SPRAR (Sistema di protezione per richiedenti asilo e rifugiati). Tuttavia, le funzioni di prima assistenza o soccorso verranno gestite nei centri governativi ordinari e straordinari istituiti dal Ministro dell’Interno, quindi attraverso i grandi e largamente disfunzionali centri di prima accoglienza che abbiamo imparato a conoscere. La successiva fase di accoglienza, invece, viene affidata agli enti locali e si articolerà in due livelli di servizi, distinti a seconda che si tratti di soggetti richiedenti protezione internazionale (per i quali la normativa torna appunto a prevedere forme di accoglienza in precedenza eliminate dal decreto sicurezza del 2018) ovvero titolari della stessa. Nel primo caso sono previsti servizi di assistenza sanitaria, sociale e psicologica nonché di mediazione linguistico-culturale, nel secondo caso si aggiungono servizi di integrazione del soggetto, tra cui l‘orientamento al lavoro e la formazione professionale. Inoltre, il decreto ha reso potenziali beneficiari dei suddetti servizi anche i titolari di una serie di permessi di soggiorno speciali (protezione speciale, protezione sociale, violenza domestica, calamità, particolare sfruttamento lavorativo, atti di particolare valore civile, casi speciali).

      Il nuovo decreto ha dunque nuovamente inciso sul precedente impianto normativo in materia di immigrazione e asilo riformando e, per lo più, abrogando le modifiche introdotte dai cosiddetti “decreti sicurezza”, pur mantenendone alcuni profili criticabili. I tempi di attesa per l’ottenimento della cittadinanza sopra evidenziati, così come il mantenimento della criminalizzazione del soccorso marittimo sono tra questi. In ogni caso, il contenuto può ritenersi complessivamente soddisfacente e il decreto è indubbiamente un passo verso l’apertura e un trattamento della politica migratoria quale evento strutturale e non meramente emergenziale.

      https://www.unionedirittiumani.it/in-vigore-il-nuovo-decreto-in-materia-di-immigrazione-d-l-n-130-d

  • France : naturalisation des étrangers en « première ligne » contre le Covid, un effet d’annonce ? - InfoMigrants
    https://www.infomigrants.net/fr/post/27322/france-naturalisation-des-etrangers-en-premiere-ligne-contre-le-covid-

    La ministre déléguée à la Citoyenneté, Marlène Schiappa, a donné instruction aux préfets d’"accélérer" et "faciliter" la naturalisation française des ressortissants étrangers qui se sont mobilisés "en première ligne" durant la pandémie de Covid-19. Une mesure difficile à appliquer tant les préfectures françaises sont saturées. Agents de nettoyage, infirmiers, médecins, manutentionnaires … Les ressortissants étrangers en “première ligne” lors du pic de la pandémie de Covid-19 en France pourraient voir leur accès à la nationalité française “facilité”. Pour eux, la durée minimale de résidence en France exigée sera de deux ans, au lieu des cinq années requises actuellement. Mardi 15 septembre, Marlène Schiappa a donné instruction aux préfets d’"accélérer" et de "faciliter" l’acquisition de la nationalité française pour les étrangers en situation régulière qui ont “contribué activement, en première ligne, à la lutte contre le Covid-19, notamment les personnels de santé. La ministre déléguée à la Citoyenneté voudrait qu’ils procèdent à "un examen prioritaire et individualisé de ces dossiers".

    #Covid-19#migrant#migration#france#sante#politiquemigratoire#naturalisation#personnelsante

  • Sur l’immigration, Gérald Darmanin durcit la ligne du gouvernement
    https://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2020/09/11/sur-l-immigration-gerald-darmanin-durcit-la-ligne-du-gouvernement_6051792_32

    La DGEF devra mettre en musique les orientations du ministre, qui partage son portefeuille avec Marlène Schiappa, déléguée à la citoyenneté. A elle, les questions d’asile et d’« intégration républicaine », notamment par les naturalisations auxquelles elle veut redonner de la « solennité ». A lui, les évacuations de campements de rue, la lutte contre l’immigration irrégulière. D’un côté, l’humanisme, de l’autre, la fermeté. Cette scission du dossier migratoire étonne, tant ses éléments se recoupent : les personnes migrantes à la rue sont ainsi majoritairement des demandeurs d’asile et des réfugiés. Les premières dissonances entre les deux ministres n’ont d’ailleurs pas tardé à se manifester au sujet des travailleurs sans papiers mobilisés pendant le confinement (aides à domicile, éboueurs, livreurs, caissiers…). Le cabinet de M. Castaner s’était mobilisé au début de l’été, envisageant la régularisation de « plusieurs milliers » d’entre eux. Des préfectures avaient même été sollicitées en ce sens. Jusqu’à ce que le remaniement gouvernemental, début juillet, interrompe les travaux. Mais le projet n’a pas totalement été enterré. D’après nos informations, le cabinet de Mme Schiappa a envoyé un télégramme aux préfets à la fin de l’été, les invitant à faire preuve de « discernement » vis-à-vis des candidats à une régularisation ou à une naturalisation s’étant illustré pendant la crise due au Covid-19. A peine quelques heures se sont écoulées avant que le cabinet de M. Darmanin envoie un contre-ordre, rendant le texte de sa collègue caduc. Un premier couac à Beauvau. L’entourage de Mme Schiappa assure aujourd’hui qu’une circulaire est en préparation pour accélérer uniquement les naturalisations des travailleurs étrangers en situation régulière mobilisés pendant la crise.

    #Covid-19#migrant#migration#france#sante#politiquemigratoire#regularisation#confinement#naturalisation#travailleurmigrant

  • ’I am Italian too’: How #BlackLivesMatter protests reignited the Italian citizenship debate

    Global anti-racism protests following the death of African-American George Floyd could impact Italy’s citizenship laws. Here, politicians are under pressure to allow more children of migrants born and educated in the country to become Italians.

    June 2 is the day Italy celebrates becoming a republic. Partly, it is a day for reflecting on the values of the country and its citizens, and what it means to be Italian. “This year it will be remembered for a series of exceptional events,” writes Angelica Pesarini in an essay entitled “Questions of Privilege” on the newsletter for cultural space Il lavoro culturale (Cultural work).

    Pesarini is a faculty member in social and cultural analysis at New York University (NYU) in Florence. She is also a black Italian, born in Italy to a family with roots in Somalia and Eritrea, countries that have colonial links with Italy.

    Many Italians think “to be Italian is to be white,” Pesarini told the BBC in 2019. “I feel I have to justify my Italian-ness a lot,” she continued. “People assume I cannot be Italian. When people ask me: ’Where are you from?’ I say: ’I’m from Rome.’ They ask: ’No, but where are you really from?’” Pesarini says that this frequent exchange demonstrates how “race, colonialism and whiteness are all connected to Italian identity today.”

    Children of migrants

    Pesarini is Italian, but her identity is still questioned. For others, the children of migrant parents, it is not just strangers who ask questions about their roots, but the state itself. As Italy’s migrant population grows, and more and more children are being born in Italy and growing up and going to school in the Italian system, they ask why they too cannot be recognized as Italian citizens.

    The current law allows Italian citizenship to be granted automatically only to those born to Italian parents. The children of migrants, both those born on Italian soil and those who migrated with their parents as minors, are not automatically granted an Italian passport when they turn 18.

    ’One million’ Italians without citizenship

    According to the campaign group “Italiani senza cittadinanza” (Italians without citizenship), there are now one million people in this position. “I feel I am Italian, but it as though the state doesn’t see me,” says Alessia Korotkova in a video made by Oxfam in 2019. She had hoped to compete at the Olympic Games in Tokyo 2020 but she couldn’t because she was unable to get Italian citizenship. “We might seem invisible to the state,” Korotkova continues, “but we are not invisible, we ARE here,” she says smiling as the video flashes up a hashtag #noicisiamo (#We_are_here).

    “I’m a foreigner in my own home,” says Ghassan Ezzarraa in another video in the series. “I feel like I am in a video game; to become myself, I have to jump the hurdles to the next level,” he says. “I am the only person in my family still considered a foreigner,” he adds.

    One of the lucky ones?

    Ghassan might be considered one of the lucky ones. At the end of January 2020, he was granted citizenship in his home town of Reggio Emilia at the age of 23. He had been living in Italy since he was four years old.

    But his journey to citizenship, like that of many others, was long and complicated. Ghassan was born in Rabat, Morocco in 1996. Just after he turned four, he and his mother were able to join his father in Italy where he had been living and working. A year later, his sister was born on Italian soil, but even that didn’t qualify her for automatic citizenship.

    According to La Repubblica newspaper, as a long time resident, Ghassan’s father received Italian citizenship in 2015. His sister, who was still a child, received it soon after, as did his mother, as his father’s legal spouse. Only Ghassan, who had already turned 18 failed to “inherit” the citizenship granted to the rest of his family.

    Becoming Italian

    Having been through the Italian school system, Ghassan applied for citizenship, traveling to Morocco to obtain all the necessary documents. The procedure should have taken two years, but under the government’s migration and security decree, this process was lengthened to four years.

    The complications meant that Ghassan had to partially give up on the athletic career he had dreamed of because, as a ’foreigner’, he was not eligible to receive sponsorship and training. He took up a job and, with the help of various cultural organizations, campaigned to get his story heard. Finally, the mayor of Reggio Emilia in the north of Italy, did listen and announced the happy news on his Facebook page in January.

    Different proposals debated

    The debate on citizenship rights has continued for decades. A commission in the current parliament has been hearing evidence on the issue since late 2019. Its deliberations were largely buried during the restrictions placed on Italy by the COVID-19 pandemic, but now, with demonstrations across Italy taking place in protest over the death of African-American George Floyd, the issue is back in the media, and public, spotlight.

    The current government is split on the issue, writes the Italian news agency ANSA. Three different proposals have been put forward. The first is granting citizenship based on where you are born, ie, if you are born on Italian soil, you should be considered Italian. The second is an idea based around education and culture. According to this, if you have been educated in Italian, speak the language fluently and think ’like an Italian’, then why shouldn’t you be considered Italian? This second proposal would also allow those who migrated with their parents but grew up feeling themselves to be Italian citizens to access citizenship. The third is a combination of both these ideas.

    The UN children’s charity, UNICEF in Italy, points out that this law would not automatically grant citizenship to any child of a migrant born on Italian soil. In fact, even the new proposals are rich with caveats. Children of parents who are waiting to have their request for international protection decided, for instance, would not qualify. Nor would children born to parents without a legal permit to stay.

    A change to the citizenship law would help children of those who have lived in Italy for a long time, completed more than five years of education and/or a professional qualification and possibly obtained Italian citizenship themselves. UNICEF says it is needed to “stop discrimination against those children who are legitimately part of Italian society.”
    Black people die in Italy too

    In her essay, Angelica Pesarini lists some of the black people, many of whom are migrants, who have been murdered on Italian soil. She highlights the death of a Malian man Soumalia Sacko on Republic Day two years ago in 2018. Sacko, she writes, was working “exploited” in the Calabrian fields in the south of Italy. He was helping two workmates collect some material from an abandoned building in the fields, in order to try and construct a shack where they were living. As they were collecting the material, they were shot at by an Italian man with an “unlicensed shotgun.” The shots resulted in a head trauma, from which Sacko died.

    His death, writes Pesarini, was initially “reported in a distorted manner” based on information provided by the Prefecture in Reggio Calabria. They said, that he was “shot at by someone unknown whilst stealing.” Soon after his death, the deputy Prime Minister at the time, Matteo Salvini, tweeted about migrants “The fun’s over;” referring to the idea that migrants arrive in Italy just to obtain benefits and ’easy’ work.
    #BlackLivesMatter: Italy

    One of the leading members of the Sardines movement, which has been fighting for migrant rights in Italy, is also pushing for the citizenship law to be reformed. “This is such an important law that it shouldn’t fall victim to political disagreement or propaganda,” Jasmine Cristallo, spokesperson for the “6,000 Sardines” movement told ANSA.

    Campaigners are hopeful that they can use the momentum of the protests around the world and anger at institutional racism to change politicians’ minds and bring citizenship laws into the 21st century. On Facebook on June 9, Italians without citizenship posted pictures from the latest demonstration in Rome, where Italian-Haitian anti-racism campaigner Stella Jean called for a change to the current citizenship laws. Jean told ANSA: “I’m speaking today because it is no longer possible to remain silent. I don’t want my own children to be subject to the threats I received as a girl. Everyone merits citizenship.”

    https://www.infomigrants.net/en/post/25300/i-am-italian-too-how-blacklivesmatter-protests-reignited-the-italian-c
    #citoyenneté #Italie #migrations #naturalisation #nationalité

    ping @wizo @karine4 @isskein @albertocampiphoto @cede

  • L’impensé colonial de la #politique_migratoire italienne

    Les sorties du Mouvement Cinq Étoiles, au pouvoir en Italie, contre le #franc_CFA, ont tendu les relations entre Paris et Rome en début d’année. Mais cette polémique, en partie fondée, illustre aussi l’impensé colonial présent dans la politique italienne aujourd’hui – en particulier lors des débats sur l’accueil des migrants.

    Au moment de déchirer un billet de 10 000 francs CFA en direct sur un plateau télé, en janvier dernier (vidéo ci-dessous, à partir de 19 min 16 s), #Alessandro_Di_Battista savait sans doute que son geste franchirait les frontières de l’Italie. Revenu d’un long périple en Amérique latine, ce député, figure du Mouvement Cinq Étoiles (M5S), mettait en scène son retour dans l’arène politique, sur le plateau de l’émission « Quel temps fait-il ? ». Di Battista venait, avec ce geste, de lancer la campagne des européennes de mai.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X14lSpRSMMM&feature=emb_logo


    « La France, qui imprime, près de Lyon, cette monnaie encore utilisée dans 14 pays africains, […] malmène la souveraineté de ces pays et empêche leur légitime indépendance », lance-t-il. Di Battista cherchait à disputer l’espace politique occupé par Matteo Salvini, chef de la Ligue, en matière de fermeté migratoire : « Tant qu’on n’aura pas déchiré ce billet, qui est une menotte pour les peuples africains, on aura beau parler de ports ouverts ou fermés, les gens continueront à fuir et à mourir en mer. »

    Ce discours n’était pas totalement neuf au sein du M5S. Luigi Di Maio, alors ministre du travail, aujourd’hui ministre des affaires étrangères, avait développé à peu près le même argumentaire sur l’immigration, lors d’un meeting dans les Abruzzes, à l’est de Rome : « Il faut parler des causes. Si des gens partent de l’Afrique aujourd’hui, c’est parce que certains pays européens, la #France en tête, n’ont jamais cessé de coloniser l’Afrique. L’UE devrait sanctionner ces pays, comme la France, qui appauvrissent les États africains et poussent les populations au départ. La place des Africains est en Afrique, pas au fond de la Méditerranée. »

    À l’époque, cette rhétorique permettait au M5S de creuser sa différence avec la Ligue sur le dossier, alors que Matteo Salvini fermait les ports italiens aux bateaux de migrants. Mais cette stratégie a fait long feu, pour des raisons diplomatiques. Celle qui était alors ministre des affaires européennes à Paris, Nathalie Loiseau, a convoqué l’ambassadrice italienne en France pour dénoncer des « déclarations inacceptables et inutiles ». L’ambassadeur français à Rome a quant à lui été rappelé à Paris, une semaine plus tard – en réaction à une rencontre de dirigeants du M5S avec des « gilets jaunes » français.

    En Italie, cet épisode a laissé des traces, à l’instar d’un post publié sur Facebook, le 5 juillet dernier, par le sous-secrétaire aux affaires étrangères M5S Manlio Di Stefano. À l’issue d’une rencontre entre Giuseppe Conte, premier ministre italien, et Vladimir Poutine, il écrit : « L’Italie est capable et doit être le protagoniste d’une nouvelle ère de #multilatéralisme, sincère et concret. Nous le pouvons, car nous n’avons pas de #squelettes_dans_le_placard. Nous n’avons pas de #tradition_coloniale. Nous n’avons largué de bombes sur personne. Nous n’avons mis la corde au cou d’aucune économie. »

    Ces affirmations sont fausses. Non seulement l’Italie a mené plusieurs #guerres_coloniales, jusqu’à employer des #armes_chimiques – en #Éthiopie de 1935 à 1936, dans des circonstances longtemps restées secrètes –, mais elle a aussi été l’un des premiers pays à recourir aux bombardements, dans une guerre coloniale – la guerre italo-turque de 1911, menée en Libye. Dans la première moitié du XXe siècle, l’Italie fut à la tête d’un empire colonial qui englobait des territoires comme la Somalie, la Libye, certaines portions du Kenya ou encore l’Éthiopie.

    Cette sortie erronée du sous-secrétaire d’État italien a au moins un mérite : elle illustre à merveille l’impensé colonial présent dans la politique italienne contemporaine. C’est notamment ce qu’affirment plusieurs intellectuels engagés, à l’instar de l’écrivaine et universitaire romaine de 45 ans #Igiaba_Scego. Issue d’une famille somalienne, elle a placé la #question_coloniale au cœur de son activité littéraire (et notamment de son roman Adua). Dans une tribune publiée par Le Monde le 3 février, elle critique sans ménagement l’#hypocrisie de ceux qui parlent du « #colonialisme_des_autres ».

    À ses yeux, la polémique sur le franc CFA a soulevé la question de l’effacement de l’histoire coloniale en cours en Italie : « Au début, j’étais frappée par le fait de voir que personne n’avait la #mémoire du colonialisme. À l’#école, on n’en parlait pas. C’est ma génération tout entière, et pas seulement les Afro-descendants, qui a commencé à poser des questions », avance-t-elle à Mediapart.

    Elle explique ce phénomène par la manière dont s’est opéré le retour à la démocratie, après la Seconde Guerre mondiale : #fascisme et entreprise coloniale ont été associés, pour mieux être passés sous #silence par la suite. Sauf que tout refoulé finit par remonter à la surface, en particulier quand l’actualité le rappelle : « Aujourd’hui, le corps du migrant a remplacé le corps du sujet colonial dans les #imaginaires. » « Les migrations contemporaines rappellent l’urgence de connaître la période coloniale », estime Scego.

    Alors que le monde politique traditionnel italien évite ce sujet délicat, la question est sur la table depuis une dizaine d’années, du côté de la gauche radicale. Le mérite revient surtout à un groupe d’écrivains qui s’est formé au début des années 2000 sous le nom collectif de Wu Ming (qui signifie tout à la fois « cinq noms » et « sans nom » en mandarin).

    Sous un autre nom, emprunté à un footballeur anglais des années 1980, Luther Blissett, ils avaient déjà publié collectivement un texte, L’Œil de Carafa (Seuil, 2001). Ils animent aujourd’hui le blog d’actualité politico-culturelle Giap. « On parle tous les jours des migrants africains sans que personne se souvienne du rapport historique de l’Italie à des pays comme l’Érythrée, la Somalie, l’Éthiopie ou la Libye », avance Giovanni Cattabriga, 45 ans, alias Wu Ming 2, qui est notamment le co-auteur en 2013 de Timira, roman métisse, une tentative de « créoliser la résistance italienne » à Mussolini.

    Dans le sillage des travaux du grand historien critique du colonialisme italien Angelo Del Boca, les Wu Ming ont ouvert un chantier de contre-narration historique qui cible le racisme inhérent à la culture italienne (dont certains textes sont traduits en français aux éditions Métailié). Leur angle d’attaque : le mythe d’une Italie au visage bienveillant, avec une histoire coloniale qui ne serait que marginale. Tout au contraire, rappelle Cattabriga, « les fondements du colonialisme italien ont été posés très rapidement après l’unification du pays, en 1869, soit huit ans à peine après la création du premier royaume d’Italie, et avant l’annexion de Rome en 1870 ».

    La construction nationale et l’entreprise coloniale se sont développées en parallèle. « Une partie de l’identité italienne s’est définie à travers l’entreprise coloniale, dans le miroir de la propagande et du racisme que celle-ci véhiculait », insiste Cattabriga. Bref, si l’on se souvient de la formule du patriote Massimo D’Azeglio, ancien premier ministre du royaume de Sardaigne et acteur majeur de l’unification italienne qui avait déclaré en 1861 que « l’Italie est faite, il faut faire les Italiens », on pourrait ajouter que les Italiens ont aussi été « faits » grâce au colonialisme, malgré les non-dits de l’histoire officielle.
    « La gauche nous a abandonnés »

    Au terme de refoulé, Cattabriga préfère celui d’oubli : « D’un point de vue psychanalytique, le refoulé se base sur une honte, un sentiment de culpabilité non résolu. Il n’y a aucune trace de ce sentiment dans l’histoire politique italienne. » À en croire cet historien, l’oubli colonial italien deviendrait la pièce fondamentale d’une architecture victimaire qui sert à justifier une politique de clôture face aux étrangers.

    « Jouer les victimes, cela fait partie de la construction nationale. Notre hymne dit : “Noi fummo da sempre calpesti e derisi, perché siam divisi” [“Nous avons toujours été piétinés et bafoués, puisque nous sommes divisés” – ndlr]. Aujourd’hui, le discours dominant présente les Italiens comme des victimes des migrations pour lesquelles ils n’ont aucune responsabilité. Cette victimisation ne pourrait fonctionner si les souvenirs de la violence du colonialisme restaient vifs. »

    Un mécanisme identique serait à l’œuvre dans la polémique sur le franc CFA : « On stigmatise la politique néocoloniale française en soulignant son caractère militaire, à quoi on oppose un prétendu “style italien” basé sur la coopération et l’aide à l’Afrique. Mais on se garde bien de dire que l’Italie détient des intérêts néocoloniaux concurrents de ceux des Français », insiste Cattabriga.

    L’historien Michele Colucci, auteur d’une récente Histoire de l’immigration étrangère en Italie, est sur la même ligne. Pour lui, « l’idée selon laquelle l’Italie serait un pays d’immigration récente est pratique, parce qu’elle évite de reconnaître la réalité des migrations, un phénomène de longue date en Italie ». Prenons le cas des Érythréens qui fuient aujourd’hui un régime autoritaire. Selon les chiffres des Nations unies et du ministère italien de l’intérieur, ils représentaient environ 14 % des 23 000 débarqués en Italie en 2018, soit 3 300 personnes. Ils ne formaient l’année précédente que 6 % des 119 000 arrivés. De 2015 à 2016, ils constituaient la deuxième nationalité, derrière le Nigeria, où l’ENI, le géant italien du gaz et du pétrole, opère depuis 1962.

    « Les migrations de Somalie, d’Éthiopie et d’Érythrée vers l’Italie ont commencé pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale. Elles se sont intensifiées au moment de la décolonisation des années 1950 [la Somalie est placée sous tutelle italienne par l’ONU de 1950 à 1960, après la fin de l’occupation britannique – ndlr]. Cela suffit à faire de l’Italie une nation postcoloniale. » Même si elle refuse de le reconnaître.

    Les stéréotypes coloniaux ont la peau dure. Selon Giovanni Cattabriga, alias Wu Ming 2, « [ses collègues et lui ont] contribué à sensibiliser une partie de la gauche antiraciste, mais [il n’a] pas l’impression que, globalement, [ils soient] parvenus à freiner les manifestations de racisme » : « Je dirais tout au plus que nous avons donné aux antiracistes un outil d’analyse. »

    Igiaba Scego identifie un obstacle plus profond. « Le problème, affirme-t-elle, est qu’en Italie, les Afro-descendants ne font pas partie du milieu intellectuel. Nous sommes toujours considérés un phénomène bizarre : l’école, l’université, les rédactions des journaux sont des lieux totalement “blancs”. Sans parler de la classe politique, avec ses visages si pâles qu’ils semblent peints. »

    Ce constat sur la « blanchitude » des lieux de pouvoir italiens est une rengaine dans les milieux militants et antiracistes. L’activiste Filippo Miraglia, trait d’union entre les mondes politique et associatif, en est convaincu : « Malgré les plus de cinq millions de résidents étrangers présents depuis désormais 30 ans, nous souffrons de l’absence d’un rôle de premier plan de personnes d’origine étrangère dans la politique italienne, dans la revendication de droits. À mon avis, c’est l’une des raisons des défaites des vingt dernières années. »

    Miraglia, qui fut président du réseau ARCI (l’association de promotion sociale de la gauche antifasciste fondée en 1957, une des plus influentes dans les pays) entre 2014 et 2017 (il en est actuellement le chef du département immigration) et s’était présenté aux législatives de 2018 sur les listes de Libres et égaux (à gauche du Parti démocrate), accepte une part d’autocritique : « Dans les années 1990, les syndicats et les associations ont misé sur des cadres d’origine étrangère. Mais ce n’était que de la cooptation de personnes, sans véritable ancrage sur le terrain. Ces gens sont vite tombés dans l’oubli. Certains d’entre eux ont même connu le chômage, renforçant la frustration des communautés d’origine. »

    L’impasse des organisations antiracistes n’est pas sans rapport avec la crise plus globale des gauches dans le pays. C’est pourquoi, face à cette réalité, les solutions les plus intéressantes s’inventent sans doute en dehors des organisations traditionnelles. C’est le cas du mouvement des Italiens de deuxième génération, ou « G2 », qui réunit les enfants d’immigrés, la plupart nés en Italie, mais pour qui l’accès à la citoyenneté italienne reste compliqué.

    De 2005 à 2017, ces jeunes ont porté un mouvement social. Celui-ci exigeait une réforme de la loi sur la nationalité italienne qui aurait permis d’accorder ce statut à environ 800 000 enfants dans le pays. La loi visait à introduire un droit du sol, sous certaines conditions (entre autres, la présence d’un des parents sur le territoire depuis cinq ans ou encore l’obligation d’avoir accompli un cycle scolaire complet en Italie).

    Ce mouvement était parvenu à imposer le débat à la Chambre basse en 2017, sous le gouvernement de Matteo Renzi, mais il perdit le soutien du même Parti démocrate au Sénat. « La gauche a commis une grave erreur en rejetant cette loi, estime Igiaba Scego, qui s’était investie dans la campagne. Cette réforme était encore insuffisante, mais on se disait que c’était mieux que rien. La gauche nous a abandonnés, y compris celle qui n’est pas représentée au Parlement. Nous étions seuls à manifester : des immigrés et des enfants d’immigrés. Il y avait de rares associations, quelques intellectuels et un grand vide politique. À mon avis, c’est là que l’essor de Matteo Salvini [le chef de la Ligue, extrême droite – ndlr] a commencé. »

    Certains, tout de même, veulent rester optimistes, à l’instar de l’historien Michele Colucci qui signale dans son ouvrage le rôle croissant joué par les étrangers dans les luttes du travail, notamment dans les secteurs de l’agriculture : « Si la réforme de la nationalité a fait l’objet de discussions au sein du Parlement italien, c’est uniquement grâce à l’organisation d’un groupe de personnes de deuxième génération d’immigrés. Ce mouvement a évolué de manière indépendante des partis politiques et a fait émerger un nouvel agenda. C’est une leçon importante à retenir. »

    https://www.mediapart.fr/journal/international/241219/l-impense-colonial-de-la-politique-migratoire-italienne?onglet=full
    #colonialisme #Italie #impensé_colonial #colonisation #histoire #migrations #causes_profondes #push-factors #facteurs_push #Ethiopie #bombardements #guerre_coloniale #Libye #histoire #histoire_coloniale #empire_colonial #Somalie #Kenya #Wu_Ming #Luther_Blissett #littérature #Luther_Blissett #contre-récit #contre-narration #nationalisme #construction_nationale #identité #identité_italienne #racisme #oubli #refoulement #propagande #culpabilité #honte #oubli_colonial #victimes #victimisation #violence #néocolonialisme #stéréotypes_coloniaux #blanchitude #invisibilisation #G2 #naturalisation #nationalité #droit_du_sol #gauche #loi_sur_la_nationalité #livre

    –—
    Mouvement #seconde_generazioni (G2) :

    La Rete G2 - Seconde Generazioni nasce nel 2005. E’ un’organizzazione nazionale apartitica fondata da figli di immigrati e rifugiati nati e/o cresciuti in Italia. Chi fa parte della Rete G2 si autodefinisce come “figlio di immigrato” e non come “immigrato”: i nati in Italia non hanno compiuto alcuna migrazione; chi è nato all’estero, ma cresciuto in Italia, non è emigrato volontariamente, ma è stato portato qui da genitori o altri parenti. Oggi Rete G2 è un network di “cittadini del mondo”, originari di Asia, Africa, Europa e America Latina, che lavorano insieme su due punti fondamentali: i diritti negati alle seconde generazioni senza cittadinanza italiana e l’identità come incontro di più culture.

    https://www.secondegenerazioni.it

    ping @wizo @albertocampiphoto @karine4 @cede

  • « Face à l’effondrement, il faut mettre en œuvre une nouvelle organisation sociale et culturelle »

    Par Agnès Sinaï, Pablo Servigne, Yves Cochet

    Le Monde du 23 juillet 2019.

    Vivre avec la fin du monde 1/6.
    Trois membres de l’Institut Momentum appellent à assumer l’effondrement systémique global qui vient pour préparer l’avènement d’une société « résiliente ».

    La fin de notre monde est proche. Une ou deux décennies, tout au plus. Cette certitude qui nous habite désormais, et qui a bouleversé nos croyances et nos comportements, est le résultat d’observations scientifiques nombreuses et variées sur l’évolution du système Terre, mais aussi de l’expression de caractéristiques banales de l’espèce humaine lorsqu’un événement extraordinaire s’annonce.
    Depuis une trentaine d’années, les études et les rapports scientifiques ne cessent d’augmenter la plausibilité d’un seuil climatique planétaire qui fera basculer le système Terre dans un état inconnu, nanti de températures moyennes plus hautes que depuis un million d’années. La probabilité d’un tel futur proche est aujourd’hui plus élevée que celle de tout autre scénario prospectif.
    Ce n’est plus une question de « si », c’est une question de « quand ». En examinant les centaines de travaux afférents, depuis le premier rapport du Club de Rome – Les Limites à la croissance – en 1972, jusqu’au récent rapport du Groupe intergouvernemental d’experts sur l’évolution du climat (GIEC) – « Rapport spécial du GIEC sur les conséquences d’un réchauffement planétaire de 1,5 °C » –, en octobre 2018, on peut estimer la date de passage de ce seuil planétaire entre 2020 et 2040.
    Trajectoire chaotique
    Ce seuil critique global est la conséquence de multiples boucles de rétroaction autorenforçantes entre éléments du système Terre, dévasté par un siècle de libéral-productivisme. Ainsi, pour le seul cycle du carbone, la fonte du permafrost sibérien, l’affaiblissement du pouvoir de séquestration du carbone par les terres et les océans, la déforestation de l’Amazonie et celle des forêts boréales constituent des boucles de rétroaction qui accélèrent le dérèglement climatique.
    Ces rétroactions s’étendent à tous les sous-systèmes de la Terre, intensifiant ainsi l’érosion de la biodiversité, et réciproquement. Cette trajectoire chaotique du système Terre conduit les sociétés humaines vers un effondrement systémique global : passé ce seuil de bascule, le chaos sera tel qu’aucun Etat ne sera plus capable de faire respecter la loi, de contrôler les armes, de lever des impôts.
    Cependant, ce basculement n’est que la composante objective de l’effondrement. Deux caractéristiques cognitives de l’espèce humaine transforment la plausibilité géobiophysique de l’effondrement en une certitude politique. La première s’énonce comme suit : l’immensité (c’est-à-dire l’imminence et l’ampleur) de la catastrophe « éco-anthropologique » est telle qu’elle excède nos capacités de compréhension, aussi bien de perception que d’imagination. Elle est irreprésentable, démesurée, supraliminaire, comme dit le philosophe Günther Anders. La seconde relève de la spécularité des croyances et des comportements : une personne informée de l’effondrement rapproché ne se demande pas si elle veut changer sa vie – c’est-à-dire diminuer drastiquement son empreinte écologique –, mais seulement si elle le ferait au cas où un certain nombre d’autres le feraient aussi.
    Ainsi, l’effondrement est inévitable non parce que la connaissance scientifique de son advenue est trop incertaine, mais parce que la psychologie sociale qui habite les humains ne leur permettra probablement pas de prendre les bonnes décisions, au bon moment. Il existe souvent plusieurs manières de résoudre un problème local ou circonscrit, mais affronter tous les problèmes ensemble et globalement rend le coût d’éventuelles solutions si élevé que seul le déni s’avère être la réponse adaptée. C’est ce déni de masse qui garantit que l’effondrement est certain.
    Stress prétraumatique
    De nombreuses populations subissent déjà les conséquences des catastrophes globales, des dérèglements écosystémiques et des pollutions diverses. Les classes sociales vulnérables et les pays pauvres (et on ne parle même pas des organismes non humains) subissent déjà des traumatismes qui commencent à être connus (stress, dépression, démence, suicides, maladies, etc.) et qui annoncent tout simplement notre avenir psychique à nous, les privilégiés.
    La prédiction même d’une catastrophe peut faire souffrir. On sait que l’annonce de dégradations à venir provoque déjà ce que les psychologues appellent le stress prétraumatique, autrement dit les effets néfastes de la peur du futur. Ainsi sommes-nous confrontés à un dilemme : comment annoncer que la maison brûle — et qu’elle sera détruite — sans faire peur à ses habitants ? Si vous étiez pompiers, que feriez-vous ? Il faut le dire, bien sûr, le crier haut et fort, avec fermeté et bienveillance. Puis, tout en se concentrant sur l’incendie, prendre soin de certains habitants traumatisés, et motiver tout le monde à sauver ce qui doit l’être.
    Prendre soin. Voilà ce qui manque cruellement à notre époque, et cela constitue une bonne partie de la réponse à la question : comment vivre la fin du monde ? Prendre soin de nous-mêmes, des autres, des non-humains. Prendre soin de notre psyché, des émotions que tout ce chaos génère, c’est-à-dire accueillir par l’écoute : tristesse et désespoir, colère et rage, inquiétude et peur. Tous ces affects sont parfaitement normaux. Pire, ils vont s’intensifier ! Il ne s’agit nullement de se complaire dans ces marais émotionnels, mais d’apprendre à les traverser individuellement et collectivement, à les côtoyer, afin de ne pas se laisser emporter, et trouver les ressources pour organiser la suite, pour résister.
    Mais comment résister à la fin du monde ? Ou plutôt, comment faire émerger un autre monde possible à partir de celui-ci ? La première piste est à rechercher du côté de la permaculture en tant que vision du monde et science pragmatique des sols et des paysages. Le néologisme « permaculture » a été forgé en Australie par Bill Mollison et David Holmgren, à partir de la contraction de deux termes : « permanent » et « agriculture », mais aussi « permanent » et « culture ». Depuis la Tasmanie, berceau de leur prise de conscience, ils formulent l’hypothèse d’un effondrement des subsides énergétiques injectés dans le système agro-industriel. Dès lors, la permaculture devient plus qu’une technique agricole : c’est une autre façon de concevoir le monde, un changement philosophique et matériel global. C’est une vision éthique des sociétés futures, qui seront confrontées à l’évolution des régimes énergétique et climatique.
    Aujourd’hui plus que jamais, il s’agit de rejeter les leurres de la croissance verte afin de revenir à une juste mesure en réduisant considérablement notre empreinte sur le monde. Ce qui veut dire mettre en œuvre immédiatement une nouvelle organisation sociale et culturelle, qui valorise la lenteur et enseigne les boucles de rétroactions, les liens de cause à effet, les mutualismes, la complexité. Dans la société permaculturelle, les réseaux ne sont plus invisibilisés, la frontière entre producteur et consommateur s’estompe dans un contexte de simplification progressive des mégasystèmes. Aussi bien par nécessité de résilience (dans la perspective d’un effondrement des sociétés industrielles) que par éthique des ressources, il s’agit de boucler les cycles, de passer d’une économie extractiviste de stocks à une économie renouvelable de flux. Le nouveau paysage permaculturel se veut directement comestible, au plus proche des habitants, qui eux-mêmes deviennent acteurs de ces nouveaux diagrammes alimentaires et énergétiques. Les paysages se déspécialisent, les fonctions se diversifient.
    Il en résulte une deuxième piste d’action, autour de nouvelles formes politiques territoriales ancrées dans le soin des paysages, œuvrant à la résilience des établissements humains face au nouveau régime climatique. Ces nouveaux territoires prennent le nom de « biorégions » et se substituent aux découpages administratifs actuels grâce à un changement général d’échelle et à une politique de décroissance. Les biorégions permettront, avant, pendant et peut-être après l’effondrement, d’organiser des systèmes économiques locaux territoriaux où les habitants, les manufactures et la Terre travailleront en coopération. La dynamique biorégionale stimulera le passage d’un système hyperefficient et centralisé à une organisation forgée par la diminution des besoins de mobilité, la coopération, le ralentissement, composée d’une multitude de dispositifs et de sources d’énergie. La civilisation automobile et l’agriculture intensive n’auront plus leur place dans cette nouvelle configuration. Les biorégions seront les territoires du ressaisissement.
    Des sociétés conviviales et de proximité
    La troisième voie de la résistance est celle d’un imaginaire social libéré des illusions de la croissance verte, du productivisme et de la vitesse, actionnées par les entreprises transnationales. La ville connectée, emblème d’une techno-euphorie totalement hors-sol, laissera la place à des bourgs et des quartiers off the grid (« hors réseau ») autoproducteurs d’énergie. Le nombre de véhicules sera réduit au strict minimum, les flottes seront administrées par les communes (libres !), tandis que les champs redessinés en polyculture pourront être traversés à pied. Des axes végétaux résorberont les infrastructures de la vitesse ainsi que les friches industrielles. Qui dit sociétés résilientes dit sociétés conviviales et de proximité. Aujourd’hui, chaque métropole occidentale requiert pour son fonctionnement une vaste partie de la planète. Demain, il en sera autrement, en raison de l’effondrement inéluctable des grands réseaux et de l’économie mondialisée, sur fond de bouleversements climatiques.
    Voilà trois pistes, mais il y en aura d’autres. Vivre avec la fin du monde passe nécessairement par un constant effort d’imagination pour arriver à dégager de nouveaux horizons, à les inventer, afin de refermer le couvercle du nihilisme, du mal absolu, du « tout est foutu ». Ce chantier politique ne peut être que collectif. Il faut un récit commun pour rester soudés. Certes, le récit de l’effondrement comporte des risques et des écueils, comme tout récit, mais il est puissant et a plusieurs mérites : il évite le catéchisme de la croissance, il réactive une vision cyclique des choses en appelant une renaissance, et surtout il dit que c’est maintenant ou jamais. Il nous rapproche de l’idée de la mort. D’ailleurs, n’est-ce pas ce que la philosophie nous enseigne depuis des siècles ? Apprendre à bien vivre, c’est apprendre à bien mourir, à prendre conscience de notre statut de mortel, radicalement vulnérable, humble, interdépendant des autres êtres vivants et de notre milieu de vie.

    Agnès Sinaï est journaliste environnementale. Chargée de cours à Sciences Po, elle a fondé l’Institut Momentum en 2011, laboratoire d’idées dont elle a dirigé les trois tomes des Politiques de l’anthropocène (parus aux Presses de Sciences Po).

    Pablo Servigne a une formation d’agronome et d’éthologue. Chercheur « in-terre-dépendant », auteur et conférencier, il est coauteur de plusieurs livres, dont Une autre fin du monde est possible (Seuil, 2018).

    Yves Cochet, militant écologiste depuis quarante ans, a été député de 1997 à 2011, ancien ministre de l’aménagement du territoire et de l’environnement (2001-202) puis député européen jusqu’en 2014. Depuis lors, il préside l’Institut Momentum.

    http://www.lemonde.fr/festival/article/2019/07/22/face-a-l-effondrement-il-faut-mettre-en-uvre-une-nouvelle-organisation-socia

    La phrase qui me paraît la plus remarquable est celle-ci :

    "Ainsi, l’effondrement est inévitable non parce que la connaissance scientifique de son advenue est trop incertaine, mais parce que la psychologie sociale qui habite les humains ne leur permettra probablement pas de prendre les bonnes décisions , au bon moment."

    Voilà une belle manière de naturaliser le #capitalisme ! Les structures de pouvoir, l’État, les entreprises, les institutions, les classes sociales, l’économie, l’industrie et la dynamique du marché capitaliste, etc. tout ça n’existe pas pour nos collapsologues. Non, c’est juste la #nature_humaine qui est responsable du désastre. C’est juste les individus qui ne prennent pas les "bonnes décisions".

    Comme le disait Margaret Thatcher : "la société n’existe pas, il n’y a que des individus qui poursuivent leurs intérêts..." (de mémoire).

    A un tel degré de #bêtise_politique, on peut se demander à quoi et à qui vont servir ces crétins et leurs dupes. Une chose est sûre, certainement pas à l’avènement d’une société émancipée des formes de domination dont ils ne veulent pas voir l’existence ni penser le rôle politique dans le maintien du statu quo ...

    Collapso, collabos ?

    #collapsologie, #naturalisation, #essentialisme, #pseudo-critique.

  • Individus sans monde
    http://www.radiopanik.org/emissions/des-singes-en-hiver/individus-sans-monde

    Pour cette troisième émission nous commencerons la tête plongée dans un brouillard hautement toxique, un brouillard mortel tout droit venu nous hanter depuis les années 30 et les usines de la vallée de la Meuse qui l’ont fait naître. Heureusement, Alexis Zimmer sera avec nous pour lever une partie de la brume sur les stratégies discursives qui hier comme aujourd’hui cherchent à naturaliser les phénomènes industriels .

    Alexis Zimmer, biologiste et philosophe, anthropologue des sciences, auteur de "Brouillards toxiques, Vallée de la Meuse, 1930, contre-enquête" aux éditions Zones Sensibles, 2016 ; et de l’article "À la recherche des #microbiotes perdus » paru dans l’ouvrage collectif "Fragmenter le monde" sous la direction de Rafanaell i Orra Josep, paru aux éditions Divergences,2018. (...)

    #naturalisation #brouillard_toxique #pollution_industrielle #singes_en_hiver #naturalisation,brouillard_toxique,pollution_industrielle,microbiotes,singes_en_hiver
    http://www.radiopanik.org/media/sounds/des-singes-en-hiver/individus-sans-monde_06551__1.mp3

  • 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

  • La plongée des « collapsologues » dans la régression archaïque – Daniel Tanuro
    http://www.contretemps.eu/critique-collapsologie-regression-archaique

    A l’heure où la jeunesse de différents pays entame des mobilisations de masse face à la catastrophe climatique, se pose de façon d’autant plus urgente la nécessité de débattre des cadres d’analyses et des réponses politiques face à la crise environnementale. Parmi les courants de pensée les plus récents sur le marché éditorial, la collaposologie[1] s’avère être un succès de librairie, en particulier grâce aux livres co-écrits par Pablo Servigne. Ce succès, largement porté par une campagne publicitaire des plus classiques, est-il un bon signe pour les luttes écologiques et sociales ? Ou n’obscurcit-il pas les horizons émancipateurs que de telles luttes sont à même dessiner ?

    « Le regard tourné vers l’avant est d’autant plus pénétrant qu’il est conscient. L’intuition, authentique, se veut nette et précise. Ce n’est que si la raison se met à parler que l’espérance, vierge de toute fraude, recommence à fleurir » (Ernst Bloch)

     

    Dans leur ouvrage Comment tout peut s’effondrer, paru en 2014, Pablo Servigne et Rafaël Stevens créaient le concept de « collapsologie », qu’ils définissaient comme suit :

    « La collapsologie est l’exercice transdisciplinaire d’étude de l’effondrement de notre civilisation industrielle et de ce qui pourrait lui succéder, en s’appuyant sur les deux modes cognitifs que sont la raison et l’intuition et sur des travaux scientifiques reconnus ».

    Ce n’était qu’un point de départ. En 2017, Pablo Servigne signait un deuxième ouvrage – L’autre loi de la jungle – avec Gauthier Chapelle. Les auteurs y reprenaient la thèse de l’anarchiste russe Kropotkine qui, dans un essai célèbre, paru en 1902, défendait l’idée – déjà émise par Marx et Engels – que l’évolution des espèces ne résulte pas seulement de la compétition, mais aussi de l’entraide[2]. Enfin, en octobre 2018, le trio Servigne-Chapelle-Stevens signait Une autre fin du monde est possible. Vivre l’effondrement et pas seulement y survivre.

    L’impact de cette trilogie mérite qu’on s’y arrête. Les « collapsologues » jouissent en effet d’une grande renommée, dans des milieux extrêmement différents. D’une part, ils sont fort populaires sur les réseaux sociaux, dans des mouvances alternatives et auprès de nombreux/ses activistes de la mouvance écologique radicale. D’autre part, ils ont été reçus à Bercy et à l’Elysée, invités par les fédérations patronales de Belgique et de Suisse et les plus grands médias mainstream ont amplement commenté leurs écrits. Certains journaux dits « de qualité » ont même été jusqu’à saluer en eux les fondateurs d’une nouvelle discipline scientifique…Qu’est-ce donc qui suscite tant d’intérêt, voire d’engouement ?

    On se concentrera ici sur le dernier livre paru, Une autre fin du monde est possible. Pablo Servigne et ses amis y répondent implicitement à certaines critiques, en ignorent d’autres et approfondissent des thèmes développés précédemment. La grande nouveauté de l’ouvrage est de proposer aux lecteurs de passer de la « collapsologie » à la « collapsosophie », autrement dit de la science de l’effondrement à la philosophie de l’effondrement. On verra que cet exercice ambitieux les entraîne vers des conceptions fort discutables, et même dangereuses.

    #collapsologie #naturalisation_des_rapports_sociaux

    • Eh bé ça va loin là…

      D’emblée, le lecteur est frappé par une contradiction : Servigne, Stevens et Chapelle découvrent l’écoféminisme… mais Une autre fin du monde n’évoque ni la lutte des femmes pour leur émancipation, ni la nécessité d’un mouvement autonome des femmes, ni la place centrale de ce mouvement dans les combats contre la destruction environnementale et sociale. Les auteurs préfèrent développer l’idée que les « archétypes féminin et masculin » sont « des polarités qui ne s’opposent pas ». Estimant que « les hommes souffrent aussi de la blessure secrète du patriarcat », ils plaident pour la « réconciliation hommes-femmes » et nous invitent à pratiquer à cet effet des « rituels initiatiques ».

      C’est là que la « collapsosophie » dérape pour plonger dans la régression archaïque, non seulement en paroles, mais en actes. Question rituels, les auteurs recommandent en effet leurs bonnes adresses : aux lecteurs mâles, ils conseillent de suivre, comme ils l’ont fait eux-mêmes, les week-ends d’initiation du « nouveau guerrier » (New Warrior Training Adventure) organisés par le ManKind Project, dont ils chantent les louanges.

      Ce ManKind Project est un business mis sur pied par trois étasuniens à l’initiative d’un certain Bill Kauth. Pour celui-ci, psychothérapeute jungien, il s’agissait de répondre à la vague féministe des années quatre-vingts. Impressionné par le potentiel émancipateur des groupements féministes, Kauth décida de mettre sur pieds des groupes non mixtes censés permettre aux hommes aussi de se libérer, en retrouvant leurs racines profondes et leur âme de mâles « adultes et sains ». Bref, en assumant leur archétype masculin.

      #anti-féminisme #essentialisme #masculinisme

    • Merci @aude_v !

      #Daniel_Tanuro avait déjà écrit des articles un peu critiques sur ce sujet :

      Une critique de la « collapsologie » : C’est la lutte qui est à l’ordre du jour, pas la résignation endeuillée
      https://www.gaucheanticapitaliste.org/leffondrement-des-societes-humaines-est-il-inevitable-une-cri

      Crise socio-écologique : Pablo Servigne et Rafaël Stevens, ou l’effondrement dans la joie
      http://www.lcr-lagauche.org/pablo-servigne-et-rafael-stevens-ou-leffondrement-dans-la-joie

      Et il y a un article de Pierre Thiesset dans de numéro de mars de La Décroissance qui montre bien comment ces "scientifiques" se font les dupes volontaires et enthousiates de diverses mystoqueries...

    • Ceci dit, chez Adrastia, ils ont même prévu un kit de « résilience » : une sacoche de biffetons bien planquée sous un matelas (et quelques marchandise trocables accumulées en réserve), solutions on ne peut plus efficace pour assurer sa survie en milieu hostile : chacun pour soi et la monnaie pour tous. Mais c’est tellement « bien argumenté », que ces vieux réflexes d’accumulation (en cas de guerre, en cas de crise ou de victoire de la gauche) et bien ça passe crème, enfin chez les CSP++, je suppose. Mais sinon, l’essentiel est de garder sa capacité à « faire société » hein ! ... Un faire société en mode « arnaquez-vous les uns les autres et malheur aux vaincus ». Une somme pour tous les bons petits soldats (guerriers sains, droits et courageux d’avant le patriarcat) du capitalisme productiviste ’globalized’

      http://adrastia.org/plan-damortissement-des-chocs-deffondrement

      Je suis un citoyen lambda, plutôt aisé, ingénieur et entrepreneur, maison, famille nombreuse, les deux pieds dans le système, le bon hamster dans sa roue en fait.

      C’est on ne peut plus clair, non ?

      #la_résilience_sans_peine #darwinisme_social #pourritures #hamster (et fier de l’être)

    • Où l’on découvre un nouveau syndrome dépressif : l’éco-anxiété :
      https://www.francetvinfo.fr/sante/environnement-et-sante/quand-le-changement-climatique-attaque-la-sante-mentale-et-si-votre-dep

      (et aussi)
      Histoire en BD d’un jeune couple gentil qui décide de passer à la « résilience ».
      http://adrastia.org/tout-va-bien-enfin-ca-va-aller

      Plüche est illustratrice et travaille sur un projet de BD, Nours est menuisier et travaille en parallèle sur des projets d’écriture et de photographie. Tous les deux sont fusionnels et vivent heureux et modestement. Mais en ce début d’année, l’équilibre économique mondial commence à s’effriter sérieusement et nos deux personnages, habitants d’une grande ville et loin d’être autonomes, vont subir ce qui se révèlera être la plus grande crise économique que l’Histoire ait connue.

      Pour passer direct à la lecture de la BD :
      https://bdtoutvabien.tumblr.com/post/179654965981/tout-va-bien-sur-vos-%C3%A9crans-en-janvier-2019

      Où l’on découvre (page 12) l’engouement de nos deux jeunes gens pour la collapsologie :
      Madame écoute (en faisant un peu d’exercice physique) une interview de Pablo Servigne (sur la chaîne Youtube de Thinkerview)
      Dialogue entre Madame et Monsieur (page 13) :
      Elle : Il faut que tu écoutes cet interview.
      Lui : D’accord. Je ferai ça cet aprèm en allant à l’atelier.
      Elle : J’ai écouté le début.
      Lui (les pieds déjà sous la table) : Notre cher Pablo est toujours aussi calme ?
      Elle (finissant de réchauffer une gamelle de pâtes) : Ah, toujours.
      (Puis faisant une petite bise affectueuse à Monsieur qui semble un peu contrarié quand même)
      Et toujours aussi beau !

      (Ouch ! ...)

  • Migration: the riddle of Europe’s shadow population
    Lennys — not her real name — is part of a shadow population living in Europe that predates the arrival of several million people on the continent in the past few years, amid war and chaos in regions of the Middle East and Africa. That influx, which has fuelled Eurosceptic nativism, has if anything complicated the fate of Lennys and other irregular migrants.

    Now she is using a service set up by the Barcelona local administration to help naturalise irregular migrants and bring them in from the margins of society. She is baffled by the anti-immigrant rhetoric of politicians who suggest people like her prefer living in the legal twilight, without access to many services — or official protection.❞

    The fate of Lennys and other irregulars is likely to take an ever more central role in Europe’s deepening disputes on migration. They are a diverse group: many arrived legally, as Lennys did, on holiday, work or family visas that have since expired or become invalid because of changes in personal circumstances. Others came clandestinely and have never had any legal right to stay.

    The most scrutinised, and frequently demonised, cohort consists of asylum seekers whose claims have failed. Their numbers are growing as the cases from the surge in migrant arrivals in the EU in 2015 and 2016 — when more than 2.5m people applied for asylum in the bloc — work their way through the process of decisions and appeals. Almost half of first instance claims failed between 2015 and 2017, but many of those who are rejected cannot be returned to their home countries easily — or even at all.

    The question of what to do about rejected asylum applicants and the rest of Europe’s shadow population is one that many governments avoid. Bouts of hostile rhetoric and unrealistic targets — such as the Italian government’s pledge this year to expel half a million irregular migrants — mask a structural failure to deal with the practicalities.

    Many governments have sought to deny irregular migrants services and expel them — policies that can create their own steep human costs. But authorities in a growing number of cities from Barcelona to Brussels have concluded that the combination of hostile attitudes and bureaucratic neglect is destructive.

    These cities are at the frontline of dealing with irregular status residents from Africa, the Middle East and elsewhere. Local authorities have, to varying degrees, brought these populations into the system by offering them services such as healthcare, language courses and even legal help.

    The argument is part humanitarian but also pragmatic. It could help prevent public health threats, crime, exploitative employment practices — and the kind of ghettoisation that can tear communities apart.

    “If we provide ways for people to find their path in our city . . . afterwards probably they will get regularisation and will get their papers correct,” says Ramon Sanahuja, director of immigration at the city council in Barcelona. “It’s better for everybody.”

    The size of Europe’s shadow population is unknown — but generally reckoned by experts to be significant and growing. The most comprehensive effort to measure it was through an EU funded project called Clandestino, which estimated the number of irregular migrants at between 1.9m and 3.8m in 2008 — a figure notable for both its wide margin of error and the lack of updates to it since, despite the influx after 2015.

    A more contemporaneous, though also imprecise, metric comes from comparing the numbers of people ordered to leave the EU each year with the numbers who actually went. Between 2008 and 2017, more than 5m non-EU citizens were instructed to leave the bloc. About 2m returned to countries outside it, according to official data.

    While the two sets of numbers do not map exactly — people don’t necessarily leave in the same year they are ordered to do so — the figures do suggest several million people may have joined Europe’s shadow population in the past decade or so. The cohort is likely to swell further as a glut of final appeals from asylum cases lodged since 2015 comes through.

    “The volume of people who are in limbo in the EU will only grow, so it’s really problematic,” says Hanne Beirens, associate director at Migration Policy Institute Europe, a think-tank. “While the rhetoric at a national level will be ‘These people cannot stay’, at a local community level these people need to survive.”

    Barcelona: cities seek practical solutions to ease migrant lives

    Barcelona’s pragmatic approach to irregular migration echoes its history as a hub for trade and movement of people across the Mediterranean Sea.

    It is one of 11 cities from 10 European countries involved in a two-year project on the best ways to provide services to irregular status migrants. Other participants in the initiative — set up last year by Oxford university’s Centre on Migration, Policy, and Society — include Athens, Frankfurt, Ghent, Gothenburg, Lisbon, Oslo, Stockholm and Utrecht.

    A report for the group, published last year, highlights the restrictions faced by undocumented migrants in accessing services across the EU. They were able to receive only emergency healthcare in six countries, while in a further 12 they were generally excluded from primary and secondary care services.

    Some cities have made special efforts to offer help in ways that they argue also benefit the community, the report said. Rotterdam asked midwives, doctors, and schools to refer children for vaccinations, in case their parents were afraid to reveal their immigration status.

    The impact of some of these policies has still to be demonstrated. Ramon Sanahuja, director of immigration at the city council in Barcelona, says authorities there had an “intuition” their approach brought benefits, but he admits they need to do a cost-benefit analysis. As to the potential for the scheme to be exploited by anti-immigrant groups, he says Europe needs “brave politicians who explain how the world works and that the system is complicated”.

    “A lot of people in Barcelona are part of the system — they have [for example] a cleaning lady from Honduras who they pay €10 per hour under the counter,” he says. “Someone has to explain this, that everything is related.” Michael Peel

    https://www.ft.com/content/58f2f7f8-c7c1-11e8-ba8f-ee390057b8c9?segmentid=acee4131-99c2-09d3-a635-873e61754
    #naturalisation #villes-refuge #ville-refuge #citoyenneté #sans-papiers #migrerrance #régularisation #statistiques #chiffres #Europe #Etat-nation #limbe #pragmatisme #Barcelone

    cc @isskein

    –----

    Au niveau de la #terminologie (#mots, #vocabulaire), pour @sinehebdo:

    Belgian policy towards irregular migrants and undocumented workers has stiffened under the current government, which includes the hardline Flemish nationalist NVA party. It has prioritised the expulsion of “transmigrants”— the term used for people that have travelled to Europe, often via north Africa and the Mediterranean and that are seeking to move on from Belgium to other countries, notably the UK. Several hundred live rough in and around Brussels’ Gare du Nord.

    –-> #transmigrants

  • Pakistan PM to Offer Citizenship to Afghans Born in #Pakistan

    Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan, in an unprecedented announcement Sunday, pledged to offer Pakistani citizenship to hundreds of thousands of Afghans born to refugee families his country has been hosting for decades.

    The United Nations refugee agency and local officials say there are 2.7 million Afghans, including 1.5 million registered as refugees, in Pakistan. The displaced families have fled decades of conflict, ethnic and religious persecution, poverty and economic hardships in turmoil-hit Afghanistan.

    “Afghans whose children have been raised and born in Pakistan will be granted citizenship inshallah (God willing) because this is the established practice in countries around the world. You get an American passport if you are born in America,” said Khan, who took office last month.

    “Then why can’t we do it here. We continue to subject these people to unfair treatment,” the Pakistani prime minister said at a public event in the southern port city of Karachi Sunday night.

    U.N. surveys suggest that around 60 percent of Afghan refugees were either born in Pakistan or were minors when their parents migrated to Pakistan. War-shattered Afghanistan is therefore alien to most of these young people who are already part of the local economy in different ways.

    This group of refugees, officials say, are reluctant to go back to Afghanistan where security conditions have deteriorated in the wake of the stalemated war between U.S.-backed Afghan security forces and the Taliban insurgency.

    Khan noted in his nationally televised remarks that without Pakistani national identification cards and passports, the refugees have been unable to find decent legal jobs or get a quality education in local institutions.

    These people, the prime minister said, will eventually be forced to indulge in criminal activities, posing security issues for areas like Karachi, the country’s largest city and commercial hub. Afghans are a significant portion of the nearly 20 million residents in Karachi.

    “They are humans. How come we have deprived them and have not arranged for offering them national identification card and passport for 30 years, 40 years,” Khan lamented.

    The Pakistani leader explained that since he is also directly overseeing the federal Interior Ministry, which is responsible for granting passports and identification cards, he will instruct his staff to make efforts without further delay to offer Pakistani nationality to the people “who have come from Afghanistan and whose children are raised and born in here.”

    Khan spoke a day after his Foreign Minister, Shah Mehmood Qureshi, visited Afghanistan, where he discussed among other issues the fate of the registered Afghan refugees who have until December 31, 2018, to stay in Pakistan legally.

    An official statement issued after Qureshi’s daylong trip to Kabul said that in his meetings with Afghan leaders, the foreign minister “underlined the need for dignified, sustainable repatriation of Afghan refugees to their homeland through a gradual and time-bound plan.”

    Pakistani authorities have lately complained that Taliban insurgents waging attacks inside Afghanistan have been using the refugee communities as hiding places. Both countries accuse each other of supporting militant attacks against their respective soils. The allegations are at the center of bilateral political tensions.

    In a meeting last week with visiting U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, Filippo Grandi, Khan assured him that his government will not force Afghan refugees to leave Pakistan.

    https://www.voanews.com/a/pakistan-pm-to-offer-citizenship-to-afghans-born-in-pakistan/4574015.html
    #citoyenneté #naturalisation #asile #migrations #réfugiés #réfugiés_afghans

    ping @isskein

  • 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

  • Aux #États-Unis, les citoyens naturalisés risquent désormais de perdre leur nationalité | Courrier international
    https://www.courrierinternational.com/article/aux-etats-unis-les-citoyens-naturalises-risquent-desormais-de

    Cette procédure de dénaturalisation est historiquement “extrêmement rare”, explique Masha Gessen, journaliste russo-américaine et auteure de l’article : 

    Et pour cause : le temps qu’une personne obtienne sa #naturalisation, elle a vécu dans le pays depuis plusieurs années et a franchi les différents obstacles pour obtenir le droit de séjour, la résidence permanente et, finalement, la #citoyenneté”.

    Avec cette nouvelle équipe, les citoyens naturalisés américains n’ont plus la garantie de le rester pour toujours. “Nous sommes tous maintenant des citoyens de seconde classe”, déplore la journaliste.

    La seule création de ce service annule la naturalisation de plus de vingt millions de citoyens en niant leur présomption de droit à la résidence permanente.”

    Selon Masha Gessen, “c’est le raisonnement sous-jacent de cette nouvelle initiative qui la rend si contestable : l’idée que les États-Unis sont envahis par des #immigrés malveillants et nuisibles qui trouvent des moyens de s’installer ici.”

    • ’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

  • Country Report : Italy

    The updated AIDA Country Report on Italy documents developments in the asylum procedure, reception conditions, detention of asylum seekers and content of international protection throughout 2017.
    The year 2017 has been chatacterised by media, political and judicial crackdown on non-governmental organisations (NGOs) saving lives at sea, and by the implementation of cooperation agreements with African countries such as Libya, while barriers to access to the territory have also been witnessed at the northern borders of the country, against the backdrop of increasing arrivals from Austria.
    Severe obstacles continue to be reported with regard to access to the asylum procedure in Italy. Several Police Headquarters (Questure) in cities such as Naples, Rome, Bari and Foggia have set specific days for seeking asylum and limited the number of people allowed to seek asylum on a given day, while others have imposed barriers on specific nationalities. In Rome and Bari, nationals of certain countries without a valid passport were prevented from applying for asylum. In other cases, Questure in areas such as Milan, Rome, Naples, Pordenone or Ventimiglia have denied access to asylum to persons without a registered domicile, contrary to the law. Obstacles have also been reported with regard to the lodging of applications, with several Questure such as Milan or Potenza unlawfully refusing to complete the lodging of applications for applicants which they deem not to be in need of protection.
    Since December 2017, Italy has established a specific Dublin procedure in Questure in the Friuli-Venezia Giulia region bordering Austria and Slovenia, with support from EASO. According to that procedure, as soon as a Eurodac ‘hit’ is recorded, Questure move the lodging appointment to a later date and notify a Dublin transfer decision to the persons concerned prior to that date. Applicants are therefore subject to a Dublin transfer before having lodged their application, received information on the procedure or had an interview.
    Despite a continuing increase in the capacity of the SPRAR system, which currently counts over 35,000 funded places, the vast majority of asylum seekers are accommodated in temporary reception centres (CAS). CAS hosted around 80% of the population at the end of 2017. In Milan, for example, the ratio of SPRAR to CAS is 1:10.
    Destitution remains a risk of asylum seekers and beneficiaries of international protection. At least 10,000 persons are excluded from the reception system. Informal settlements with limited or no access to essential services are spread across the entire national territory.
    Throughout 2017, both due to the problems related to age assessment and to the unavailability of places in dedicated shelters, there have been cases of unaccompanied children accommodated in adults’ reception centres, or not accommodated at all. Several appeals have been lodged to the European Court of Human Rights against inappropriate accommodation conditions for unaccompanied children.
    Five pre-removal centres (CPR) are currently operational, while a new hotspot has been opened in Messina. However, substandard conditions continue to be reported by different authorities visiting detention facilities, namely the hotspots of Lampedusa and Taranto and the CPR of Caltanissetta and Ponte Galeria.
    The hotspots of Lampedusa and Taranto have been temporarily been closed as of March 2018.

    http://www.asylumineurope.org/sites/default/files/report-download/aida_it_2017update.pdf
    #Italie #asile #migrations #réfugiés #procédure_d'asile #hotspots #Dublin #frontières #procédure_accélérée #vulnérabilité #pays_sûr #relocalisation #hébergement #logement #éducation #travail #santé #rétention #détention_administrative #naturalisation #liberté_de_mouvement #rapport #refoulement #push-back

    Intéressant, lien avec la #frontière_sud-alpine (#Côme #Milan #Vintimille) :

    Particularly as regards Taranto , as reported by the Senate , among the 14,576 people transiting through the hotspot from March to October 2016 , only 5,048 came from disembarkations while the majority (9,528 ) were traced on Italian territory, mainly at border places in Ventimiglia , Como and Milan , and forcibly taken to Taranto to be identified. Some o f them were asylum seekers accommodated in reception centre in the place they were apprehended and who, after being again identified, were just released out of the hotspot without any ticket or money to go back to their reception centres.

    v. aussi la carte de #Gwendoline_Bauquis, produite dans le cadre de son mémoire de master : « Géopolitique d’une crise de la frontière – Entre #Côme et #Chiasso, le système européen d’asile mis à l’épreuve » (2017)


    #cartographie #visualisation

  • Les portes de la #nation
    http://www.laviedesidees.fr/Les-portes-de-la-nation.html

    Comment la République considère-t-elle ses « autres » ? À partir d’une étude ethnographique des dispositifs de lutte contre les discriminations raciales et de la procédure de naturalisation, Sarah Mazouz s’interroge sur les « politiques françaises de l’altérité ».

    Livres & études

    / #discrimination, nation, #racisme, égalité

    #Livres_&_études #_égalité_

  • 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

  • Da immigrati a nuovi milanesi: «Anno record per le cittadinanze»

    L’Italia è la nazione che rilascia più cittadinanze l’anno in Europa: 178 mila su 800 mila. Quasi una su quattro. E, a sua volta, una su quattro è lombarda, regione record con Milano a quota 7.750, in crescita vertiginosa rispetto alle 1.760 rilasciate nel 2012

    http://milano.corriere.it/notizie/cronaca/17_agosto_07/da-immigrati-nuovi-milanesi-anno-record-le-cittadinanze-72c5a352-7b3
    #statistiques #chiffres #Italie #naturalisation #citoyenneté #migrations #Milan