European Union Policy of Free Movement of Persons - Essay Example

? To what extent does the European Union policy of free movement of persons discriminate against the non-European 'others'? Date of Submission To what extent does the European Union policy of free movement of persons discriminate against the non-European 'others'? The EU (European Union) policy concerning free movement within its member states has ,in many quarters been taunted to be extremely discriminative in nature .These policy on free movement of persons tend to ,in particular , discriminate against people from other parts of the world- the non Europeans ,commonly referred to as “others”. The E.U’’s hostility towards immigrants has been discussed at length in various forums. A very important aspect of the said immigration policy that many find not friendly is in the treatment of people who are from troubled countries, for instance due to problems like wars, lawlessness and require humanitarian assistance like, for instance refugees. In most cases helpless and poor or stateless individuals who basically throw themselves around or on the mercy and sympathy of the state that they deem safe, seeking refuge from ill treatment in their country of origin have always had it rough upon attempting to gain entry in countries that subscribe to the European Union1. For the sake of highlighting the xenophobic treatment and approach that immigrants face countries like France, United Kingdom and Italy will be used because they are believed to be very notorious for this kind of discriminative treatment. Majority of these member states always claim that with the steady rise of terrorism and related activities worldwide they have all the reasons to be discriminative against anybody coming into their country. Another commonly blamed excuse, which to them is a major concern, is the national and regional security of the various nations that allow people to cross over their borders. They have this mentality that terrorists and other people with ill intensions are very likely to come in from overseas2. These kinds of concerns and worries often lead to very thorough and intrusive security checks and scrutiny and stringent visa requirements and in the process discouraging immigration, short term and temporary visitors from other parts of the world and even the movement that people like having within their continent and countries. There has been frantic search to solutions to this tight regulations and even pressure from all over the world for European Union to loosen some of the aspects of the immigration policy and inspections to create an ample environment which can help promote tourism and other developmental aspects like relocation and transfer of businesses to other countries from, for instance, destabilized countries or better yet regions3. Since most of the member states of the European Union allow free movement of individuals within the union under an exemption commonly known as Schengen arrangement which many immigrant refers to as the discriminative extra communitarian movement of individuals i.e. non-European Union citizens4. This is, indeed an irony in the sense that the European Union allows movement of individuals freely within its various member states but unfortunately takes a very tough and harsh approach towards immigrants from non European Union countries. This xenophobic treatment and approach of the European Union is basically rooted in very complex historical, political, social and economic contexts which this paper intends to intensively and extensively look and discuss in details. Historical Historically, even before the establishment of the European Union, most of the countries that are now in the union had a negative attitude towards people moving into their countries because they believed that such moves would create competition for the available resources .The historical perspective and aspects of the heinous xenophobic approach that EU had, greatly affected the ambitions and desires of many immigrants who really yearned to visit or even temporarily move into the EU countries. Even back in the day when EU was not yet formed and rules and regulations written down to govern it as an entity, the various countries in Europe adopted a very unfriendly policy of restraint in as afar as matter concerning immigration are concerned which greatly discriminated against people from outside5. This was due to the fact that the size of the European countries’ economies, it would be impossible for the various member countries to carelessly welcome immigrants from all over with open arms. They ensured that all the taxes, tariff and even the trade rules which determine the kind of goods immigrants may bring in with them, the kind of services the immigrants may perform while using their temporary work permits in whatever country they were in had very strict immigration restrictions. And they also restricted who was allowed to remain and operate within Europe no matter the kind activities they were involved in6. They also made it impossible for foreigners and even citizens of countries that others deemed not friendly to the now signatory nations. It is just a few new member countries that may move and seek employment anywhere within the European Union, very little can be done by member states to stop it without having to leave the EU or may be having to renegotiate the treaty. Historically the investment policy that was in place was only that which permitted wealthy and rich immigrants to invest in the economy by setting up businesses in exchange for rewards and favourable treatment, they were in fact issued with passports and other documents like permanent resident documents and status with out delay7. They also restricted the kind of agricultural policy that was in place making it not so easy for immigrants to get in and work in agricultural farms, particularly those who typically enter foreign countries only during the harvest season to work and then return to their home countries which in most cases are normally developing nation like say for instance Mexico, Latin America countries or Jamaica that like sending such workers to the developed countries particularly those in the EU8. Most of the European Union countries have always had the fear of carelessly admitting many people from developing countries with the fear of there being cases of overcrowding which can be blamed for health related problems like the spread of diseases like Tuberculosis or even other social problems like house price boom. Economical For some time, the European Union member countries were very generous and friendly when it came to welcoming immigrants because they were only interested in using them to help boost their economy by providing cheap and readily available labour. The economic aspect that the Xenophobic approach that the EU member countries were employing ,with the exception of a few countries like France and the united kingdom ,threw their borders wide open to immigrants from all over as a means of basically enhancing productivity and creating an easy access to cheap labour for the low skilled labour and jobs9. This was a means of attracting some of the best talent and skills possible for the high skilled and technical jobs but cheap. This discriminative approach alienates many people especially immigrants who are interested in contributing to the economic development of the EU .Many of the workers seeking the opportunity to be allowed to move freely within the EU are always seeking employment or business opportunities which may in turn benefit the respective countries they intend to venture in. If anything what they, in most cases, provide is cheap and affordable labour. By being discriminative against who enters and freely moves within the union ,in many ways ,hampers economic growth and development10. Social In the UK and France there has been a high level of immigration and in many other EU countries that has resulted in creation of ethnic communities and the rise of settlements like ghettos in the UK and France. This has added impetus to the anti-immigrant lobby’s drive which intends to restrict immigration as they point to the lack of assimilation by some of these communities hence resulting in loss of social cohesion. There has been a general feeling that immigrants are unwelcome because they do not properly fit in to the culture of the countries to which they always like to immigrate to11. From asocial perspective, many pundits are of the view that the discriminative nature of the free movement policy greatly causes social harm on the surrounding communities. There exist a host of social ills that the way EU carries out its free movement policy affects its subjects. The policy is believed to be unfair and discriminative because there exists no clear convergence of their objectives and interests leaving one to wonder about the point of attempting to include more countries and expanding the EU when they actually very discriminative against others. This has led to instances of riots for instance in France in 2005 and recently in London and other parts of UK have greatly been blamed on the immigrants and their lack of decorum and respect for the culture of these countries. This has created grounds on which most member countries deny immigrants entry12. The emphasis on creating a friendly and free movement atmosphere for workers has to be taken seriously, because since the establishment of the European Union and the whole concept of having distinguished rules that governed labour regulation from the national labour laws of various member States, where by free movement of workers was not of concern even those from other countries many workers freely moved in and out of the union but that was just for a short while. Labour standards and regulations that are focused on employment security and protection combined with friendly industrial relations, if made a primary concern of the European Union, more immigrants willing to work within the Union will be at ease to work in the Union13. The primary reason or objective of establishing this free movement of individuals particularly workers in the labour market would greatly improve the industrial relations. Such instances led to EU adopting a tough stance on immigration. And in addition most of the EU countries do not need low skilled immigrants any longer because they have gone up the economic and technological curve and they claim that there are no low skilled low wage jobs anymore. This is due to the fact that most of the immigrants are from third world countries with underdeveloped technology and skills hence matching the technological skills and requirements in these developed countries of EU might prove to be quite a problem to them( A.,Joanna,2002). There should be provisions in the rules and regulations that govern the whole concept of workers seeking employment within the union and all the restrictions on free movement abolished .These kind of provisions which entitle not just the EU national but any other individual to take up and engage in meaningful employment in the territory of any of the member State. This also may help in ensuring that the workers are subjected to equal treatment in regard to working conditions, tax and social benefits. This can also be extended to his or her other family members regardless of their nationality14. The proportion of immigrants who seem to be interested in applying for these positions is disproportionate to the size of their population which makes these countries look askance at these immigrants. The basic human rights of immigrants are being infringed on by denying them entry or free movement, especially workers interested on searching for employment within the EU if they are not from member states. By creating friendlier atmosphere, the EU can attract many people and in the process such a move has the ability to enhance social cohesion and integration which is a good this for the sake of social development15. Additionally, even in the high skilled and high wage category, the growing trend is to hire locals and only when the locals are not available can the employers look for immigrants to fill the positions. This has resulted in laws being mandated that require the employers to justify the need for immigrants to be hired and hence there is a legal aspect to the hiring of immigrants as well. The rights of the immigrants have to be looked into. With clear and well stipulated down rights and privileges of immigrants, many will be more than willing to get into the European Union16. The basic and fundamental rights of foreigners within the European Union have to be guarded. For instance there are those who are qualified for jobs within the European Union but due to the fact that they are from somewhere else they always tend to be sidelined and denied the opportunity to work there. This has always been a source of stress and torture to most that have always had dreams to working within the European Union even when they are genuinely and legally in those European Union states. Political There are quite a number of political issues that this discriminative policy has led to and those that it has caused not just to the member states but also to those immigrants with intentions of moving in any of the member countries. The EU has put in place some very strict anti immigration policies that restrict the number of people that would be accepted into any of its member countries17. This has resulted in the EU shutting its doors to anyone seeking asylum and immigrants because of various reasons. The European Unions decisions to expand and increase the number of members has been bitterly scrutinized as being simply apolitical gimmick hence reducing the trust that many people had in the European Union. In some individual member countries, for instance, in France, Italy, Austria and Belgium, the immigration policies here negatively affect free movement of persons and workers in particular. According to Sawyer, C.(2011),some of the other political problems that this discriminative free movement policy has had include disagreements between the EU and other countries that show their interest in sorting out some of the differences between EU has with some particular countries. A good example is when international labor organization and the United States of America showed genuine interest in sorting some of the differences and problems between the European Union and Turkey on free movement but unfortunately the EU member countries bitterly objected18. It was alleged that what was once a bastion of human rights and many others like the right to social justice by welcoming asylum seekers and victims of repression from other countries has now become fortress Europe, thanks to the growing intolerance among the elite policy makers of the EU towards immigration. This has grave implications to the practice of global principles of human rights as many countries like Germany and France have sequestered the immigrants and all those wishing to settle in EU and the way in which these individuals are treated by the authorities is a direct contravention of human rights, international law and the law governing refugees19. The United Nations has, on several occasions pointed to the urgent need for a fair and just treatment of all people be they refugees or just immigrants though in the aftermath of the tragic 9/11 where worldwide after there became a trend of nations closing doors to foreigners. There have been very little teeth to all the protests from various lobby groups and human rights activists20. The strict immigration and deportation rules have meant that the EU has a relatively high deportation rates as a percentage of immigrant applications in the world. This is a dubious distinction which the EU can do without. We have also had cases of overt and covert racism towards immigrants which has been quite visible to any casual visitor to the EU. This expert’s claim that manifests itself in weird ways in which the foreigners and especially those who are not white, tend to be treated by not just the authorities but the public too21. The inherent xenophobia that the Europeans subjects non-EU members to, combined with the rhetoric emanating from the elite policy makers and the intelligentsia produce what can be termed as a lethal cocktail that explodes more often. According to Bailey, D., De Propris, L.(2009),this is evident in some of the statements by Germany’s councillor Angela Merkel and other UK and France leaders who openly talk about how the whole concept of immigration is undesirable and in fact contrary to the spirit of EU. They claimed that increasing the size of the union and allowing free movement of individuals and particularly immigrants may be catastrophic and involving because some of the policies have to be changed. Though this is considered to be an open interpretation, it is the case that most of the political parties in many member states of the EU tend to be established themselves on- anti-immigrant platforms. This is indeed a very dangerous trend and in fact it is something that is very contrary to the principles of international spirit of integration22. The discriminative nature of the European Union's is believed to be having political angles to it. A good example is the problem of Turkey and The EU itself which remain persistent and hampers all the other mechanisms in place to works well. Turkeys request to accede to the European Union which has always been denied (A. Pieter Van der Mei,2002) .The political impact that such antagonism brings has far reaching implications not only on the member states but even on those neighboring states that have always had desires of visiting or doing business with member states. Much as the concerned authorities claim that the main aim of this policy is to basically come up with solutions and promoting freedoms of immigrants and workers, some of the main political problems have never been solved23. Most of the immigrant population can do very little other than taking the rhetoric and the xenophobia that they are subjected to, since much of the anti immigrant rhetoric is actually backed by law as well. This has resulted in unnecessary social tensions which have contributed to the already gloomy outlook in the European Union because of the ongoing economic crisis24. Customs union has always been seen to be imposing Europeans Union's political ideas and agenda on Turkey who are never willing to assimilate any of the ideas because of the discriminative nature of some of their policies, for instance, that on free movement25. Some of those policies they try to impose on, for instance, Cyprus greatly affect the enhancement of economic, social and trade relations in the Mediterranean countries26. Solutions The whole concept of free movement of persons should be made to be one of the very fundamental freedoms to be guaranteed by laws governing the union. It should be made to be the most important right under law for visiting individuals and also an essential element for any one who intends to be a citizen. For workers, the freedoms should be made friendlier because since the formation of the union many workers have had issues with how they treat foreigners particularly those who show interest in living there for longer periods of time27. It should be made to entail more friendly right for anyone to look for employment in another member State, the right t to reside in a member state even if one is from a third country so long as they are willing to abide by the laws, and last but not least, the right to be subjected to equal treatment in as far as access to employment is concerned and all other working conditions or advantages which might help in facilitating the worker's integration while in the member States28. The implications and concept of this freedom have to be well developed and interpreted by the laws European Union Court of Justice, not forgetting the concept of workers itself. This freedom of movement for workers within the European Union can actually provides a great platform for economic development where by various interested business people regardless of their nationalities can come in and set up businesses29. States that are seeking membership in the EU have often been given specific provisions in the union’s accession Treaty which subjects them to free movement but with some conditions. Following the enlargement of the European Union to twenty five members after the accession of ten countries in 2004, there was a transitional period which limited the free movement of individuals and workers from the member states, excluding Cyprus and Malta. Until in the year 2006, accessing the labour markets of the initial fifteen Member States was exclusively depended on their respective national policies. It was after sometime that these fifteen Member States got tired of the restrictions and had to notify the relevant authorities including commission of their request not to continue with the national restrictions with a view of being allowed to allow free movement of workers in their countries30. Recently the fifteen Member State asked the Commission of the EU to authorise them to continue applying national measures for some more two years –especially those who still were experiencing serious problems and disturbances in their labour market. Although allowing free movement is more of an economic concept not a social concept, which is believed to be a potential source of problems which are social in nature. For instance, the transfer of pensions and others like the social benefits, social security, entitlements of foreign workers to unemployment, and other related benefits like family education and housing. These social problems and issues need to be dealt with as both from a social perspective and under the rubric economic free of workers movement of labour31. To avoid creating tension in the existing delicate balance between the social and economic perceptions that people have in regard to free movement of workers. It’s argued that the policy initiatives, court decisions and legislative provisions were concerned with strictly concerned with economic not social consequences. Of course this was done with possible restraints on the free movement of workers and not minding the social implications on the free movement of workers. However, the overlap of the European Union’s social and economic policy in the issue of free movement has been pointed out as the source of major developments within the EU social policy with far-reaching implications32. A good example is the definition of who is a worker by the European Court in as afar as the treaty provisions that deal with free movement is concerned .This is believed to have very important implications on the general regulation that govern employment and the industrial relations within the EU, not just in the regulation of free movement of workers and immigrants. Overall, the policy of free movement of people as a founding principle in regard to a common market had a dominant influence on the way people looked at the nature of rules and regulations on labour in the European Union33. In contrast, the emergence of the right to free movement of workers and immigrants just like all other citizens of the European Union has had very positive impact34. Doing away with the need for strictly an economic justification for that right to free association and movement on the basis work, the shift to free movement of people has caused far reaching consequences for the actions of European Union institutions that are active in the issue of free movement. There are quite a number of issues that need to be looked into to help sort out the problem if not perception that many people have in regard to the European Union’s immigration policy. Some of the main issues that must to reassess include the assessment which should be shared by all the involved countries for the sake of collective growth and development among the European Union countries35. One of the measures that must taken is to prevent any illegal immigration, address all the policies that govern issuing of visa, the policy on return and readmit ion due to the security issues36. There are quite a number of issues that may help in creating change particularly in the national legislation and other closely related immigration practices. Things need to be put in perspective to avoid people who are considered non-Europeans from looking at it as being discriminatory37. Another solution that must to put to practice is ensuring that people of third country who are qualified and have genuine reasons to get into any country that is a member of the European union don’t undergo some unnecessary torturous checks and scrutiny38. There are always many people from third country who are very honest with their dealings and have nothing criminal on their minds as they intend to get in the European Union. Issues of entry and residence of third country members has always caused a lot of problems with immigration officials. Some of such individuals are normally genuinely seeking greener pastures in form of employment or alternatively there are those who are normally interested in setting up business in those foreign lands and engaging in economic activities39. The laws must be amended so as to come up with more favorable ones that encourage those that have intentions of staying within the European Union for longer times to do so without fear of being discriminated against. Labor immigration policy has to be revised and affected properly. The member countries of European Union need to be encouraged and encouraged to develop some positive political attitudes to wards people who are not from member countries. The issues of multiculturalism has to be emphasized among member states .Most immigrants seem to find countries like Germany, Italy, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the united kingdom as very favorable migration destinations due to various varied experiences that have been talked about by few who have visited these destinations. Bibliography A Pieter Van der Mei, Free movement of persons within the European Community: cross-border access to public benefits (Oxford, Hart 2002.)37. A.,Joanna. Freedom of movement of persons: a practitioner's handbook (The Hague, Kluwer Law Internat 2002)16. Bailey, D., De Propris, L., Industrial and regional policies in an enlarging EU (3rd edn Routledge, Abingdon 2009) 47. C Sawyer, Statelessness in the European Union: displaced, undocumented, unwanted (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2011)81. Cholewinski, R.,Borders and Discrimination in the European Union(Immigration Law Practitioners Association, London andMigration Policy Group, Brussels 2002) 43-49. Commission of the European Communities. Directorate-General for Employment, Industrial Relations, and Social Affairs. ‘Green paper: European social policy: options for the Union: consultative document. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1993. Diamond, J., etal, Urban regeneration management: international perspectives (2nd edn Routledge, London 2010) 136. Dinan, D.,Encyclopedia of the European Union (Lynne Reinner Publishers, Boulder 1998) 57. E Guild, The legal framework and social consequences of free movement of persons in the European Union (2nd edn The Hague, Kluwer Law Internat 1999). Favell, A., Hansen, R., 'Market against politics: migration, EU enlargement and the idea of Europe'(2002) 28 Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 581. Fredman, S., 'Combating Racism with Human Rights: the Right to Equality' in Fredman, S., (Ed), Discrimination and Human Rights The Case of Racism (OUP, Oxford 2001) 9, 26-29. G Elspeth, Minderhoud, Security of residence and expulsion: protection of aliens in Europe ‘The Hague, Boston, Mass: Kluwer Law International 2001)27. Havinga, T., 'The effects and limits of anti-discrimination law in the Netherlands' (2003) 31 International Journal of the Sociology of Law 1. Hepple, B.,et al, Equality: A New Framework (Hart Publishing, Oxford, 2000). I Lejeune, The Enlargement of the European Union: Opportunities for Business and Trade (Chichester: John Wiley & Sons 2004) 91. JM Gibney, Immigration and asylum : from 1900 to the present 1 Entries A to I. Santa Barbaram (Calif, ABC-CLIO 2005) 42. JN Blake, ‘Immigration, Asylum and Human Rights’ (OUP, Oxford 2003). Kantola, J.,Gender and the European Union (4th edn Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke 2010) 74. Lord Lester of Herne Hill QC, 'The East African Asians Cases Revisited.' Spring Issue, Administrative & Public law, [2002] PL 52. M El-Agraa, The European Union: economics and policies (4th edn Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press 2011). M Oinonen, Does EU merger control discriminate against small market companies? : diagnosing the argument with conclusions (Austin, Kluwer 2010)73. Mooney, C.,Pregnant pause: an international legal analysis of maternity discrimination (6th ednAshgate, Farnham 2010) 95. P Littlewood, The future of work in Europe ( Aldershot (Hants, England); Burlington (VT) : Ashgate, cop 2004)182. R (Sivakumar) v Home Secretary[2003]1 W LR 840, HL CE). Report of the Commission on the Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain [the Parekh Report], The Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain (Profile Books, London 2000). S. Josephine, Social law and policy in an evolving European Union (Oxford, Hart 2000.) 62. Solomos, J.,Race and Racism in Britain (3rd edn Palgrave, London 2003) 6-8. V H Amersfoort, ‘International Migration and Civil Rights: the Dilemmas of Migration Control in an Age of Globalisation' in Guild, E., (ed), The Legal Framework and Social Consequences of Free Movement of Workers in the European Union (Kluwer, Hague 1999) 73. Westlake, M.,The Council of the European Union (2nd edn, John Harper London 1999) 215. X Arzoz, Respecting linguistic diversity in the European Union (3rd edn Amsterdam; Philadelphia: J. Benjamins Pub. Co., 2008)126. Read More