HUMAN MIGRATION

By
Dayana Jerome
Presented by
DAYANA JEROME
COURSE: 2nd SEMSTER/ 1st year MSW
SUBJECT: SOCIAL PROBLEMS
INSTITUTION NAME: BHOPAL SCHOOL OF
SOCIAL SCIENCES

 According to WHO,
MIGRATION is the movement of a person or a group of persons, either across an
international border, or within a State. It is a population movement, encompassing
any kind of movement of people, whatever its length, composition and causes; it
includes migration of refugees, displaced persons, economic migrants, and persons
moving for other purposes, including family reunification.
REFUGEE is a person who, owing to well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of
race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political
opinions, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such
fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country.

 INVASION
 CONQUEST
 COLONIZATION
 EMMIGRATION/IMMIGRATION

 VOLUNTARY MIGRATION : is based on the initiative and the free will of the
person and is influenced by a combination of factors: economic, political and social:
either in the migrants` country of origin (determinant factors or "push factors") or in the
country of destination (attraction factors or "pull factors").
 FORCED MIGRATION: refers to the movements of refugees and internally
displaced people i.e. IDPs (displaced by conflict) as well as people displaced by
natural or environmental disasters, chemical or nuclear disasters, famine, or
development projects.

 "Push-Pull factors" are the reasons that push or attract people to a particular place.
• "PUSH" factors are the negative aspects of the country of origin, often decisive in people`s
choice to emigrate.
Ex: Inadequate conditions ,Desertification ,Famine or drought ,Political fear or persecution
.Slavery or forced labor. Poor medical care ,Loss of wealth ,Desire for more political or
religious freedom etc.
and
• the “PULL" factors are the positive aspects of a different country that encourages people
to emigrate in search of a better life.
Ex: Job opportunities ,Better living conditions, Education, Better medical care, Attractive
Climates, Security, Industry etc.

Since they are internally displaced due to conflict or environmental
disasters hence they move to a new environment. Immigrants leave
their beloved homes to seek a life in camps, spontaneous settlement,
and countries of asylum.
IDPs stay within their own country and remain under the protection
of its government, even if that government is the reason for their
displacement. They often move to areas where it is difficult to
deliver humanitarian assistance and as a result, these people are
among the most vulnerable in the world.
At the end of 2019, some 45.7 million people were internally
displaced due to armed conflict, generalized violence or human
rights violations, according to Internal Displacement Monitoring
Centre (IDMC).

 While Migration is a positive and empowering experience for many, it is
increasingly clear that a lack of Human rights-based migration
governance at the global and national levels is leading to the routine violation
of migrants’ right at the transit and international borders and in the
countries they migrate to.
 Human Trafficking and Migrant Smuggling.

LACK OF HUMAN RIGHTS-BASED MIGRATION
GOVERNANCE
 Human rights violations
against migrants can
include a denial of civil and
political rights such as
arbitrary detention, torture,
or a lack of due process, as
well as economic, social
and cultural rights such
as the rights to health,
housing or education.
 The denial of migrants’
rights is often closely linked
to discriminatory laws
and to deep-seated
attitudes of prejudice or
xenophobia

THE ROUTINE VIOLATION OF MIGRANTS’ RIGHT AT
THE TRANSIT AND INTERNATIONAL BORDERS
 Migrants in transit risk a range of human rights violations, including because they have
become destitute or “stranded” in the transit country and because they lack legal protection
and are unable or unwilling to seek the protection of the country of transit.
 Migrant women in transit often face specific gendered forms of discrimination and abuse,
and children can be particularly at risk, whether they are travelling on their own or with
their families or caregivers. States have obligations under international law to address the
dangers and risks faced by migrants in transit, but lack of regular migration pathways,
coupled with harsh, security-driven migration policies and xenophobic rhetoric often operate
to aggravate these risks rather than mitigating them.
 Arrival at an international border does not put an end to the human rights risks that
migrants face. At land, sea and air borders around the world, migrants experience human
rights protection gaps, including unlawful profiling, torture and ill-treatment, gender-based
violence, dangerous interception practices, and prolonged or arbitrary detention.

 Thailand, as a country of origin, transit and destination of victims of human trafficking, has
being particularly active in its efforts to fight against this crime. In 2008, it passed the Anti-
Trafficking in Persons Act, a comprehensive law that provided a broader definition of human
trafficking and imposed heavier penalties to persons involved in this crime. In addition, the
country launched awareness-raising activities and campaigns, provided capacity-building to both
public and private agencies, and created several mechanisms to strengthen its fight against
human trafficking (OSCE, 2009).
 In 2006, Brazil developed a national policy to fight human trafficking, establishing for the first
time the principles, directives and actions on prevention, repression and prosecution of this
crime. It defined and implemented actions in the areas of justice and public security, as well as in
the fields of external relations, education, health, social assistance, promotion of racial equality,
employment, human rights, women rights, tourism and culture. In 2013, the country approved
the IInd National Plan to Fight Human Trafficking for the period 2013–2016, which was
preceded by the Ist National Plan that was implemented between 2008 and 2010 (Brazil,
Ministry of Justice, 2013).

 In 2010, the Arab Initiative for Building National Capacities for Combating Human Trafficking
was launched in the Doha Foundation Forum. This initiative seeks to establish an Arab
partnership that involves all relevant stakeholders in the region to foster a political consensus for
future regional action to combat this crime, and at the same time the national capacities in the
relevant governmental and non-governmental bodies to effectively combat human trafficking.
Among other objectives, this initiative aims at increasing the compliance of domestic legislation
with the Protocol and other human rights legal instruments, raising awareness about human
trafficking and the means to combat it, and improving the mechanisms for the identification,
referral, support and protection of the victims of human trafficking (Qatar Foundation for
Combating Human Trafficking, n.d.).
 The current legal framework of the European Union to fight human trafficking is the Directive on
Preventing and Combating Trafficking in Human Beings and Protecting its Victims, which was
approved in 2011. This directive obliges the member States of the European Union to establish
national rapporteurs or equivalent mechanisms for monitoring the implementation of anti-
trafficking policies. The European Union also launched the EU Strategy Towards the Eradication
of Trafficking in Human Beings 2012–2016 that builds on the priorities identified in the directive
and shares its holistic approach, addressing issues on prevention, protection, prosecution and
partnerships. Additionally, the Stockholm Programme of 2009, a adopted by the International
Migration Policies: Government Views and Priorities United Nations Department of Economic and
Social Affairs ‫׀‬Population Division 95 European Council to set a framework on issues of
citizenship, justice, security, asylum, immigration and visa policy between 2010 and 2014, stresses
the need to further strengthen existing mechanisms in the fight against human trafficking and
migrant smuggling (European Commission, 2013)

ENCOURAGING THE RETURN OF MIGRANTS TO THEIR
COUNTRIES OF ORIGIN:
In 2011, information on the existence of Government programmes to facilitate the return of
migrants to their countries of origin was available for only 58 countries worldwide. Governments
of 40 of the 58 countries with data (69 per cent) had programmes to facilitate the return of
migrants to their home countries. Out of 40 countries in more developed regions with data, 32 (80
per cent) had programmes to facilitate the return of migrants to home countries, compared with
only 8 (44 per cent) out of 18 countries in less developed regions with data. Thirty-one of the 32
countries in more developed regions with such return programmes were in Europe.
Examples of programmes to facilitate return of migrants to home countries include the Czech
Republic, Japan and Spain. These countries have introduced cash incentives in recent years to
encourage the return of migrants dealing with the challenges posed by the economic downturn.
Japan, for example, established a programme providing financial incentives to migrants to return
to their home countries, covering the period from April 2009 to March 2010.

 In this programme, about 22,000 migrants participated, the vast majority (93 per cent) of them
from Brazil. Spain also established a programme called the Plan de Retorno Voluntario in 2008.
This programme was a “pay-to-go” system that gave unemployment benefits to non-European
Union citizens who agreed to return to their home countries. However, these programmes are
believed to have had limited impact (IOM, 2011b).
 Another example is the European Return Fund, which was established by the European
Parliament and the Council of the European Union as part of the Solidarity and Management of
Migration Flows programme covering the period 2008–2013. The fund provides resources for action
at the national or transnational levels, aimed at facilitating voluntary return of foreign persons
residing in a European Union country who are not under an obligation to leave the territory, such
as applicants for asylum awaiting a response or refugees enjoying temporary protection. It also
facilitates voluntary return of migrants without proper documents or in an irregular situation
(European Union, 2010).

 Countries where naturalization was available to only certain categories of immigrants or where
the residency requirement was 10 years or longer were categorized as having “more restrictive”
naturalization policies. In 2011, out of 196 countries considered, 128 countries (65 per cent) had
“less restrictive” naturalization policies, whereas another 63 countries (32 per cent) allowed
naturalization under “more restrictive” conditions. Five countries—Kuwait, Lebanon, Myanmar,
Nauru and the United Arab Emirates—did not allow naturalization under any conditions.
 Naturalization policies were more restrictive in countries in less developed regions than in more
developed regions. Seventy-eight per cent of Governments in more developed regions allowed
“less restrictive” acquisition of naturalized citizenship in 2011, compared with 61 per cent of
Governments in less developed regions and 47 per cent of least developed countries (figure 3.2).
More restrictive naturalization policies were particularly common in Africa and Asia.

 Integration measures in most destination countries fall into two distinct categories: multiculturalism
and assimilation.
 While policies within the multiculturalism approach encourage migrants to retain their own cultural
identity, assimilation policies promote the absorption of minority cultures into the majority culture
(Borooah and Mangan, 2009). Countries of permanent settlement, such as Australia, Canada, New
Zealand and the United States of America, tend to be inclusionary, making it possible for immigrants
to become citizens with full rights while maintaining their cultural identities.
 Others examples are Lithuania and Latvia, which have a multiculturalism approach whereby
educational programmes have been designed to provide the immigrant pupils the option to complete
school education in their mother tongue— Polish, Belorussian or Russian (EACEA, 2009). On the
other hand, the Netherlands is an example where the policy has shifted from multiculturalism to
assimilation by removing mother tongue teaching for migrant children and introducing mandatory
Dutch language and civic integration courses for all immigrants (Entzinger, 2006; Kern, 2011)

 Keystones UNHCR’s stepped-up engagement on internal displacement will be supported and showcased in
the nine target operations in relation to the keystones articulated in the IDP Policy. Each of the keystones is
being put into practice in the nine target operations, while some keystones will be prominently highlighted in
particular operations, depending on the operational context:
 Centrality of protection
 Coordination leadership
 Emergency preparedness
 Operational response
 Integrated programming and area-based approaches
 Support to solutions
 Supporting localization and national capacities
 Data, information management & analysis

 Centrality of protection : As in all IDP operations, UNHCR advises and supports Resident/Humanitarian
Coordinators and UN/Humanitarian Country Teams in the development of overarching protection and
solutions strategies, relying upon evidence-based protection and needs analyses developed in cooperation
with stakeholders prior to and after cluster activation. Representatives participate in UN/Humanitarian
Country Teams, to help ensure that protection is placed at the centre of the humanitarian response (across
the IDP spectrum), and guide humanitarian action, advocacy and engagement. As Protection Cluster lead,
UNHCR will continue to promote protection mainstreaming across all clusters, thereby ensuring that inter-
agency preparedness and response is shaped by protection considerations. These actions will ensure that all
activities take account of age, gender and diversity considerations, as well as the existing skills and
capacities of affected populations.
 Coordination leadership: When clusters are established UNHCR will step up to its responsibilities in
accordance with IASC commitments and accountabilities. UNHCR will strengthen its preparedness,
response and solutions interventions, through dedicated cluster coordinators and information management
support, underpinned by a robust operational response in each of these sectors. Dedicated efforts to
strengthen internal tri-cluster synergies, including through the mainstreaming of protection across all
sectors, and to bolster UNHCR coordination capacities, are ongoing at global level and across all IDP
operations. These will be advanced in IDP-Initiative target operations in particular.]

 Emergency preparedness : To ensure better preparedness for emergencies involving internal
displacement, both in its operational role and as tri-Cluster Lead Agency, UNHCR is finalizing an
internal Preparedness Package for IDP Emergencies (PPIE). In line with this tool, UNHCR will
ensure strengthened participation in inter-agency preparedness measures, contribute to UN system-
wide, and government-led or supported, risk assessment and early warning mechanisms, and
continue to support local and national capacity to prepare for, prevent and mitigate displacement
risks. UNHCR will consistently embed protection considerations in the various steps of agency and
inter-agency preparedness efforts, and will contribute to scenario-based contingency planning within
its shelter and settlements, and camp/site coordination and management, areas of expertise.
 Operational response: UNHCR is committed to strengthening operational delivery in internal
displacement situations in line with its leadership and coordination responsibilities related to
protection, shelter and camp coordination and camp management, and ensuring its contribution as
Provider of Last Resort. UNHCR will bring experience in community-based protection approaches to
prioritize interventions for prevention, response and mitigation of the most urgent and immediate
protection risks and needs, including engagement with the relevant lead agencies, to combat sexual
and gender-based violence (SGBV) and promote child protection. UNHCR will continue to engage in
inter-agency and system-wide efforts related to protection against sexual exploitation and abuse
(PSEA). UNHCR will also apply and systematically integrate its longstanding expertise in shelter,
and camp/site management into its work with IDPs.

 Integrated programming and area-based approaches:A number of regions are increasingly
affected by overlapping refugee movements, internal displacement and statelessness, thereby
necessitating a strategic and joined-up approach to forced displacement that UNHCR is
uniquely positioned to provide. UNHCR has initiated measures for system-wide integrated
programming, which will maximize opportunities for operations to respond through area-
based approaches that are inclusive of all population groups in an operational context,
including situations where populations of concern are co-located (e.g. IDPs, refugees and
asylum seekers, returning refugees and IDPs), and/or with host communities. Programmes
will define a mutually supportive and complementary set of actions for UNHCR within multi-
stakeholder plans.
 Support to solutions: UNHCR will continue to prioritize actions that contribute to the
conditions conducive for safe, dignified and comprehensive solutions. In line with the 2030
Agenda and the principle of “leaving no-one behind,” UNHCR’s work with partners to secure
the inclusion of IDPs in national services, social safety nets, and local and national
development plans will continue. UNHCR will build effective approaches to resilience and
solutions that assist IDPs, wider displacement-affected communities and their governments to
better manage and overcome the consequences and effects of displacement. In the pursuit of
solutions, UNHCR will bolster ongoing contributions to transition strategies that link
humanitarian and development action, and activities that build and sustain peace.

 Supporting localization and national capacities: In line with 2030 Agenda, UNHCR will support the
post-conflict transition to local and national actors to meaningfully take over operational delivery,
coordination and monitoring in relation to IDP protection and solutions. This will include multiyear
multi-partner strategies to enhance national coordination and response capacity, including technical
advice and support for national laws and policies on internal displacement, training and capacity
development. UNHCR will contribute to UN/Humanitarian Country Team efforts for the gradual de-
activation of clusters in support of government-led coordination arrangements, including in the
transition of any IDP sites to governments and/or other agreed approaches that facilitate durable
solutions.
 Data, information management & analysis: With dedicated information management capacity – for
each of the clusters it leads/co-leads and for its own operational response – UNHCR will ensure
timely and impact-oriented assistance and protection for those displaced and affected. This will be
enabled through sound protection monitoring, needs assessments, and analysis conducted, together
with partners, including at all stages of internal displacement crises. UNHCR’s new Data
Transformation Strategy 2020-2025, envisions strategic partnerships with key data gathering and
analysis actors. The data and information generated and analyzed – by UNHCR and its
implementing partners, as well as UNHCR led cluster partners – will support evidence-based
planning, response, communications and advocacy for protection, assistance and solutions outcomes,
by UNHCR and the rest of the humanitarian community. Data, Identity Management & Analysis
(DIMA) units are being established in each Regional Bureau to support Country Operations,
including with IDP data.

 established within IOM ( International Organization for
Migration) to strengthen and promote the Organization’s
involvement in International Migration Law (IML).
 Its main roles and activities involve:
Policy and Programming Support: The unit provides
support to IOM missions. It coordinates, facilitates and
serves as a focal point for the development and
implementation of IML and IML related project activities.
In particular, the unit provides guidance and input (as
well as trainings) on how to apply a rights-based approach
to projects in line with supporting Principle 1 of the
Migration Governance Framework (MiGOF).
Capacity Building Activities: The Unit provides training
and workshops for government officials, international
organizations, academics, civil societies and IOM staff on
international migration law.

 get involved in advocacy and policy change on behalf of refugees, asylum seekers, IDPs
and returnees who may not be entitled to services, or lack access to them due to their
circumstances (Delgado, Jones, & Rohani, 2005).
 Social workers have an ethical mandate to address social and economic justice issues
(NASW, 2008), therefore placing them in a position to advocate for resources, provide
education and training to IDPs, and assist in the process of returning to the place of
origin post-conflict, or resettlement at the reception site through building community
and social networks
 Provide emotional support to the ones experienced abuse which can be very hard to
prove as personal accounts are tainted by PTSD, anxiety disorders, memory loss due to
trauma experienced.

 Migrants are not inherently vulnerable, nor do they lack resilience and agency. Rather,
vulnerability to human rights violations is the result of multiple and intersecting forms of
discrimination, inequality and structural and societal dynamics that lead to diminished and
unequal levels of power and enjoyment of rights. The vulnerable situations that migrants face
can arise from a range of situational and personal factors that may intersect or coexist
simultaneously, influencing and exacerbating each other and also evolving or changing over
time as circumstances change. Migrants may find themselves in vulnerable situations as a
result of the situations compelling them to leave their country of origin, the circumstances in
which they travel or the conditions they face on arrival, or because of personal characteristics
such as their age, gender identity, race, disability or health status.

 Database report from the United Nations Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division
 International Migration Policies Report
 Migration and Human Rights, OHCHR (Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights),
IOM Publications.
 UNHCR Policy and Guidance
• UNHCR’s initiative on internal displacement 2020-2021

HUMAN MIGRATION

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to HUMAN MIGRATION

Recently uploaded

HUMAN MIGRATION