Urban Refugees from 'Detachment' to 'Harmonization'

Home , Aksaray, Esenler, Muhammed Muheisen, Silivri, Sivas, Sultanbeyli

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul

JANUARY 2017 Photo:Şahin Avcı

PUBLISHED and PRODUCED by Gafa Media | www.gafa.com.tr This research was conducted by Migration Policy Workshop (MAGA) operating within Marmara Municipalities Union’s Center for Urban Policies and led by Assoc. Prof. Dr. M. Murat ERDOĞAN.

Project Manager / Report: Assoc. Prof. Dr. M. Murat Erdoğan

Researchers Burcuhan Şener (MMU) Elif Sipahioğlu (MMU-HUGO) Yudum Kavukçuer (HUGO) Dr. Esin Yılmaz Başçeri (HUGO)

ISBN 978-605-83293-8-6

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PRESENTATION...... 6 INTRODUCTION...... 8 AIM AND SCOPE OF THE RESEARCH...... 10 I. SYRIANS AND OTHER REFUGEES IN TURKEY...... 13 I-A. Legal and Administrative Regulations on Refugees in Turkey ...... 16 I-B. Refugees in Turkey...... 21 II. IMMIGRANTS, REFUGEES AND DEVELOPMENT IN ISTANBUL...... 27 II- A. Dynamics of Internal Migration in Istanbul...... 27 II-B. International Migration and Refugee Influx into Istanbul ...... 29 III. SYRIAN REFUGEES IN ISTANBUL...... 33 IV. MUNICIPALITIES AND REFUGEES IN TURKEY: LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE STATUS...... 39 V. THE RESEARCH: URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul...... 45 VI. GENERAL FRAME OF THE RESEARCH...... 51 VII. RESEARCH FINDINGS...... 57 1. “Numerical Quantity” The Foundation of Process Management by Istanbul District Municipalities...... 59 2. The Database Based on District Municipalities and the Need for a Common Database...... 61 3. Are Municipalities Legally and Administratively Obliged to Take Care of Refugees?...... 65 4. Are Legal and Administrative Changes Necessary?...... 67 5. Which Municipal Departments Are Related to Refugee Issues?...... 69 6. Staff Recruitment for Refugees...... 71 7. Information on Numbers and Characteristics of the Refugees...... 73 8. Municipal Income and Refugees...... 75 9. Municipal Services for Refugees...... 77 10. How Many of the Syrian Refugees Benefit from Municipal Services?...... 81 11. Employment Status and Business Operations of Syrians...... 83 12. Begging and Municipalities...... 85 13. Which Institutions Are Cooperating on Refugee Issues?...... 87 14. Cooperation with International Institutions...... 89 15. Harmonization Programs and Municipalities...... 91 16. Multi-Purpose Community Centers...... 95 17. Which Persons and Institutions Lead These Activities?...... 97 18. How are the Services for Refugees Financed?...... 99 19. How Should the Funds for These Activities Be Regulated?...... 101 20. How Much Have Refugees Increased the Workload and the Financial Burden of Municipalities?...... 103 21. Where Do Syrian Refugees Get Provided with These Services?...... 105 22. Do Syrian Refugees Get Help for Their Health and Education Problems?...... 107 23. Future Plans of Syrians: Will They Stay or Will They Leave?...... 109 24. Possibility of Tension Between Syrians and Local Communities...... 111 25. Involving Refugees in Decision Making Process...... 113 26. Other Issues/Problems...... 115 VIII. OVERVIEW...... 117 CONCLUSION AND POLICY PROPOSALS...... 125 APPENDIX: SEMI-STRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRE...... 130 URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul 6 MARMARA MUNICIPALITIES UNION PRESENTATION welcoming suffering refugees.” exceptional position among the world’s nations once again by “Our mighty nation proved its uniqueness, greatness and its nation provednation uniquenessgreatnessits and their homeland. By offering such a help, our frompart to people many yearsled has and recent the in humanity of shames greatest the of one is escaped which War, Civil Syrian that from ones the refugees, particularly suffering most many welcoming usual by as nations world’s among position exceptional its proved nation mighty Our and inTurkey. world the in both topics agenda important most the among is Syria in place took tragedythat The exile. in hearts the and into hope faith brings welcome of kind any helpor of kind any cruelty, this the of darkness Through experiences. of kind all and demolishes cities, hopes, anddreams, memories sweeps It behind. wrecks leaves War find arelieving solutiontothistragedy. notcould a yet greatand moon the on walk to way found the Humankind humanity. in of stories history painful many with mingled which migration, for found been yet has solution no times, modern in even Unfortunately,migration. with along comes thatsuffer the is humanity of history the in one’s and home, from becoming lonely. a One of the biggest of sorrows devoid parting being homeland, means Migration Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). High in Nations United Istanbul the with cooperation in organized was Refugees” Urban to Service “The in Municipalities on of Role workshop a 2015, November In NGOs andinternationalorganizations. government, in central municipalities, projects the with run cooperation municipalities member help and our coordination between the and knowledge administer of experience, share for migration, ground on set studies scientific conduct to is MAGA Center of aim The of Policies. Union’s Urban for body Municipalities the within Marmara founded been has PolicyWorkshopMigration (MAGA) 2015, In to functionimmediately. of Assembly Marmara Municipalities Union and it started General of body the within founded been has Commission” “Migration As thesea leading example for local governments, of some mention relevant activities; to like would I activities onthelevel of localgovernments. and relevantleading also but adaptation, social aid humanitarian asylum, migration, as issues on been working excessively only has not Union Municipalities Marmara years, recent the in Especially again. once a hl fr h frt ie n itr and history in time first the for held was which Summit, Humanitarian World the At participants suchasUNICEFandUNHCR. international with together organized was in congress held afterwards held in the Istanbul on April 30, were Village;2016 Children’s festival Balıkesir children’s a and local 2016, government workshops 19, April the On addressed. 2016, was April City” and Child in “Immigrant of relationship Policies Center Urban our for by organized Congress, City Children’s International 2nd the in Besides, Ministry of theInterior. foremost,relevantand tofirstthe actors, to delivered turned was report this and report, and a into way same the were in municipalities determined the by difficulties experienced these resolving for plans and requests Suggestions, discussed. also were future the in conducted be to be possible to or proposals planned are that activities solution the and practices, conducting effective their municipalities shared refugees Syrian on activities the While workshop. the in discussed were field the in face municipalities that challenges the and activities Municipal developed. were proposals solution joint and shared were experience and activities related to evaluated, this was issue refugees, Syrian to priority with migration, and refugees the of status attended the workshop, in which the current borders, their within refugees Syrian 5,000 thanmore with municipalities, 21 of total A and more extensive works andincrease hope. our government. to I hope this all, work could lead to of new local most beneficial and as NGOs, issue be governments, the to in involved report actors all this for like would I one of them. and everyand each thank to likewould I Union. Members Members, hardworking Commisionstaff of Marmara Board Municipalities Migration Advisory Assembly General Members, dear for not were it if possible be not would report this Creating effort intocreating thisstudy. great a such putting for Erdoğan Murat M. Dr. Assoc. esteemed thank to like would I way toget therightresults. whole the at otherno unfortunately, picture,is but there look to hurts it Sometimes day. every problems of resolution the with of on field accurate and analyzed data while dealing the rely to is task in Our refugees. and migration situation the the and the to issue relevant of actors local picture of important approach Erdoğan, very Murat a M. offers Dr. by Assoc. coordinated esteemed work intense with of created months was which study, field This around and Turkey.” in Dynamics Issue: Refugee the on Perspectives “Multilateral on event an organized Assembly, Citizens Helsinki the and Istanbul Centers Global Columbia in 23-24, Union, May cooperation withthe Municipalities on Marmara Istanbul 2016, in place took President of Marmara Municipalities Union URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Recep ALTEPE 7

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul 10 SCOPE OFSCOPE THE RESEARCH AND AIM MARMARA MUNICIPALITIES UNION 1 refugees million 5.5 not be ignored. Around 3.2 milion of more than should that fact a as Turkey,stands especially been trying to survive in neighboring countries, and country their fleed have who Syrians the presencethe but comeSyria, will to of stability and peace when and end will war this when to predict difficult is It country. their had leave to Syrians million 5.5 than more while try, countheir - within leavehomes to their had tal, to- in million 22 is which Syria, in population the of half than more crisis, this In 2011. April Worldin sincebeganWar history II in crises an humanitari- biggest the of war,one civil a into turned soon Syria in turmoil political the After used Turkey as a “transit” country. are Syrians and the other half non-Syrians, also and especially in 2015, and about 2014 half of whom in Turkey through Europe to went who people, million 1 than more that known also is tion we have been facing in the last five years. It can better understand such a massive immigra- we before2011, 100,000 Turkeybelow in was refugees of number total the that consider we If 300,000. over also is refugees non-Syrian of key,forgottenbe not should it number the that Tur- in group refugee majority the numerically are refugees Syrian because background the in remain mostly Pakistan and Iran Iraq, istan, Afghan- from refugees the Turkey.Although in population the of 4% reached has refugees Syrian of number the that us shows also ber num- This that them. of half means than more has which Turkey now, Turkey in live Syria Turkey”. in Refugees on Regulations Administrative and “Legal titled the motives of this choice are covered in detail in the section Turkeyframeworkin legal The and better. sociologically tion situa- the reflects it since preferred, is term this “refugees”, legally not are they that knowledge the in are we Although context.legal-administrative the of Turkeyindependently in study,this In conceptthe of “refugee” forused is Syrians the 1 who had to escape from escape to had who around Turkey, an unusual issue has emerged: has issue unusual Turkey,an around border,the to all everyclose city in single then are that ones the centers, in first city the in but because 2012, camps the in not live to refugeesbegan Syrian of middle the from Starting around 1million. is region, the outside refugees of number est ra,arewhich firstthe provinces 6 larg the with - Anka- and İzmir,Konya Mersin, Bursa, Istanbul, in living and TP bycovered Syrians of number The Turkey,Istanbul. in in around especially all way scattered a in lives half border other the the region, to close cities the in live Syrians the of half while that means This million. 1.6 is Şanlıurfa) ve Osmaniye Mardin, Malatya, Kilis, Kahramanmaraş, Hatay, Gaziantep, Adıyaman, (Adana, located are camps refugee the where provinces 10 the in (TP) Protection Temporary coveredcenters)by city and camps the (in ans Syri- of number total The refugees. urban as Turkeyof cities the livein Syrians million around 2.8-3 hand, other the On refugees. million 3.1-3.2 of 257,566 to corresponds which area, border the near located camps the in live key Turin population Syrian the of 8% - only 2016, December of As regions. border the from key refugees, they have begun to disperse into Tur- of number of largeness the 270 to around due thousand, of capacity a with camps 26 of establishment the Despite different. been has Turkeycomingto Syrians with 2011 sinceApril back to their homelands. However, the situation go would refugees the normal, to back turned and whenthesituationintheirhomecountries way; this in controlled been also had periods The mass migrations into Turkey in arrived. the previous have they country the of regions der in the rapidly established camps and in the bor- masses these keep to try usually governments When refugees begin mass entry into a country, 2 3RP the known, is it process.As this in place special governmentsa local giving in role a played also period), permanence of extension the to (due live refugees where countries neighboring the “resistance”thein increasing as determined is ugees (UNHCR), and in which the main element CommissionerHigh Nations United the for Ref and (UNDP) Program Development Nations ed December 2014 under the auspices of in the Unit launched was which (3RP), Plan Resilience and Refugee Regional The power. legitimate their of sense the in controversial considered be might that and before planned never have they that areas some in refugees the to vices tended, municipalities have had to provide ser- ex cities the in stay refugees’of period the as but refugees, to support emergency provide to had municipalities, especially Local governments, refugees. of needs and problems with dealing start to had governments local issue, ed local governments primarily, and due to this affect have refugees Urban refugees.” “urban aims to establish a better link between human- between link better a establish to aims 3RP the this, on Based future. better a for hope ty and garbage collection, and more importantly, electrici- water,sanitation, education, health, as such services basic need people These lihood. sourceliveofa - need Syrians displaced ternally Syrian crisis. Refugees, host communities and in- provide solutions in the long-term crises like the approacheslike develop” then “first aid, not can the burden of refugees. Because, it is known that carry to have that countries the of “resistence” improvethe to aims and goals its among “help” “development” puts wellas that approachas an adopts 3RP helped. be could issue this support will that organizations and institutions the how ways the determines also it and populating, ly intensive- been has country this from that escaped refugees the which in countries the also but experienced, is crisis the which in country the only develnot supporting of- philosophy the oped has plan This crises. in intervention of terms in vision and scope its with (UN) Nations inlRfgeRslec-lnTrihpf (Access: 10.12.2016) gional-Refugee-Resilience-Plan_Turkish.pdf uploads/2016/02/Turkey-2016-Reiacrisis.org/wp-content/- http://www.3rpsyr- Turkey,2016-2017 Plan, Resistance and Refugee 3RP,Regional (UNDP), Program Development UN 2 2 is the first worldwide action of the United United the of action worldwide first the is - - - - that the municipalities shouldbesupported. of boththeTurkish andtheUNorganizations for acknowledgment the indicates framework this systems. in 3RP the in municipalities presencethe The of aid development and humanitarian the in visibility much gain to able not are they services, of provision the in active are they that and crisis the influenced by areactually too ties municipali- though even that known also is It improvelivelihoods. to Turkishtheir and people hosting and Syrians the both to services viding pro - for supported be to actors as place their took municipalities the 2016-2017), in lished and pub- plan latest Refugee the (including TurkeyPlan Resistance subsequent the in and 2014 in Plan Intervention Regional Syrian third the in 2014, and 2012 between Plan vention Inter- Regional Syrian of “Turkey”section the in mentioned not were municipalities While scale. in small still is it although more, and more felt be to begun projectshas funded internationally in presence municipality’s the onwards, from 2014 Thus, management. process of terms in forgovernments,local municipalities, especially the UN has begun to include specific regulations reports, recent its in Particularly partnerships. host societies and a special focus on multi-actor for support with development, and aid itarian 3 necessary andvalidfor allmunicipalities. very similarandtheproposals for solutionsare are municipalities the by faced problems the that believed is it Istanbul, in out carried was research ofthis part study field the solution. Although for suggestions and legislation the from arising limitations the encountered, lems prob- the management, process refugees, of generallyand aroundTurkey,all in issuethe Istanbul on in particularly municipalities, the of Case of Istanbul”, is trying to reveal the services and Process Management of Municipalities: The Refugees Syrian ‘Harmonization’ to tachment’ Refugeesresearch,“Urban This titled from‘De- gee-andresilience- plan--3rp--launched-in-ankar.html) ter/news-from-new-horizons/2015/04/the-regional-refu- website. presscen- UNDP-Turkey(http://www.tr.undp.org/content/turkey/tr/home/ the and silience-Plan_Turkish.pdf) Turkey-2016-Regional-Refugee-Re- tent/uploads/2016/02/ (http://www.3rpsyriacrisis.org/wp-con- 2016-2018 Turkey: 3RP are here used are that sources the reviews, 3RP the For URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 3 11

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul 3.2 million Syrians in Turkey

300,000 2.8 million Pre-registered Syrians Under Syrians Temporary Protection 5 million Asylum seekers that have entered Turkey

since April 2011 258,000 Syrians in the Camps

92% Ratio of Urban Refugees

Fotoğraf:AA I. SYRIANS AND OTHER REFUGEES IN TURKEY

As one of the most important crossroads of human history, Anatolian lands have hosted many human mobilities in history. In this respect, immigration history of Turkey can also be read as history of very important social and political developments. Prof. Dr. Kemal H. Karpat, who is one of the most important connoisseurs in the fields of history and migration, says in the preface of a book called “Türkiye’nin Göç Tarihi: 14. Yüzyıldan 21. Yüzyıla Türkiye’ye Göçler”1 (Migration History of Turkey: Migration to Turkey from 14th Century to 21st Century) that “Turkey, ISTANBUL in brief, was established, has been changed and is a national state now thanks to migration.” It is also Registered 418.653 stated in this very book that immigrant-refugee Ratio to Provincial Population 2.86% traffic for the Anatolian lands continued intensive- ly throughout the history of the Republic. It is esti- ANKARA mated that the number of immigrants and refugees Registered 64.613 coming to Turkey from the year 1923 to the time of Ratio to Provincial Population 1.23% the great migration which started with Syrians today is between 1.8 and 2 million.2 It is also known IZMIR that those who came to Turkey were chosen from Registered 97.453 Turkish nobility as a means of the Republican “na- Ratio to Provincial Population 2.34% tion state” policy.3 These immigrants and refugees from Balkans, Central Asia, Caucasus and Middle BURSA East, who were Ottoman remnants and mostly Turk- Registered 102.017 ish nobles, have become one of the most serious decisions of the new Republic of Turkey, not only Ratio to Provincial Population 3.59% socially, but also politically and strategically. Turkish society has become diversified and strengthened Detailed information on the other provinces is shown on Chart 1. with these immigrants. Immigration was quite successfully managed via Population and Settlement Laws and turned into a contribution to the society in those years.

1 M. M. Erdoğan - A. Kaya (2015) Türkiye’nin Göç Tarihi: 14. Yüzyıldan 21. Yüzyıla Türkiye’ye Göçler, Istanbul Bilgi Univer- sity Press, Istanbul. 2 K. Kirişçi - S. Karaca (2015) Hoşgörü ve Çelişkiler: 1989, 1991 ve 2011’de Türkiye’ye Yönelen Kitlesel Mülteci Akınları, Türki- ye’nin Göç Tarihi: 14. Yüzyıldan 21. Yüzyıla Türkiye’ye Göçler, Istanbul Bilgi University Press, Istanbul, pg. 295-313. 3 A. İçduygu - K. Kirişçi (2009) Land of Diverse Migrations: Chal- lenges of Emigration and Immigration in Turkey. Istanbul Bilgi University Press: Istanbul. URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul 14 MARMARA MUNICIPALITIES UNION [http://www.goc.gov.tr/icerik6/gecici-koruma_363_378_4713_icerik] (Access: 12.12.2016) Source: Directorate General of Migration Management (8.12.2016) Chart 1:Syrians Under Temporary Protection in Turkey by Provinces 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 28 30 29 24 27 26 25 20 23 22 21 19 18 17 16 15 14 12 11 13 10 # 8 7 9 5 6 3 2 1 4 Hatay Hakkari Gümüşhane Giresun Gaziantep Eskişehir Erzurum Edirne Erzincan Elazığ Çorum Düzce Diyarbakır Denizli Burdur Çankırı Çanakkale Bursa Bolu Bitlis Bingöl Bilecik Bayburt Bayburt Batman Balıkesir Aydın Bartın Artvin Antalya Ankara Ardahan Aksaray Amasya TOTAL PROVINCES Afyon Adıyaman Adana Ağrı Ağrı REGISTERED 2.790.767 377.198 318.748 102.017 149.074 28.931 19.281 64.613 24.423 2.018 5.017 6.486 7.057 1.446 3.405 7.775 7.091 1.138 4.081 1839 878 146 504 170 562 311 988 655 731 509 328 210 849 65 39 31 40 71 POPULATION 78.741.053 1.533.507 1.931.839 1.654.196 2.842.547 1.053.506 1.186.688 5.270.575 2.288.456 2.183.167 278.775 151.449 426.686 826.716 762.312 222.918 360.388 574.304 402.537 180.945 993.442 525.180 291.095 513.341 258.339 340.449 267.184 212.361 566.633 190.708 168.370 322.167 547.210 386.514 602.774 709.015 78.550 99.265 RATIO TO PROVINCIAL POPULATION %24.60 %16.50 % 0.16 % 0.58 %3.54 %0.31 %0.04 %0.03 %0.24 %0.07 %0.08 %0.16 %0.87 %1.61 %0.17 %1.75 %0.71 %0.28 %0.34 %0.66 %3.59 %3.01 %0.19 %0.27 %0.24 %0.05 %3.40 %0.02 %0.67 %0.02 %0.15 %0.07 %1.23 %0.07 %0.01 %0.29 %4.05 %6.83 81 80 79 78 77 76 75 74 73 72 71 70 69 68 67 66 65 64 63 62 61 60 59 58 57 56 55 54 53 52 51 50 49 48 47 46 45 44 43 42 41 40 39 38 # Zonguldak Yozgat Yalova Van Uşak Tunceli Trabzon Tokat Tekirdağ Şırnak Şanlıurfa Sivas Sinop Siirt Samsun Sakarya Rize Osmaniye Ordu Niğde Nevşehir Muş Muğla Mersin Mardin Manisa Malatya Kütahya Konya Kocaeli Kilis Kırşehir Kırklareli Kırıkkale Kayseri Kastamonu Kars Karaman Karabük Kahramanmaraş Izmir Istanbul Isparta Iğdır PROVINCES REGISTERED 401.711 137.292 121.940 418.653 14.315 40.823 93.333 19.841 69.830 26.227 54.464 86.347 97.453 2.921 2.623 1.597 1.200 1.998 5.739 2.116 3.126 3.888 6.744 3.159 5.520 8.325 5.872 2.075 6.129 302 779 612 621 813 347 662 682 719 143 508 357 88 69 79 POPULATION 14.657.434 1.096.397 1.892.320 1.279.884 1.745.221 1.380.366 2.130.544 1.780.055 1.341.056 1.096.610 4.168.415 595.907 419.440 233.009 353.048 768.417 593.990 937.910 490.184 618.617 204.133 320.351 953.181 328.979 512.873 728.949 346.114 286.767 408.728 908.877 796.591 772.904 571.463 130.655 225.562 346.973 270.271 372.633 292.660 242.196 236.978 421.766 192.435 86.076 URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” RATIO TO PROVINCIAL POPULATION %21.23 %11.72 %93.33 %0.05 %0.70 %1.13 %0.15 %0.34 %0.10 %0.26 %0.13 %0.61 %2.92 %0.34 %0.03 %0.98 %0.30 %0.71 %0.19 %7.96 %0.09 %0.91 %1.92 %0.20 %0.92 %7.87 %0.43 %2.57 %0.06 %3.28 %1.47 %0.29 %0.60 %0.25 %4.06 %0.19 %0.05 %0.21 %0.15 %7.87 %2.34 %2.86 %1.45 %0.04 15

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul 16 MARMARA MUNICIPALITIES UNION their country 5.5 million Syrians left 4 For a general idea on refugee issues and legal regulations on refugees in Turkey: Nuray Ekşi (2014) Ekşi Turkey:Nuray in refugees on regulations legal and issuesrefugee on idea general a For 4 “refugee.” of The status the has person the justified, is country another in asylum seeking is countryand fromhis escaped has who person a reasonwhy the When to seekandenjoy inother countries asylumfrom persecution.” Declaration of Human Rights (Article 14/1) it is stated that “Everyone has the right Universal 1948 In countries. and homes their leave to people million 20 almost caused which WorldWarII, in people of plight humanitarian the with mostly text con international the in developed was status This status. legal a is “Refugee” International Law aim of getting closer to EU legislation. the with also and law international with accordance in status other in but citizens Turkey has made a number of arrangements on refugees and foreigners who are not Refugees in Turkey I-A. Legal and Administrative Regulations on even becompared withtheprevious onesinanyway. not could that trend gigantic a facing been has it 2011 issues,sincemigrant with way they have become “urban refugees.” This shows that despite Turkey is familiar this in and wishes, and will own overTurkeytheir Turkeyall with scatteredin are any placement since the arrivals are “temporary”. More than 92% of the refugees arranged not has but years, 87 almost receivedin had it refugeesof number the twice as many as receivedTurkey has 2011 since hand, other the on beginning; in 87 years, most of whom are Turkish nobles, and had them settled since the very Turkeyrefugees2016. Decembermillion receivedby 1.8 million 3.4-3.5 reached Turkeyin refugees of number the words, other Turkey.In in stayed have them of ofsand havethem moved thousand 300-350 while Europe2015, to and 2014 in thou 500 Approximately 2011. since Pakistan and Iran Iraq, Afghanistan, cially espe countries, various from refugees thousand 850-900 accepted has Turkey due to security controls, waiting to be approved to TP status. In addition to Syrians, pre-registeredcurrentlyareand, them (PR) of 300,000 and (TP) Protectionporary Tem under Turkeyare them in of 2,783,617 refugees2016. December by Syrian million 3.1-3.2 of reached number The 2016. December by million 3.1-3.2 reached Turkey in refugees Syrian of number The years. 5.5 over for continuing been has war civil with 2011 April in began that floods refugee subsequent the and Syria in turmoil political The them. about policies with up coming and ugees In the us with some important clues for assessing the numerical quantity of Syrian ref Syrian of quantity numerical assessingthe for clues important some with us of 1.8-2 million immigrants-refugees, most of whom were Turkish nobles, provide 2014, are of importance both in general and in particular for the local governments. Yabancılar ve Uluslararası Koruma Hukuku,Istanbul:Beta. 87 years prior to the start of Syrian refugees’ coming in 2011, around a total 4 The latest regulations, especially in 2013 and - - - - - irregular andmass migration. of terms in country “target” a becoming gradually Turkeyis that fact the of ation consider in structured also was law This abandoned. partly is approach security forerunner, the and is initiative civil basis, the are rights their and policy humans where new a to turned law, this of frame the in (DGMM) Interior of Ministry the of Management Migration ofDirectorate General establishing by and, 1999 since influence EU’s also framework with the initiated in studies first time for the the of 2013 April in Law Protection International and Foreigners the Turkeyintroduced tion Regulation”. is “temporary protection” in the framework of the most recent “Temporary Protec Turkeyin Syrians the of status legal The protection”. “temporary and protection” “international refugees”,“conditionalEurope), from (only “refugees” statuses: ing follow the with countries other from Turkey to come who those describes tion legisla new The condition. their of regardless“refugees” Turkeyas to Europe of them as “refugees”, Turkey does not officially consider those coming from outside defines law international although words, other In year. following the in enacted was which Regulation”, Protection “Temporary especially the legislation, with secondary and refugees, and immigration for infrastructure legal the constitutes which and 2013 in enacted was which Law”, Protection International and eigners Turkeyofgeographical“Forprinciple the the restrictionwith adopted once again National Legislation than Congo, Madagascar, Monaco andTurkey. other restriction geographical this upholding still are that countries no are there than the “place where one comes from” that should determine the decision. Today, rather “situation” the is it that considering it on gaveup then and while a for tion excep this used had agreement 1951 the to parties Many “refugees”. as Europe outside from those consider not would it reason, whateverthe that means which that it would uphold the exception on “geographical restriction” in the convention, countries to be a party to the Geneva Convention, announced on 29 August 1961 first the Turkey,of Refugees”. one of Status Legal the on Protocol “1967 the and refugees and have seekersalso been laid down within the framework asylum of the “1951 Geneva Convention” to regard with obligations international Turkey’s related togeographical area. ‘excluding the cases before 1951’ or ‘including all cases in all times’) and the other as options (two history to related one exception, of matters important two given contracthavebeen the of validity the Refugees.”ofto Parties Status Legal the on Convention the to Protocol Additional “1967 in Conventionand Geneva 1951 in internationally determined been has refugees of status legal The country.” that of protection the of himself avail to unwilling fear,is such to owing or to, unable is and nationality, his of country the outside is opinion, political or group social particular a of membership nationality, religion, race, of reasons for persecuted being of fear well-founded a to owing who “someone as refugee the defines UN URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” ------Status of Refugees”. the Convention on the Legal 1967 “Additional Protocol to Geneva Convention and in the internationally in the 1951 determined been has The legal status of refugees 17

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul 18 MARMARA MUNICIPALITIES UNION consider those from outside August 1961that it would “geographical restriction” countries to be aparty to in the convention, which uphold the exception on the Geneva Convention, the reason, it would not Turkey, one of the first means that whatever that means Europe as “refugees”. announced on 29 5 deepened, got outof control andeventually led ahuge chaosintheregion. The political crisis in Syria, contrary to anticipation, Turkey.did not end in a short time ofbut history the as well as world the of history the in crises biggest the of continued ceaselessly within the “open door policy” framework until 2016, is one Syrian originated mass humanitarian mobility, which started in April 29, 2011 and Process Management Regulation clarifies the status issue by making a special regulation Protection for the Syrians: Temporary the of 1 Article Provisional Syrians. the for arrangements is understood that these regulations have been made in a way that allows special it framework,general a draw regulation the and law the both Although sibility-”. the “well-intentioned support of the host to the guests - within the bounds of pos ratheron sense,but this in state ofrefugeesthe “obligation”on the imposed and it should be noted that the main idea of these regulations is not based on “rights” long-term dimension of the issue by referring to “harmonization” as well. the However,for prepared also and refugees”, “conditional to provided be to services the framework of the defined but protection”, “temporary for limit time a set not did Turkeyby out regulations GenevaThe logic.Conventionthe its in retainedwith is set reservation geographical the which in regulations, new the in included been For the first time, the concept of “conditional refugee” in addition to “refugee” has crisis. Syrian framedbythe also was 2011, April after crises humanitarian serious most world’s the of one face to had Turkey,who in 2014 October 22 on lished pub was which Regulation”, Protection “Temporary the expected, be could As off-camp refugees began onlyin2014through thesystemcalledGÖÇ-NET. the processregistrationforcentral the processand formation new this by fected af adversely was refugeesof recruitment the even period, this In Interior. the of Ministry the of Affairs Foreign of Department the by over taken were authorities ness. DGMM was institutionalized only in April 2014, and it greatwas only after that ofthe terms in history Turkey’s in case any and to comparable history even world not is in which even rare very is which crisis, of time this with coincided However, “misfortune”ofa structuring DGMM is and the it establishment the that tional Protection Act. was transferred to GÖÇ-NET, which is on the initiative of the DGMM, after the Foreigners and Interna- Turkeyforeignersissueofin the on transactions for previously used was that system “POL-NET” The (Temporary Protection Regulation, Provisional Article1) protection.” temporary of implementation the during processed be not shall protection international for applications Individual tection. protection, even if they have filed an application for international pro temporary coveredunder be shall 2011 April 28 since Republic Arab protectioneventsthe to due purposes havethat taken place Syrian in temporary for individually or influx mass a of part as Republic Arab Syrian from coming borders our crossed or at arrived have who gees “The citizens of the Syrian Arab Republic, stateless persons and refu and persons statelessRepublic, Arab Syrian the of citizens “The 5 ------coordination between public institutions, Prime Ministry Immigration and Human 7 6 task coordination the and matters other on work to assigned was Advisory Chief this Cabinet, the of decision the with 2016, May In Development.of Ministry the of document a as negotiations EU forpreparedstudy, analysis need the and ings meet group working thematic the including works, important many undertaken has establishment This Minister. Prime the to Advisor ChiefYetiş, Murtazathe Dr. Mr. of responsibility the under established was Advisory Chief Assistance itarian camps. in refugees the on working still is AFADprovinces. 10 in thousand 270 of capacity a with camps 26 the managing and establishing and border crossedthe who those for support first the providing in successfulextremelyespecially been process.AFADhas the cial/flexible authorities on spending made great contribution to its involvement in spe has it and Ministry Prime the to affiliated institution an AFADis that fact the DGMM as one of the two most important institutions in the process. Undoubtedly, with working still is AFADCurrently,forefront. the to (AFAD) Presidency agement Man Emergency and Disaster Ministry Prime the brought also have crisis the of progress and dimensions the DGMM, as designated was Turkey in refugees and Although according to the law in Turkey the responsible institution for immigration the law. Thisalsocausedacomplication inprocess management inTurkey. of enactment the after year one 2014, April in activities its start to able was tion, subject-relatedthe DGMM, institu “liberal”way. highly graphicala reservation,in geo the of protection the of exception the with and, principles, universal with accordance in made were regulations These 700,000. Turkeyreached in Syrians of number the when time a at 2013, 11, TurkeyApril in on legitimizedweregees refu and foreigners on issues the for authority have would who on Regulations credit for it. every single public institution and staff serving in the region. They should be given extraordinarywereforthe it not effort if problems,especially by enormous to led processhave this could that say to right be process.would this It of management extraordinaryceptancelevelsat Turkey in success miraculous the a in to have led easily. Public institutions, local governments and especially social support and ac controlled be to place, takes it world the wherever in intensity, this of influx sive Turkey.in stayedgees However, possiblemas fornot a is nature,it its of because refu million 3.5 so 2015, who and 2014 in especially those EuropeTurkey to to went came of million 1-1.5 About case). Kobani (eg periods some in day single a in people 100,000 reached day, per people 2350 of average an to equivalent number, This countries. other from are million 1 about and Syrians are whom of million 3.5 Turkeyhaveentered2011, people April million since 4.5-5 than More cape to Turkey and other neighboring countries has not only been limited to Syria. es human the functioning, stopped Iraq -partially- and Syria in authority the As Deputy PrimeMinister Mr.Veysi Kaynakhasundertaken thistask. leadershipthe Atalay,ofBeşir Mr. YalçınKurtulmuşMr. Numan and Mr. Akdoğan. Since 2016, 24, May The AFAD, which operates under the responsibility of Deputy Prime Minister, previously worked under Istanbul. See M.Murat Erdoğan (2015) Türkiye’deki Suriyeliler: Toplumsal Kabul ve Uyum, Bilgi University Press, 6 7 From September 2015 to May 2016, in order to ensure ensure to order in 2016, May to 2015 September From URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” ------bounds of possibility-.” host to the guests -within the intentioned support of the sense, but rather on the “well- imposed on the state in this refugees and the “obligation” is not based on “rights” of main idea of these regulations It should be noted that the 19

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul 20 MARMARA MUNICIPALITIES UNION in the management of this not possible for amassive Because of its nature, it is easily. Public institutions, especially social support support especially social local governments and governmentslocal and extraordinary levels in influx of thisintensity, place, controlled to be Turkey have led to a miraculous success in the world it takes and acceptanceand at wherever process. 9 8 and refugee issues. to migration regard with specifically Ministry Prime the to affiliated ministry a or presidency/undersecretariat a of establishment the for need a is There creased. in be should municipalities, especially governments, local of initiatives the ing, restructur of kind this In regulations. administrative and institutional legal, new for need revealsthe Turkishpopulation the of 4.5-5% reachingrefugees million 3.5 than more of existence The Crescent. Red and Affairs Religious of Presidency Ministry of Labor and Social Security, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Development, Education, National of Ministry Policies, Social and Family of Ministry nizations, orgagovernmental non- and municipalities, particular in governments, local are and institutions that has played an extremely important role in the process. These lel with the former one. In addition to DGMM and AFAD, there are other ministries sense and the need for “emergency management”, which has developed in paral “temporary” the between subject, structureofthe dynamic frameofthe the in 2011-2014 especially developed situation this that clear is It process. the in role important an played also Ministry, Prime the under is which AFAD, crisis, the of agement affiliated to the Ministry of Interior. However, due to the size and urgency Man DirectorateadministrativeMigrationofGeneral the and regulations,legal is the initiative about the refugees in Turkey,has which including institution the Syrians, under the the current known, is it As emphasized. now is way coordinated a ceededforneed a 90%, newa harmonization out carry to programsinstitution in refugeesex urban has ofratio the persistence“emergencyand to management” “emergency management”. Since the issue of refugees in Turkey has evolvedfor from structured dis institution an is being AFAD because is and content AFADits of because to cussed Ministers of Council the by given task coordination The Customs; andRed of Crescent.” Undersecretariat Affairs; of Religious Presidency Staff; General Finance; and Livestock, and Agriculture Transport and Food Education, National Health, Affairs, Interior,ofForeign Ministries the of work joint the AFADwith ofcoordination the the issue of Syrians as “All the needs of our Syrian guests are being fulfilled under on AFADcoordination.position expressesof its terms in especially management, process the in actor important most the become has AFAD Thus, Ministry. Prime Deputy the under operatesAFAD, which to given was issuesrefugee the for task coordination the 2016, April of as Cabinet, the of decision the to According inet. nition of the task has also been clarified with a regulation established by the Cab process,defi the the in interventionAFAD’s actual to Yalçın addition Akdoğan.In time, that of Minister Prime Deputy under working was AFAD,who to given was healthier. process the make to order in Orientation” and Policies Social of “Ministry and ofFamily” and “Ministry Women called ministries separate two as Ministry restructured the be should that Policies suggest Social Ünverand Family and of Erdoğan 26. page Ankara, TİSK, Önerileri, ve Düşünce Görüş, Türkiye’dekiKonusundaki SuriyelilerDünyasının Türk İş (2015) Ünver Can Erdoğan- Murat M. ments: govern- local the to resources and authority more give to as well as Ministry, Prime the to affiliated ministry a or presidency/undersecretariat a of establishment the for proposal the of example an As AFAD: https://www.afad.gov.tr/tr/2373/Giris (Access: 10.12.2016) 9 8 ------ugee populationinthe world since 2014. refbiggest the Turkeywith countryled the becomehas to This population. its of 5% as refugees many as Turkeyhas result, a As 2011. April in door” the “opened Syrians after Turkey entered has Pakistan and Somalia istan, Afghan- Iraq, as different countries fromrefugees thousand 300 than more that known is It Turkeynow. in lives Syrians realistic, if million 3.2 million, 3.1 least at words, other Turkey.In in TP of grant the forinvestigated being and pre-registeredare who Syrians thousand 300 about are number,there this to addition In 2,783,617. reached 2016 December 1 by status TP their granted Turkeyand in registered refugees Syrian of number the DGMM, by cerns was experienced from time to time. According to the information given con- safety of out trouble some though evenprocess the of beginning the since maintained been havepolicy, former the support also that principles protection international with compatible fully is which policy”, door “open needs in Turkey will be met and that no one will be forcibly returned” and its basic their so, be will and open are war and persecutionfrom escaped who years. The policy of the Turkish government as “The borders for these guests 5 last the for uninterrupted continued then and 2011 April 29 provinceon of 252 people from the Cilvegözüthe fromcrossing borderpeople in 252 of group a with started Syria, with kilometers 911 of border a shares Turkey,which to movement population collective first Syria’s Iraq. and Turkey,Lebanon Jordan, Syrian crisis affected primarily Syrians and then the neighboring countries such as country isanotherreality. areforwho fromwatching fighting opportunity the an forces from escape their to candidates refugee of millions of existence the fact, framework In million. inthis 5.5 exceeded has country the fleeing Syrians of number The Canada. or States United the Europe, to went Syrians 700,000 about and countries neighboring to went Syrian million 4.8 least at 2016, September of as data, UNHCR Accordingto homes. their leave to had people million 9 to 6 and injured, were thousands of hundreds 2011, April after lives their lost people thousand 250 least at 2011, in of migration in the recent history”. In Syria, which had a population of 22.4 million countered in the history of the world, is described by UNHCR as “the greatest wave en rarelybeen has that dimension a reached has experiencing,which havebeen countries with serious conflicts and subsequent civil war. The tragedy that Syrians war, and then began a great and dramatic human escape towards civil the neighboring a subsequently and conflict serious a into turned soon 2011, March 15 on began which Syria, in demonstrationsanti-regime The 2011. since Syria in on ing tragedieshuman ofserious ofOne most history worldthe the the in go been has I-B. Refugees Turkey in YayladağıHatay of district URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” - - - exceeded 5.5million. country in thisframework has number Syrians of the fleeing United States or Canada. The Syrians went to Europe, the countries and about 700,000 Syrian went to neighboring 2016, at least million 4.8 UNHCR data, as of September their homes. According to to 9million people had to leave thousands were injured, and 6 April 2011, hundreds of people lost their lives after 2011, at least thousand 250 population of 22.4 million in In Syria, which had a 21

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul olduğu tahmin edilmektedir.) , mlo cvrnai uieii % Suriyelinin civarındaki 54’ünden fazlasını tek başına konuk etmektedir. Türkiye’yi L milyon 5,5-5,7 eden terk ülkesini itibarıyla 2016 Aralık Türkiye, dâhil ( Kaynak: Suriyeli Mültecilerin Ülkelere Göre Dağılımı (Aralık 2016 / 5,7 milyon) Grafik 1: haline ülke barındıran mülteci fazla en dünyada gelmesine neden olmuştur. Türkiye’nin yana bu yılından 2014 rındırmaktadır. Bu durum olarak Türkiye, kendi nüfusunun % 5’ine ulaşan sayıda mülteci ba Pakistan gibi ülkelerden de Türkiye’ye 300 bini aşkın mülteci geldiği bilinmektedir. Sonuç Ancak bu sayıya Avrupa’daki yaklaşık 600 UNHCR Ürdün %11 K.Irak

KOPUŞTAN %2 eidr B sylra birlikte sayılarla Bu değildir. Lübnan %18 Mısır %2 eieie öe Sryl mleiedn ög üklrne aıl oalrn aıı , milyondur. 4,8 sayısı olanların kayıtlı ülkelerinde bölge mültecilerden Suriyeli göre, verilerine Göç İdaresi Genel Müdürlüğü & UNHCR

UYUMA KENT MÜLTECİLERİ:

%11

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: AB The Case of Istanbul

S URİYELİ lei ııd yşyn uieiei sysnn , mlou üzerinde milyonun 5,7 sayısının Suriyelilerin yaşayan dışında ülkesi - MÜLTECİLERLE 700 bin Suriyeli ile Türkiye’de “ön kayıt” yaptırıp GK bekleyenler 22 MARMARA MUNICIPALITIES UNION İLGİLİ

İSTANBUL

ALAN

ARAŞTIRMASI übnan (1 milyon 17 bin), Ürdün Turkey has as many refugees as 5%of its population. that is,approximately 600-700thousandof them,are Syrians;theotherhalfare non-Syrians. rious migration wave from both Syria and other countries. However, only half of these refugees, in 2015, a total of 1.3-1.5 million refugees arrived in EU countries, which have had to face a se- (655 thousand), Northern Iraq (228 thousand) and Egypt (115 thousand). After 2014, especially Jordan thousand), 17 million (1 Lebanon by followed Turkeyis country. their left who Syrians As of December 2016, Turkey alone has been hosting 54% of the approximately 5.5-5.7 million their country isover 5.7 million.) waiting for their TP approval in Turkey. With these numbers, it isestimated that the number of Syrians living outside but thisnumber does not include the 600-700 thousand Syrians in Europe and Syrians who are “pre-registered” and (According to the data of UNHCR, the number of Syrian refugees registered in the countries of the region million, is4.8 Source: Directorate General of Migration Management &UNHCR Graphic 1:Distribution of Syrian Refugees in Different Countries VE

YEREL (December 2016 /5.7 million) YÖNETİMLERİN olduğu tahmin edilmektedir.) , mlo cvrnai uieii % Suriyelinin civarındaki 54’ünden fazlasını tek başına konuk etmektedir. Türkiye’yi L milyon 5,5-5,7 eden terk ülkesini itibarıyla 2016 Aralık Türkiye, Kaynak: Suriyeli Mültecilerin Ülkelere Göre Dağılımı (Aralık 2016 / 5,7 milyon) Grafik 1: haline ülke barındıran mülteci fazla en dünyada gelmesine neden olmuştur. Türkiye’nin yana bu yılından 2014 rındırmaktadır. Bu durum olarak Türkiye, kendi nüfusunun % 5’ine ulaşan sayıda mülteci ba Pakistan gibi ülkelerden de Türkiye’ye 300 bini aşkın mülteci geldiği bilinmektedir. Sonuç dâhil Ancak bu sayıya Avrupa’daki yaklaşık 600 ( 11% Jordan UNHCR Ürdün %11 4% N. Iraq Türkiye K.Irak %54 18% Lebanon

2% Egypt KOPUŞTAN %2 eidr B sylra birlikte sayılarla Bu değildir. Lübnan %18 Mısır %2 eieie öe Sryl mleiedn ög üklrne aıl oalrn aıı , milyondur. 4,8 sayısı olanların kayıtlı ülkelerinde bölge mültecilerden Suriyeli göre, verilerine Göç İdaresi Genel Müdürlüğü & UNHCR

ROLÜ

UYUMA

KENT 23 MÜLTECİLERİ: 11% EU

%11 AB

İSTANBUL

ALAN

ARAŞTIRMASI übnan (1 milyon 17 bin), Ürdün VE

YEREL YÖNETİMLERİN Türkiye 54% Turkey %54

ROLÜ

23 itibarıyla) 24) bulunan) ilde) 10) Türkiye’de) kamplarda) içinde) zaman) değil,)Türkiye’nin)bütün)bölgelerinde)çoğunlukla)kendi)imkânları)ile)yaşamaya)başlamıştır.) kısa) ettikçe,) devam) Suriyeli,) fazla) daha) aralıksız) çok) yaşayanlardan) gelişler) ve) da,) olsa) arttıkça) yerleştirilmiş) kamplara) sayılar) yapılan) hızla) bölümü) ilk) Suriyelilerin) gelen) Türkiye’ye) ! [http://www.goc.gov.tr/icerik6/gecici Kaynak: Türkiye’de!Geçici!Koruma!Altındaki!Suriyelilerin!Kamp!ve!Kamp!Dışı!Sayıları! Grafik!3: ) ve) GİGM) Halen) yenilenmektedir.)) düzeltilmektedir.) gün) geçen) her) ) olarak)yaşamaktadırlar. 2’si) anlamına)gelmektedir.)Geri)kalan)%)9 since 2014. This has led Turkey to become the country with the biggest refugee population in the world Currently, registrations are beingrenewed incooperation withDGMMandUNHCR. rienced in the beginning due to excessive intensity are also getting corrected every passing day. live in Turkey as “urban refugees” distributed in 81 provinces. The registeration problems expe- 92% remaining Turkey.The in refugees Syrian of number total the of 8% only is number This 2016. December ofprovinces Turkeyas of10 257,566 in is located refugee camps 26 in living number the of them eventually exceeded and Turkeythe number of Syrians of who live regionin the camps. everyThe number of Syrians in but region, border the in only not camps, the of outside live to started Syrians many ceaselessly, continued number in increase and influx the as camps, built rapidly in placed to was Turkey came who Syrians the of part first the Although [http://www.goc.gov.tr/icerik6/gecici-koruma_363_378_4713_icerik] (Access: 08.12.2016) Source: Directorate General of Migration Management Protection Live Graphic 2:Top 10Provinces in Turkey Where Syrians Under Temporary 100.000! 150.000! 200.000! 250.000! 300.000! 350.000! 400.000! 450.000! 50.000! KOPUŞTAN 0! )Göç)İdaresi)Genel)Müdürlüğü)) dc)% 8 %) sadece) sayısının) mülteci) Suriyeli) toplam) Türkiye’deki) sayı) Bu) 257.566’dır.) 418.653! ) UYUMA) ) KENT 401.711! MÜLTECİLERİ: Başlangıçta)aşırı)yoğunluktan)kaynaklanan)kayıtlama)sorunları)da) 377.198! ) S URİYELİ) na aaa)Sryllrn aıı rlk 2016) Aralık) sayısı) Suriyelilerin) yaşayan) kampında) mülteci) 318.748! MÜLTECİLERLE) =koruma_363_378_4713_icerik])(Erişim:)09.12.2016)! 149.074! ütc)kmlr)dşna)sdc)snr bölgesinde) sınır) sadece) dışında,) kampları) mülteci) ise)Türkiye’nin)81)iline)dağılarak)“kent)mültecileri”) Şehirler! İLGİLİ 137.292! ) İSTANBUL URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” ) ALAN 121.940! UNHCR ) ) ARAŞTIRMASI 102.017! ) şilğne kayıtlamalar) işbirliğinde) VE ) YEREL) 97.453! YÖNETİMLERİN 93.333!

) ) ROLÜ ) ) ’i) 25! 23

Bu konuda ındaki 393 bin bebekten, Türkiye’de doğanlar için gerçekçi sayının 200 binin üzerinde olduğu açıktır. yılı KOPUŞTAN [http://www.goc.gov.tr/icerik6/gecici-koruma_363_378_4713_icerik] (Access: 09.12.2016) Source: Directorate General of Migration Management tection in Turkey Graphic 3:Numbers of Camp and Off-camp Syrians Under Temporary Pro için verilen sayı 70 bin doğum, yani günde 191 doğum anlamına gelmektedir. Bu çerçevede 0 hastane kayıtlarına dayanılarak verilen resmi sayı Mart 2016 itibarıyla 158 bindir. Ancak sadece

UYUMA KENT

MÜLTECİLERİ: medium and long term.But the need is extraordinarily great and costly. At costly. and great extraordinarily is need the term.But long and medium one of the most serious problems for both Syrian refugees and Turkey in the is this that clear is It all. at education receiveany not can children these of thousand 550 least at that is fact tragic most the But education. of quality the about problems serious have schools these Unfortunately, curriculum. TrainingSyrian accordancethe Center,in with education haveArabic which children, whether in or out of the camps, go to the schools called Temporary havechancereceivethe to Turkish restthousand The 255 ofeducation. the school. However, only 62 thousand of them go to Turkishto public go schools and to opportunity the have still them, of thousand 311 is that children, 17) Syrian children in Turkey is more than 850 thousand. Only 36% of these tion also demonstrates the need for education. The number of school-age (5- agenda items, especially in the process of “permanence”. The young popula- important be will teenagers and children of reunification” “family and tion need of special protection. It should be taken into consideration that educa- the age of 18 and more than 75% of the Syrians are children and women in It is seen that 44% of the Syrians in Turkey are children and teenagers under important issue thatmustbetaken intoconsideration infuture projections. 11 In this regard, the official number based on hospital records is 158 thousand as of March 2016. March of as thousand 158 is records hospital on based number official the regard, this In 11 10 Thesenumbers donotincludepre-registered Syrians. clude those not under TP. in- not does This thousand. 393 than more is group age 0-4 the between million SyriansunderTPinTurkey show thatthenumberof Syrianswhoare 2.7 than more of characteristics demographic the 2016, 1, December of As sand of these 393 thousand Syrian babies were born in Turkey.werein babies born Syrian thousand 393 these of sand thou- 230 than more that said be Turkeycan years,in it average3 an offor aged between 0and 4were borninTurkey. In this framework, to be more realistic, it is clear that more than 200,000 of the 393 thousand babies day. a births 191 is, that births, thousand 70 means 2015 for However,only given number eventhe 10

SURİYELİ MÜLTECİLERLE aıı aee 2 bindir. 62 sadece sayısı

Ama en dramatik olan en az 550 bin çocuğun hiçbir 1.000.000 1.500.000 2.000.000 2.500.000 3.000.000 10 500.000 Considering that the Syrians in Turkey have been İLGİLİ 0

İSTANBUL 257.566 CAMP OFF-CAMPTOTAL KAMP 7 olan (5-17) çağında okul Türkiye’de .

ALAN

ARAŞTIRMASI 0 ii şıı söylenebilir. aştığı bini 30 KAMP DIŞI 2.526.051 ei aa 25 i çck ise çocuk bin 255 kalan Geri Suriyelilerin sayısının 393 VE

YEREL 2.783.617 TOPLAM 11 This is an is This YÖNETİMLERİN -

ROLÜ

13 -

4 yaş

26 numbers. there isan extra of 184thousand people in the the “school-age” and the “working-age” groups, since the 15-17 age group isincluded in both * “TOTAL” number of TP is2,783,617. However, RATIO NUMBER SEX [http://www.goc.gov.tr/icerik6/gecici-koruma_363_378_4713_icerik] (Access: 09.12.2016) Source: Directorate General of Migration Management Chart 2:Age and Sex Rates of Syrians Under Temporary Protection in Turkey this of part final The Report-2015-2016”. Monitoring “ERG-Education the in given are details The 13 ie TL, 4,000 approximately as estimated Turkeyis in schools public in teachers of salary gross The 12 would be more than € 700 million. This also reveals a huge financial statement. Only the annual cost of teachers system. Turkisheducation the into integrated be to children Syrian of 80% least 40 thousand new teachers and 30 thousand classrooms are needed for ensure thatthere would benomore “lostgenerations.” decreases in middle school and high school. Special efforts must be made to rateconsiderablythis appears that it school, primary ratein ofparticipation high relatively a is there While schools. the in children Syrian of numbers the in seen be clearly could situation of effect The schools. to taken be to working and who are also experiencing motivation problems due totrauma, by money earn to forced are who children Syrian the for difficult more and AGE GROUP web.pdf (Access: 12.12.2016). www.egitimreformugirisimi.org/sites/www.egitimreformugirisimi.org/files/EIR2015-16.17.11.16. Refugeehttp:// Children”.Syrian of “Education title the with ErdoğanMurat M. by written was report 1,250 €. TOTAL* 15-65 5-17 66+ 66+ 0-4 0-4 WORKING-AGE NEWBORN SCHOOL-AGE 53,3% 1.482 NUMBER (THOUSAND) MEN WOMEN 46,7% 1.301 2.783 1.657 867 393 12 48 In addition, every day it is getting more TOTAL AGE 90+ 85-89 80-84 75-79 70-74 65-69 60-64 55-59 50-54 45-49 40-44 35-39 30-34 25-29 19-24 15-18 10-14 5-9 0-4 13

URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 1.482.591 121.077 148.774 221.973 133.262 152.809 201.182 203.677 11.353 17.643 25.349 37.552 48.193 59.619 86.690 1.075 1.983 3.718 6.159 MEN 440 1.301.026 115.540 175.598 111.950 139.464 190.029 189.814 WOMEN 11.726 18.074 25.426 36.260 44.317 56.256 73.872 96.674 1.250 2.538 4.525 7.129 584 education system. be integrated into the Turkish of Syrian80% children to classrooms are needed for thousand teachers 30 and At least thousand 40 new 2.783.617 115.875 160.562 217.751 264.314 397.571 245.212 292.273 391.211 393.491 13.288 23.079 35.717 50.775 73.812 92.510 TOTAL 1.024 2.325 4.521 8.306 25

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:AFP/GETTY II. IMMIGRANTS, REFUGEES AND DEVELOPMENT IN ISTANBUL1

II-A. Dynamics of Internal Migration in Istanbul

Istanbul is the center of attraction for people seeking jobs not only in Turkey but also in the region. The human migration to Istanbul, which is symbolized with the metaphor “where land is gold”, is very unique in the world. When the population change is examined, it is seen that the population of Istanbul which was 1,166,477 in 1950, increased by 13 times to 14,657,434 in 2015. In 1950, the share of Istanbul’s population in Turkey was 5.6% in total population; however, it rose to 10.6% in 1980 and to 18.1% in 2015 as a result of the rapid increases that followed. In other words, at the beginning of the 1950s, every twenty of the people who lived in Turkey lived in Istanbul, while in 1980 this number reached one in ten, and today it is one in five.2 With a de- crease in the number of net migrations in recent years, Istan- bul has received between 339 thousand and 439 thousand annual “internal” migration between the years 2008 and 2014. The number of immigrants who arrived and settled in Istanbul only in 2014 is 438,998. In other words, an average of 1.202 people came to Istanbul each day in that year. In 2014, 424,662 people left Istanbul, so the net migration in 2014 was 14.336. Though the number of net migrations is low, extraordinarily great human mobility is noteworthy. This fact, which is determined within the framework of the Adress Based Population Registration System (ABPRS), points to a very difficult situation to be managed in Turkey, especially in terms of local governments.

1 The data used in this section is mainly based on the “Measurement of the Quality of Urban Life in Istanbul, 2014” prepared by the Istanbul Metropolitan Munici- pality (IMM) Directorate of Urban Planning (supported by İSTKA). In this study, the documents created by getting analyzed and compiled from various sources under the titles of “Social Structure Presentation” and “Quality of Life” have been prepared as parts of the study called “Revision of 1/100000 Scaled Istanbul En- vironmental Plan”, which continues to work and has not yet reached the final stage. We would like to thank the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Directorate of Urban Planning who shared their work with us to be used in this report. 2 IMM Directorate of Urban Planning, Revision of 1/100000 Scaled Istanbul Envi- ronment Plan - Quality of Urban Life Index. URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul ! KOPUŞTAN ArXş!Hızı! Growth Rate 0,00%! 0,50%! 1,00%! 1,50%! 2,00%! 2,50%! 3,00%! 28 ) UYUMA) MARMARA MUNICIPALITIES UNION ) KENT 0,98%! 2008! MÜLTECİLERİ: 1,72%! 2009! ) S URİYELİ) gold”, isvery unique in the metaphor “where land is MÜLTECİLERLE) 2,64%! 2010! The human migration symbolized with the to Istanbul, which is 2,78%! 2011! İLGİLİ ) İSTANBUL Source: TÜİK &www.nufusu.com Chart 3:Population of Istanbul –Immigration /Emigration /Population 1,69%! 2012! ) ALAN ) ) ARAŞTIRMASI 2,21%! 2013! VE Growth Rate ) YEREL) 1,53%! 2014! world. YÖNETİMLERİN 1,95%! 2015! ) ) ROLÜ ) ! 3 IMM Directorate of Urban Planning, Revision of 1/100000 Scaled Istanbul Environment Plan - Quality trend of birthrates. declining the despite continuing been has Istanbul in growth population that is Istanbul of growth population the in influential highly is migration that proof Another Istanbul. outside born was 55% while Istanbul in born 2010 and 2015. As of 2015, 45% of the population residing in Istanbul was between received17% it Turkey while in migrants the of received9% bul flows in Turkey becomes even more evident. Between 1980 and 1990, Istan- migration flows to Istanbul, Istanbul’s central location in the main migration of dynamics the at closely look we When years. five last the in especially increased extremely has number whose Istanbul, in refugees the include not do here mentioned expressions “migration-immigrant” the that sized in Istanbul’s urban population in the last seventy years. It should be empha- Planning’s work, Quality of Life, migration is the main reason of the increase Urban of Directorate (IMM) Municipality Metropolitan Istanbul in stated As of UrbanLife Index. 2015 Year 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 31! 14.657.434 14.377.018 14.160.467 13.854.740 13.624.240 13.255.685 12.915.158 12.697.164 Population ! 3

Growth Rate Population Population 1.95 1.53 2.21 1.69 2.78 2.64 1.72 0.98 (%) Immigration 453.407 438.998 437.922 384.535 450.445 439.515 388.467 374.868 Emigration Emigration 402.864 424.662 371.601 354.074 328.663 336.932 348.986 348.193 Net Migration Net Migration Difference 121.782 102.583 50.543 14.336 66.321 30.461 39.481 26.675

4 IMM Directorate of Urban Planning, Revision of 1/100000 Scaled Istanbul Environment Plan - Quality vided by thelocalgovernments totherefugees. pro - services the and refugees the preferencesof the between correlation inverse an is there that fact remarkable the noticing but help not could we jective criteria”, which was conducted by IMM Directorate of Urban Planning, sub- and objective through life of “quality of analysis the at look we When gazi, Küçükçekmece, Bağcılar, Zeytinburnu andFatih districts. Sultan- Başakşehir, Esenyurt, in concentrated mainly are immigrants These Istanbul. in live them, of 20% and 17% Turkey,between in refugeesie ian 2016 is around 1 million. At least 540 thousand of more than 3.1 million Syr- by Istanbul in living citizensnon-Turkish of number the that information is there precisely, known not are numbers the Although provinces. other in registeredare they though even Istanbul in liverefugees many that known is it because possible, “minimum” the but percentage actual the not is this that forgotten be not should It Istanbul. in reside Turkey in permit idence res- a have who foreigners the of 33% refugees. to especially and grants immi- international to importance high of is Istanbul of attraction great The Influx into Istanbul II-B. International Migration and Refugee of UrbanLife Index. URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 4 14,657,434 in 2015. increased by 13times to which was 1,166,477 in 1950, the population of Istanbul is examined, it isseen that When the population change Photo:Ozan Köse/AFP/GETTY 29

Percentage KOPUŞTAN 5 Çatalca (79,67%)andAdalar(79,65%). (80,78%), Gaziosmanpaşa are life with pleased are that districts three first The Beşiktaş. and Beylikdüzü Şişli, of districts the are Istanbul in value life ofhavequality that highest districts the the workIMM, formedofthe the in fer/settle in the most. According to the results obtained from all the indexes environment and life is relatively cheaper in the places where refugees pre- spread, conservatism-religiosity is significant, solidarity is dominant in social wide- povertyis that seen be could it exceptions, some are there Although refugees more positively. This can be interpreted both as a sign of emotional solidarity ofand as that refugees can adapt sign to these regions more easily a as both interpreted be can This positively. more refugees approach regions these in people and resources, less have naturally, and, poorer relatively are that regions prefer refugees words, other In 3.26%. averageof Istanbul the than population, their to proportion in refugees, of However,tepe. ratiohave higher districts a these of noteworthy all is that it Bağcılar,Sancak- Sultangazi, and Esenler,Sultanbeyli, Esenyurt are Istanbul 59 points, it is seen that the 6 districts that have the lowest quality of life in as determined averageis Istanbul the study,where this In life.of quality of arethat districts aregenerallythe in disadvantagedterms higher as in seen refugees of number the headings, index 12 under criteria subjective and objective 50 of total a on determined and Istanbul of provinces 39 in out carried was life”forstudy,“qualityofwhich values results According the to ! İlçeleri!Arasında!Yaşam!Kalitesi!Sonuç!Değerleri!ve!Bu!Değeri!Oluşturan!Objektif 4 of UrbanLife Index. IMM Directorate of Urban Planning, Revision of 1/100000 Scaled Istanbul Environment Plan - Quality : ! ) UYUMA) ) KENT MÜLTECİLERİ: )sıralamasında,) yoğunluğu) mülteci) aa üsk rnad)mlei aıdraı ikt çekicidir.) dikkat) barındırması) mülteci) oranlarda) yüksek) daha) ) e)d)b)bleei)mültecilerin,) bölgelerin) bu) de) hem) S ! URİYELİ) Composite ,) Kentsel)Yaşam)Kalitesi)İndeksi MÜLTECİLERLE) “yaşam)kalitesi”)konusundaki)sonuçlara)bakıldığında,) n kötü ) en) İLGİLİ Objective Districts ortalamasının) ) İSTANBUL 5

uud)oa)6 leii)Sultanbeyli,) ilçesinin) 6) olan) durumda) aşlığı)altında)toplamda)50)objektif)ve) ) ALAN ) ) ARAŞTIRMASI Subjective ) üulrn)oranla,) nüfuslarına) 59)puan) VE ) YEREL) olarak)belirlendiği) aa)uulğ)ve) ucuzluğu) hayat) YÖNETİMLERİN 8 Subjektif! na)bu) Ancak) ) ) ROLÜ şeklinde) İstanbul) ) bu) 33! ) they live offer them. which in containers or tents fine that opportunities the than with live they society the and codes solidarity the by affected more are they revealsthat state” emotional “highly Refugees’ camp. the of infrastructure logistical life satisfaction in a refugee camp and the technical and between relationship serious no is there that revealed already have camps refugee in satisfaction on studies 6 In a study carried out in five countries where Syrian asylum-seekers live, asylum-seekers Syrian where countries five in out carried study a In 6 society. the of ture struc conservative and conditions life cheaper to due orsam.org.tr/en/showReport.aspx?ID=2638 (Access: 10.12.2016). http://www. Countries, Neighboring in Refugees of Status The Edge: the Center for MiddleEasternStrategic StudiesReport (April2014)Syrianson ORSAM, seekers.See: asylum of “satisfaction” the and camps the ofdards therethat determined was it directno was relationship between stan- the Photo:Bülent Kılıç/AFP 6 oe nentoa comparative international Some - URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” refugees and the services provided Urban Planning, we could not help that there isan inverse correlation and subjective criteria”, which was significant, solidarity isdominant conducted by IMM Directorate of seen that poverty iswidespread, but noticing the remarkable fact in social environment and life is “quality of life through objective When we look at the analysis of are some exceptions, it could be relatively cheaper in the places between the preferences of the where refugees prefer/settle in the refugees. Although there by the local governments to conservatism-religiosity is the most. 31

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Osman Orsal/Reuters

540,000 Syrians in Istanbul

61,000 Pre-registered Syrians in Istanbul

479,000 Syrians Under Temporary Protection in Istanbul 3.67% Ratio of Refugees to Population of Istanbul III. SYRIAN REFUGEES IN ISTANBUL

Determining the numbers of refugees in Istanbul, the most important attraction center for refugees, is more difficult than in other places. For this reason, different numbers could be obtained from different institutions at the same time, and numbers could change by increasing incredibly in this extremely dynamic process. There are two important problems that have been experienced in determining the numbers in Istanbul. The first of these problems arises from the continuation of the registration and updating of the data and also from the policy of granting TP status to Syri- ans only after security investigation which began in March 2016. Because of this situation, a number of Syrians (about 300 thousand as of December 2016) could not be included in official statistics although they have been registered by DGMM.1 Therefore, the numbers that DGMM shares with the public as weekly updates include only those who are under TP status. This causes a confusion about what the actual general and province-district based numbers of the Syrian people are. While the number that DGMM revealed as the Syrians in Turkey on December 1, 2016 was 2,783,617, at that time there were also more than 300 thousand Syri- ans who had pre-registered themselves and been waiting for the results of security investigations to get the TP. The second important problem is specific to Istanbul. Although their TP or PR location is another province, many Syrian refugees come to Istanbul with their own will, without any permission. It is almost impossible to know their exact number.

1 When it was revealed that the person who carried out the terrorist act in Ankara on February 17, 2016 had a TP identity card, the practice of security investigation started before TP statuses were given, in consideration of the risk of using TP identity documents given to the Syrians in similar terrorist acts. DGMM gives TP status to those who have positive results in security investigation. This has led to the emergence of a new category for Syrian refugees under the name of “pre-registered” (PR). URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul 34

Number ofRefugees MARMARA MUNICIPALITIES UNION 20.000 andabove 10.001 -15.000People 5001 -10.000People 1001 -5000People 0 -1000People Population Density in Source: IMM Directorate of Urban Districts of Istanbul Graphic 5:Map of yin Refugees Syrian (2016) Planning in total, 478,850 in TP and 60,212 in PR. as of November 2016 the number of Syrian refugees in Istanbul is 539,062 Also,according ProvincialIstanbul to Directorate of Migration Management, in Istanbulisestimatedtobemore than600thousand. Syrians of number the registration),for appointment got has them of many and registered officially (although their number considerably lowered when reached be not could who those However,with Istanbul. in made are day per transactions TP 700 approximatelypresent, refugees.At the of number “minimum” the actually is it is, lower;that higher,not be but might number 4 3 2 has reached to 3.1 million, respectively 2,790 thousand and 300 thousand. As of December 2016, the number of Syrians in TP and PR statuses in Turkey tables. by adding 10-15% more to the district based Syrian refugee numbers in the more than the number of those in TP, it is possible to find the actual number 13% is which 539,062, least at is Istanbul in registered Syrians of number in the tables are given only as TP numbers. Taking into consideration that the how the total of 60,212 Syrians are distributed in the districts, the numbers below show table the coveredSyrians information478,850 on no Sincethere is Istanbul. in TP by in Case numbers The based district Municipalities: official the of Istanbul”, of Management Process and Refugees Syrian ‘Harmonization’ to ‘Detachment’ from Refugees “Urban titled study this In they estimated the total number of non-Syrian and Syrian refugees in Istanbul to be around 1 million. Some of the authorities who were interviewed in the framework of this research expressed to us that study, thetotal numberistaken as539,062(478,850inTPand60,212PR). However,PR). in 62,081 and TP this in in (482,058 544,139 was Management,MigrationDirectorate of On December 12, 2016, the number of Syrians registered in Istanbul, obtained from Istanbul Provincial This number does not include more than 33 thousand Syrians living in Turkey with residence permits. 3 It should not be forgotten that this 4

5 Anatolian side. the in live population, total the of 33,5% people, 4,997,548 and side pean Euro- the in live Istanbul, in million 14.6 of population total the of 62.7% constitutingpeople, 9,162,919 side. Anatolian the in 14 and side European the in are which of 25 districts, 39 into divided administratively is Istanbul (67,532) live intheAnatolianside. under TP in Istanbul (411,318) live in the European side while 14% of them Istanbul. According to the data of November 2016, 86% of 478,850 Syrians each district. Syrian refugees are highly concentrated in in differ the them European side of of density population and number the although Istanbul, in There are Syrian refugees under temporary protection in each of 39 districts tanbeyli, Ümraniye (14,858) andSancaktepe(12,072),isbelow 5thousand. number of Syrian refugees in 11 districts of the Anatolian side, other than Sul- ber of refugees, and 5th in terms of the ratio of refugees to its population. The own population, Sultanbeyli ranks 9th among 39 districts in terms of the num- with 20,192 people. With the number of these refugees reaching 6.57% of its Sultanbeyli is side Anatolian the refugeesin Syrian most the with district The köy (7,55%)andBaşakşehir(7,48),which are againintheEuropean side. Arnavut Zeytinburnu(8,63%), are population total their refugeesto Syrian of ratio highest the with districts three first the while (31,426) Sultangazi areKüçükçekmeceIstanbul and ropeanside and Bağcılar(37,643) (38,278), first three districts with the largest number of Syrian refugees in both the Eu- Photo:Bülent Kılıç/AFP and theAnatolianside corresponds to35%. The geographical size of the European side corresponds to approximately 65% of the total of Istanbul, 5 According to the distribution of refugees in the districts, the URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” - in other places. refugees, ismore difficult than for center attraction important refugees in Istanbul, the most Determining the numbers of 35

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul

IV. MUNICIPALITIES AND REFUGEES IN TURKEY: LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE STATUS

Photo:Bülent Kılıç/AFP URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul 40 MARMARA MUNICIPALITIES UNION here is“fellow-citizenship”. municipalities to carry out the “citizens”. The concept that includes non-citizens the services to be given to 5393 isbasically based on fellow-citizenship”, which some activities for non- leaves an open door for for door open an leaves The Municipal Law No. in the interpretation of be serious differences the “law related to the However, there may citizens. 1 these matters on“refugee” issues: include regulations legal relevant other and Law Municipal the Turkey, In issue. the forthis on duty mandatory assigna not does refugees,providedbut to be door” to services “open an leaves 5393 No. Law strikingly. issue this of complexity refugees,even ofmunicipalities district revealsthe alone among This Istanbul. Syrian towards the ofpolicies terms in and actions approaches between difference some activities for non-citizens. In the last five years, there has been a very serious out carry to municipalities for door open an leaves which fellow-citizenship”, the to related “law the of interpretation the in differences serious be ever,may there “citizens”. The concept that includes non-citizens here is “fellow-citizenship”. How the to given be to services the on based basically is 5393 No. Law Municipal The voluntary services alsoaddress foreigner issues from timetotime. tional Protection No. 6458. In addition to these, structures such as city councils and Interna Foreignersand on Law the and 5393 No. Municipalities on Law the be to erateserveand refugeeon issues. legalmain The sources regardthis in are known to op particular,should in as municipalities general, governmentsin local uncertainty bases which serious a is there that acknowledged generally is it Turkey, In Ministry of Interior, provides importantclues. under Communication, and Harmonization of Department Management’s gration Mi of General Directorate and (IOM) Migration for Organization International the with cooperationprepared in was which and 2014 16, April on Istanbul in ducted wellas academicians. as Management Migration of Directorate Provincial Istanbul and Istanbul of norship directoratethe ofMMU,Goverunder municipalities expertsof21 and authorities the received and UNHCR, and MMU with cooperation in 2015 November 25-26 on held was which Refugees”, Urban to Service in Municipalities of Role “The as named workshop the of report the is these of first The data. their with report this helped that workstwo mention possibleto is It activities. and needs own their for ities in Turkey are very limited, except for the works of some municipalities created It is known that the academic reports on Syrian refugees and especially municipal product. This report, which compiles the views expressed in the workshop con workshop the in expressed views the compiles which report, This product. Publication_465_Kent-MultecileriRaporu.pdf (Access: 08.12.2016). http://marmara.gov.tr/UserFiles/Attachments/Publication/ Istanbul Refugees”, Urban to Service in (NovemberWorkshopRoleUnion Municipalities Reportofthe of Municipalities 2015) Marmara “The LAW RELATEDMunici TOthe of THEFELLOW-CITIZENSHIP:13 Article the municipal activities and to benefit from the aids of the municipal municipal the of aids the from benefit to and activities municipal the about knowledge acquire to municipality, the of services and cisions de the in participate to entitled be shall fellow-citizens The in. lives he which county the of fellow-citizen a is “Everyone 13: 5393-Article pal Law No.5393isregulated asfollows: 1 Likewise, secondthe report emergedalso workshop a as ------the report of the MMU Workshop as “The open legal frameworklegal chang open bycreated Workshop “The MMU as the ofreport the 3 2 ities todecideontheassistance andservices for refugees.” sistance, services and employment for refugees is making it difficult for municipal relevanting removelegislationto as ofmunicipal ambiguities and hesitations the by theCourt of Accounts. “irregularity” as considered be may budget, municipal the from funding requiring cause municipalities are concerned that spending on non-citizens, especially those Be municipalities. the of activities the affect also services, municipal of context the in contradictory be to appear which Law, Municipal of provisions two These tion asthat“citizenship” isthebasisfor services. Article14isasfollows: regulamakesa also law same the of 14 Article hand, other the approachhere.On serve the refugees. However, it should be noted that “residence” is the basis for the to municipalities for obligation and opportunity an created havelow-Citizenship” occurring in such problems expenditures ofis very likelihood high. the Accounts, of Court the of supervision the under that, stated often is it study, field the In non-citizens. mention explicitly not does law the since hesitantly, acting are authorities municipal that fact a However,also is it Fel the to Related “Law of provisions the that said be could it section, this From

vice toUrbanRefugees Workshop Report, p.7. Ser- in Municipalities ofRole The (Novemberrefugees.”2015) MMU with working and helping about refugees and a clear legal framework puts municipalities in a difficult position while making decisions forprovisions clear of lack The refugees. with working and helping about concerned are nicipalities mu- context, financial and administrativelegal, the in uncertainties to “Due as report the in stated is It MMU. by organized workshop the in frequently expressed been also have issue this on Concerns MMU (November 2015) The Role of Municipalities in Service to Urban Refugees Workshop Report, p. 15. Municipal Law No. 5393, which regulates the “duties and responsibil and “duties the regulates which 5393, No. Law Municipal the of 14 Article POOR PEOPLEANDTHOSEWHOAREINDESTITUTE: people aswell asfor thoseindestituteandwithlimitedincome.” old and disabled the for suitable most procedure a adopt to principle basic a is It citizens. the to nearest places the at manner appropriate municipal services5393-Article 14: “The shall be rendered in the most and toconstruct housesfor disabled.” disabled the of favor in services the out carry to destitute; in are who those and people poor the for budget the in reserved appropriations the use powerto the has mayor “the that law same the of38/n Article in seen is It services. municipal in included possiblebe refugeesforto is it that argued be could it “citizen”, emphasizes sentence previous the Although income.” limited with and destitute in those for as well as people old and disabled the for suitable most procedure a adopt to principle basic a is “It sentence the includes municipalities”, of ities and topreserve cultural values.” fellow-citizens the between relations cultural and social the improve to necessaryactivities perform shall municipality ...The administration. 2 This state of hesitancy is pointed out in 3

URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” ------serve the refugees. obligation for municipalities to created an opportunity and the Fellow-Citizenship” have provisions of “Law Related to It could be said that the 41

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul 42 MARMARA MUNICIPALITIES UNION been established in recent years for the participation management process as as management process Turkey is“city councils.” active fellow-citizens in institutions that have of non-citizens in the One of the important http://alanyayabancilarmeclisi.com/P/11/Hakkimizda (Access: 12.12.2016). 5 http://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2006/10/20061008-5.htm (Access 15.12.2016). 4 Committee” “AlanyaForeigners ples. 4) (Article city” to urban management and take active part in the management of a fine and livable “havesegmentscontribute Councilsto social Regulationaims various 2006 dated ment process manage as active fellow-citizens the in Turkey in is “city non-citizenscouncils”. Although the City of participation the for years recent in established havebeen that institutions important the of One respect. this practicein common a is Committee”“Foreigners rights. political local have to opportunity the eigners for give even countries Some processes. management the in non-citizens clude in to mechanisms efficient some on working been have level, local the at cially and works onlythrough DGMM’sinitiative: contributions” and suggestions their from “benefiting as only established is link regulated, it is seen that local governments are very poorly linked to the issue. This In Article 96 of Law No. 6458, in which the issue of “Harmonization of Refugees” is vide service torefugees, isfar from sufficient. the grounds that the municipalities have a role in the issue of refugees and/or pro on 2013, in issued 6458 no. Protection International and Foreigners on Law The It is known that many developed countries, where democracy is important espe important is democracy where countries, developed many that known is It explicitly mentioned.(Article96/3) are organizations” non-governmental and institutions “public while included not in the provision of social and cultural services to foreigners, local governments are DGMM’s harmonization activities. Furthermore, among the actors to be cooperated only things expected from local governments the are say,“proposals and to contributions” for is That governments. local to role limited very a gives respects, many in innovative is which 6458, No. Protection International and Foreigners on Law the accepted, have institutions international and experts subject the of many As fact that city councils have potential to gain more authority through good exam good through authority more gain to potential have councils city that a fact also is it But yet. processes management urban the in involving actively been Alanya Foreigners Committee: Official Gazzette dated08.10.2006, issue 26313, re t fcltt mta hroiain ewe frinr, appli foreigners, between harmonization mutual facilitate to order in activities harmonization for plan possible, deems capacity financial “The Directorate General may, to the extent that Turkey’s economic and country. For these purposes, the Directorate General may seek the sug own their in or resettled are they which to country the in Turkeyor in persons third assistanceof the without life social of areas all in active independently be to skills and knowledge the with them equip to as cants and international protection beneficiaries and the society as well national organisations.” inter and universities organisations,non-governmental governments, local agencies, and institutions public of contributions and gestions 4 , it could not be said that city councils established in Turkeyhave in established councils city that said be not could it , 5 , which was established in 2004 and is one one is and 2004 in established was which , ------monization” and“participation”. be given related duties, authorities and resources, especially for the works on “har governments local should population, their of 100% eventhan) (sometimes more refugeesas many as host to have cities refugeesand urban becomehave country a refugeesin the of 90% than moreprocesses. where However,this, like case a in interim for authorizations and duties provide to required be would governments local that foreseen not was it Australia, or Zealand New Canada, USA, the as such should governments take chargelocal of point, this situation. Since this TurkeyAt is not status. a typical legal “migration country” a obtaining and registration to ited However,legitimate. fairly is refugees/foreignersit lim oflife and not world the is the everywherein almost observed practice a is law international and national of context the in status their determining and registration their country, the into try en refugees’ of process the in initiative the has governmentcentral the that fact should play a serious role in ensuring social inclusion and local harmonization. The governments local that clear is it million, 3 over is Especially refugees of be. number the to while needed is it as much as processes these in governments local include Turkeynot in regulationsdo related that say to However,right be would it urgentsociety,provisionsprocesses,needs. and local forbasic the with encounter harmonization local inclusion, social as such issues some with deal to havewould governments local case, this in that, is this for reasons important most the of One issues. refugee on initiative have refugees, of number considerable a host to gin be they when especially governments, local world, the in everywhere in Almost anisms andpractices of thatcountry, especiallyatthelocallevel. (“foreigners”) also have a voice in decision making processes, administrative mech country a citizensof not are who people lifecommonthat of values important the that would cover non-citizens, except for a limited number of structures. It is one of infrastructure providean not could expected, are servicesvoluntary and symbolic However,amples. evenof knowngreatthat deal is a councils, throughit which city ex leading province,some Antalya are in Municipality Konyaaltıof Council City of directorate the under 2014 in established was which Committe”,“Foreigners and Working Group”,6 which was established in 2011 as one of the 30 working groups, in field this Turkey,in institutions City Council “Bursa Foreignersleading the the of Photo:AFP URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” ------needed to be. needed to be. processes as much as it is governments these local in in Turkey do not include say that related regulations However, it would be right to provisions for basic needs. the local society, and urgent processes, encounter with inclusion, local harmonization some issues such as social would have to deal with this case, local governments reasons for thisisthat, in One of the most important initiative on refugee issues. number of refugees, have to host aconsiderable especially when they begin governments, local world, Almost in everywhere in the 43

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Bülent Kılıç - AFP V. THE RESEARCH: URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” SYRIAN REFUGEES AND PROCESS MANAGEMENT OF MUNICIPALITIES: THE CASE OF ISTANBUL URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul 46 MARMARA MUNICIPALITIES UNION first think of the provinces near the border with Syria; most Syrians have settled Syrians havemost settled Istanbul isthe city where however, it isknown that When it comes to Syrian refugees, people might as of December 2016. in 7of themitisbelow theaverage. ans under TP to total population is above the Istanbul average (3,26%), and Syri- survey,of ratiothe interviewedthe in municipalities the of 20 In side. viewed in the survey are located in the European side and 6 in the Anatolian this field study is comprehensive enough. 21 of the 27 municipalities inter - that sense academic the in doubt no is there sense, this In TP). under ans Syri- 478,850 of total the (considering Istanbul in Syrians all of 3,78% is which 18,207, is districts 12 other the in refugees Syrian of number Total exceeds96,22%. Istanbul in Syrians the all to TP under Syrians of ratio the research, this of scope the within interviewedwere that districts 27 the In and datawere provided andanalyzed. information existing the 12, other the for while interviewed, were ipalities munic Kadıköy),(Ataşehir,Bakırköy, levels minimum at remained refugees of number the where districts 15 of sourceinformation.For3 ofinvaluable an number,provide this than lesshave which of 3 and refugeesregistered 2500 than more have which of 24 Istanbul, of municipalities district 27 in terviews with the relevant people in Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality and in- the context, this In years. 5 last the over out carried been have that es count boththeexisting legal andadministrative framework andthepractic ac into taking services, effectivereasonable conduct and to municipalities necessaryconsideredforare that measures establish to seeks Istanbul”, of Case The Municipalities: of ProcessManagement and Refugees Syrian tion’ This study, with the title “Urban Refugees from ‘Detachment’ to ‘Harmoniza- context, municipalities should this find solutions to this in problem that they issues cannot ignore. refugee on works the of framework the and this study, of part relevant the in examined be will which legislation, municipal the Regardlessof debate. of matter another is this allow municipalities for people. However, the extent to which the primary and secondary legislation to the refugees while taking into account the possible reactions of the local borders of a municipality, that relevant municipality should provide services at risk at the same time, reaches more than 1% of the locals living within the nicipalities. In general, if the number of these refugees, who are in need and Urban refugees are becoming a serious problem that primarily concerns mu- ie 20thousand. nations within the EU have no more refugees than in one district of Istanbul, It is easier to understand how high the numbers are, given that 23 out of 28 districts. its of 10 per thousand 20 of than more is refugeesnumber Syrian registered the only that seen be could it Istanbul, of data the at Looking bul is that it also hosts many refugees who are registered in other provinces. Istan- ofcharacteristic Another nations. refugeesother from thousand 200 thousand Syrians registered in Istanbul, it is necessary to include more than 540 to addition In 2016. December of as settled have Syrians most where city the is Istanbul that known however,is Syria; it with border the near es provinc the of think first might people refugees, Syrian to comes it When - - - - 1 ► tions, there are the following main sections that contain 52 questions in total: ques- semi-structured of composed mainly form interview the In tionnaire). Ques- Semi-Structured (Appendix: IMM and municipalities district 27 the for researchThe interviewsame the formused team for interviews, all especially ► ► ► ► ulse previously published reports study, the this of reporting the During municipality. specific evena tions as much as possible, rather than making assessments on individuals or of the municipality on this issue, we attempted to make institutional evalua- performance the in role major a play interest and effort personal Although together. evaluated were subject the to related documents and formation inother and field the from obtained data the study, the of analysis the In Mr. NuriGezici, wasalsointerviewed withinthescope of thisresearch. GovernorDeputy Istanbul, ofthe and DirectorateManagementMigrationof Provincial Istanbul of Director The table. this through made were analyzes the and table weresingle IMM a and placedin municipalities district 27 the the field study of the research had been completed, the data collected from After municipalities. of opinions institutional as well as departments these here is to learn about personal views and expectations of those who manage aim The think”. you “Do including questions many are there interviews, the sponded these forms in writing and presented them to the research team. In face-to-faceto rehaveinterviews,addition - also in municipalities, Some ty. municipali- relevanteach ofaccount,most department into wereachedthe issue.Takingthis this on working departments havemultiple municipalities some municipalities, some in departments relevant no are there While ty. municipali- to municipality from differs subject this with dealing partment de- The subject. relevantthe arealso to municipality,who the but of behalf on speak could who those interview to tried we Istanbul, in municipalities district 27 the and Municipality Metropolitan Istanbul with interviews For ► Migration Management, inorder toensure thevalidityof thestudy. GovernorshiprelevantProvincialDeputy including Directorateand oftions, organiza - and institutions public many with held were interviews Turkey, in administrations local and government central the between relationship Municipality Directorate of City Planning were also utilized. Considering the Metropolitan Istanbul the for prepared Presentation” Structure “Social and in Service to UrbanRefugees” andIOM-DGMMWorkshop Report. Municipalities ofRole Workshop “The the ofReport (November 2015) Union Municipalities Marmara ► ► ► ► ► ► Basic DataonMunicipalities(11questions) Information andPolicies onSyrianRefugees (8questions) Activities andCooperation Areas (13questions) Services (5questions) Perception andExpectations(8questions) Harmonization/Integration (7questions) 1 n te tde “sabl opttvns Index” Competitiveness “Istanbul studies the and URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Istanbul, ie 20thousand. refugees than in one district of within the EU have no more that 23out of 28 nations high the numbers are, given It iseasier to understand how 47

URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” ccording withtheratios andsupposingthat RATIO TO POPULATION (%) 3,67 3,26 0,03 0,98 0,72 2,40 2,40 2,87 4,04 4,88 3,41 4,21 3,24 2,15 5,57 3,53 2,94 7,55 4,59 6,27 4,93 8,63 7,48 3,92 7,33 6,02 4,97 5,02 0,13 49

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul

VI. GENERAL FRAME OF THE RESEARCH

Photo:Yannis Behrakis /Reuters URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul 52 MARMARA MUNICIPALITIES UNION registration renewals are The registration process is continuing and also still being carried out. Source: TUİK /DGMM /Governorship of Istanbul, Provincial Directorate of Migration Management Statuses (December 1,2016) Chart 6:Number of Syrians in Turkey and in Istanbul According to Their registered inIstanbulbecausethey are registered inotherprovinces. risk and come to Istanbul for many reasons, and these refugees do not appear as services.health yet,cially And there arerefugees many still havewho taken this espe- facilities, state-provided some from benefit to registered are they which provincein the leave refugeeswho forpossible not is it principle, In relocating. frequently are refugees that is fact However,the cases. exceptional are these and excusesreasonablefor permission granted havethe they if registeredonly are they which provincesin the leave refugeescould that state regulationstive scale and refugees’ high tendency to relocation (mobility). Legal and administra- the size of great the provinces other mainly the are than difficult more little a is Istanbul in numbers the of clarification the why reasons the that said be could However,out. carried it being still arerenewalsregistration also and continuing is processregistration the that emphasize to necessary is it First, Istanbul. to ic eral reasons rising from the nature of immigration, as well as the reasons specif gen- the and crisis the of dimensions enormous the of terms in both evident is 3 2 1 for TP, one for PR and the other for residence. for other the and PR TP,forfor one one Syrians, for categories different three are There complicated. bit a seems “refugee”) live in Istanbul. However, in the case of official numbers, the situation or seeker” “asylum as are referredto are who who (and TurkishRepublic of people citizens not million 1 about 2016, of end the of as estimates, to cording Ac most. preferthe etc.), Iran Pakistan, (Burma), Myanmar (Afghanistan,Iraq, ian Turkey,provincerefugeesin the which is non-Syr- Istanbul or that showsSyrian Istanbul”, of Case The Municipalities: of ProcessManagement and Refugees an Syri- ‘Harmonization’ to ‘Detachment’ from Refugees “Urban titled study, This TOTAL 18.1% of thetotalpopulationinTurkey and17.5%of totalSyrianrefugees live inIstanbul. PRE-REGISTRATION TEMPORARY PROTECTION POPULATION (2015) expressed intalkswiththeofficials ontheSyrian issue. Thedetails are unknown. number the Turkeyis in Syrians PR of number However,total Management. the Migration of torate Direc Provincial Istanbul, of Governorship by provided was PR of number total the on Information 2016 by Governorship of Istanbul,Provincial Directorate of Migration Management. December wereprovidedin These November2016. of numbers the are section this in numbers The excluded. DGMM:http://www.goc.gov.tr/icerik3/ikamet-izinleri_363_378_4709 (Access: 11.12.2016) granted were who residence in Syrians 2015 is 32.578. However,of number since this the study was conducted DGMM, on refugees, residentby holders are given information the to According permission. TurkeyresidenceTurkeyin livewith to before2011, came whose of some Syrians, thousand 70 about Although more than 97% of Syrians are under the statuses of Temporary Protection or Pre-Registration, 78,741.053 3.083.617 2,783.617 300.000 TURKEY 3 14.657.4342 1 ISTANBUL The emergence of this situation situation this of emergence The 539.062 478.850 60.212 2 RATIO OFISTANBUL TO TURKEY (%) 17,5 20,0 18,1 17.1

- - - 3 Photo:Nikolay Doychinov/AFP/Getty Images URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” average. average. is very compatible with this 4%, it isseen that Istanbul average of Turkey isaround Considering(4,06%). that the Adıyaman and (4,05%) Kayseri Mersin (7,87%), Adana (6,83%), Kahramanmaras (7,87%), Mardin(16,5%), (11,7%), Şanlıurfa Gaziantep (21,23%), Hatay +), Kilis (100% (24,6%), Syrians under TP. are These population, based on only the refugees than 4%of their have that more provinces In Turkey, there are 10 53

i t ter ouain r Anvtö, aaşhr Fth n Sultanbeyli. and ra- Fatih Başakşehir, the Arnavutköy, are of population regard their in to foreground tio the in are that provinces Other 8.63%. with ratio highest the has Zeytinburnu these, Among 16. is 3.67% of age aver - Istanbul the than refugees more hold that number municipalities The district them. of of 14 in refugees thousand 15 than more and tanbul Is- of Nu- districts 21 39 provinces. in refugees in thousand 10 than more are rates there merically, density popu- population Istanbul’s different of to 4% leads about lation, is which population, refugee Syrian The it isseenthatIstanbulvery compatible withthisaverage. Turkeyaverage4%, ofaround the is that Considering (4,06%). Kayseri and (4,05%) Adıyaman (6,83%), Adana (7,87%), Mersin (7,87%), ramanmaras Hatay (24,6%), Şanlıurfa (21,23%), Gaziantep (16,5%), Mardin (11,7%), Kah- +), (100% Kilis are These TP. under Syrians the only on based population, Turkey,their In of 4% provincesrefugeeshavemorethan 10 that are there the nearfuture. in Istanbul in Turkeygather in refugees Syrian all of 25% than more when surprise a be not would it stabilized, and controlledprovinces is the tween be- mobility refugee the Unless Istanbul. in increase of speed the of terms in striking very also is situation This 17,4%. Turkeyis in Syrians 3,083,617 of total the to Istanbul in Syrians thousand 539 of ratio the consideration, into taken is PR + TP When 14,9%. Turkeyis in Syrians thousand 2,783 of into consideration, the ratio of 416 thousand Syrians in Istanbul to the total taken is TP if calculation, similar a With 4%. is ratio the then estimations, of frame the in correctnumber the is which thousand, 600 is it if 3,54%; is ratio the then thousand, 539 is it if 2,84%; is population to Syrians of ratio the then thousand, 416 is Istanbul in Syrians of number the if 14,657,434, is ofIstanbul Consideringpopulation ofSyrians. the density population the makedifferencenumbersalso a these out that finding doubt terms of no in is There thousand. 600 around be would Istanbul in Syrians of number the 4 PR. in are them of 60,212 and TP in are them of 478,850 539,062. in is Istanbul Syrians of number the 2016, of as provided, Istanbul of Governorship of Management Migration of Directorate Provincial data the to According Provincial Directorate of Migration Management. 539 thousand, which is the sum of TP and PR. This number is obtained from Governorship of Istanbul, in TP of number Turkeytotal is the 2,783,617 and the 2016, number of December TP in 1 Istanbul is of 416,690. This study as is based that on the information number of the provides website DGMM’s 4 When the records are completed and sorted out, it is estimated that estimated is it out, sorted and completed are records the When Chart 7:14 Districts of Istanbul with More Than Syrians 15,000 under TP ŞİŞLİ GAZİOSMANPAŞA BAHÇELİEVLER ARNAVUTKÖY AVCILAR SULTANBEYLİ* ESENLER ZEYTİNBURNU BAŞAKŞEHİR ESENYURT FATİH SULTANGAZİ BAĞCILAR KÜÇÜKÇEKMECE DISTRICT POPULATION 274.017 501.546 602.040 236.222 425.228 321.730 459.983 289.685 353.311 742.810 419.345 521.524 757.162 761.064 SYRIANS (TP) NUMBER OF NUMBER OF 15.269 17.709 17.710 17.838 19.554 20.192 22.678 25.000 26.424 29.177 30.747 31.426 37.643 38.278

RATIO TO POPULATION (%) URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 5,57 3,53 2,94 7,55 4,59 6,27 4,93 8,63 7,48 3,92 7,33 6,02 4,97 5,02 RANK 16 19 12 10 15 7 2 5 1 3 4 6 9 8

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Ibrahim Khader / Bron: Middle East Eye VII. RESEARCH FINDINGS

Based on the semi-structured questionnaire used within the frame of this research, answers from 27 district municipalities and IMM are given in the following headings:

“Numerical Quantity” The Foundation of Process Management by Istanbul District Municipalities 1 Database Based on District Municipalities and the Need for a Common Database 2 Are Municipalities Legally and Administratively Obliged to Take Care of Refugees? 3 Are Legal and Administrative Changes Necessary? 4 Which Municipal Departments Are Related to Refugee Issues? 5 Staff Recruitment for Refugees 6 Information on Numbers and Characteristics of the Refugees 7 Municipal Income and Refugees 8 Municipal Services for Refugees 9 How Many of the Syrian Refugees Benefit from Municipal Services? 10 Employment Status and Business Operations of Syrians 11 Begging and Municipalities 12 Which Institutions Are Cooperating on Refugee Issues? 13 Cooperation with International Institutions 14 Harmonization Programs and Municipalities 15 Multi-Purpose Community Centers 16 Which Persons and Institutions Lead These Activities? 17 How is the Financing of the Services for Refugees Provided? 18 How Should the Funds for These Activities Be Regulated? 19 How Much Have Refugees Increased the Workload and the Financial Burden of Municipalities? 20 Where Do Syrian Refugees Get Provided with These Services? 21 Do Syrian Refugees Get Help for Their Health and Education Problems? 22 Future Plans of Syrians: Will They Stay or Will They Leave? 23 Possibility of Tension Between Syrians and Local Communities 24 Involving Refugees in Decision Making Process 25 Other Issues/Problems 26 The main criterion that determines the process management of 39 district municipalities in Istanbul on refugee issues is numerical quantity.

58 Photo:AP between 1000 and3000,in5districtmunicipalitiesitisbelow 1000. is municipalities district Istanbul’s of 10 in refugeesof number The Pendik. and Büyükçekmece Beylikdüzü, in and thousand 5-10 between is Bayrampaşa it and Beyoğlu,Eyüp; Sancaktepe, Güngören, Kağıthane, Ümraniye, Arnavutköy,in thousand Bahçelievler,10-20 between Şişli, Gaziosmanpaşa, is it Avcılar; and Sultanbeyli Esenler, Zeytinburnu, Başakşehir, in thousand 20-30 between is refugees of number The thousand. 30 over is provinces Syrian of Esenyurt and FatihKüçükçekmece, Bağcılar,Sultangazi, number of each in refugees The quantity. numerical naturally is issues refugee on municipalities in Istanbul, with 166 to 38,278 refugees within their borders, district 39 of management process the determines that criterion main The 1. “NUMERICAL QUANTITY” THE “NUMERICAL DISTRICT MUNICIPALITIES MANAGEMENT BY ISTANBUL FOUNDATION OF PROCESS URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 59

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Armend Nimani/AFP

In process management, it is of the utmost importance that local governments have valid data.

60 1 water. and electricity ofcost and rents people, disabled home, at children school-age in, live that refugees houses the of quality like need of areas all determine more to convenient it makes this records, household-based municipalities receive to Since prefer generally management. process harmonization-oriented a to contribution a considerable offer now aid, of distribution the started organize initially to were which works, These successful Sultanbeyli. most is this the of of examples One teams. municipal by directly visits family or These databases are created through refugees’ application to municipalities boundaries. havetheir refugeewithin of populations database own their created Ümraniye, and Sultanbeyli Pendik, Gaziosmanpaşa, Büyükçekmece, Bağcılar,of Municipalities the including municipalities, of group A creation. own their of systems the through need this fulfil to trying been have they issue, this on government central the enough from information get detailed and not valid could municipalities because However, data. valid have In process management, it is of the utmost importance that local governments for municipalitiestomanage thisprocess inanotherway. impossible almost is it data, some collecting while experienced been have data personal for principle privacy of context the in problems content and authority some Although visits. home recordskeepthroughdirectly usually 2. even shoesize of thechildren inrefugee families. and Asylum Seekers Assistance and Solidarity Association”, some highly detailed data were “Refugeescollected, via conducted it works the for created has Sultanbeyli of Municipality that database The FOR A COMMON DATABASEFOR ACOMMON MUNICIPALITIES AND THE NEED DATABASE BASED ON DISTRICT 1 The municipalities that conduct such services such conduct that municipalities The URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 61

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Raad Adayleh/AP Photo

“We have a humanitarian and a conscientious obligation; we cannot ignore so many desperate, needy and poor people.”

64 between therefugees and the municipalities. that the city councils should be made more functional and serve as a bridge context this in expressed frequently also was It capacity. and economy of refugees in high numbers and which are relatively underdeveloped in terms taken have which municipalities in expressed especially was opinion This municipalities. metropolitan are issues refugee for authority main should the that be institutions the that stated and matter the of aspect security was for municipalities, burden expressedeverythe almost out in pointed also authorities interview. administrative Some and financial a and issue important extremely an become have which issues,refugee on regulations administrative and legal new for need the context, this In ignored. be not could 14 Article in “citizenship”emphasis the hand, other the on but 5393, that “asylum” is possible and reasonable according to the Article express13 authorities municipal Accounts.The ofCourt ofthe of audit the about Law No. them also for the peace of district locals, but to that they important have is serious concerns issue this that stated officials municipal Many to this. Fellow-Citizenship”explain the to Related “Law to referred and people,” poor a conscientious obligation; we cannot ignore so many desperate, needy and enough,” they also expressed their opinion as “We have a humanitarian and clearly this state not does 5393 No. Law Municipal “”The repliedas ofthem most Although issues. refugee on authorities as working officials municipal at directed refugees?” of care take to obliged administratively and legally “Are municipalities question the to responses different quite were There 3.

REFUGEES? TOOBLIGED TAKE CARE OF ADMINISTRATIVELYAND ARE MUNICIPALITIES LEGALLY URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 65

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Emrah Gürel/ AP

It is proposed that special financial support should be provided from the central budget to municipalities based on the number of refugees to be used on66 refugee issues. es are, infact, areflection of allthe expectations onthesubject: gee issues should be made in order to provide better services. These chang - refu- on changes administrative and legal some that expressed authorities municipal Istanbul, in municipalities district with interviewevery in Almost 4. CHANGES NECESSARY? ARE LEGALAND DMINISTRATIVE ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► on acomprehensive analysisof needsare requested. based term long and medium short, on policies of Construction the issue andtransformation of thisstrategy intopolicies; concerning state the of decision strategic the of Determination aspects of therefugee issue; all addressing of capable body coordinating a of Establishment in practice; and system data common a in institutions central and ernments gov- local between and governments, local among Coordination lan- and specialists guage-speaking staff; for opportunities employment Creating refugee issues; on used be to refugees of number the on based to municipalities budget central the from support financial special Providing Republic by makingchanges inMunicipalLaw; Turkishofcitizens not are who people serve to way the Opening URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 67

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Muhammed Muheisen/AP

The current legislation in Turkey does not make a clear definition of the municipal departments that should deal with refugee issues.

68 4 projects through relevant NGOs. poor in local community. Another method the frequently for used here it is do to they develop ways the in refugees the of needs the fulfil to trying are they povertyissueand a perceived as is this municipalities, For population. the other hand the population of refugees is still less than 10% of municipal on and obstacles legal are there hand one the on because problem, urgent an as situation the perceive to not tend municipalities The municipalities. some in issues refugee on working are departments multiple hand, other the On issues. refugee with deal to determined been have Development Affairs, Directorate Pressof Public and Directorate and Relations Strategyof Social and Culture of Directorate as such directorates the municipalities, some In Assistance. common Social of Directorate the mostly very is issue this to department related a municipal not the exceptions, is some are it there however, Although refugees; practice. with deal to migration of departments special established have municipalities Some municipalities. in aid social with deal that ones the generally are departments related the choiceofthey departments have However,authorised. couldit that seen be in the in and this have to they solutions way found the differ in municipalities legislation current which that observed the is it with issues, these of definition clear Because a make authority first not Turkeydoes issue. and Istanbul, this capacity in approach departments, municipalities municipalities the district with questioned conducted we study the In 5. Solidarity Association” working incooperation withMunicipalityof Sultanbeyli. Assistanceand Seekers Asylum and the”Refugees is regard this in successfulworks most the of One ISSUES? ARE RELATED TO REFUGEE WHICH MUNICIPAL DEPARTMENTS 4

URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 69

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Rayane Abou Jaoude/Norwegian Refugee Council

Almost all of the municipalities working on managing this process express their need for language-speaking staff.

70 staff whenneeded. in shifts making are they Currently, staff. language-speaking for need their expressprocess this managing on working municipalities the of all Almost etc.). Beylikdüzü, Kağıthane, (Sancaktepe,few in a forexcept municipality any conducted been not had that knowledge, language observed foreign with was especially it issues, related refugee municipalities, on work would who district staff additional of in recruitment held interviews the In 6. REFUGEES STAFF RECRUITMENT FOR URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 71

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Dimitris Michalakis/Reuters

It is observed that the municipalities do not have valid and up-to-date information on the number of refugees.

72 numbers are 25%higherthantheofficial numbers. This shows that municipalities are not exaggerating by stating that the actual said that the number of Syrian refugees in Istanbul is around 600 thousand. be couldprovince, it other some registeredin are they although Istanbul in PR. 60,212 and TP 478,850 total; Adding Syrians who have not been registered in yet and Syrians who are living 539,062 is Istanbul in number the Provincial Directorate of Migration Management of Governorship of Istanbul, However,416,690. the fromis obtained it information and the accordingto website of DGMM based on December 1, 2016 shows only the number of TP the on Istanbul in refugeesfor given of number the example, Forregistration. because numbers andactual different statuses, continuance types of of registrations practice and pre-of numbers formal between there are that differences state also officials DGMM However, numbers. these the of perceptioncreated refugeeabout issues frequently exaggerationan to lead the and numbers official the of validity on a suspicion The clearly problem. general is it fact, In Management. Migration of Directorate Provincial by of refugees are between 10% and 100% higher than the numbers provided numbers actual the that stated authorities municipal municipalities, the of all almost foreground.In the on now is permanence the processwhere a in Migration municipalities to of flow information Directoratemore provide regularly Provincial to Management for important very Police is of It Directorate Department. District the and Management on Migration of information Directorate up-to-date Provincial from and that obtain they numbers observedsome valid for except refugees of was number have it not municipalities, do district in municipalities held interviews the In 7.

REFUGEES AND CHARACTERISTICS OF THE INFORMATION NUMBERS ON URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 73

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Bülent Kılıç/AFP

The distribution of the shares from the general budget tax revenues is predominantly based on the population criterion, and the variable population is not considered in this distribution.74 tax revenues within the provincial borders. receiveMetropolitanadministrations.municipalities general cial budgetthe of 6% tan areas, 4.50% to metropolitan district municipalities and 0.5% to provincial spe- metropoli - in those than other municipalities to revenuesallocated aretax budget AccordingAdministrationsMunicipalities. and ofoftotal 1.50% generalthe this, to Provincial Special TaxRevenuesto Budget General from Apportionments on 5779 Transfers from the general budget to the municipalities are regulated by the Law No in this distribution. this in considerednot is population variable the and criterion, population the on based ly The distribution of the shares from the general budget tax revenues is predominant diate needsand process management. such a resource transfer could make a significant contribution to fulfilment of imme- Turkish citizens due to the urgency of the situation and the additional costs. At first, for resourceallocated the than more as calculated resourceis this fact, In refugee. per resources of amount certain a transferring by issue ad- the addresscentral ministrations areas, particular in settled refugees for that observed is it Europe, In difficulty inmanagingthe process. have will population their of 100% and 10% of excess in refugees with regions those with more refugees than 3% of their population. It is clear that especially the creates an extremely important resource problem for local governments, especially This legislation. the in foreseen refugees the for resource separate no is there es, resourcexisting the from Apart shares. these of distribution the consideredin not tax revenues change between 51TLand79TL. budget general from capita per municipalities metropolitan the of shares the that tan municipalities after Law No. 6360 (for April 2014-March 2015 period), it is seen is 65%for metropolitan municipalities. rate This municipalities. incomeof total the ofconstituteapproximately 52% nues revesharesfromgeneraltax budgetcountry.The our in for- municipalities funding Transfersneeds. their from general budgetrevenues tax aresource important an of to income of sourcesown their tailor to ability the have not thereforedo and fees and self-taxes of tariffs the determine to authority the have not do municipalities our country, municipalities do not have efficient sources of self-income. In addition, ities, classified as: 1. Self-Income, 2. Transfers from General Budget Tax Revenues. In it is known, other than borrowing, there are two sources of income of the municipal- dens and financial needs arising from these refugees in the districts are evident. As bur- five the last and receivedyears refugeesthe ofhas large in number Istanbul a 8.

MUNICIPAL INCOME AND REFUGEES 8 Therefore, havethat population the comemigration the is with 9

6 In a survey conducted for 30 metropoli- 7

URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” - -

9 8 7 6 “Türkiye’de (2016) Arıkboğa Ülkü 5 These numbers are striking. 2016. in million 52 reached 2011 ban transportation of 35 million in million to 90 million TL and the ur- 60 from increased expenditures 80 million m3 in 2016, the energy to increased 2011 in m3 million 60 of consumption water annual the example, For people. million 2.5 by used being are people lion mil- 1.9 for planned services cial so- and transportation sewerage, water,infrastructure, the that also services,and public in disruptions various causing are Şanlıurfa in an additional of 480,000 refugees year.per fund that out pointed He additional TL would million 20 receive municipality the means it then Syrians, thousand 480 of forpopulation also additional the capita per provided is TL 43.37 if that states Çiftçi Mr. capita. per TL 43.37 of average an with total, in TL million 82.2 is government tral cen- by given fund the numbers, officialin million 1.9 is population municipal the for Bank, Provincial of data TURKSTAT the to ac cording that, expressed Çiftçi Mayor services. municipal in disruption of serious cause also can million, 1.9 population total the of 25% exceeding population a reaching Şanlıurfa, in Syrians The province. than 480 thousand Syrians in their more actually were there records, DGMM in thousand 400 as shown was number the although that ed Mayor of Şanlıurfa Nihat Çiftçi stat in Şanlıurfa on November 7, 2016, held meeting UCLG-MEWA the At the area. accordingto 30% and population to according distributed is 40% the of 70% directly, distributed share is borders provincial the in allocated of 60% nicipalities, mu- metropolitan according In area. the 10% to population, to ities, 90% is distributed according In metropolitan district municipal- index. development to according 20% index, population to cording ac distributed 80% are shares the of municipalities, ropolitan met than other municipalities In Issue 2,s.23-25. XXXVIII Volume 2015, İ.İ.B, of nal Etkileri”, Marmara University Jour- Kanun’un Sayılı Transfer6360 ve Sistemi Belediyesi Büyükşehir “Türkiye’de (2015) Arıkboğa Ülkü and numbered 26937. Official Gazette dated 15.07.2008 Municipalities” and ministrations Revenues to Special Provincial TaxAd- Budget General from ments Apportion- on “Law 5779 No. Law 13, Issue 33,287-288. Volume 2016, Institute, Sciences Kemal University Journal of Social Mustafa Önerileri”, Çözüm ve lar Sorun- Yapısı: Gelir Belediyelerin - - - - 75

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:AP

It has been observed that the vast majority of the municipalities are providing extremely important services for refugees in the context of “emergency management” and especially “support for the76 poor and needy”. ra mblte o rfge wt mncplte, n fo tm t time to time from organize thedistributionof aid. and municipalities, with refugees of mobilities urban special place. Neighborhood headmen share the needs and the most micro- a have headmen neighborhood frame, this In system. the to questionnaire the on information the entering by cases the up follow also They services. their in analysis needs for visits home at registrations on-the-spot conduct municipalities all Almost visits. home via cases urgent determining through District municipalities provide their assistance either through on-demand or provide services, by official orinformal means,to persons to who are not registered. not government central urged has municipalities process, the context,encourageregistered,this to in registrationmanageand better and serious case especially in 2014-2015. In order to ensure that all refugees are and services to be provided to the refugees who are “not registered”; it was a municipalities have been experiencing serious problems with the assistance - some established by the initiative of the municipality itself. It is known that ofmunicipality,the servicesmany are cooperationin out carried NGOs with staffand capacity means, the with directly conducted are services these of “emergency of contextmanagement” and especially “support for the poor and needy”. While some the in refugees for services important extremely has been observed that the vast majority of the municipalities are providing However,it districts. problem their in settle and the come to refugees more avoid encourage to trying would areit refugees,forprograms support some conduct they if that thinking they and locals/electors, of reaction services. It is understood that these municipalities are afraid of the negative some providing avoided consciously While have municipalities been some has todistrict. that it determined issue, the to district related systems developed from have municipalities services differ municipal dramatically that refugees observed been for and has it However, longer-term “poverty”. and developed “neediness” of frame the within refugees to assistanceproviding have generally are Istanbul in municipalities municipalities district the projects, harmonization-oriented some Although 9.

REFUGEES MUNICIPAL SERVICES FOR URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 77

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul 78 MARMARA MUNICIPALITIES UNION for municipalities to recruit problem. Also, it isnot easy Arabic-speaking service staff who could speak The lack of sufficient providers isamajor Arabic. Arabic. uiiaiis eeal drc te ed o cs o cmoiy from commodity or some However, Foundations. cash Solidarity and Assistance for Social to need refugees the direct generally Municipalities municipalities are not common enough and obviously must be strengthened. by provided services translation and support psycho-social the that stated is it context, this In Arabic. speak could who staff recruit to municipalities Arabic-speaking service providers is a major problem. Also, it is not easy for sufficient of lack The here. out comes refugees, to related problems main more and morethe of one is becoming which problem, However,language day. the every are systematic people disabled women, and violence lonely of patients, victims chronic children, school-aged unaccompanied elders, as children, such groups disadvantaged for Services refugees. to and comprehensive. Psycho-social support services have also been provided The services provided by some municipalities have become very diversified provided torefugees would create ariskfor theminfinancialaudit. aid any that and issue this on restrictions legal certain are there that said municipalities some responsibilities, and rights municipal of domain the in within the framework of “fellow-citizenship law” and that these services are services these providing are they that said municipalities some While etc. blankets, beds, stoves, goods, white foodstuffs, cookers, sofas, materials, significantly to the provision of basic necessities, supplies, carpets, cleaning contribute indirectly or directly Municipalities money. any without mostly persons, who come to this country only with a few pieces of belongings and Municipalities also housing. have inexpensivea special role renting in providing of basic processnecessities to the these in refugees support to them forpossible only is it often housing, new build to capacity the have not do housing that can be used by refugees and other poor people and since they locals do not rent their houses to refugees. because Since municipalities do not sometimes have and shortages housing of because also but poor, are do not have the opportunity to live in better housing, not only because they Refugees shops. in the liveof basements to and havestorehouses warehouses, still garages, refugees the of many today, Even problematic. very are in live they places the cities, the in arrive they when beginning, the in and they do not have more than a few pieces of belongings. Thus, especially refugees is also arrivedhousing. Refugees newlyare very of poor,issue mostly with many the children, on face to have municipalities The that need support. basic and facilities necessary of basis the on lives their continue can they where space new a for searching start housing with provided are who people arrivals, new and acquaintancesfor opportunities limited very and Turkey.short in Despite settle would they area the of choicerefugees’ of acquaintances, presence relativesSyrian rolein important areaplayed an has that kinfolk in or living the years, five last immigration the all in almost cases, refugee in and experienced As housing. is refugees urban of problem urgent and primary most The employment. and services medical Refugees come to municipalities mostly for housing, household goods, food, limitations duetorefugees. resource and risks social overcoming of chance the have now valid, are cards these where stores, grocery small because valuable highly also considerably is cards these of use Also, contribute to local economy and local harmonization life. process. This practice honorable an for valuable 0 o eape “tkr” “tkr Fo Sedn Eetoi Cr”, hc hs en rdcd by produced been has which Card”), Electronic Spending Food (“Atakart “Atakart” example, For 10 the card if it is not used for a of week. credit weekly the cancel municipalities Some need. their to creditaccording of amount certain a with provided get holders card month, Every municipality. the with contracted also are which stores/markets grocery the from obtained be could products, food especially municipalities, by determined necessities daily the cards, these With consumption. luxury ofareforconsideredproductsbe that or for to cash used be cardscannot these in deposited Money assistance. social of adirectorate municipality’s in registered citizens the to conditions, necessary with accordance in are provided for daily basic needs such as bread, water, milk and detergent, names are distributed to differentrefugees in under some districts practiceof Istanbul. These into cards put municipalities many that cards aid The important for direct orindirect expenses of municipalities. very also are citizens by made Donations stores. contracted from products cleaning and food buy can they and need in those to card monthly a gives municipality the that expressed official The victimized. not are people that so need, in non-Turkishcitizens help to them allowingassistance social on with “99”. He also stated that there is an additional clause in the regulations and they also help those who do not have a “Foreigner’s ID Number” starting expressed that they do their activities within the designed framework of Law No. have5393 they because cases, practicesthese officialmunicipal fordistrict “support A as poor”. and needy such in support their continue and takeinitiative many municipalities However, issue. this from “98” suffer with could starting Numbers” “Personel the with people even Sometimes refugees. unregistered to biggest given the support the point, is this here experienced At problem Syrians. to provided also are Bank” “Food and - generallyprovided these,Market”practicesBesides by“Social IMM. as such parcels” “food of support the by followed emergencies, in meals hot of the most common form of support provided by municipalities is the However,provisiondistricts. own their in needy and poor the for established already systems the in refugees include to preparations or practices some started have Some municipalities to refugees. support financial direct provide to of businessmen and transport. philanthropic citizens. It school is not possible and for municipalities telephone Expenditures water,in this regard are generally electricity, made possible by the contributions as such needs refugees, urgent the of meet to resources create to striving are municipalities tshr uiiaiy n dsrbtd o tosn ctzn o Tre, s o pand o be to planned now is Turkey, of citizens thousand 9 distributed totherefugees. to distributed and Municipality Atasehir 10 It is clear that this practice is extremely URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” provided to Syrians. Market” and “Food Bank” are Practices such as “Social 79

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Osman Orsal/Reuters

Some municipalities stated that they had reached almost all the Syrians, while some gave numbers as 60%, 40%, 10% and so on.

80 number becausethey donothave ahealthyinventory onthissubject. a such give not could they that stated municipalities 40%, Many on. so and 10% 60%, as numbers had gave some they while Syrians, that the all stated almost reached municipalities Some obtained. were borders within district their living refugees the Syrian which the reached to have extent Istanbul in the municipalities about clues important research, the In 10. MUNICIPAL SERVICES? REFUGEES BENEFIT FROM HOW MANY OF THE SYRIAN URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 81

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Joseph Eid Agence France Presse

The areas in which Syrians mostly work are textile, construction, manufacturing, recycling (paper collection), hairdressing and teaching Syrians.

82 11 IstanbulMetropolitan Municipality“Alo 153”(2016) Project Management Office (PYO) Analysis Report forSyrianCitizens. of theseareas by thecitizens are mentioned. use the to ownedexperiencedbusinesses due be suffering already to and experienced or also unlicensed stores. Similarly, on removing “occupations”, the areas occupied by Syrian- and insanitary are that storesunauthorized to related mostly are municipalities district and to security after activities economic directed complaints the to IMM, from obtained information the Accordingto issues.begging related mostly are reported, are Istanbul Metropolitan of citizens Istanbul the of to evaluations and made complaints Syrians demands, the about where 153”, “Alo complaints Municipality the that out pointed was It informaland businesses.labor child employeesabout and is enterprises of Syrian subject the on municipalities to complaints reported frequently most the that expressed was It unless thecomplaints are filed. enterprises such of activities the with interfere not do they generally but Syrians, the by established enterprises the about made complaints the account into take municipalities and uninsured in their jobs and such cases are against competition. It is understood that the that from time to time, local people report refugees to police because they are unregistered the refugees are indifferent or uninsured, or that they are out of competition. It was stated when tell to hard it find people local time, Fromto kebabetc. time snacks, spices, clothes, for stores or jewelersworkshops, small women, and men hairdressersfor wash, car cafes, confectioners,hookahrestaurants, small cafes, small open especially Syrians The Syrians. other serve mostly they and work people 1-2 where establishments business small open The municipal authorities also stated that entrepreneur Syrians with opportunities usually working conditions andplaces. jobs Syrians have taken are not commonly preferred by Turkish people due to poor wages, decreased afterwards. The municipal authorities attribute this situation to the fact that the Syrians had created an uneasiness in the local community in the first place, the complaints of employment although that expressed authorities municipal The hairdressingSyrians. teaching collection), and (paper recycling manufacturing, construction, textile, are work mostly Syrians which in areas The businesses. small own their opened have some and - workers cheap and informal as often - jobs unqualified in working mostly are Syrians that the of conditions working the Syrians from about Istanbul district municipalities. However, information in healthy almost all interviews, it obtain was stated to possible not was It 11. OPERATIONS OF SYRIANS EMPLOYMENT STATUS AND BUSINESS 11

URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 83

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Bülent Kılıç/AFP

Most of the complaints are about “Syrian beggars”, which are mostly the children waiting in traffic lights.

84 themselves inthemiddleof thissuddenhumanitariancrisis. local people while also helping these people who have nothing remained to 12 Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality “Alo 153” (2016) Project Management Office (PYO) Analysis (PYO) Office Management Project (2016) 153” “Alo Municipality Metropolitan Istanbul 12 that of top the list. at complaint are begging to related closely are which “security”, or three complaint subjects. Also, issues such as “deterioration of social order” top the among is beggarsof subject the Syrians, about complaintsfor 153” “Alo Municipality Metropolitan Istanbul line the to made calls the Among effect. lack of into put to be must due Security of Directorate thus, issue capacity; this and power on ineffective be would police municipal that stated municipalities other some hand, other the On departments. relevant to responsibility and power sanction give and sanctions severe impose to municipal police. Instead, they suggested that it would be more appropriate wrong, even negligent to leave this case to Directorate of Security instead of be would it different that expressed havemunicipalities Some regard. municipalities this in approaches that observed is It people. these Turkey in using “mafias” are beggar the that is other the and Syria doing in were works who similar people are beggars these of most that is here attention particular of points the of One situation. this areserious against fighting there in but problems thissituation, by is disturbed officials municipality including everyone that stated was it municipalities, with interviews the In are years, five about “Syrian beggars”, last which are the mostly the forchildren waiting areasin traffic lights. urban in living been have who refugees, There is no doubt that a vast majority of the complaints on the issue of Syrian 12. Report for SyrianCitizens. BEGGING AND MUNICIPALITIES 12 The municipalities have to manage the reaction from the from reaction the manage to have municipalities The URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 85

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul The cooperation of district municipalities with each other on the issue of refugees remains extremely limited.

86 Photo:AFP/GETTY ht dprmn fr rcs mngmn o rfge sus hud be established withinthebodyof IMM. should issues refugee on management process for department a that view the expressed municipalities district all Nearly management. process healthy and sharing data both of terms in problems serious creates IMM in issuethis to related department special a of Lack IMM. with relations the to refugeesremains extremely Therelimited. evenan is ofgreater regardin need issue the on other each with municipalities district of cooperation The Bashir and Foundation Culture and Association. Education Sinan Mimar Gönülder, Foundation, Hudavi Mahmud Aziz Association,Arab PalestinianFoundation, as such institutions including UNHCR, ASAM, HRDF, NGOs Kuwait Qatar Businessmen Foundation, IHH, Syrian Nur with cooperation project-based in been have municipalities that learned we Also, Policies. Social and Family of Ministry and AFAD Directorate, Health Provincial Education, National of Directorate Provincial Directorate, Security Provincial IMM, Management, Migration of Directorate Provincial Governorship, District Governorship, as very such institutions the with is consult and meet frequently municipalities with that observed is cooperate it context, this In municipalities management. process of terms in district important the institutions Which 13. ISSUES? COOPERATING ON REFUGEE ARE INSTITUTIONS WHICH URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 87

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Muhammed Muheisen/AP

Some district municipalities feel discomfort and suspicion towards international institutions.

88 13 “Municipalities should be trained in project writing and finding funds from national and international sources. international and national from funds finding and writing project in trained be should “Municipalities 13 frequently expressed intheMMUworkshop report. competent project team, a suitable project and suitable partners. This problem is also a of lack mainly are these forit; obstacles some arethere that cooperationstated to international institutions. On the other hand, a group of municipalities that are prone towards suspicion and discomfort feel interviewed we municipalities district Some to beestablishedinFatih district,which housesavery highnumberof refugees. planned is “coordinationcenter”second the that stated was it conducted, we views bul. It is possible to develop such a “model” cooperation in other regions. In the inter- center also plays an important role in the coordination of the Anatolian side of Istan- This center. this for support financial partial provides institution Hilfe”“Welthunger regard.German this The in model a is roofrefugeeand workingone on issues under institutions all gathered has center This established. been coordinationhas centera RefugeesSeekersand SultanbeyliAsylum Assistance and Association, Solidarity and of Municipality Management, Migration of DirectorateProvincial Istanbul with ation cooper- In EBRD. and (JICA), Agency Cooperation International Japan International, Amnesty Association, Medical International Tzu-Chi Foundation, Taiwan Corps, ical eration Agency (GTZ), Maya Foundation, Doctors Without Borders, International Med- CoopTechnical- German the of roof the under established was which (GIZ) Agency Cooperation International German Association, Bar Welthungerhilfe,American WFP; UNDP,IOM, UNHCR, especially institutions, UNICEF,UN arethere municipalities, trict dis- with collaborated have that institutions the Among very collaborations. successful some with services their out carried have which municipalities district some are Nevertheless,development.there project and authority of capacity the in lems probthe is areNGOs or - charities cooperatingbased UK and American German, with that municipalities for obstacle biggest the particular, In institutions. international some with projects conducting also are cooperation, international to open are and haveextensiverefugeepopulations which municipalities, district that observed is It 14. ities inService toUrbanRefugees Workshop Report, p.14. encouragedTheybe should forapply to project-based well.”as (Novemberfunds MMU Role2015) of Municipal-

INSTITUTIONS COOPERATION WITH INTERNATIONAL 13 URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 89

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:AFP

Municipalities underlined that refugees should be supported as economically integrated individuals.

90 guest anymore” or“permanence.” the Because reasons. a being “not justifiable of meanings evokethe integration-harmonization of for concepts here, itself concept the than rather translations. In fact, there is a hesitation about what is meant by the concept, It isknown in especially preferred, commonly also is “integration” ofcontent. of concept the that the meaning in difference significant a create to considered not is preference this However, preferred. is “harmonization” of concept the study, this in Also “integration.” of instead “harmonization” of concept the prefer institutions official Turkish that known is It used. are “orientation” and “adaptation” as such concepts sometimes integration, of concept“assimilation” oftenexpressedis Forcriticisms. reason,these this instead in the evokesconcept migrations,the in which in way massThe criticized. living is and problems of has itself people terms Turkish-origined in by especially However, about Europe. brought was time, concept first the the this For Turkish). from in originally as (“entegrasyon” Turkish “integration” entered of concept has harmonization of concept The 15. AND MUNICIPALITIES HARMONIZATION PROGRAMS URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 91

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Ümit Bektaş/Reuters

Around 60 community centers in Turkey are working on refugee issues and conducting harmonization centered programs.

94 eues r hgl itrse i tee etr ad atcpt i many in participate and activities withtheirchildren. centers these in interested highly are refugees Municipalities of Şişli, Esenler and Sultanbeyli in Istanbul. Especially women by established been have carried which Centers being Community Multi-Purpose currently in out are courses hobby also and occupation place), a language, education, health, informing, working life (finding a job and opening district municipalities in Istanbul has been rather limited. Many programs on the of initiative the at established centers such of number The in future. the Crescent Red the of directorate the under work would Turkey, of all in 60 around currently are which centers, these that harmonization-oriented foreseen foris conduct It programs. courses and problems and their training with provide deal refugees, refugees, highly urban are inform refugees to where regions populated the in centers community establish NGOs RedCrescentor Policies,municipalities, FamilySocial of and Ministry 16. CENTERS CENTERS MULTI-PURPOSE COMMUNITY URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 95

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Ümit Bektaş/Reuters

While some municipalities are cooperating with NGOs, some are abstaining from cooperation due to ideological disputes.

96 therefore donotcooperate with them. and viewpoint ideological not of terms in do municipalities some with but agree do not NGOs some activities, that is NGOs’ NGOs with problem allow Another them. with they cooperate that stated authorities These problematic.be might contentaid ofalso this and collect aid NGOs way the that and activities NGOs’ of supervision the in gaps are there that concern expressed authorities municipal Some NGOs. international of activities the from away stay purposely they that expressed municipalities other some the hand, On NGOs. with cooperation in refugees great for a services of conducted number have they that stated have authorities municipal The systems of othermunicipalities. and services the about informed get they events, such in because them to and somemeetings important extremelyareissue regardingorganize this even MMU that workshops that stated officials municipal Some channels. emergency management and unofficial relations rather than through official of form the in out carried areissue this to related works the gather of many issue, to structure any this ofnature the established of because that stated is roof.It one under municipalities not has Management Migration of systems regarding the issue. IMM, the Governorship or Provincial own Directorate their establish to efforts making are municipalities district Generally, 17. ACTIVITIES? INSTITUTIONS LEAD THESE AND WHICH PERSONS URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 97

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Expenditures of district municipalities on the issue of refugees are majorly funded by donations and by municipalities’ own resources.

Photo:AFP

98 of refugees are for municipalities. burdens financial the what determine possibleto not is it reasons, these all Forextensively, either. donations records of the keep not do municipalities but donations, is municipalities of item spending largest second The items. causes situation budget the among included explicitly This be to not refugeesfor services non-citizens.many for activities of basis legal the about issues. The most important reason for this is the hesitation of municipalities refugee on spent have municipalities amount the not on data could valid any we obtain research, the In women. or courses people young for integration activities professions,and language, education, harmonization as in such interest programs show can NGOs few vision, and capacity their NGOs mainly focus on “charity” activities to meet basic commodity necessities.or cash donations and distributing Regardeingit to people in need. However,collecting in role important an play municipalities with cooperating NGOs that observed is It funds. own municipalities’ by and donations by funded refugeesmajorly issueareof the on municipalities district ofExpenditures 18. REFUGEES FINANCED? HOW ARE THE SERVICES FOR URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 99

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Bülent Kılıç/AFP

Municipal authorities pointed out the necessity of transferring additional funds depending on the number of refugees.

100 of refugees. out the necessity of transferring additional funds depending on the number tax revenues” regulated in Article 59 of municipal Municipal Law No. 5393 and The pointed issue. this on budgetgeneral from Apportionments “b) used section referredthe authorities to be to expressed funds additional municipalities for all need almost their study, this During budget. the from used indirectly funds, municipal and donations than other issues refugee on used be to funds any have not do municipalities district that clear is It 19. REGULATED? BE ACTIVITIES THESE FOR HOW SHOULD THE FUNDS URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 101

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Zoltan Gergely Kelemen/AP

For many municipalities, refugees are perceived as an additional group of poor-needy people living in their regions.

102 municipalities doesnotexceed on acertain level inthiscase. pressure political and psychological Consequently, refugees. meet towards they and acceptance social of workinglevel high a is are there Besides, themselves. needs refugeestheir many Moreover, regions. their in living people poor-needy of group additional an perceivedas arerefugees 4 codn t te rvnil ietrt o Mgain aaeet f oenrhp f Istanbul, of Governorship of Management Migration of Directorate Provincial the to According 14 in Istanbul with more than 25 thousand refugees. how self-evident be would It districts 8 arethere accountthat into taken is it way. if is approach this valuable calm and mature very a in with issue dealing this are municipalities these Greece), and Italy Austria, Sweden, more than the number of refugees in any EU country except for 5 (Germany, is However,hosting most. haverefugeesbeen theyof number the although are population their of and resourceare capacity experieningwho significant those constraints the 5% than more refugees with municipalities the research, this in seen be could it As population. refugee and of density the financial to The population. district of 5% administrative capacity constraints of municipalities are naturally corelated than more is refugees of KüçükçekmeceFatih,Şişli, number Sultangazi, the Sultanbeyli,Bağcılar) and Arnavutköy,(Zeytinburnu,Başakşehir, municipalities, 17 these of 9 In 17. is is Istanbul in The abovepopulation a host averagethat Istanbul ofmunicipalities number the districts. the population in 10% to total up be the could ratio This to 3.67%. approximately population refugee of ratio The 20. uiiaiis 0 huad yin i P ae iig I Sras n R r dsrbtd n balanced a in distributed are PR in Syrians manner withtheexisting numbers, theestimatedresult would pointtomore than10municipalities. If living. are PR in which Syrians in thousand clear 60 not municipalities is However,it refugees. thousand 25 than more with municipalities 8 are there MUNICIPALITIES? AND THE FINANCIAL BURDEN OF WORKLOAD THE INCREASED HOW HAVE MUCH REFUGEES 14 For many municipalities, URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 103

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Bülent Kılıç / AFP

Municipalities provide services to Syrian refugees in the places they live in as well as municipal cultural centers, soup kitchens and social markets.

104 5 salse b Mncplt o Slabyi wih a scedd n raig n motn sse fr h srie poie t the to provided services the for system important an creating in succeeded has which Sultanbeyli, of Municipality by Established 15 of opportunity the offered permanent shelteringwiththeir children. are they and protection under taken are women victimized the houses, these In temporarily. stay can onboth women refugee disadvantaged socio-economically and working lonely where is staff the housing, of terms permanent and temporary solutions (guest In houses). There are also Female center.Guest Houses in Sultanbeyli community multi-purpose in provided services are provided in the fields of accommodation, health and education in addition to the services CoordinationCenter,In employment. and education health, marriage,issuesof the on Associationare SeekersSolidarity AssistanceAsylum and Refugeesand the Coordinationof CenterSultanbeyli the of activities priority The Center. Coordination of establishment the to contributed Welhungerhilfe,also Construction,German CultureFoundation,EducationSinan besides and Mimar Association and Bashir to have external support on their projects.municipalities Handicap International, Maya Foundation, Hudayi Foundation, for valuable extremely is It activities. these in participated actively NGOs foreign the issueon ofrefugees havework roofto togethersame opportunity the all the now.under and Also,domestic Security) Social developments, and these Labor and with Health Education, addition, Interior, of In (Ministries institutions Affairs. relevant Religious of Presidency also and Sultanbeyli of Municipality as well as Governorship are there Management, Migration of Directorate Provincial and Istanbul of Governorship by established structure “model” this knowledge) In place. general one in refugees and by needed needs search job courses, vocational healthcare, education, (registration, Seekers Assistance and Solidarity Association has the opportunity to provide almost all public services external bysources, is a successfulsupported example in been this respect. The new has 6-storey building of the which Refugees and NGO,Asylum an through Sultanbeyli of Municipality by established center The problems. important most the of one is refugees to providedservices the ofCoordination financing. for used arerelations personal and donations instead, cases; involvedsuch not in are authorities and funds However,municipal fuel. and gas time to natural water,electricity, rent, as from such needs and, basic for housing time, finding for refugees to support provide municipalities Some problems. administrativeovercome and to legal method a as venues NGOs’ and NGOs throughserve frequently are hesitant to provide services to people who do not have ID numbers starting with 99. Municipalities well.Some as municipalities also to refugees serve refugees in facilities services of social assistance support/support directorates. However, mobile offer municipalities municipalities Some refugees. to provideplacesmunicipalities the support areamong municipalities neighborhood marketsand social Masa”), “Beyaz (especially buildings municipal in. kitchens, soup livecenters, cultural they municipal addition, places In the in refugees Syrian to services provide to trying primarily are Municipalities 21. effective implementations interms of fields of activity. refugees, Coordination Center of Association for Solidarity with Asylum Seekers and Migrants has become one of the most diversified and WITH THESE SERVICES? THESE WITH WHERE SYRIAN DO PROVIDED REFUGEES GET 15 URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 105

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Robin Meldrun

District municipalities are providing special services for health and education needs of refugees.

106 16 The AKDEM (Family Support and Disability Center) unit, which has been working successfully on successfully working been has which unit, Center) Disability and Support (Family AKDEM The 16 immigrants. of have harmonization which towards municipalities attitude sensitive some traditionally of programs harmonization and in special health place a have also for education and services Health refugees. of special needs education providing are municipalities District rbes n eiey f sa eeya srie, r al t wr on work to able are services, refugee issues onlyinexceptional casesandasemergency management. everyday usual of delivery in problems reason, this For administrative and yet. financial experiencing already defined are who issuemunicipalities, clearly been the not on have refugees responsibilites Syrian of their and institutions relevant However, 22. “harmonization in the city” with Zeytinburnu Municipality since 2009, is one of the examples that examples the have succeeded indevelopingof aconsiderable capacityinapproach totherefugees. one is 2009, since Municipality Zeytinburnu with city” the in “harmonization EDUCATION PROBLEMS? HELP FORTHEIR HEALTH AND SYRIANDO REFUGEES GET URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 16

107

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Bülent Kılıç / AFP

Up to almost 90% of the respondents expressed that they think Syrians will stay permanently, rather than temporarily.

108 stay permanently, rather thantemporarily. up to almost 90% of the respondents expressed that they think Syrians will permanently, or temporarily here were they whether and Syrians of future In the interviews, when we asked district municipalities of Istanbul about the 23. LEAVE? STAY THEY WILL THEY WILL OR FUTURE PLANS OF SYRIANS: URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 109

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Emrah Gürel / AP

According to the municipal authorities, the three most important problems concerning refugees arise on the subjects of language differences, unemployment110 and housing. s dcto, agae getiain rn ices, egn, staying security. begging, increase, rent and problems economic services,accessing health to unregistered,barriers ghettoization, language, education, refugees as affect that problems priority the rank authorities municipal The and increases rent concerns, security incompatibility. differences, as expressed language for were create people of Syrians local that problems subjects main The the housing. and on unemployment arise refugees concerning problems important most three the authorities, municipal the to According and highbirthrates. order” social “deteriorationservices,of public refugeesin Syrian by caused andlosing/ potential for losing their jobs due to this, some obstacles that they businesses think are unregistered cultures, working of differentiation people local from noise, begging, Syrians, complaints to provided aid rents, in increase are main Syrians about The respect. this in careful very are and anxieties worries have these not community,turned into conflicts, local and that both in local people and concerns Syrians some of existence social the on opinion their about acceptanceimpressionstheir despite and that they stated tension, ofsocial asked were authorities municipal When 24.

COMMUNITIES BETWEEN SYRIANS AND LOCAL TENSION OF POSSIBILITY URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 111

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Aris Messinis / AFP

It is very important for refugees to be included in the process in terms of both the better detection of their needs and expectations and the development of a sense of belonging through participation.112 of thisneedby municipalauthoritiesisalsohighlyvaluableinthisregard. expressionthat said be could It participation. through belonging of sense a of development the and expectations and needs their of detection better the both of terms in process the in included be very to refugees is for important It schools. public Turkish in children Syrian school-age educating effective on this problem in a short time: Language education for adults and language be serious to consideredinvolvement. areTwo practicespreventstheir that barrier a is there However, process. this in refugees including should refugees Syrian continue and municipalities should take serious for initiative on this issue programswhile harmonization that stated of Istanbul municipalities indistrict issues on refugee working officials Municipal 25. DECISION MAKING PROCESS INVOLVING IN REFUGEES URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 113

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Reuters

The sense of injustice that social services are only provided for the Syrian population is one of the main problems expressed by locals.

114 the current situation. to adapted services psycho-social providing in difficulties labor the in and market competition the locals), by (expressed population provided Syrian only the are for services social that injustice of sense the community, local with tension social rents), rising and community local of victimization the (especially pricesmarket housing in increase the from arising problems water, as infrastructures, service social such on pressures services management, waste electricity, municipal basic in cost and workload increased Istanbu l where Syrian population has exc eeded 5% of of municipalities district the expressedin the often are problemsfollowing the district that seen population: be ld ou c it studies, relevant other in and research this in Both 26. OTHER ISSUES/PROBLEMS URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” 115

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Photo:Reuters VIII. OVERVIEW

This study, with the title “Urban Refugees from ‘Detachment’ to ‘Harmonization’ Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul”, was conducted by interviewing the 39 district municipalities in Istanbul and the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality authorities in order to assess the situation of urban refugees and local governments’ services in this area and to formulate policy recommendations for the future. Istanbul, where 17-20% of the 3.1 million Syrian refugees in Turkey live as of December 2016, is the province that hosts the largest number of Syrian refugees in Turkey, with more than 540 thousand registered Syrian refugees. The ratio of Syrian refugees in Istanbul to the total population of Istanbul is 3.67%. This ratio is 8% in some districts while 0.01% in some others. Within this context, it is observed that there are different perception and process management models in Istanbul. In this respect, this study, which is the most comprehensive research on local governments and process management related to the issue of refugees, is structured with an understanding that would cover not only Istanbul but also all provinces where refugees are concentrated in Turkey. Certainly, there may be some cases specific to Istanbul, sometimes even specific to a district; however, the problems experienced, the effort made for solution, the difficulties in coordination, and especially the legal and administrative limitations on local governments are similar in everywhere. URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul 118 MARMARA MUNICIPALITIES UNION Photo:Bülent Kılıç/AFP/Getty Images The ratio of Syrian refugees registered Syrian refugees. some districts while 0.01% refugees in Turkey live as more than thousand 540 largest number of Syrian largest number Syrian of refugees in Turkey, with 3.67%. This ratio is8% in population of Istanbul is of December 2016, isthe of the 3.1 million Syrian province that hosts the Istanbul, where 17-20% in Istanbul to the total in some others. ► ► ► ► lows: as fol- listed regard this be in proposals could policy Research and findings ► ► ► ► there isstillneedfor additional arrangements andsupportfor sustainability. However,processmanagement. in importance utmost of also is community local tolerance of and support issue, the this on working staff municipal ing self-sacrific extraordinarily the of contribution and role the to addition In municipality. district each for are numbers the big how understood better could we thousand, 10 than less have others the of most and refugees thousand EU members only Germany, Sweden, Austria and Italy have more than 50 and over 10 thousand in 21 district municipalities. Considering municipalities that of 28 district 10 in thousand 20 over municipalities, be district 5 not should It resources. in thousand over of30 is Istanbul refugeesin of number the forgottenthat lack and problems authority despite successfully very process the managed have municipalities now, Until directly dealingwithrefugees are municipalities. institutions the policy), its centralof regardless general the in is, of (that government priorities and method purpose, the of Regardless with. deal to municipalities forarea problem a as directly arises situation This refugees”. “urban as centers urban in live refugees of 92% than More issues, althoughitwascounducted onlyinIstanbul. onrefugee governments all local of position the reflects research The - ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► or unplanned-harmonization programs. -planned conduct to started also they need, in people to aid distribute and aid emergency management of in the first years. distribution Then, while they continued to as such services provided municipalities The of refugees staysinthree-digit levels. reaching number the municipalities some in ownofwhile their 10% population, thousand, 50 to up refugees are there municipalities some In province. or district the their of on borders the depending within refugees of varies number issue this in municipalities of interest The refugees. made it problematic for municipalities to provide services to has non-citizen Law, Municipal in especially municipalities, to related regulations citizens”in “serviceto on emphasis responsibilities.The restrictionson administrative and legal is municipalities for problem basic most The even thoughallof themare registered. IDNumber” 98, with starting Number” “Personel a with a “Foreigner’s those and 99 with starting with those the between differences is be municipalities may of there delivery Similarly, refugees. registered/unregistered service between difference the in obstacle Another the municipalitieswithhighnumberof refugees withintheirborders. staff are particularly influential in the process management, especially for The interest and willingness of mayor, deputy mayor, director and relevant is completely in line with the legislation, some say that they provideservices atrisk,despitelegislative barriers. they that say some legislation, the with line “fellow-in completely is on based do they destitute” what that say officials municipal in some While law”. citizenship are who poor/those to assistance “providing as considered is it that way a such in this do refugeesserve In order to abolish legal and administrative restrictions, teams aiming to the process through an already existing and reliable NGO that they know. donations in this regard, face municipalities often use the method of they managing charitable of use make restrictionsto time, same the at legal-administrative and refugees, serving while the overcome to order In ih uiiaiis rae a eiu osal fr uiiaiis to municipalities for obstacle correctly plantheservices they willprovide torefugees. serious a creates municipalities with refugees on data the share not does government central the that fact help/support problem to refugees is the serious lack of healthy information and data. most The The providing in experiencerefugees of to number high management. a with municipalities access process have the governments in local data that valid importance utmost of is It inventory analysis viahomevisits. highly out carry sophisticated and detailed studies in municipalities this regard and conduct These needs and refugees. to services for a basis as serve to databases own their creating by and duplication prevent neediness, to and needs the determine to try municipalities Some URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” citizen refugees. to provide services to non- problematic for municipalities in Municipal Law, has made it to municipalities, especially citizens” in regulations related The emphasis on “service to 119

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul Fotoğraf:AA CONCLUSION and POLICY PROPOSALS URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul 126 MARMARA MUNICIPALITIES UNION Between and of 17% all 20% refugees in Turkey live in 39 districts of Istanbul. eues hn t s o ctzn. h aeae eore rnfre b the by transferred resource average The citizens. for is it than forrefugees higher be should amount this capacities, new creating of necessity fact, In Turkey. in also consideringurgent ofrefugees,needs the grievancestheir urgentthe and boundaries support their financial within refugee additional registered practiced receiveper generally should As municipalities 10%. Europe, to up in is population district of to 3.67% of refugees ratio the constitutes districts, some refugees in however, Istanbul; of in population total number the The population. the than refugees more houses now which Kilis, like examples However,are there boundaries. municipal the within living citizens Turkish the of basis the on determined revenue,are of source municipal of share important most the constitute government,centralwhich the transferred fromshares The condition of “beingregistered” inlegal regulations. the include to important is it relocations, the controlunregisteredness and reduce to all order In registered”.are they and that condition on individuals boundaries other municipal the within living “citizens to expanded be to need services municipal law, the in and more; law” “fellow-citizenship municipalities’ emphasize to rearranged be should law This 5393. No. Law Municipal the non-Turkishin to especially providecitizens,services should There is a serious uncertainty about the extent to which municipalities could/ proposals thatshouldbeemphasized are listedasfollows: policy far, the so conducted studies the all and research the this of study on field Based Turkey. all in but Istanbul in only not governments local of Turkeyrefugeesin urban ofliving subject the revealson it and position the conducted been ever has that work comprehensive most the is Istanbul”, of Case The Municipalities: of Management Process and Refugees Syrian ‘Harmonization’ to Refugees‘Detachment’ from“Urban research, titled This live in39districtsof Istanbul. Turkeyin refugees all of 20% and 17% between that so refugees, attracts also Istanbul of appeal The more. even increase probably will number this Therefore, ongoing. still is process registration The Syrians. thousand 539 with Turkey, in population Syrian of share largest the has Istanbul Today, refugees” in all of Turkey’s provinces together with Turkish local community. of 8% “urban as only liveprovinces;rest 10 the in camps 26 the refugeesin livethese importantly, more Even million. 3.1 exceeded has Turkey in exceededofAs million. 3.1 December ofnumber the 2016, refugeesSyrian Turkeyrefugeesin Syrian of number the has 2016, December of As history. Since 2011, Turkey has been experiencing the greatest mass migration in its should be provided so that they can better serve refugees in the municipalities. etc. workers, social psychologists, interpreters, for opportunities Employment municipalities and districtmunicipalities. metropolitan both in establishments department relevant and Local Administrative Institutions Unions’ should be regulated Affiliated in a way that and would enable Municipalities of Standards and StaffPrinciples Permanent the on ‘Regulations immigrants. department and independent refugees to an related establish should municipality district Each laying thegroundwork for internationalcooperation. the providing in role particular,in coordinationand, largerforscale slightly RegionMarmara a on special a play to Union Municipalities Marmara for Migration Management of Governorship of Istanbul. It would be appropriate of DirectorateProvincial the especially institutions including issues,refugee to administrativerelated central other as with municipalities communication the district as with well coordination the regulate to department a a as designed non- be in million should department 1 This especially boundaries. and its shortcomingwithinh thousand citizens 600 serious between has a which Istanbul, as like seen city is ofsuch unit lack coordination The a issues. order on refugee in coordination department efficient the a ensure to establish should Municipality Metropolitan The not onlyintheshortterm,butalsomediumandlongterm. analysis should be conducted to ensure that plans in this regardneeds are a effectiveaddition, In database. created this creating when consideration be into taken should be database should data personal of privacy This The services. municipal for roof. specifically same the under municipalities district all gathers which Database” “Refugee a establish to necessary Istanbul, is it like municipalities, metropolitan are there where regions the In on thecentral government’s preference. as that regardthis consultedin be not dependingmight or might that institutions rather policies cohesion and refugee institutions migration, primary determine the that as regarded be should Municipalities actively. special more a subject this in involve have they and harmonization municipalities local in play to role that ensure to implemented be should 6458, No. Law” Protection International and “Foreigners the particularly regulations, administrative and Legislative refugees. for capita per more 50% be to arranged be can citizen Turkish each for government central URBAN REFUGEESFROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” that they are registered”. other individuals on condition municipal boundaries and all to “citizens living within the expanded to need be services and in the law, municipal “fellow-citizenship law” more; to emphasize municipalities’ The law should be rearranged 127

URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION” Syrian Refugees and Process Management of Municipalities: The Case of Istanbul MARMARA MUNICIPALITIES UNION

APPENDIX: Semi-Structured Questionnaire

RESEARCH ON SYRIAN REFUGEES IN ISTANBUL AND MUNICIPAL SERVICES: MARCH-NOVEMBER 2016

DATE OF INTERVIEW

INTERVIEWER(S)

MUNICIPALITY

MAYOR

POLITICAL PARTY

INTERVIEWEE(S)

NAME

TITLE

POSITION IN THE MUNICIPALITY

MUNICIPAL REPRESENTATION STATUS

130 URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION”

BASIC DATA ON THE MUNICIPALITY

POPULATION

AREA (TOTAL)

BUDGET OF 2016

NUMBER OF MUNICIPAL STAFF

NUMBER OF MUNICIPAL DIRECTORATES/DEPARTMENTS

NUMBER OF NEIGHBORHOODS

NUMBER OF NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL COMPANIES

NUMBER OF SCHOOLS (PRIMARY/SECONDARY)

NUMBER OF STUDENTS

NUMBER OF MEDICAL CENTERS (PUBLIC/PRIVATE)

OTHER

INFORMATION AND POLICIES ON SYRIAN REFUGEES

How many Syrian refugees are there within your municipal boundaries? How many of them are women and children?

What are the official numbers and the numbers according to the data of your municipality?

How many of the refugees within your boundaries do you think works? In which job sectors do they work? Does local community react negatively to this?

How many Syrian-owned businesses are there within your boundaries? What are their types/In which sectors are they?

Which department works on refugee issues in your municipality?

How many people work on refugee-related issues in your municipality? In which positions do they work? Is there a department established specifically for this purpose?

131 MARMARA MUNICIPALITIES UNION

If yes, since when this department has been functioning?

If no, do you think such a department is necessary?

Are you working on detecting the needs of Syrians? If yes, in what ways are you doing this? Do you visit homes?

Do you have any kind of information/database on the refugees residing within your municipal boundaries?

If yes, how and from where was it provided?

Is it possible for you to share it with us?

Is there a software you use or have specifically developed for the database?

What do you think about establishing a refugee database system by developing a common software for all municipalities and NGOs in Istanbul to help prevent duplicate benefits - including assistance provided?

What institutions do you cooperate with regarding refugee issues?

Official Institutions (Governorship, District Governorship, AFAD, DGMM, etc.)

NGOs

International organizations

Municipalities

ACTIVITIES AND COOPERATION AREAS

What kind of services do you provide to Syrians within your municipal boundaries? a. Help i. Winter help ii. Food/provision parcels iii. Hot meal iv. Clothes v. Domestic utensils vi. Stationery vii. Rent aid viii. Financial aid b.Translation services c. Transportation services (to hospitals, schools, etc.) d.Psycho-scoial support, health services e. Referral to relevant institutions f. Language courses g. Vocational courses h.Education (Syrian schools, temporary training centers etc.) i. Other

How many of the Syrian refugees benefit from municipal services?

132 URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION”

DO YOU THINK municipals are (legally and administratively) obliged to take care of refugees?

Which persons and institutions lead these activities? What are their cooperation areas? (NGO, Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality, Municipalities, District Governor- ship, Governorship, DGMM etc.)

Did your municipality establish any NGO or have any NGO established in order to conduct such activities? If yes, which NGOs are these? When were they established?

Which NGOs does your municipality directly cooperate in carrying out activities related to refugees?

In which areas are these NGOs cooperating?

Do you cooperate with foreign NGOs or international institutions?

If yes, which ones?

In which areas?

What is the financial size?

Would you like to cooperate more with foreign NGOs or international institutions?

Do these institutions have activities that would be inconvenient to your municipality or to society?

How is the financing of refugee-related activities provided?

Do you cooperate with Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality on refugee issues?

If yes, how and in which areas?

Do you cooperate with other district municipalities on refugee issues?

If yes, how and in which areas?

What is the monthly average of the municipal resources spent for refugees so far? (Could be estimated)

How much have refugees increased your workload and financial burden?

Has the capacity of municipal resources or staff increased due to refugees?

If not, what is the need in this regard?

133 MARMARA MUNICIPALITIES UNION

SERVICES

Where and how do you provide services to Syrian refugees?

Is there a Community Center for the refugees that your municipality has established, governed or cooperated with?

If yes, in which areas does it function? How many people does it serve?

If not, are you planning to establish one?

Does your municipality have a contribution or effect on the settlement process of the refugees? (Finding a house, rent payment etc.)

Does your municipality conduct health services for refugees?

Does your municipality conduct education services for refugees?

Do your municipalities provide education or social support to special groups? (Women, Children, Disabled, Older etc.)

PERCEPTION AND EXPECTATIONS

What do you think Syrians are planning for the future? (Do you think they will stay or go? Why?

Do you have any expectations on legislative changes? If so, what kind of changes should be made in the Municipal Law and other legislation?

DO YOU THINK there is a tension, conflict or possibility of conflict between Sy- rians and local community? If yes, why? What could be done to prevent this?

What DO YOU THINK the most important three problems of refugees are?

DO YOU THINK refugees are causing problems for the local people living within your municipal boundaries? If yes, what are the most important three among these problems?

134 URBAN REFUGEES FROM “DETACHMENT” TO “HARMONIZATION”

Related to refugees, what are the top three problems the local people are most complaining about?

What DO YOU THINK the most important three contributions of refugees to your municipality and to local community living within the boundaries of your municipality?

Which ones DO YOU THINK are already existing problems especially affecting refugees? (You can also choose one.) 1. Being unregistered 2. Failure to provide education 3. Concerns about access to health care 4. Settlement problems/Ghettoization 5. Lack of communication due to language barrier 6. Economic problems/Unemployment 7. Negative reaction of local community 8. Cultural differences 9. Security 10. You can add:

HARMONIZATION / INTEGRATION

What DO YOU THINK harmonization/integration is?

What do you think should be done about the harmonization of the refugees in your district?

What do you do for the harmonization of the refugees in your district?

What are the expectations of refugees from you? What do they mostly demand from you? Which problems do they expect you to solve?

Should refugees be involved in the decision-making process?

If yes, how and by what means?

What DO YOU THINK should be done to allow your municipality to better manage this process? Could you list them according to priority?

If there is anything else you would like to add, please do so.

135 NOTES: