STRENGTHENING MIGRATION MANAGEMENT AND COOPERATION ON READMISSION IN EASTERN EUROPE (MIGRECO) A Study on IntegrAtIon, HAte CrImeS And dISCrImInAtIon of dIfferent CAtegorIeS of mIgrAntS In moldovA And ukrAIne SummAry The project Co-funded Co-funded Immigration Implemented is funded by by the by the Ministry and Naturalisation and co-funded the European US Department of Foreign Affairs Service of the by the International Union of State of Denmark Kingdom of the Organization for Netherlands Migration is a partner Kyiv – 2015 A Study on IntegrAtIon, HAte CrImeS And dISCrImInAtIon of dIfferent CAtegorIeS of mIgrAntS In moldovA And ukrAIne The study was carried out with the financial support of the European Union. The content is the sole responsibility of its authors and cannot be regarded as representing the views of the European Union, the US Department of State, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, the Immigration and Naturalisation Service or the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the International Organization for Migration. © International Organization for Migration (IOM) Mission in Ukraine, 2015. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written permission from the European Union and the International Organization for Migration. Delegation IOM Mission in Ukraine of the European Union to Ukraine 8 Mykhailivska Str., Kyiv, 01001 101 Volodymyrska Str., Kyiv, 01033 Tel.: +38 044 568 50 15 Tel.: +38 0 44 390 80 10 Fax: +38 044 568 50 16 E-mail: [email protected] e-mail: [email protected] http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/ukraine http://www.iom.org.ua CONTENT OVERVIEW OF EUROPEAN EXPERIENCE IN IMMIGRANT INTEGRATION AND EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF STATE POLICY . 4 A STUDY ON INTEGRATION, DISCRIMINATION AND HATE CRIMES OF FOREIGNERS IN THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA . 12 Introduction . 12 Methodology . 13 Conclusions and recommendations . 15 STUDY ON INTEGRATION, HATE CRIMES AND DISCRIMINATION OF DIFFERENT CATEGORIES OF MIGRANTS IN UKRAINE . 20 Introduction . 20 Methodology . 22 Approaches to the evaluation of the state integration policy . 27 Conclusions and recommendations . 30 3 A Study on IntegrAtIon, HAte CrImeS And dISCrImInAtIon of dIfferent CAtegorIeS of mIgrAntS In moldovA And ukrAIne OVERVIEW OF EUROPEAN EXPERIENCE IN IMMIGRANT INTEGRATION AND EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF STATE POLICY Background of the EU’s migration-integration policy Having conducted research and analysed current trends in the European Union, the European executive authorities found that the working-age population began to decline in 2012 against the backdrop of an aging population, and over the next decades this figure may be reduced by 14 million people.1 According to Eurostat,2 the EU’s total population was 503.7 million people and its economically active population (aged 15-64) 335.4 million people as of 1 January 2012. The able-bodied population is projected to continue to decrease over the next 50 years and will be at 290.6 million by 2060. This, among other things, pointed to the need to implement deliberate policy of attracting im- migrants, given also the fact that 32 million people now living in the EU (i.e., approximately 6.5% of the total population) came from other countries. According to a Eurobarometer survey,3 70% of EU citizens recognise the need to attract immigrants for the development of the EU’s economy. At the same time, certain challenges associated with the integration of foreigners, which should be counteracted by the EU community, and the need for local communities to practice tolerance and interaction were indicated. A survey presented by the Gallup World Poll4 in 2011 shows that there is a global trend of short-term migration to improve the financial situation rather than -per manently moving to live in another country. The basic principles at the EU level Although there is at present no single clear standard for the integration of immigrants in the European Union which would be mandatory for fulfilment by all member states, over the last decade the Euro- pean Commission has repeatedly highlighted this as an important issue and formulated guidelines that can be considered the so-called minimum standard. Today, the EU has no competence to establish requirements for the harmonization of national legislation in the field of integration, but it does establish the main trends and identify key issues in this area. So, for example, it defines who is considered an immigrant and which integration areas are crucial. 1 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-552_ro.htm http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/eurostat/home/EUROSTAT 2 http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/eurostat/home/ 3 http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/index_en.htm 4 http://www.gallup.com/strategicconsulting/158126/current-past-european-research-projects.aspx 4 Key Concepts Before considering certain provisions of integration approaches and methods to assess their effective- ness in some member states we must define terms, namely five basic concepts for the topic at hand: multiculturalism, assimilation, interculturalism,5 migration and integration. There is no official definition of migration at the EU level.6 This term describes movement of persons across borders in search of work or a new place of residence or study and is used to identify non-EU na- tionals residing in the EU or moving within its borders. The bulk of the EU’s integration efforts are aimed at so-called first-generation immigrants – those born outside the member states. However, in the con- text of developing successful approaches to integration and considering coverage of migrants’ children, it is important to remember that second-generation migrants7 should also be integrated. Definitions proposed for this study are based on the approach adopted by the Centre for European Policies Studies.8 Integration is a process rather than an end result. Integration is best described as dynamic, consistent implementation of policies aimed at active measures to ensure opportunities for representatives of mi- nority groups (immigrants) to learn the language of their new society, its traditions, culture and values. The term is also used in defining policy aimed at securing the involvement of migrants in the labour market and social support. Integration policies in individual countries may range from multiculturalism to complete assimilation. At one time, the European Commission proposed its own understanding of integration:9 Integration should be understood as a two-way process based on mutual rights and corresponding ob- ligations of legally resident third-country nationals and the host society which provides for full partici- pation of the immigrant. This implies on the one hand that it is the responsibility of the host society to ensure that the formal rights of immigrants are in place in such a way that the individual has the possi- bility of participating in economic, social, cultural and civil life and on the other, that immigrants respect the fundamental norms and values of the host society and participate actively in the integration process, without having to relinquish their own identity. The history of the EU-level approach In the process of harmonising the general principles of European policy on integration and while work- ing out a common approach, within the framework of developing law and approaches, the EU’s atti- tudes and focus in integration issues have changed. The first step in the formation of what can today be 10 considered a pan-European approach to integration was the adoption of the Tampere Programme in 5 See the definition of the first three terms in the Glossary on the disk. 6 See http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/areas/industrialrelations/dictionary/definitions/migration.htm 7 Under second-generation migrants we understand children of first-generation migrants born in the territory of the host country who already are citizens of this country. Eurostat refers to certain studies as it compares data on first-generation and second-generation migrants, which are, in particular, used to formulate the tasks of integration and evaluate its success. A more detailed example of this kind of research can be found here http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-31-10-539/EN/KS-31-10-539-EN.PDF 8 Centre for European Policies Studies (CEPC), Brussels. More about the CEPC can be found here http://www.ceps.be 9 European Commission, Commission on Immigration, Integration and Employment, COM (2003) 336, Brussels, 3 June 2003. 10 Tampere Programme (Finland, 1999) is the first action plan in the field of freedom, security and justice for 2000 for the EU Member States. More information on the programme is available here http://www.europarl.europa.eu/summits/tam_en.htm 5 A Study on IntegrAtIon, HAte CrImeS And dISCrImInAtIon of dIfferent CAtegorIeS of mIgrAntS In moldovA And ukrAIne 1999, which was developed after the EU’s first two anti-discrimination directives, one concerning ra- cial equality and the other workplace equality. Both directives established an equality-based approach and applied to both citizens of member countries and migrants. By the end of 2006, all member states had incorporated both directives into their national law some way or another. This process was later supplemented by documents concerning the right to family reunification and determining the status of third-country residents permanently residing in the EU. In this process, some member states11 have departed from the approach of liberal multiculturalism and insisted that such rights must be combined with the duties or conditions identified as “integration condi- tions”. Where it was not about refugees, the conditions required that applicants meet certain standards, such as knowledge of the state language. This process led to the adoption, in 2004, of the second two- year development programme, known as the Hague programme,12 which, no longer acknowledging the competence of member states to independently define their national policies on immigration, established 11 “common basic principles” for the EU member states in the field of migrant integration policies: 1.