Systematic push back of ‘well behaving’ asylum seekers at the Polish border: M.K. and Others v. Poland (original) (raw)
Related papers
Defending the right to seek asylum – a perspective from Poland. In ‘Legal Dialogue’, 8 August 2018.
While the number of forced migrants moving out of conflict-ridden or otherwise troubled regions into relatively stable and safe parts of the world is higher than ever, the countries of destination are increasingly trying to prevent migrants from reaching their territories. Given the scale of forced displacement and current trends of tightening immigration policies, it should be expected that tragedies at the borders, similar to that recently witnessed in Europe, will become the norm rather than the exception and that new discourses and practices will continue to emerge, transforming territorial borders in various parts of the world into highly conflictual and politicised 'borderspaces'. This article is a contribution to the understanding of borders through a case study of the recent policy of 'closed doors' that Poland has adopted towards Russia's North Caucasus asylum seekers at the country's eastern border with Belarus, preventing them from entering the territory and claiming protection. It demonstrates that, through the process of 'bordering', power is no longer exercised only by the border guards at the crossing point in Terespol from where asylum seekers are being returned and that it is increasingly to be found in social practices that occur on both sides of the border, away from the clearance points. The article examines the various practices of resistance undertaken by the asylum seekers and other actors on several different levels in response to the changed reality at the border. It also analyses the meanings and discourses developed by Polish state actors in order to legitimise restrictive migration policies.
Refugee Protection - Poland Country Report
Working Papers: Global Migration Consequences and Responses, 2020
This work is the country research report prepared within Work Package 3, focused on refugee protection and asylum policy in Poland, delivered under the H2020 project RESPOND—Multilevel Governance of Mass Migration in Europe and Beyond. The main aims of this report are: • to analyse policies and practices in the field of international protection implemented by state and non-state actors; • to analyse the experiences, actions, perceptions, and opinions of state and non-state actors and forced migrants with regard to the functioning of the national refugee system and implemented asylum policy; • to provide empirical analysis based on the macro- (WP1 country report), meso- and micro-level (from fieldwork) analyses; • to identify examples of good practices in the area under study; • to evaluate the national refugee system and implemented asylum policy and provide recommendations for policy development. With reference to the common guidelines for WP3 reports under the RESPOND project, the section concerning the legal and institutional framework of asylum policy in Poland has been firmly embedded in the two previous national reports, that is, report WP1 (political, legal, and institutional context of the asylum system) and report WP2 (border control and migration control). At the same time, great emphasis was put on the extensive use of qualitative research material from in-depth individual interviews conducted at the meso and micro levels (16+30 interviews), in particular in sections 2 and 3 of this report. In addition, due to the wide scope of the report, the authors focused on selected issues from the field of refugee protection and asylum policy in Poland that they identified as being particularly relevant. The problem of vulnerability was also highlighted. To this end, an important part of the report is comprised of the considerations regarding good practices. In 2017, a proposal for amending the Law on Protection was announced and followed by its revised version in 2019. The proposed amendment concerned, among others, the introduction of a border procedure and lists of safe countries and safe third countries. The planned changes were criticised by many NGOs in Poland. In recent years, however, it was rather the implementation of the law, government policy, and unofficial practices (e.g., of the Border Guard) that raised more doubts than the changes in the law and planned amendments. The most important public institutions in Polish asylum policy remain the Border Guard and the Office for Foreigners, and thus, the Ministry of the Interior and Administration (which supervises them). Other significant actors are the Refugee Board and administrative courts. A special role is played by NGOs providing legal support to forced migrants, both in Poland and abroad (e.g., in cases before the ECtHR). The interviews also raised issues of cooperation with international organisations such as the UNHCR and the EU, and other EU Member States, including Germany and the Visegrad Group countries, e.g., in the context of Dublin transfers, the Dublin system and its reform or relocation scheme. In many meso-level interviews, attention was drawn to the tensions and difficult relations between public-administration institutions and NGOs and the unfavourable political climate. The analysis clearly shows that in the years 2015 and 2016 there was a breakthrough in the asylum system in Poland in terms of implementation because the new government formed by the Law and Justice Party after the parliamentary elections in 2015 referred to the migration and refugee crisis in Europe to justify policy and legal changes. The change of power has influenced the politicisation of migration and asylum issues in the country. Poland withdrew from relocation and resettlement schemes and eventually did not implement them. The Ministry of the Interior and Administration significantly changed the rules for financing projects from EU money through AMIF, which limited the activities of many NGOs providing legal support for asylum seekers and refugees. Since 2015-2016, the situation on the eastern border of Poland was difficult—the limited access to Polish territory for asylum seekers was observed, multiple pushbacks at the Brest-Terespol railway border crossing were recorded, and different unofficial practices of the Border Guard were reported. At the same time, the Ombudsman for Human Rights, NGOs and lawyers became involved in the situation at the border in different ways, such us monitoring visits, interventions, and actions at border crossings, publications of reports, etc. The situation on the eastern border translated into difficulties in submitting applications for international protection. With regard to the asylum procedure itself and the decisions issued in this regard, the large number of discontinuances, negative decisions, and appeals are noteworthy. Among the micro-level respondents, the long duration of the asylum procedure was underlined. They also drew attention to the problems with crossing borders in Brest-Terespol (some tried several times), the role of language and communication during the proceedings, and the importance of collecting evidence to justify their situation. Meso-level actors assessed asylum law rather positively, although there were strong criticisms, mainly in relation to the detention of foreigners, including children and other vulnerable groups. The planned changes in the Law on Protection, implementation of existing law and practices applied were rated much worse (e.g., second-line control at the border and the way of formulating questions by the Border Guard, encouraging asylum seekers to include in the application form only the main reasons for applying for refugee status, without going into detail, etc.).
Departing or Being Deported? Poland’s Approach towards Humanitarian Migrants
Journal of Refugee Studies
Referring to the theoretical reflection on securitization in the area of forced migration and applying Barak Kalir’s concept of Departheid, we investigate policies and practices deployed by the Polish authorities to deal with humanitarian migrants. In particular between 2015 and 2021, in the Polish context, humanitarian migrants were usually equated with ‘bogus’ asylum seekers, ‘undeserving’ of protection or even the right to apply for it. With the increasing presence of Belarusian and, more recently, Ukrainian asylum seekers in Poland, two completely different state attitudes towards asylum seekers reaching Poland’s borders became visible. People directly fleeing Belarus and Ukraine were seen as deserving protection and support, and faced no obstacles in entering Poland through its eastern border. At the same time, non-White people forced to leave Asian or African regions in crisis, attempting to cross the border and to enter Poland remained ‘unwanted’—to be deterred or deported, a...
Cahier de l'EDEM, 2020
In the case Commission v. Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic, the Court of Justice of the EU, upholding the actions for failure to fulfill obligations brought by the European Commission, ruled that the defendant States breached EU law by failing to comply with the relocation decisions adopted in 2015 by the Council. The Court rejects the States’ argumentation as to the need to safeguard their national order and security, adduced as justification for not relocating asylum seekers, and confirms that solidarity is a legally binding obligation. It also does not accept the alleged existence of malfunctioning and flaws of the relocation mechanism as a valid reason not to cooperate and show solidarity: it is exactly when obstacles and difficulties arise that solidarity and a sincere, genuine spirit of cooperation are most needed.
This article analyses the impact of the recent migration crisis on forced migration to Poland, with a particular focus on the situation of Ukrainian asylum seekers. Contrary to predictions, very few Ukrainian nationals have applied for international protection in Poland since the beginning of the conflict in 2014. According to the analyses conducted by the Polish asylum authority, the majority of applicants come from conflict zones in Eastern Ukraine and Crimea. In spite of this fact, the recognition rate of their applications is very low which may in turn have an adverse effect on the number of people willing to seek asylum in Poland. The authors argue that this situation is a result of application of the concept of ’internal flight alternative’ to Ukrainian cases without a genuine assessment of individual situation of each asylum seeker. Contrarily to the information contained in recent international reports, Polish authorities take as a general rule that civilians fleeing Eastern Ukraine can, as internally displaced persons, relocate safely in other parts of the country. Other persisting human rights concerns and deficiencies of Polish reception system, in particular the amount of social aid offered to asylum seekers and lack of the system of identification of vulnerable groups, may further deter Ukrainians from seeking asylum in Poland.
While the number of forced migrants moving out of conflict-ridden or otherwise troubled regions into relatively stable and safe parts of the world is higher than ever, the countries of destination are increasingly trying to prevent migrants from reaching their territories. Given the scale of forced displacement and current trends of tightening immigration policies, it should be expected that tragedies at the borders, similar to that recently witnessed in Europe, will become the norm rather than the exception and that new discourses and practices will continue to emerge, transforming territorial borders in various parts of the world into highly conflictual and politicised 'borderspaces'. This article is a contribution to the understanding of borders through a case study of the recent policy of 'closed doors' that Poland has adopted towards Russia's North Caucasus asylum seekers at the country's eastern border with Belarus, preventing them from entering the territory and claiming protection. It demonstrates that, through the process of 'bordering', power is no longer exercised only by the border guards at the crossing point in Terespol from where asylum seekers are being returned and that it is increasingly to be found in social practices that occur on both sides of the border, away from the clearance points. The article examines the various practices of resistance undertaken by the asylum seekers and other actors on several different levels in response to the changed reality at the border. It also analyses the meanings and discourses developed by Polish state actors in order to legitimise restrictive migration policies.