Land of asylum?” “

London, Berlin, Rome: what welcome do they hold out to refugees? Is Europe really a land of asylum? Despite the numerous “good practices” adopted by the three European capitals to guarantee assistance to those fleeing from their own country for grave humanitarian or political reasons, the situation does not seem excellent. “In all three cities the national policies on asylum have frequently produced poverty or aggravated the level of social exclusion, an effect that conflicts with the efforts being made by each local authority and, in principle, by the national governments themselves to promote the social inclusion of refugees”. This is one of the findings of a research project entitled “Europe land of asylum”, investigating the policies for the reception and integration of asylum seekers and political refugees being implemented in London, Berlin and Rome. The book with the research findings was presented in Rome on 9 July. It is the result of the project “Europe Land of Asylum” financed by the European Fund for Refugees and conducted in collaboration with some organizations in the services sector. From an analysis of the situation some conclusions are drawn, and some recommendations made, for the improvement of the system of reception and integration at the national and European level. The recommendations include: guaranteeing refugees “adequate means of subsistence and healthcare, to prevent them from being pushed into poverty by policies that do not ensure them of material assistance and housing”; “the national laws on asylum and on employment and the practices of the local administrations ought to permit asylum seekers access to the labour market within six months of the presentation of their application”. The legislative and social context. All the national policies on asylum are subject to the principles of the Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees of 1951. According to the treaty of Amsterdam of 1999, policies should be determined at the European level. In actual fact asylum policies are currently decided in large part at the national level. The largest cities in Europe are magnets for the attraction of asylum seekers: London and Berlin have long been among the main goals; Rome, on the other hand, was, until some time ago, a place of transit for those coming from Africa. But “the process of harmonizing EU policies on asylum – points out the book – will inevitably alter the routes and goals of migratory flows. If in fact the number of asylum seekers has greatly declined in London and Berlin in recent years, Rome could, in future, witness an increase, due to the impossibility for migrants to gain access to the countries of Northern Europe”. Another finding of the research is that in none of the three cities do there exist reliable data on refugees and asylum seekers. London. In Great Britain government policy “has developed a particular attention to measures that discourage asylum, rather than protection and assistance”. But “the government has recently begun to devote more attention to the questions concerning the integration of recognized refugees”. The research shows that “a large number of asylum seekers have their application for asylum rejected for reasons of non-consent”. Housing is granted only in a limited manner, as also is financial support. In the field of healthcare a number of good measures are being taken. The projects for the insertion of refugees in the labour market are also positive, but the “high levels of unemployment” remain. The main problems identified include “the unavailability of interpreters and language and communication barriers; the inadequate accommodation; and the exclusion of social assistance. Berlin. In Germany refugees are given the same rights as citizens of the EU: they enjoy freedom of movement in the Schengen area; they can live in private accommodation for which the district of Berlin pays the rent and the deposit; they have unrestricted access to the labour market, regular health checks, free compulsory education to the age of 16; and receive regular social security benefits. “The policy of the government, however, aims at preparing them to return to their homeland rather than encouraging their integration. It is intended to have a deterrent effect on potential asylum seeks”, concludes the research. Rome. The most obvious limitation in Italy is the absence of a specific law on the matter, which “severely conditions” any real chance of assisting refugees. Numerous centres are available, with particular attention being devoted “to those in conditions of particular vulnerability” such as victims of torture, women and juveniles. But “due to the limitation of the available funds the number of places available is unable to satisfy the demand”. Refugees can remain in these centres for up to 12 months, after which “it is difficult for them to achieve independence in the housing market”. The most evident problem is the excessively long waiting times for the processing of asylum applications (on average one year), with “meagre funds available for the integration of refugees and to help them begin income-producing activities”. Access to the national health system is permitted, as also to compulsory schooling, which boasts of “good practices for integration” thanks to intercultural education. The difficulties arise, however, at the higher levels of schooling. Moreover, asylum seekers are debarred from working, “consequently depriving them of their right to employment for over a year”. Fact file : refugees in Europe According to Unhcr, the Un High Commission for Refugees, in the first three months of this year the number of new asylum seekers in Europe dropped by 18%. A total of 92,700 applications for political asylum were presented in the 29 industrialized European countries. In the 14 countries of the European Union, the number dropped by 15%. Only seven of the 29 countries taken into consideration registered an actual increase in the numerical level. No figures are available for Italy. The country that received most applications for asylum was France with 15,740 applications. The second country with the highest number of applications was the Uk, though the figure dropped by 20% to 10,590 applications, followed by Germany, where a 12% reduction was registered with 10,170 applications. Among the other asylum countries, substantial decreases were registered in Sweden (falling by 25% to 6,242 applications) and Austria (falling by 24% to 5,920). Considerable reductions were also registered in Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Greece, Norway, Poland and Slovakia. Russians – most of them Chechens – are the group with most applications for political asylum (7,508), though this figure too showed a 26% downturn over the figure for the previous quarter. Afghans and Iraqis – the two groups with most asylum seekers in 2001 and 2002 – continue significantly to decrease in numbers. Altogether, only five of the first forty nationalities of asylum seekers have registered an increase in real terms. The number of Algerians has increased by 30% to 2,626 applications; Haitians increased by 28% to 1,727 (almost two thirds of them went to the USA and a third to France); while the number of Slovak asylum seekers increased by 109% with 1,052 applications (most going to Finland, Belgium and Germany).