The article discusses the current problem of illegal migration for Italy and the main ways to combat it. In particular, issues of its solution at the national level, as well as coordination of ...actions at the European and international levels are raised.
Border policing and immigration law enforcement produce a spectacle that enacts a scene of 'exclusion'. Such spectacles render migrant 'illegality' visible. Thus, these material practices help to ...generate a constellation of images and discursive formations, which repetitively supply migrant 'illegality' with the semblance of an objective fact. Yet, the more these spectacles fuel anti-immigrant controversy, the more the veritable inclusion of the migrants targeted for exclusion proceeds apace. Their 'inclusion' is finally devoted to the subordination of their labour, which is best accomplished only insofar as their incorporation is persistently beleaguered with exclusionary campaigns that ensure that this inclusion is itself a form of subjugation. At stake, then, is a larger sociopolitical (and legal) process of inclusion through exclusion. This we may comprehend as the obscene of inclusion. The castigation of 'illegals' thereby supplies the rationale for essentializing citizenship inequalities as categorical differences that then may be racialized.
The article considers the problems of administrative and legal regulation of illegal migration. There is a chain of reasoning questions of formation of a steady migration situation which is aimed at ...ensuring compliance with interests of the state. The authors found out that the adverse dynamics of illegal migration to the country. In conclusion, activities of the state for minimization and prevention of negative consequences in the specified sphere demand a comprehensive investigation and also correlation with subsequent changes of the administrative and migration legislation.
The global expansion of deportation regimes has spurred an analogous expansion of migrant detention. Arguably even more than the onerous punitive power of deportation, detention imposes the sovereign ...power of a state on the lives of non-citizens in a manner that transmutes their status into de facto legal non-personhood. That is to say, with detention, the condition of deportable migrants culminates in summary (and sometimes indefinite) incarceration on the basis of little more than their sheer existential predicament as ‘undesirable’ non-citizens, often with little or no recourse to any form of legal remedy or appeal and frequently no semblance to due process. Castigated to a station outside the law, their detention leaves them at the mercy of the caprices of authorities. The author argues that to adequately comprehend the productivity of this power to detain migrants, we must have recourse to a concept of detainability, that is, the possibility of being detained. The paper situates the analysis of immigration detention in the framework of contemporary critical theory, interrogating the economy of different conditionalities and contingencies that undergird various degrees by which distinct categories of migrants are subjected to detention power.
‘Combatting’ irregular migration is one of the key challenges to migration management at EU level. The present book addresses one of the most pressing structural problems regarding the EU’s return ...policy: the low return rate of irregularly staying migrants. In this regard the EU Return Directive obliges Member States to issue a return decision, yet only 40% of such decisions are enforced annually. Moreover, despite the political and legal efforts, the EU is not making any significant progress in enforcing the rules it has laid down in the Return Directive. The legislation of EU Member States may, however, serve as a source for possible solutions to ‘combat’ the problem of irregularly staying migrants. It is for this reason that the book compares the system of regularisations in Austria, Germany and Spain. Regularisations constitute an effective alternative to returns because they terminate the irregular residence of migrants, not through deportation, but rather by granting a right of residence. Regularisation is therefore understood as each legal decision that awards legal residency to irregularly staying migrants. As is shown by the examination and comparison of regularisations in Austria, Germany and Spain, differentiated systems of regularisation exist at national level. However, EU regularisations supplementing the present return policy would be more effective at ‘combatting’ irregular migration at EU level.
Several mechanisms like Deep Quantum Machine Learning and Artifical Neural Networks (ANN) are available for modeling real-life phenomena having complete data set. But there are certain real-life ...situations where the modeling is possible only by applying fuzzy logic on the available incomplete and ambiguous data. The examples like illegal migration and human trafficking need directed fuzzy graph models with additional illegal path components. In this article, we develop the theory of directed fuzzy incidence graphs (DFIG), that aid in the analysis of a number of dynamic networks. The relations found in DFIGs are asymmetric, so that the extent of node-arc interactions can be well studied. In this work, we take a different approach to connectivity by focusing legal and illegal flows through the network. In addition, we study the concepts of cycles and characterize some special type of nodes, arcs, and d-pairs in DFIGs. Also, we examine the migration of refugees across Mexico and the U. S as an application.
This article presents an in-depth comparative analysis of the migration policies of the European Union and Ukraine. The study aims to identify and examine the similarities and differences between ...these two migration systems, considering their underlying objectives, legal frameworks, and approaches to managing migration flows. By analyzing various aspects of migration policies, including labor migration, combating of illegal migration, as well as international protection systems, such as asylum, subsidiary and temporary protection, the article aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the different strategies employed by the EU and Ukraine in managing migration. The analysis begins by discussing the drivers of migration in both EU and Ukraine, highlighting the diverse dynamics and complexities that have shaped their migration policies. It explores the EU’s migration policy framework, encompassing the common asylum system. Similarly, it delves into Ukraine’s migration policy framework, emphasizing its legal framework and analizing policies towards beneficiaries of temporary protection and cooperation with EU in this sphere. Through a comparative lens, the article evaluates various dimensions of migration policies in the EU and Ukraine. Firstly, it examines the policy objectives in EU and Ukraine, assessing how they align with broader socio-economic, security, and demographic considerations. Secondly, the article examines the legislative framework and analyzes the legislative instruments that regulate migration in both the EU and Ukraine. It also emphasizes the compatibility of supranational EU legislation with the legal system of Ukraine, which is extremely important given Ukraine’s status as a candidate for accession to the EU. Finally, the article identifies areas of convergence and divergence between the migration policies of the EU and Ukraine and reflects on their implications for both regions. It recognizes the challenges and limitations faced by each system. The analysis aims to provide insights for policymakers in the EU and Ukraine to enhance their migration management strategies and foster greater collaboration in addressing the complexities of migration. Overall, this comparative analysis of EU and Ukrainian migration policies contributes to a comprehensive understanding of the various dimensions of migration management, offering a foundation for further research, policy development, and collaboration between the EU and Ukraine.
PDF
