Abstract
In Southern European countries, the regularization of irregular migrants has been largely used in the past as ex post control policy measure, blamed by several scholars as an emergency remedy for the lack of systematic working immigration policies (Baldwin-Edwards, 1999; Finotelli & Sciortino, 2009). Nonetheless, COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on the essential agricultural chains and elderly homecare led countries like Portugal and Italy to adopt an unprecedented comprehensive regularization, in terms of numbers of people involved and modalities. Prima facie similar in the approach, the two legislations may entail not only different bureaucratical implications, but also different rational, as different are the political and the socio-economic environments behind. The aim of the article is to compare the two emergency legislations on a synchronic dimension. Through the analysis of primary and secondary sources, the article will compare the different approaches of Italy and Portugal in addressing the policy problem after the start of COVID-19 pandemic. As two Southern EU Member States with different views on immigration policies, Italy and Portugal represent an interesting case study to investigate. The article will benefit from an interdisciplinary approach, addressing the issue combining both legal and political literatures. Ultimately, the article will try to assess if the current measures are in line with the regularization policies that have been adopted in the past decade.
Highlights
In Southern European countries, the regularization of irregular migrants has been largely used in the past as an ex-post control policy measure, blamed by several scholars as an emergency remedy for the lack of systematic working immigration policies (Baldwin-Edwards, 1998; Finotelli, Sciortino, 2009)
In what ways do they differ? Does a different legal framework with diverse levels of integration correspond to a different response in emergency legislation? How do countries react when facing an emergency like a pandemic in terms of migration and integration strategies? Can the law provide the necessary tool for migrants’ integration?
The article examined the emergency legislations related to the migration of Italy and Portugal during the COVID-19 pandemic
Summary
In Southern European countries, the regularization of irregular migrants has been largely used in the past as an ex-post control policy measure, blamed by several scholars as an emergency remedy for the lack of systematic working immigration policies (Baldwin-Edwards, 1998; Finotelli, Sciortino, 2009). The COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on the essential agricultural chains and elderly homecare led countries such as Portugal and Italy to adopt an unprecedented comprehensive regularization in terms of numbers of people involved and modalities. Does a different legal framework with diverse levels of integration correspond to a different response in emergency legislation? How do countries react when facing an emergency like a pandemic in terms of migration and integration strategies? In what ways do they differ? Does a different legal framework with diverse levels of integration correspond to a different response in emergency legislation? How do countries react when facing an emergency like a pandemic in terms of migration and integration strategies? Can the law provide the necessary tool for migrants’ integration?
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
