Schengen Visas Research Articles

Does Romanian Emigration Influence Labour Force?

The present paper contributes to the studies on Romanian emigration by assessing the link between emigration and labour force. After the elimination of Schengen visa and adhesion to the European Union, the low incomes and the competition on the European Union market influenced and intensified the Romanian emigration, which reached 3 mil. in 2020. However, the number of available jobs followed a similar trend like emigration, being on an increasing trend starting with 2010. In light of this, the first questions that arises are: There is any connection between migration and labour force? and What is the impact of migration on the labour force? The purpose of this paper is to assess the influence of migration on the labour force in Romania using the main four dimensions of migration: emigration, remittances, return migration and immigration.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) at Schengen Borders: Automated Processing, Algorithmic Profiling and Facial Recognition in the Era of Techno-Solutionism

Abstract Since the past three decades, an elaborate legal framework on the operation of EU-Schengen information systems has been developed, whereby in the near future a series of personal data concerning almost all third-country nationals (TCN s) with an administrative or criminal law link with the EU/Schengen area will be monitored through at least one information system. This article provides a legal analysis on the embedment of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools at the EU level in information systems for TCN s and critically examines the fundamental rights concerns that ensue from the use AI to manage and control migration. It discusses automated risk assessment and algorithmic profiling used to examine applications for travel authorisations and Schengen visas, the shift towards the processing of facial images of TCN s and the creation of future-proof information systems that anticipate the use of facial recognition technology. The contribution understands information systems as enabling the datafication of mobility and as security tools in an era whereby a foreigner is risky by default. It is argued that a violation of the right to respect for private life is merely the gateway for a series of other fundamental rights which are impacted, such as non-discrimination and right to effective remedies.

Schengen and the Administration of Exclusion: Legal Remedies Caught in between Entry Bans, Risk Assessment and Artificial Intelligence

Abstract To create an area in which persons can move freely, the Schengen states committed to control their external borders to prevent irregular immigration and the entry of third-country nationals (TCN s) who are considered to be ‘a public order and security risk’. The exclusion of ‘unwanted aliens’ can be based on the mutual enforcement of national decisions, such as entry bans reported in the Schengen Information System, or objections against the issuing of a Schengen visa, based on the consultation procedure in the Visa Code. This contribution focuses on the right of TCN s to have access to effective remedies, both with regard to existing and newer mechanisms of exclusion. It argues that when dealing with the use of large-scale databases and risk assessment as basis for excluding admission, existing rules and case-law by the CJEU should be taken into account to ensure access to effective judicial protection for TCN s.

Visa Refusals to Foreign Scientists Participants in Megascience Experiments, other Scientific Events and the Right to Appeal: New in the ECJ Practice

The paper analyzes the provisions of the legislation and the latest court practice of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) regulating the procedure for refusing to issue Schengen visas and other migration permits necessary for foreign scientists to participate in experiments using unique European mega-science facilities, as well as in other scientific events in the EU. The first section "Visa refusal and the right to appeal it in the EU: Historical and comparative legal aspects" examines the formation and initial content of the EU rules on the rationale and appeal of the refusal of Schengen visas, starting with the Schengen agreements of the 1980s and before the adoption of the 2009 EU Visa Code. The second section "Right to appeal against refusal of Schengen and equivalent visas" is devoted to the rules of the 2009 EU Visa Code regarding visas for short-term stays (up to 90 days within a period of 180 days), amended and supplemented by the 2017 EU Court of Justice prejudicial decision as in the case of "El Hassani" regarding the recognition of foreigners’ right to judicial appeal against a visa refusal and, in a broader context, "the right to a fair and adequate consideration of their application" for a visa. The subject of the third, final section "The right to appeal the refusal of visas for long-term stay and residence permits" are the provisions of the latest ECJ court practice (judgment in the case of "M.A." of 10.03.2021), which made it possible to challenge in the courts of the EU Member States refusals to issue even those migration permits that are issued in accordance with national law.

Research on the Spatial Structure of the European Union's Tourism Economy and Its Effects.

With the implementation of European integration policies such as the single market, the Euro and the Schengen Visa, the EU member states are developing closer economic ties through tourism, and their level of tourism integration is constantly improving. Taking the 28 EU member states as research objects, this paper constructs a tourism economic connection network among them, measures the strength of their tourism economic connections from 1995 to 2018 by using the modified gravity model and social network method, and analyzes the spatial structure characteristics and effects of the EU tourism economy. The results are as follows: (1) The tourism economic ties of EU member states are growing increasingly close, enhancing network stability. (2) Germany, France, Italy, Austria and the United Kingdom are the top five countries in the degree centrality and closeness centrality rankings, meaning that they are located in the center of the network and have great influence, and the network is becoming increasingly concentrated. Germany, Italy, Sweden, Austria and France play an important intermediary role in the network, and the centrality of most member states has increased. (3) The core areas are mainly concentrated in Western Europe, Southern Europe, Mediterranean mainland countries and Central Europe, while the marginal areas are mainly concentrated in Eastern Europe, Northern Europe and Mediterranean island countries; the network connection density of the core area, the network connection density of the marginal area, and the network connection density between the core and marginal area overall show an increasing trend. (4) Improvements in the complete network connectedness and a reduction in graph efficiency can significantly reduce differences in EU tourism economic development levels and improve spatial equity.

The problem of recognition by the European union of "Crimean" passports

The article considers the problem of non-recognition by member countries of the European Union, the Russian passports issued on the territory of the Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol city, and the difficulty of obtaining a Schengen visa by citizens of these regions. The EU's position on this issue is a violation of human rights and contradicts the norms of international law. The authors suggest possible solutions to this problem.

Preparedness of Lao People’s Democratic Republic to Implement ASEAN Common Visa (ACV)

The concept and practice of free migration has long existed, but the modern border pass and common visa have only been used since the establishment of the Schengen Agreement of the European Union in 1995. Since its establishment, the Schengen Visa has been an extraordinary example of the success of a borderless region and led to vibrant in growth and social development. ASEAN, as a new economic community that tries to set itself as a beneficiary of the lessons learned from the European Union, has been struggling in establishing its own common visa region. The reasons encompass economic, political, and social-cultural concerns. This study focuses specifically on the Lao PDR and it aims to assess the preparedness of the country if the region were to establish the common visa system. The study employs a qualitative approach and collects data via an interview questionnaire. Research data are collected from interviews of six high-ranking government officials. Using the theme generating and data coding approach in ATLAS, a qualitative data analysis program, this study found that the preparedness of the Lao PDR in implementing the ASEAN Common Visa (ACV) spans nine key factors: (1) geographical location, (2) visa policy, (3) immigration control, (4) quota of foreign workers in the private sector, (5) information and communications technology (ICT) in connectivity development, (6) electronic systems in the consular sector, (7) infrastructure, (8) population mobility, and (9) attitudes towards the ACV. After categorizing these factors based on economic, political, and social-cultural dimensions, it was found that population mobility is a common concern among the three dimensions. This suggests that the Lao PDR needs to focus on improvements in border management, synchronization of information and communication technology, infrastructure, and human resources development among the relevant sectors.

Real fake? Appropriating mobility via Schengen visa in the context of biometric border controls

ABSTRACTAlthough the majority of illegalised migrants in the European Union are so-called visa overstayers who enter with a Schengen visa only to become ‘illegal’ once it has expired, this mode of illegalised migration has only received scarce attention in border and migration studies so far. This article takes the introduction of biometric visa as an opportunity to compensate for this neglect by asking: How do migrants appropriate Schengen visa in the context of biometric border controls? Drawing on the autonomy of migration approach (AoM), it investigates the visa regime from the perspective of mobility in order to elaborate on one set of practices of appropriation that involves the provision of falsified or manipulated supporting documents upon which the decision to issue a biometric visa is based. The article draws on this example to develop a conception of the notion of appropriation that addresses the two central criticisms which have been raised against the AoM. Besides contributing to the AoM’s development, the article thus introduces a concept in debates on migrant agency that highlights, better than existing concepts, the intricate intertwinement of migrants’ practices with the means and methods of mobility control.

Dynamics of exclusion and everyday bordering through Schengen visas

Turkey is the only European Union candidate country whose citizens are obliged to obtain a Schengen visa. The difficult visa procedures, often seen as unjust and discriminatory, are a longstanding source of frustration and humiliation among Turkish citizens, as they reproduce both symbolic and physical borders between the EU and Turkey and seem to reiterate the ‘Fortress Europe’ thesis. These perceptions of the visa process and the consequent feeling of ‘otherness/non-Europeanness’ hinder the process of Turkish integration into the EU. Bordering no longer occurs merely in the border areas separating two states, but rather through a wide range of practices in multiple locations within and beyond the state's territory. This complexity has recently been augmented by the introduction of intermediary companies. The offices of these intermediaries have become an example of bordering sites located away from the border area. Moreover, in these offices border work is carried out by non-traditional actors: in other words, not by border guards or immigration officers of the EU but by Turkish employees. Treating those offices as significant nodes where border work is done, this paper draws on material collected at visa offices in Ankara to understand the multifaceted construction of borders between the EU and Turkey. Using a situated intersectional framework, this paper elucidates not only perceptions from both sides of the border –Turkish nationals applying for visas and Turkish nationals doing border work – but also how the differentiated social positionings and purposes of travel shape these interactions.

Unpacking the Schengen Visa Regime. A Study on Bureaucrats and Discretion in an Italian Consulate

ABSTRACTThe article focuses on European Consulates as key institutions in the filtering of prospective travelers to the Schengen area. Through qualitative research at the Italian Consulate in Dakar, the article examines the administrative practices surrounding Schengen visas. The article retraces the path travelers have to face to travel with proper documents toward the Schengen area, identifying and analyzing the role of consular bureaucracy in the implementation of the common visa policy at the local level. It will be ascertained whether the notion of street-level bureaucrats can be applied to Consular officials in their daily routine as well as investigating practices of discretion in the decision-making process of visa issuance.

Малое приграничное движение в Беларуси: реализация и перспективы развития

Characteristics and problems of the organization of the small border traffic (SBT) in Belarus have been described. SBT is regarded as one of the possible forms of integration of Belarus into the community of countries of the European Union (EU). The key features of the introduction of the SBT as a tool of the interim procedure easing of the visa regime with EU countries are disclosed. The article presents examples of objective economic and social disadvantages of the introduction of the SBT. The evidence and examples of SBT between EU and Ukraine, Russia, Belarus provided is based on the analysis of statistics of border crossing, sociological surveys. The development stages of SBT in Belarus, Moldova, Russia and Ukraine have been analyzed. The economic and geographic peculiarities of functioning of the SBT revealed key problems of its revitalization have been analyzed. The article discusses the political, economic (trade), social, ethnic and cultural reasons for the refusal of the Belarusian authorities of the introduction of SBT. Belarus has been signed an agreement on SBT with all neighboring countries of EU – Latvia, Lithuania and Poland. Currently, there are only an agreement with the Republic of Latvia. The scope of this agreement covers about 285 thousand of people on both sides of boundary. However only about 4% of the population of border areas benefit from SBT. Most of the persons who have received permission to STB live in Latvia. This fact indicates that the fears of the Belarusian authorities over the significant growth of visits to neighboring EU countries with the introduction of SBT are exaggerated. In addition, according to the data of the Statistical Office of Poland based on the claimed checks on VAT refunds Belarusian resident was carried out only 14% of total cash costs in the 30-kilometer zone on the territory of Poland in 2014. Moreover, the proportion of multipleentry visas, which are issued by the consular offices of the EU neighboring countries, is increasing. This figure rose to 36% in 2010 to 66% in 2015. About 80% of the total number of Schengen visas (type “C”) issued by the consular offices of the Polish residents of Belarus are multiple. The total number of Schengen visas issued to residents of Belarus exceeded 750 thousand in 2015. Thus, the economic and technical reasons for the postponement of the introduction of SBT with Poland and Lithuania are not objective. On the other hand, as the experience of SBT in Russia and Ukraine the EU uses SBT as a way to get away from the transition to a visa-free regime.

What do Belarusians think about the EU and what can the EU do for Belarus?

This article focuses on Belarusians’ attitudes towards integration, the EU and Russia, as well as on their motives for choosing foreign allies. To judge by its values, Belarusian society is closer to the Customs Union of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan than to the EU. Nevertheless, Belarusians’ geopolitical preference is not the result of political or social values but is based on pragmatic calculations, according to which Europe successfully competes with Russia. Further growth of pro-European attitudes is limited by the frosty relations between Minsk and Brussels, difficulties with Schengen visas, and a general lack of knowledge about the EU.

The Politics of Trade and Turkish Foreign Policy

The Politics of Trade and Turkish Foreign Policy

Must EU Borders have Doors for Refugees? On the Compatibility of Schengen Visas and Carriers' Sanctions with EU Member States' Obligations to Provide International Protection to Refugees

AbstractWhereas the EU is developing a highly protective Common European Asylum System in purported compliance with the Geneva Convention, it is also displaying growing reluctance to provide unhindered access to it to those in need. The question of physical access to protection is ambiguously dealt with within EU law. On the one hand, it appears that entry to the Schengen zone has been designed disregarding refugees' entitlement 'to special protection'. Prior to admission, refugees seem to have been assimilated to the broader class of (potentially illegal) immigrants and thus required to submit to general immigration conditions, including visa. On the other hand, some isolated EU law rules give the impression that refugees are to be exonerated from normal admittance requirements.This article intends to show how, 'in the light of present day conditions,' a contextual, dynamic and teleological interpretation of Articles 31 and 33 of the Geneva Convention as well as of Articles 3 ECHR and 2(2) of Protocol 4 ECHR require that the second set of EU rules be appropriately furthered.

Biometrics: Intersecting borders and bodies in liberal bionetwork states

This paper addresses the following two part question: How are liberal bionetwork states using technology to manage human flows and what are the broader political implications of these developments? Specifically, I examine the expanding scope and implications of biometric surveillance technologies in liberal states’ border securitization practices. Since 9/11, biometric identification systems have been fast‐tracked as a “silver‐bullet solution” to address perceived threats to border security in the United States and the European Union. I argue that the deployment of new information and biometric technologies in the United States and the European Union is both individuating and expanding state space into new geographies (i.e., state control is extensifying inside bodies and reaching outside sovereign territorial boundaries). This is due, in part, to the deployment and growing interoperability of new border securitization technologies, like US‐VISIT in the United States and the second generation of the Schengen Information System (SIS II) and Visa Information System (VIS) in the European Union. Biometric systems augment efforts to create a high‐concept, multi‐layered, interoperable system of “virtual borders” designed to deter or intercept determined terrorists, criminals, and unauthorized migrants. As the deployment of biometric technologies creep from the margins to the mainstream, privacy and surveillance concerns will become evermore salient. Equally important are the implications of this incremental “disembodied integration” of people with states on how liberal bionetwork societies make decisions about belonging and exclusion. As virtual borders extend into our bodies and around the globe, securitization measures that intersect bodies and states require a virtual theory to account for these new geographies of state space and the qualitative affects on individuals.

A Friendlier Schengen Visa System as a Tool of “Soft Power”: The Experience of Turkey

A Friendlier Schengen Visa System as a Tool of “Soft Power”: The Experience of Turkey

The Second Legalization of the Illegal Immigrants in Greece

Greece, traditionally a country of emigration, has evolved since the late 1980s into one with an estimated number of between 800,000 and one million foreign residents, mostly economic immigrants (SOPEMI, 2000:193). Prior to the first legalization in 1998, about 85 percent of these immigrants were undocumented. The March 2001 census counted 10.94 million inhabitants in Greece, and the labor market survey in the last quarter of 2000 counted 514,4000 unemployed (11.6% of the labor force). Although riddled with bureaucratic obstacles and requirements that proved very difficult for many migrants to fulfill, the 1998 legalization resulted in about 370,000 immigrants (revised figure) receiving white cards for residence and work for about one year with extensions given (see Papantoniou-Frangoudi and Leventi, 2000). Approximately 65 percent had come from neighboring Albania and 11 percent from Bulgaria and Romania, while Pakistanis, Ukrainians, Poles, Georgians and Indians made up 2 to 3 percent each, and the remaining immigrants were from dozens of other source countries (Cavounidis and Xatzaki, 1999). Only about 220,000 of the applicants supplied the required documents for the issue of a renewable green card, which granted them the same rights as Greeks in the labor market and allowed them, as a rule, to receive Schengen visas. Although that legalization increased five-fold the number of foreign legal immigrants (excluding ethnic Greeks and EU nationals), it nevertheless left an estimated number of more than 400,000 illegals. Despite the massive expulsions and deportations, which continue unabated and have amounted to about 2.5 million persons since 1990 (Ministry of Public Order), the number of illegals grew as relatives and friends joined them and others entered on their own in search of better economic opportunities and in the hope that they would be included in the next legalization (see King et al., 2000). To cope with that situation, the new law, 2910/2001 (Government Gazette 91/ A/ 2.5.2001), which replaced the 1795/1991 aliens law, stipulated a second legalization, fixing a two month registration period (June 5, 2001 August 2, 2001). A ministerial circular on July 19, 2001 extended it to September 7, 2001, provided the interested immigrants submitted a simple