Temporary Protection Regime Research Articles

Becoming temporarily protected, producing temporarily protecting places: how Syrian refugee women and children co-create place in Istanbul

ABSTRACT The paper examines the usefulness of the Deleuzian concepts of smooth space and stratified space while capturing the experiences of refugee women and children as non-citizens under the temporary protection regime in Istanbul. Deleuze and Guattari, in their book ‘A Thousand Plateaus’, describe smooth space as the territory of the nomads, those who do not fit in neatly into forms of identity and division. Striated space on the other hand is created by the sedentary, the state, with an interest in blocking the speed of flows, movements of elements not rooted in a supposedly homogenous whole. Many refugee children acquire by birth the legal status of being under temporary protection, a liminal position which for many turns into a life-long arrangement. How do refugee women and children re-create community and culture as bounded to a place? What kind of space delivers itself to being transformed into a place of belonging for them? To work through these questions, interview data from several Syrian women and three Syrian children gathered through semi-structured interviews are embedded in the observations of social workers and psychologists working at the Kizilay community Centre the informants frequent in the Bagcilar district of Istanbul Province in Turkey.

Providing permanent protection to refugees in Australia: Real change or window dressing?

This article argues that the recent changes to Australia’s rolling temporary protection regime do not mark a shift away from Australia’s flawed and unjust asylum system for two key reasons. First, the government did not repeal the temporary protection regime nor the fast track process. Secondly, the changes mobilise and perpetuate the inherent hostility of Australia’s asylum seeker policies targeting ‘irregular arrivals’. This article offers a critical analysis of the design and operation of Australia’s asylum system, as well as an examination of the 2023 changes and the political and journalistic discourse surrounding their announcement.

Making Room for Refugee Interpretation of Labelling: A Case Study from the Turkish–Syrian Border

Abstract Turkey admitted millions of refugees fleeing the Syrian civil war. However, the situation of Syrians in Turkey remains precarious under the temporary protection regime, unable to qualify as Convention refugees due to Turkey’s geographic reservation to the 1967 Protocol and with limited access to work permits and citizenship. Based on in-depth interviews, we provide a case study of refugee perspectives on refugee “labelling” as an absurd, historically contingent, and myth-telling process, which contributes to a growing body of research taking a bottom-up approach to understanding refugee protection. We put forward a refugee-interpreted view on labelling, finding that refugees explained labelling as an opaque and unpredictable digitised process, administrated through paper documents which act as talismans but also scams. Our study provides rich detail about how refugees subvert and cope with the labelling process through humour and mockery, historicity, and developing alternate forms of identity. We sought to use these interviews to work with refugees to turn a critical gaze on the paradigm of labelling from a refugee perspective and address the lack of empirical research centring refugee interpretations of labelling.

Letter from the editors

Letter from the editors

Negotiating State-Civil Society Relations in Turkey: The Case of Refugee-Supporting Organizations

How do nonstate organizations carry out their programs in political contexts hostile to civil society activity? This paper examines the case of refugee-supporting organizations in Turkey, which hosts over 3.6 million Syrians under a temporary protection regime. While the Turkish state has taken a central role in refugee reception, nonstate organizations have played a sizeable role in refugee support. Analyzing interviews with key personnel across 23 organizations in Istanbul, the paper finds that organizational capacity and organizational identity together explain variations in CSO-state relations. While high-capacity organizations that adopt a variety of “rights-based” and “needs-based” identities will cooperate with state institutions, lower-capacity organizations use comparable signifiers to justify selective engagement or avoidance of state institutions. The paper argues that analyzing how organizations negotiate their identities can help explain variations in CSO-state relations in restrictive contexts without relying on a priori assumptions about CSO alignment with or opposition to the state.

The Protection of Displaced Persons from Ukraine in Portugal

Abstract The war in Ukraine has caused a massive influx of people seeking protection in the European Union and has led to the activation, for the first time, of the Temporary Protection Directive. Although this influx mainly affects neighbouring countries, such as Poland and Romania, Portugal triggered, as early as 1 March 2022, the national temporary protection regime, thus granting immediate protection to people who were arriving because of the war. This article analyses this temporary protection regime, as well as the measures adopted to allow the rapid integration of those displaced persons, such as simplifying the recognition of professional qualifications, essential for their access to the labour market. Being special measures that only benefit citizens affected by the war in Ukraine, their compatibility with the constitutional principle of equality is questioned, as other foreigners equally affected by war and violation of human rights are excluded.

Refugees and Asylum Seekers as Workers: Radical Temporariness and Labour Exploitation in Australia

This article analyses the emerging evidence of labour exploitation of refugees and asylum seekers on temporary visas in Australia. Over the last decade, Australia’s temporary protection regime has been marked by profound uncertainty in relation to visa status, unfettered Ministerial discretion, and the punitive exercise of governmental power. We argue that this framework amounts to abuse of governmental power, confining refugees and asylum seekers who arrived by boat to a situation of radical temporariness in Australia. This results not only in the denial of permanent protection and social inclusion to these refugees and asylum seekers, but also provides conditions for greater abuse of power by employers in the realm of workplaces across Australia. We outline six factors related to temporary immigration status and other punitive, unpredictable and arbitrary elements in this regulatory regime that currently increase the vulnerability of refugees and asylum seekers to labour exploitation.

Syrian Refugees’ Homemaking in Gaziantep: Uncertainty, Legality and Temporality

ABSTRACT Temporary protection has long been formulated and debated in policy circles as a practical interim response for large-scale refugee movements, awaiting durable solutions. This article critically engages with the top-down formulations of temporary protection by focusing on one of its latest and most comprehensive application in Turkey for Syrian refugees since 2011. The conceptual framework adopts a bottom-up approach in questioning how Syrian refugees interpret, conceive, and shape the category of temporary protection. By building upon empirical work conducted in the city of Gaziantep, which has become one of the important sites of refuge for Syrian refugees, and a hub for protection activities since the beginning of the Syrian displacement, this article uncovers Syrian refugees’ urges and attempts of “homemaking” in Turkey as a crucial aspect of understanding the dynamics of temporary protection. The article unpacks the interplay between the inherent uncertainties of the Turkish temporary protection regime, the legality of its Syrian beneficiaries, and homemaking practices of Syrian refugees during their protracted displacement. It concludes that it is only through a bottom-up understanding of the many dimensions of temporary protection—and its impacts on the refugees—that a truly workable framework will emerge, that focuses on protection rather than temporality.

Public service provision for Syrian refugees in Turkey: challenges and prospects

ABSTRACT Refugee crises are among the most heartrending and vexatious humanitarian issues since the beginning of civilization. These crises are particularly evident in the case of Syria, where, since 2011, civil war and terrorism have led millions of people to seek refugee status in neighbouring countries, including Turkey. Since 2011, Turkey has pursued an open-door policy accompanied by a national temporary protection regime to protect more than four million Syrians fleeing the civil war. As a corollary, government institutions (the public service) in Turkey have the responsibility of providing essential services, including education and health. Against this backdrop, this study aims to examine and analyse the opportunities and challenges Turkey is currently facing in accommodating the Syrian refugees from the perspectives of Syrian migrants living in Turkey. This research employed the qualitative research approaches, which adopted in-depth interviews, focus group discussions and documentary reviews as the data collection instruments. The findings revealed that the Government of Turkey is being overstretched by the refugee crisis, and this has affected the quality of public service provisions. Consequently, this study is a rare attempt to examine the impact of the Syrian Refugee crisis on the public service provision of Turkey.

A Comparative Analysis on International Refugee Law and Temporary Protection in the Context of Turkey

The Syrian civil war prompted a large number of people to flee their country and seek asylum in other countries, making Turkey a leading host country with around 3.6 million of asylum seekers. Syrian asylum seekers in Turkey are under temporary protection regime. This article examines Turkish temporary protection regime in comparison with international protection standards and human rights law, especially with the UNHCR Guideline and European Union legislation on temporary protection and European Court on Human Rights judgements. In this respect, this article argues that Turkish legislation has met the fundamental requirements of international protection law and standards, however, still needs to be improved in some crucial areas. In this regard, the international protection law and the difference between the status of refugee and temporary protection is explored. Subsequently, declaration of temporary protection in case of a mass-influx, the rights and freedoms covered under temporary protection, non-refoulement principle and termination of temporary protection regime under Turkish Temporary Protection Regulation are discussed and compared with the international standards. Finally, some conclusions and recommendations for the improvement are deduced from this discussion.

A Masterclass in Evading the Rule of Law: The Saga of Scott Morrison and Temporary Protection Visas

For over a year, the then Minister for Immigration successfully avoided granting permanent protection to refugees who came by boat. His newly elected government had promised to re-introduce a temporary protection regime, but came to power without the numbers to pass necessary legislation. In order to achieve his policy objective, the Minister chose to engage in a variety of legally dubious tactics to forestall and delay granting permanent protection, as required by the law. In doing so, the Minister navigated skilfully through the holes in Australia’s institutional frameworks designed to protect the rule of law and Australia’s constitutional arrangements. The saga of Scott Morrison and temporary protection visas is therefore a telling story about the fragility of the rule of law in Australia and demonstrates how a determined executive can upend the constitutional order.

Syrian trajectories of exile in Lebanon and Turkey: Context of reception and social class

AbstractResearch on refugee trajectories rarely takes into account social class. Yet migration options for those fleeing conflicts and insecurity are more or less dangerous, desirable and doable and differences in trajectories have to do with people's ability to mobilise resources at a given time and in a given space. Based on 42 semistructured interviews conducted with Syrians who fled to Lebanon and Turkey between 2012 and 2017, this article focuses on how trajectories of exile are shaped by the interactions between social class and the specificities of the context of reception. These countries are similar to the extent that they both border Syria and host the largest numbers of Syrian refugees worldwide. Yet their respective policies, as well as their unique historical, legal and socio‐economic contexts, create different impacts on refugee trajectories and refugees' experience of inequality. We argue that as a result of the different contexts of reception for Syrians in Lebanon and Turkey, refugees' strategies to reduce precarity also differ significantly. As such, the relevance and usefulness of any given form of capital vary. Results indicate that survival strategies and mobilisation of capital in Lebanon revolve around obtaining legal status, whereas in Turkey, where all Syrian refugees benefit from legal status under the temporary protection regime, capital is mainly used to negotiate an exploitative labour market. Our study challenges conventional class analyses that imply direct links between the possession of economic and social capital and favourable trajectories of exile.

The Principle of Non-refoulment within the Deportation Procedure, Admission to the Country, Right to Life and the Freedom of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment According to the Turkish Legislation on Temporary Protection Regime

This article elaborates on the non-refoulement principle regarding deportation procedure, security, and entry to the country (Turkey) under the 2014 Temporary Protection Regulation, and the 2013 Law on Foreigners and International Protection. According to the document presented by the United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner “(…) the principle of non-refoulement guarantees that no one should be returned to a country where they would face torture, cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment and other irreparable harm. This principle applies to all migrants at all times, irrespective of migration status”.1 The rights of refugees and asylum seekers in mass influx situations are recognized by UNHCR Executive Committee resolutions and general international law.2 Thus, it is necessary to analyze the non-refoulement rule as inseparable part of globally accepted principles: the right to life and the freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The article describes the development and violations of the said rule, focusing on the pertinent current Turkish legislation.

Evaluation of the minimum standard of the treatment to be provided in the Turkish temporary protection regime and legislation

This article will elaborate and give an overview of the Turkish temporary protection regime. In 2011, when the war in Syria began, Turkey had to face the mass influx from the southeast area, bringing Turkey many Syrian refugees. By 2011 Turkey did not have sufficient regulation on temporary protection, which could deal with many upcoming refugees. In 2013 the Law of Foreigners and International Protection came into force. It was necessary to update the latest legislation on temporary protection, the 1994 Temporary Protection Regulation. Due to unification with international and European standards and to provide possibly the best services to the refugees, Turkey, in 2014, enacted a new law on asylum, migration, and temporary protection construction. Therefore, according to the Turkish Constitution and international regulations, the following article will describe the Turkish refugee law development and legal construction, temporary protection regime, and the problems that still need to be solved.

Is Temporary Protection Eternal? The Future of Temporary Protection Status of Syrians in Turkey

Turkey has provided temporary protection status for the Syrian people, who were accepted by "open door policy" and sheltered as “guests” until the situation in Syria ameliorates. Temporary protection, a convenient tool to respond to the mass influx and provide protection while a permanent solution is sought, is indeed designed as an interim solution. After seven years of conflict, it can be assumed that peace and security cannot be established in Syria in a short period of time, as a consequence, Syrians shall continue staying in Turkey longer than anticipated. Therefore, congruent with the meaning of temporary protection status, it is time for Turkey to collaborate with international society in terms of burden-sharing on the one hand, to terminate temporary protection regime, and to determine its own strategies to provide permanent solution on the other.

Challenges and Obstacles for Syrian Refugee Women in the Turkish Labor Market

The civil war in Syria resulted in the displacement of 5.7 million civilians between 2011 and 2018. Approximately four million of these civilians started to live in Turkey as refugees trying to integrate themselves into the labor market. The present research is a case study regarding the obstacles faced by Syrian refugee women’s access to the labor market in Şanlıurfa, Turkey. To this end, a survey was carried out on a population of 341 migrants under a temporary protection regime comprising 207 women. The results obtained indicate numerous problems and show the needs of Syrian women. For example, Turkish language fluency and low education and skill levels are among the largest barriers for employment. Moreover, the opacity of bureaucratic procedures and non-computerized work permit applications are shown to be another slowing factor in this process. Compared with their home countries, Syrian women are more active in Turkey. However, a majority is involved in precarious and seasonal jobs. The problems of childcare and the feudal (male-dominated) nature of many homes deter Syrian women from contributing economically, and despite being a generally young population, most hold seasonal jobs, which leave little opportunity for career development. It is recommended that, to overcome structural barriers in accessing the labor market, Syrian refugee women need long-term training rather than restrictive policies.

Property Rights in the Syrian Conflict: Remedy for the Displaced

Since the beginning of the Syrian uprising in March 2011, Turkey has been the leading host country for the displaced. As of December 2017, 3.3 million Syrians reside in Turkey under a temporary protection regime and there is an expanding discussion on the future of these people. Despite sporadic reports of individual or family groups returning, measures have evolved around themes of their more or less permanent integration in Turkey. Issues of property rights have barely featured in these discussions. Based on findings from previous research, the article argues that whether Syrians in Turkey return or not, it is in the interest of the displaced as well as the host country to work towards a scheme where their property rights in Syria are restored, or in cases where they did not exist prior to the conflict, granted.

The governance of Syrian refugees in Turkey: The state-capital nexus and its discontents

ABSTRACT This article argues that the convergence of state policies and the interests of capital and business owners are central to the understanding of the governance of Syrian refugees in Turkey. Drawing on fieldwork in Ankara, Gaziantep, Hatay and Izmir, collected between 2016 and 2018, this article shows that the terms of Turkish state’s temporary protection regime, the state’s ad hoc leniency towards the informal use of refugee labour and the disciplinary effects of the laws complies with the economic expectations of business and capital owners. This article also sheds light on the structural limitations that the state-market convergence places on civil actor’s ability to make improvements to the overall living and working conditions of Syrians in Turkey. The overall analysis points to the fact that the governance of Syrian refugees in Turkey could be conceived as yet another manifestation of the vital role that the state plays in the pursuits of capital.

A Temporary Protection Regime in Line with International Law: Utopia or Real Possibility?

Temporary protection has long been a state response to mass influx situations offering persons seeking refuge immediate protection from refoulement and basic minimum treatment. Today, temporary protection is still relevant: Since 2011, Syrians in Turkey have been protected under a temporary protection regime. Despite this relevance, there is no structured legal framework regulating temporary protection at an international level. Furthermore, conformity of temporary protection regimes with the Refugee Convention, international law and human rights is largely undefined and unsettled. This article takes a step towards clarifying the relationship between temporary protection and international law by discussing whether states can implement a temporary protection regime which does not undermine the Refugee Convention, deprive temporarily protected persons of their basic human rights and lead to premature forced return of the protected persons. Building on the premise that such a temporary protection regime would be in line with international law, this article provides guidance to states on how they should regulate rights and entitlements of the temporarily protected persons, maximum time limit of protection and withdrawal of temporary protection.

Legal Violence Against Syrian Female Refugees in Turkey

Turkey hosts the world’s largest community of Syrians displaced by the ongoing armed conflict. The object of this article is to explore the damaging effects of a hostile legal context on female Syrian refugees in Turkey. I base my analysis on scholarship that theorises immigration legislation as a system of legal violence and I argue that the Temporary Protection Regulation and the Law on Foreigners and International Protection that govern the legal status of refugees in Turkey inflict legal violence on Syrian female refugees. This legislation keeps them in the regime of temporary protection and prevents their access to international protection. The temporary protection regime serves furthermore as the main determinant for other forms of legal violence inflicted by various actors. I explore the effects of the Turkish government’s inaction in terms of preventing and sanctioning the abuse of Syrian female refugees as unpaid sex and household workers. I show that the extended legal limbo on the conditions of employment of Syrian refugees secures female Syrians as the most precarious workforce for Turkey’s various sectors. Finally I claim that the forced confinement of Syrian beggars in refugee camps is instrumentalised for their disciplinary regulation.