This paper aims to shed light on the issue of irregular migration in Sweden, which has become an increasingly pressing concern for policy makers and the public. This study examines the various factors that contribute to irregular migration and the situation of irregular migrants. It explores the various risks that migrants face after entering Sweden such as documentation, challenges, well-being, exploitation, abuse, shelter, and insecurity etc. Additionally, it discusses why some immigrants choose unauthorized migration as a strategy to move, stay, or survive in an illegal situation in Sweden. This study examines and analyses academic literature on irregular migration, including definitions, theories, and methods. Terminology and methods of measuring irregular migration are briefly discussed, and analysis of some of the basic determinants of irregular migration and Swedish government’s policies and initiatives to address this issue and their effectiveness. Literature on migration has been used to frame the discourse and empirical research, i.e., to frame the theoretical framework. Thus, mixed-methods research is used to draw empirical information by combining quantitative and qualitative methods (e.g., semi-structured interview) to obtain results that cannot be achieved by using only one method. An evaluation of empirical evidence is conducted using neoclassical theory and social network theory to assess the 'current' state of irregular migration in Sweden

Les politiques migratoires européennes sont conçues en termes de contrôle de l’entrée et du séjour des étrangers. Depuis la mise en place des conditions de libre circulation dans les années 1980, l’Union européenne est impliquée dans le traitement des non-nationaux qui, auparavant, relevait exclusivement de la discrétion étatique. La migration et l’asile sont aujourd’hui des domaines de compétence partagée entre l’Union et ses membres. La priorité est accordée à la lutte contre la migration irrégulière, perçue non seulement comme un défi à la souveraineté, mais aussi comme une menace à l’État providence et un risque pour la sécurité. Cette recherche porte sur l’européanisation de la lutte contre la migration irrégulière et ses effets sur les droits humains des étrangers. Il est soutenu que l’européanisation définie comme un processus de construction, de diffusion et d’institutionnalisation des normes, des pratiques et des convictions partagées, permet aux États d’atteindre leur objectif de limiter le nombre d’étrangers indésirés, y compris des demandeurs d’asile, sur leur sol. L’européanisation légitime et renforce les mesures préventives et dissuasives existantes à l’encontre des migrants clandestins. De nouvelles normes communes sont produites et de nouveaux dispositifs de coopération européenne sont créés en vue de réprimer la migration irrégulière. Ce phénomène transforme le paradigme migratoire dans les États membres ainsi que les pays candidats à l’adhésion qui se trouvent désormais chargés de la sécurisation des frontières extérieures de l’Union. La recherche démontre que ces développements ont un impact négatif sur les droits fondamentaux. Ils exacerbent aussi la vulnérabilité des demandeurs d’asile assimilés aux migrants économiques. Une analyse comparative de l’européanisation du renvoi forcé en France, au Royaume-Uni et en Turquie montre que la politique européenne engendre des atteintes aux droits et libertés des étrangers et limite leur capacité de contester les violations devant les tribunaux. L’accent est mis sur la nécessité de trouver un équilibre entre la préoccupation légitime des États et de l’Union d’assurer la sécurité et le bien-être de leurs citoyens et la protection des droits des migrants irréguliers. Il revient ultimement aux tribunaux de veiller à ce que le pouvoir discrétionnaire étatique s’exerce en stricte conformité avec les normes constitutionnelles et les obligations internationales découlant du droit international des réfugiés et des droits de l’homme. / In Europe, migration policies are designed to control the entry and residence of foreigners on the national territory. Since the establishment of a common market in the 1980s, the European Union is increasingly involved in the treatment of foreigners. Migration and asylum have become issues of shared jurisdiction between the Union and its members. Policies are dominantly focused on the fight against irregular migration, perceived not only as a challenge to territorial sovereignty, but also as a threat to the welfare state and as a security risk. This research explores the Europeanization of migration and asylum policy and its impact on irregular migrants’ human rights. It is asserted that, as a process of construction, diffusion and institutionalization of norms, practices and shared convictions, the Europeanization enables States to limit the number of unwanted foreigners on their territory, including asylum seekers. It legitimizes and reinforces already existing preventive and deterrent measures against clandestine migrants. Common norms and cooperation mecanisms are established with a view to optimizing States’ control over irregular migrants. This process transforms the migration paradigm not only in member States, but also in accession countries as they become the gatekeepers of the European Union’s external borders. The research maintains that these developments have a negative impact on clandestine migrants’ fundamental rights. The vulnerability of asylum seekers is exacerbated by their systematic association to economic migrants. A comparative analysis of the securitization of French, British and Turkish forced removal policies demonstrates how the Europeanization limits the foreigners’ rights and curbs their capacity to claim rights before tribunals. It is necessary to strike a fair balance between the legitimate aim to ensure citizens’ welfare and security and the protection of irregular migrants’ rights. It is argued that this balance will only be achieved by allowing the judiciary to test over time the constitutionality of repressive measures as well as their compatibility with international obligations of human rights and refugee protection.

Les politiques migratoires européennes sont conçues en termes de contrôle de l’entrée et du séjour des étrangers. Depuis la mise en place des conditions de libre circulation dans les années 1980, l’Union européenne est impliquée dans le traitement des non-nationaux qui, auparavant, relevait exclusivement de la discrétion étatique. La migration et l’asile sont aujourd’hui des domaines de compétence partagée entre l’Union et ses membres. La priorité est accordée à la lutte contre la migration irrégulière, perçue non seulement comme un défi à la souveraineté, mais aussi comme une menace à l’État providence et un risque pour la sécurité. Cette recherche porte sur l’européanisation de la lutte contre la migration irrégulière et ses effets sur les droits humains des étrangers. Il est soutenu que l’européanisation définie comme un processus de construction, de diffusion et d’institutionnalisation des normes, des pratiques et des convictions partagées, permet aux États d’atteindre leur objectif de limiter le nombre d’étrangers indésirés, y compris des demandeurs d’asile, sur leur sol. L’européanisation légitime et renforce les mesures préventives et dissuasives existantes à l’encontre des migrants clandestins. De nouvelles normes communes sont produites et de nouveaux dispositifs de coopération européenne sont créés en vue de réprimer la migration irrégulière. Ce phénomène transforme le paradigme migratoire dans les États membres ainsi que les pays candidats à l’adhésion qui se trouvent désormais chargés de la sécurisation des frontières extérieures de l’Union. La recherche démontre que ces développements ont un impact négatif sur les droits fondamentaux. Ils exacerbent aussi la vulnérabilité des demandeurs d’asile assimilés aux migrants économiques. Une analyse comparative de l’européanisation du renvoi forcé en France, au Royaume-Uni et en Turquie montre que la politique européenne engendre des atteintes aux droits et libertés des étrangers et limite leur capacité de contester les violations devant les tribunaux. L’accent est mis sur la nécessité de trouver un équilibre entre la préoccupation légitime des États et de l’Union d’assurer la sécurité et le bien-être de leurs citoyens et la protection des droits des migrants irréguliers. Il revient ultimement aux tribunaux de veiller à ce que le pouvoir discrétionnaire étatique s’exerce en stricte conformité avec les normes constitutionnelles et les obligations internationales découlant du droit international des réfugiés et des droits de l’homme. / In Europe, migration policies are designed to control the entry and residence of foreigners on the national territory. Since the establishment of a common market in the 1980s, the European Union is increasingly involved in the treatment of foreigners. Migration and asylum have become issues of shared jurisdiction between the Union and its members. Policies are dominantly focused on the fight against irregular migration, perceived not only as a challenge to territorial sovereignty, but also as a threat to the welfare state and as a security risk. This research explores the Europeanization of migration and asylum policy and its impact on irregular migrants’ human rights. It is asserted that, as a process of construction, diffusion and institutionalization of norms, practices and shared convictions, the Europeanization enables States to limit the number of unwanted foreigners on their territory, including asylum seekers. It legitimizes and reinforces already existing preventive and deterrent measures against clandestine migrants. Common norms and cooperation mecanisms are established with a view to optimizing States’ control over irregular migrants. This process transforms the migration paradigm not only in member States, but also in accession countries as they become the gatekeepers of the European Union’s external borders. The research maintains that these developments have a negative impact on clandestine migrants’ fundamental rights. The vulnerability of asylum seekers is exacerbated by their systematic association to economic migrants. A comparative analysis of the securitization of French, British and Turkish forced removal policies demonstrates how the Europeanization limits the foreigners’ rights and curbs their capacity to claim rights before tribunals. It is necessary to strike a fair balance between the legitimate aim to ensure citizens’ welfare and security and the protection of irregular migrants’ rights. It is argued that this balance will only be achieved by allowing the judiciary to test over time the constitutionality of repressive measures as well as their compatibility with international obligations of human rights and refugee protection.

No description available.

This thesis provides an ethnography and critical phenomenology of undocumentedness in the Swedish context. By attending to the forces and processes that circumscribe the life-worlds of undocumented persons, as well as the phenomenology and essential experiences of their condition, a complex and multi-layered illustration of what undocumentedness is and means is successively presented. Employing a dual conceptualization of the state, as a juridico-political construct as well as a practiced and embodied set of institutions, the undocumented position emerges as a legal category defined only through omission, produced and reproduced through administrative routine and practice. The health care sector provides empirical examples of state-undocumented interaction where the physical and corporeal presence of the officially absent becomes irrefutable. This research suggests that the Swedish welfare state – universalistic, comprehensive and with digitized administrative routines – becomes a particularly austere environment in which to be undocumented. Drawing on interviews with regional and local health care administrators, NGO-clinics’ representatives and health professionals, as well as extensive participatory observation and interviews with undocumented persons, I argue that the undocumented condition is characterized by simultaneous absence and presence, and a correspondingly paradoxical spatiality. I suggest that the official absence and deportability of undocumented persons deprives them of the capacity to define space and, in an Arendtian sense, appear as themselves to others. There are, however, some opportunities for embodied political protest and dissensus. The paradoxical qualities of the absent-present condition manipulate the undocumented mode of being-in-the-world and I argue that alienation and disorientation are essential experiences of the undocumented situation.

This thesis provides an ethnography and critical phenomenology of undocumentedness in the Swedish context. By attending to the forces and processes that circumscribe the life-worlds of undocumented persons, as well as the phenomenology and essential experiences of their condition, a complex and multi-layered illustration of what undocumentedness is and means is successively presented. Employing a dual conceptualization of the state, as a juridico-political construct as well as a practiced and embodied set of institutions, the undocumented position emerges as a legal category defined only through omission, produced and reproduced through administrative routine and practice. The health care sector provides empirical examples of state-undocumented interaction where the physical and corporeal presence of the officially absent becomes irrefutable. This research suggests that the Swedish welfare state – universalistic, comprehensive and with digitized administrative routines – becomes a particularly austere environment in which to be undocumented. Drawing on interviews with regional and local health care administrators, NGO-clinics’ representatives and health professionals, as well as extensive participatory observation and interviews with undocumented persons, I argue that the undocumented condition is characterized by simultaneous absence and presence, and a correspondingly paradoxical spatiality. I suggest that the official absence and deportability of undocumented persons deprives them of the capacity to define space and, in an Arendtian sense, appear as themselves to others. There are, however, some opportunities for embodied political protest and dissensus. The paradoxical qualities of the absent-present condition manipulate the undocumented mode of being-in-the-world and I argue that alienation and disorientation are essential experiences of the undocumented situation.

'Regularization of Illegal Migration as a Policy-making Process' deals with the social problem of having a high number of irregular migrants in the Czech Republic and regularization as a tool that could help reduce it. Regularization is seen as a political process theoretically described by using the Advocacy Coalition Framework. This thesis tries to find normative definitions of the two coalitions, which hold different beliefs and two different points of view rather than describe the problem. The work is partly designed as a case study in which the theory is applied to the issue of regularization in part there is also an explanation of regularization as well as the Advocacy Coalition Framework. The thesis defines the two coalitions within the subsystem - the for-regularization and anti-regularization coalitions. Each coalition has its deep core and policy core beliefs that determine the relationship to the topic as well as the relationship between the coalitions themselves. In conclusion, the author summarized the information about the coalitions and their belief in three comparative tables where one can confront their approaches. The last part also contains a chapter on The Changes of Beliefs and Policies, where there is an introduction of two policies: the system of voluntary return and that...