dw.com
Finland Denies Asylum to Russian Activists Amid Rise in Rejection Rates
Finland's Migri agency denied asylum to two Russian activists, Artur Ankkalainen and Alexander Zheleznikov, despite their claims of FSB surveillance and threats; in 2024, Finland rejected three times more asylum applications than it approved, raising concerns about stricter immigration policies.
- What are the immediate consequences for Russian political asylum seekers in Finland given the sharp increase in asylum rejections?
- Two Russian activists, Artur Ankkalainen and Alexander Zheleznikov, were denied asylum in Finland despite claiming persecution fears. Ankkalainen, involved in organizations advocating for Finnish-Ugric self-determination, cites FSB surveillance and threats. Zheleznikov, an anti-fascist activist, points to FSB interest following his involvement in anti-government protests.
- How do the differing lists of extremist and terrorist organizations maintained by various Russian agencies affect asylum applications from Russian activists?
- Finland's Migri agency denied their asylum requests, citing insufficient evidence. Ankkalainen's threats lacked verifiable origin, and the organizations he was involved with weren't on the Ministry of Justice's list of extremist groups, although they are listed by the FSB and Rosfinmonitoring. Zheleznikov's case, pending in the Supreme Court, highlights a six-year wait for a decision.
- What are the potential long-term impacts of Finland's stricter asylum policies on its relationship with Russia and the broader international perception of its commitment to human rights?
- The increasing number of asylum denials in Finland (three times more rejections than approvals in 2024) suggests a stricter immigration policy, potentially influenced by societal concerns and resource constraints. The cases highlight challenges faced by Russian political exiles seeking refuge in the EU, where evidence standards for asylum may vary widely and are difficult to meet. The long processing times and lack of transparency further complicate the situation.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the narrative around the difficulties faced by Ankkalaeinen and Zheleznikov, emphasizing their fears and the perceived injustices of Migri's decisions. While presenting both sides, the emphasis on the individuals' experiences might lead the reader to sympathize more with the refugees and question Migri's practices. Headlines and subheadings focusing on the high refusal rate of asylum applications could reinforce this bias.
Language Bias
The article maintains a relatively neutral tone, using factual language and direct quotes from the interviewees. However, phrases like "political motivations," "political emigrant," and "ultra-right organizations," while factually accurate, may carry slightly negative connotations and could be replaced with more neutral alternatives. For example, "political asylum seekers" instead of "political emigrants.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the cases of Ankkalaeinen and Zheleznikov, potentially omitting other cases which might present a more balanced view of Migri's decision-making process. The article also doesn't explore the internal workings of Migri in detail, potentially overlooking systemic issues that might contribute to the high refusal rate. While acknowledging limitations of space, a broader overview of Migri's decisions regarding Russian asylum seekers would improve the analysis.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat false dichotomy by portraying a conflict between the needs of Russian political refugees and the concerns of the Finnish government regarding budget and social infrastructure. The reality is likely more nuanced, with possible solutions that address both concerns.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights the denial of asylum to Russian political activists in Finland, indicating a failure to protect individuals fleeing persecution and uphold the principles of justice and human rights. The Finnish authorities' decisions raise concerns about the lack of adequate protection for political refugees, undermining international cooperation on human rights and the rule of law.