dw.com
Greece Implements Stricter Migrant Return Policy
Greece has implemented a stricter policy for undocumented migrants entering from countries deemed safe by the EU, requiring their return or detention for up to 24 months with a potential fine of €10,000, following an increase in arrivals this year.
- What are the key features of Greece's new migrant return policy?
- The policy targets undocumented migrants entering from EU-designated safe countries who are ineligible for asylum. It mandates their return to their country of origin or detention for a minimum of 24 months, alongside a potential fine of €10,000. This follows a recent surge in migrant arrivals.
- What are the potential criticisms and consequences of this new policy?
- The UNHCR criticizes the policy, suggesting it may punish migrants needing international protection. The lack of a rapid asylum process to identify genuine refugees could lead to wrongful deportations. Greece has already returned hundreds of migrants and plans further deportations this month.
- How does this policy relate to Greece's broader immigration stance and recent migrant influx?
- This stricter policy reflects Greece's hardening stance on immigration, particularly due to increased arrivals this year from Libya via Crete and Gavdos. It builds upon existing measures, such as border fences and increased maritime patrols, implemented since 2019 by Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article presents a balanced account of Greece's new immigration law, including perspectives from the government and UNHCR. However, the emphasis on the government's perspective and the inclusion of specific details about its border security measures might subtly favor the government's narrative. The headline (if any) could also influence the framing. Further analysis is needed to examine the headline and subheadings if available.
Language Bias
The language used is largely neutral, with terms like "stricter stance", "increased arrivals", and "reinforced patrols." However, phrases such as "illegal immigrants" and "those whose asylum applications have been rejected and continue to live in the country illegally" carry a negative connotation. Neutral alternatives could be "undocumented migrants" and "individuals whose asylum claims have been denied.
Bias by Omission
The article might omit details on the experiences of migrants themselves, focusing more on government actions and statistics. The overall context of push factors driving migration from countries designated as 'safe' is underdeveloped. A deeper look into how the countries are designated as safe is needed. Further investigation into the long-term effects of the new law on both migrants and the Greek population would provide a fuller picture.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplified eitheor framing by highlighting the government's emphasis on national security versus the UNHCR's concern for migrants' rights. The reality may be more nuanced, with potential for solutions that balance both concerns. A more thorough exploration of alternative solutions could enhance the article's objectivity.
Gender Bias
The article does not exhibit overt gender bias in its language or representation. However, including perspectives from women migrants or women involved in aid organizations could provide additional balance and richer insight into the human dimension of the story.
Sustainable Development Goals
The new Greek law imposes stricter penalties on undocumented migrants, potentially violating international human rights standards and principles of refugee protection. The UNHCR has raised concerns that the law may punish those in need of international protection. This undermines international cooperation on refugee protection and the rule of law, hindering progress towards SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions). The increased border security measures and deportations also represent a potential infringement on the right to seek asylum and fair treatment of refugees.