Annual Report on Migration and Asylum Part 1 2021 Luxembourg

Report (2022)

KEY POINTS 1. The Law of 16 June 2021 amending the Immigration Law changes the legislation on immigration, by lightening the administrative burden for third-country nationals, and by altering certain ... [more ▼]

KEY POINTS 1. The Law of 16 June 2021 amending the Immigration Law changes the legislation on immigration, by lightening the administrative burden for third-country nationals, and by altering certain provisions relating to intercorporate transferees, trainees and family reunification. 2. The Law of 16 June 2021 amending the Asylum Law modifies the remedies available to applicants of international protection (AIPs). This law increases their effectiveness and guarantees maximum legal certainty in the context of transfers under the Dublin Regulation, as well as in the case of final decisions to close proceedings on an application for international protection and of decisions to withdraw international protection. 3. Bill 7877, introduced to Parliament on 2 September 2021, proposes abolishing the 5-year residency clause on active and passive voting rights in municipal elections for EU- and non-EU citizens residing in Luxembourg [less ▲]

Preliminary findings: EMN-OECD InformDigitalisation and Artificial Intelligence

Scientific Conference (2022, January 27)

This presentation provides the preliminary findings of the EMN-OECD Inform on Digitalisation and Artificial Intelligence. It aims to analyse the use of digitalisation and artificial intelligence in ... [more ▼]

This presentation provides the preliminary findings of the EMN-OECD Inform on Digitalisation and Artificial Intelligence. It aims to analyse the use of digitalisation and artificial intelligence in migration management. [less ▲]

Migration Internationale au Luxembourg: Système d'observation permanente des migrations OCDE

Report (2021)

Le Luxembourg reste un pays attractif à l’immigration. Entre 2019 et 2020 la population luxembourgeoise a continué à augmenter principalement en raison de l’immigration nette, passant de 626.108 à 634.730 ... [more ▼]

Le Luxembourg reste un pays attractif à l’immigration. Entre 2019 et 2020 la population luxembourgeoise a continué à augmenter principalement en raison de l’immigration nette, passant de 626.108 à 634.730 habitants (+1,4%), mais d’une manière plus discrète que les années précédentes. La part luxembourgeoise représente 52,8% de la population et les ressortissants étrangers 47,2%. La pandémie a dominé la politique en matière d’immigration et asile pendant l’année 2020 et 2021. Ces politiques ont impacté tous les secteurs au Luxembourg y compris les volets de l’immigration et de l’asile. La fermeture des frontières extérieures de l’Union Européenne, la réintroduction temporaire des contrôles aux frontières internes de l’espace Schengen (décrétées par l’Allemagne, la Belgique et la France) et la perturbation du trafic aérien international ont affecté les mouvements migratoires vers et au départ du Luxembourg. La limitation des mouvements des ressortissants pays tiers (RPT) s’est compliquée suite à la déclaration de l’état de crise entre le 18 mars et le 13 mai 2020 et la fermeture des services d’immigration et asile. Néanmoins, afin d’éviter qu’ils ne tombent dans une situation irrégulière, les autorités luxembourgeoises ont étendu la durée de validité des titres et cartes de séjour et des visas de manière automatique. De même, le traitement des dossiers et la prise de décision par la Direction de l’immigration se sont poursuivis sans interruption. L’interdiction d’entrée des RPT (avec des exceptions pour certaines catégories) a été maintenue jusqu’au 30 juin 2021. Une baisse significative du nombre de titres de séjour délivrés, de demandes d'autorisation temporaire de séjour et de visas de court séjour a été constatée, ainsi qu’une diminution de presque 50% des demandes de protection internationale. Le regroupement familial est resté le principal type de titre de séjour en 2020. Les limitations de mouvements ont aussi une incidence sur les transferts sous le règlement Dublin ainsi que sur les retours vers le pays d’origine. Au cours de l’année 2020, le Luxembourg a continué à maintenir ses engagements de solidarité internationale avec la relocalisation et la réinstallation des demandeurs de protection internationale (DPI) puisque 25 personnes (dont 16 mineurs) ont été relocalisées et 14 réinstallées. La réception des DPI s’est poursuivie car l’Office national de l’accueil (ONA) n’a pas fermé ses guichets. Un défi majeur est constitué par les taux d’occupation élevés dans les structures d’hébergement de l’ONA. La crise du logement affecte particulièrement les bénéficiaires de protection internationale (BPI) qui peinent à trouver un logement en-dehors des structures d’accueil réservées en principe aux DPI. Dans ce contexte l’ONA a poursuivi ses efforts à inciter les communes à promouvoir la mise en place de structures d’hébergement pour DPI et/ou de possibilités d’hébergement pour BPI. [less ▲]

Measuring progress to address statelessness in the EU and Georgia

Report (2021)

Member States reported statistics from a range of sources or categories. The time period covered by the statistics, which was not specified in the information request, also varied. If a date is not ... [more ▼]

Member States reported statistics from a range of sources or categories. The time period covered by the statistics, which was not specified in the information request, also varied. If a date is not specified, it is assumed that statistics refer to the time of the answer period for the ad hoc query which was April/May 2021. Sources/categories reported include residence permit data, population register data, statutory stateless persons, persons without citizenship, unknown/undetected nationality, nationality not specified and recognised stateless persons. T [less ▲]

The impact of COVID-19 in the migration area (EMN OECD UMBRELLA INFORM)

Report (2021)

The COVID-19 pandemic has created profound changes in all areas of migration and asylum. EU Member States and OECD countries have made many efforts to keep the pandemic under control, entailing impacts ... [more ▼]

The COVID-19 pandemic has created profound changes in all areas of migration and asylum. EU Member States and OECD countries have made many efforts to keep the pandemic under control, entailing impacts such as border closures, travel restrictions, and the need to introduce sanitary measures. Beginning with the pandemic’s impact on permits and entry conditions, the Inform reports on contingency measures to keep systems operational and to mitigate the impacts on migrants and citizens to the extent possible. For instance, the reduction of in-person immigration related services was largely replaced by electronic or postal communication to ensure continuity in processes. In EU Member States and Norway, the automatic extension of residence permits or the removal of the obligation to leave in some cases, were some of the measures taken to reduce the impact of COVID-19. Most EU Member States provided financial support for migrant workers affected by the pandemic, either due to unemployment or loss of income, and made COVID-19 related healthcare services available to all migrants. Although restrictions were imposed on the admission of migrants, continued admission was granted for jobs deemed essential to meet labour market needs, notably in areas of health, agriculture, and transport. New digital tools have been critical in providing asylum and migration services, although the Inform notes that it has also raised new challenges. In the area of asylum, for instance, providing effective and fair application and appeals processes has become more complicated by having remote interviews, and depends largely on the applicants’ ability to use and access electronic means. Both the requests for asylum and the number of returns carried out have reduced in 2020 as a result of the pandemic. The landscape also changed for international students, where in-person attendance was discouraged if not suspended altogether. Many students returned home, and in some cases, were able to continue their studies remotely, while processes to renew residence permits were moved online. The joint research shows that public authorities have acted swiftly to introduce new measures or adapt their systems to confront the migration challenges caused by the pandemic, or in some cases, to simply continue to use pre-existing on-line systems. While the long-term impacts are hard to predict, the last chapter of the inform looks towards future migration policies and how these might be shaped in the context of the digitalisation of migration management, the need for bio-secure borders, and the expansion of teleworking digital nomads. The European Asylum Support Office (EASO) and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (FRONTEX) provided inputs to the publication. [less ▲]

Detention and alternatives to detention in international protection and return procedures in Luxembourg

Report (2021)

The main objective of this study of the European Migration Network is to provide objective and reliable information about the usage of detention and alternatives to detention in international protection ... [more ▼]

The main objective of this study of the European Migration Network is to provide objective and reliable information about the usage of detention and alternatives to detention in international protection and return procedures in Luxembourg. Luxembourgish legislation, namely the amended Law of 29 August 2008 on Free Movement of Persons and Immigration (Immigration Law) and the Law of 18 December 2015 on International Protection and Temporary Protection (Asylum Law), foresees three alternatives to detention: - Alternative 1: Reporting obligations, which includes the obligation to surrender a passport, travel document or identity document; - Alternative 2: Home custody (+ electronic monitoring, if necessary); - Alternative 3: Deposition of a financial guarantee of 5.000€. In principle, the assessment between detention or alternatives to detention is made at the same time as when the grounds for detention are considered, as long as the Directorate of Immigration, as the responsible authority, has all the necessary information to decide if an alternative to detention can be ordered. Furthermore, the possibility to impose an alternative to detention is in principle systemically considered, as both relevant laws foresee that the detention decision is ordered in writing by the Minister on the basis of a case-by-case assessment, where necessary and if other less coercive measures cannot be effectively applied. Grounds for detention are generally rejected in favour of an alternative to detention if the person concerned falls within the category of vulnerable groups and if person is able to proof effective guarantees of representation to prevent the risk of absconding. This latter obligation on the third-country national to revert the legal presumption that there is a risk of absconding remains the main challenge because effective guarantees of representation are not defined by law. This is particularly challenging in the context of return procedures, where this legal presumption exists in nearly all cases where a third-country national has no valid identity, travel or residence documents. In the absence of such effective guarantees of representation, the Minister in charge of Immigration and Asylum generally does not make the decision to apply an alternative to detention. Consequently, the research in the context of this study has shown that alternatives to detention are only rarely used in Luxembourg, with the important exception of home custody in the Emergency Housing Structure of Kirchberg (‘Structure d’hébergement d’urgence Kirchberg’ – SHUK). The SHUK serves as a semi-open return facility for applicants for international protection and irregularly staying third-country nationals whose fingerprints have already been registered in Eurodac by another Member State and are therefore likely to be transferred to that Member State, in accordance with the Dublin III Regulation. A placement at the SHUK corresponds to home custody. The rare use of alternatives to detention also results in the fact that there is generally not much data available in this regard, with the important exception of home custody in the SHUK, which is more widely used. [less ▲]

The role of European Migration Network in supporting European migration policymakers: Mechanisms, Tools and contemporary challenges

Scientific Conference (2021, March 26)

The role of the EMN in the collection of information to provide timely, comparable information to EU and national policymakers.

NOWHERELAND REVISITED IN TIMES OF PANDEMIC 2020

Report (2021)

Undocumented Migrants (UDM) belong to the most vulnerable groups in times of global emergency situations. COVID-19 does hit hardest the most vulnerable groups and it is important to create an evidence ... [more ▼]

Undocumented Migrants (UDM) belong to the most vulnerable groups in times of global emergency situations. COVID-19 does hit hardest the most vulnerable groups and it is important to create an evidence base to guide policy making. The Center for Health and Migration, Vienna, has initiated a stock-taking of national regulations concerning access to health and social care for UDM. The initiative aims to create a landscape of policy frameworks to inform policy making and practice development. National experts on health and migration are contacted and asked to provide information on the respective legal frameworks in the following categories: work, housing, compulsory education, social welfare, and health. A validated template is used for data collection. [less ▲]

EMN Synthesis Report on Children on Migration

Presentation (2021, January 28)

This presentation maps the key findings of the progress made by Member States in the implementation of the recommended actions laid down in the 2017 Commission Communication on the protection of children ... [more ▼]

This presentation maps the key findings of the progress made by Member States in the implementation of the recommended actions laid down in the 2017 Commission Communication on the protection of children in migration, with a view to further understanding progress made in the implementation of the Communication's recommendations. [less ▲]

ANNUAL REPORT ON MIGRATION AND ASYLUM Luxembourg 2020

Report (2021)

The Annual Report on Migration and Asylum provides an overview of the main developments and debates in Luxembourg in 2020. The COVID-19 pandemic strongly impacted migratory movements to and from ... [more ▼]

The Annual Report on Migration and Asylum provides an overview of the main developments and debates in Luxembourg in 2020. The COVID-19 pandemic strongly impacted migratory movements to and from Luxembourg. In 2020, there was a significant decrease in the number of residence permits, applications for temporary authorisation of stay and visas (short stay visas and D-visas), a reduction of around 50% on the number of applications for international protection and a decline in Dublin transfers and returns. Public health measures in response to the pandemic significantly impacted migration policies. For instance, Luxembourg temporarily closed its borders to third-country nationals and automatically regularized the stay of third-country nationals whose legal residence status ended during the state of crisis. Moreover, personal interviews with applicants of international protection (AIPs) and Dublin transfers were suspended. Lastly, irregular migrants were granted access to healthcare, free of charge, regardless of their social security coverage without being issued a return order or being placed in detention during the pandemic. Outside of the COVID-19 context, the following developments can be highlighted: The introduction of Bill n°7682 foresees the extension of the time limit from three to six months available to beneficiaries of international protection (BIPs) to apply for family reunification after the granting of their status, as well as the simplification of administrative procedures, concerning the elimination of the requirement to provide integral copies of travel documents for family members of the third-country national applying for family reunification. At the procedural level, Bill n°7682 aims to amend the appeal procedure against a Dublin transfer decision to increase their effectiveness while guaranteeing maximum legal security for the applicant for international protection. It proposes to amend the Asylum Law by introducing “extraordinary” remedies against a final decision to close proceedings and against a decision to withdraw international protection. The Grand Ducal Regulation of 4 November 2020 entered into force, establishing the Commission on the evaluation of the best interest of unaccompanied minors in return decisions. However, this commission continues to generate debates and criticism, especially from fundamental rights organisations, regarding its composition. In view of the high occupancy rate in the ONA’s accommodation structures, efforts to promote the construction of new accommodation structures continued in 2020. A new emergency reception facility was set up for newcomers. Strengthening the fight against trafficking in human beings was another priority of the Luxembourgish government. As a result, the composition of the Monitoring Committee on the Fight Against the Trafficking in Human Beings was implemented by Grand Ducal Regulation. Other strategic developments were implemented, such as the elaboration of a second National Action Plan on Human Trafficking and an enhanced collaboration at the Benelux and EU level. In terms of integration, several major developments should be noted: The creation of a communication service within the Department of Integration The first interministerial committee on integration open to civil society took place on 16 December 2020 The launch of a large consultation including all key actors on the future of integration policies The selection of several municipalities to take part in a pilot phase regarding a new approach to the Communal Plan on Integration (PCI) A discussion in Parliament on the issue of racism and discrimination, which resulted in the adoption of two motions and a resolution. One of the motions provided for a study on racism and ethno-racial discrimination and the resolution aims to strengthen the resources of the Centre for Equal Treatment (CET). The Minister of Education, Children and Youth is planning to set up a service specifically responsible for the integration and reception of children of foreign origin and to review the procedures for taking care of newly arrived pupils [less ▲]