Konferenzbericht (PDF-Dokument, 3 MB) - SID

Wissen wandert
ensure that the traveller is indeed authorized to travel
and so on. Whilst one might sympathize with the logic
behind such controls, many of such controls are per-
ceived to be arbitrary, intrusive and often conducted by
personnel who are insensitive, patronizing or even
worse. Having personally been screened severally and
even detained as an „intending illegal immigrant‟, I can
vouch for the arbitrariness and impersonal nature of this
system which only heightens animosity amongst travel-
lers to their „tormentors‟ and those who might be re-
sponsible for inventing this system in the first place.
Coupled with a domestic (European) political atmos-
phere that is increasingly hostile to immigrants, it is hard
to avoid the perception that such controls are part of an
evolving xenophobia.
v.l.n.r.: Angela Zarro, Arthur Muliro, Jos van Gennip, Duncan Okello
But what is also important to note in this context is that
the people who fall within these control net are those
who opt to go through the existing legal channels – visa
application and so on. And the treatment they receive
does not often reflect this fact. A vast majority of those
whose visa applications are denied or who are con-
scious of the fact that they would not qualify, or for
whom the luxury of a visit to an embassy doesn‟t exist
are not necessarily deterred from travelling. Those peo-
ple who end up on the beaches of Southern Europe did
not apply for visas, and if they did, they applications
were certainly turned down. Nobody chooses to make
that kind of trip – the costs are very high, not just in
monetary terms, but also in personal terms. The-re is no
knowledge migrates
guarantee that you will arrive alive. So those who make
it take a very risky gamble.
Thus, the equivalence of treatment for those who opt for
the legal channel and the clandestine channel does not
do much justice to these policies in the eyes of those
who observe the situation. Indeed, it vitiates any argu-
ments made about the „humane‟ approach of the travel
regimes that are being promoted.
Secondly and perhaps worse, there is the unintended
result that these harsh control regimes have contributed
to a flourishing of criminal networks on all sides. Today
there are elaborate and sophisticated networks that are
preying off poor people by offering travel documents
(forged or stolen) and travel (in risky conditions) that
would supposedly guarantee entry to Europe. For those
who opt for this channel, they are often bonded to the
same criminal gangs as they work for years to pay back
the cost of their travel and entry into Europe.
Third, the apparent disinterest by African governments in
addressing the asymmetry in visa regimes is also con-
tributing to a hardening of public opinion against migra-
tion policies (and politics) which are seen as a one-way
traffic route. Why, I have heard asked several times,
should European tourists merely show up at our borders
and they receive an entry visa, no questions asked
whereas Africans would never in their wildest dreams
imagine such treatment at a European border. It is true
that on occasion there have been voices raised (when
some politician or their relative was manhandled at an
embassy or border), but there has never been a sys-
tematic attempt to investigate and redress this asymme-
try. To the extent that this differentiated treatment is
continued, it is difficult to convince the rank and file
African that such policies are not aimed at impeding their
freedom of travel.
The experience of transit countries is also contributing in
more ways than one to a negative perception of Euro-
pean (im)migration policies. As transit countries set up
37