REGINE Regularisations in Europe Final Report - European ...

iii. issues of advance planning
iv. lack of involvement of stakeholders and social partners
Provided that mechanisms are used as a policy complementary to programmes, these problems are not
perhaps so serious. However, we do question the policy effectiveness of the experience of large-scale
users of mechanisms (e.g. France). Individual applications are time-consuming, may be costly, and
without careful (and even more costly) review procedures can have highly variable outcomes for
apparently similar cases. As a result of the lack of clear criteria and procedural rules, it is often left to
the courts to define the scope of and criteria for regularisation mechanisms Although sometimes
established as a substitute for regularisation programmes (as in Belgium or France), the functions and
modi operandi of regularisation mechanism and programmes are different, and the distinctive
successes of each policy instrument should be noted and used appropriately.
3.3.2.1 A functional argument for limited regularisation mechanisms in all MS
Against this background, the lack of regularisation mechanisms in some Member States is a reason for
concern. The following countries do not have any legal mechanism 127 by which they can regularise on
an individual basis:
o
o
o
o
o
Bulgaria
The Czech Republic
Italy
The Netherlands
Slovenia
Furthermore, there is a similar number of countries that appear to have restricted ability or tendency to
regularise. In terms of setting minimum standards across the EU, it would seem desirable to specify
that every MS has at its disposal a basic continuous regularisation mechanism. It is inconceivable that
there is no need for humanitarian and other considerations for the individual granting of legal status in
every Member State. As noted above, such mechanisms are probably more appropriate instruments
for regularisation of illegal residents in vulnerable employment or financial situations or with health
problems.
Of those countries which do grant legal status through such a mechanism, many award temporary
statuses that cannot be renewed or provide non-statuses (temporary suspension of removal orders) that
are not considered a legal status, although beneficiaries of such non-status are usually not considered
illegally resident either. Some principles setting out minimum standards on the type and renewability
of such permits would also seem to be a legitimate area of legislation.
The procedures for awarding humanitarian statuses vary. In some countries, there is a fully-fledged
application procedure, including the right to appeal against negative decisions, whereas in others a
humanitarian status/a non-status is awarded ex officio without application and without any legal
127 One could argue that short-term humanitarian permits for asylum seekers are a substitute for a regularisation
mechanism, but we do not do so for the purposes of the REGINE project.
49