management problems of the modern state in the perspective ...€¦ · new areas of state action...
TRANSCRIPT
LIDIA NOWAKOWSKA
MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS OF THE MODERN STATE IN THE PERSPECTIVE
POLISH IMMIGRATION POLICY EVOLUTION
Summary
New areas of state action have arisen as a result of the influx of immigrants. The author presents models of the modern state policy on immigrants. Issues studied in the article are considered with respect to European Union countries’ experiences. A proposal of instruments for improving immigration area management is also pre-sented.
Keywords: state management, Polish immigration policy, immigration policy models
1. Introduction
Size and dynamics of contemporary international migrations created the situation that gov-
erning modern states requires taking up a wide range of activities with regards to migration and
application of different facilitating tools than before. This purpose should be fulfilled by a properly
state-constructed migration policy. New challenges cannot be met by a traditionally- shaped policy
that concentrated mainly on controlling foreigners’ inflow and taking into account state’s safety as
well as its short-term economic benefits. Currently, cultural and social cohesion – protection of
national identity, religious traditions and social integration play an equally important role in the
state interests. Deep transformation of the national economy, labour market and demographic
changes make the integrative and distributive function, as fulfilled by the State, gain increasing
importance. Conflict inspiring areas should be removed or weakened not only by means of eco-
nomic modernization but also by social and legal tools with the use of political measures. These
are followed by institutional changes. The developing catalogue of human rights that contains
widely accepted political, economic and social rights also influences the efficiency of migration
management. New kinds of rights such as the right to live in a clean, natural environment, the right
to information or group rights (important for ethnic minorities) are being added. Measures guaran-
teeing their protection created by the State are applied in their dominant part to immigrants. Inter-
national obligations, which the State accepts following signed agreements, strengthens respecting
these rights. Adopting of universal or regional standards of human rights protection is not only
a symptom of civilizational development but also a test of the open character of liberal democra-
cies.
91
2. Polish immigration policy evolution
Migration policy is not shaped by an isolated state. Modern states function within rich envi-
ronments, co-shaping both the global and regional migration systems. As a result of the continuous
flow of migrants, social and economic networks are created as well as political ones that have been
expanding for a few decades [23, 17]. International cooperation as it regards policies towards immi-
grants is on the increase and ideas are transferred into national systems.
The administrative and bureaucratic traditional migration policy type is replaced by a model
of migration management based on the idea that such a policy should consider the processes of
population movement as a whole and attempt to shape a new model of society. It should also con-
tain predictions taking into account all consequences of taken actions. These will be made up pri-
marily of economic but also social, cultural and political consequences. Polish immigration policy
has chance of meeting all these assumptions as well as avoiding crucial problems that occur mostly
in countries of “immigration status”.
After 1989, Poland started creating such a policy from scratch. It was shaped by two process-
es: political transformation and European integration. Waves of refugees, economic migration and
illegal immigration so far experienced outside the country started occurring also in Poland. At the
same time, joining the EU influenced the modification of the policy being created as a result of the
transfer of EU legal and institutional norms. Poland found itself in the centre of the East-West
migration routes.
The lack of the tradition of a “hosting country” led to the fact that in the first stage of the mi-
gration policy development (1989 – 2001) no coherent programme of procedures was worked out
with regards to immigrants. No migration doctrine was formulated that would reflect the state’s
and citizens’ attitude towards foreigners and form foundations for norms of newly passed legal
acts and programmes [12, 50–51]. Wider opening of the borders resulted in the increasing influx of
foreigners and showed basic political deficiency. According to the estimations of the Government
Population Council, from 1991–2001, there were 84,000 immigrants who arrived in Poland, half
of whom were Poles coming back to their homeland [12, 53]. Those immigrants came mostly from
the states of the former Soviet Union, Vietnam and Romania. In 1990 an inflow of refugees was
also observed. Partially, they were deported from Sweden, which regarded Poland as a safe coun-
try, capable of providing them necessary protection. The rest of them came from regions with
ethnic and national conflicts in the territory of the collapsing USSR. For many immigrants Poland
became only a transit country in their journey to final destinations in Western Europe as Poland’s
economic conditions were not attractive enough. The geographical and political position of Poland
contributed to the increase of immigration at the same time [24].
Joining international structures (membership of the Council of Europe, Organization for Eco-
nomic Cooperation and Development) and taking up negotiations to join the European Community
(the Association Agreement was signed in 1991) became the main reasons for strengthening the
relatively liberal regulations concerning various migration issues. This led to the gradual prolonga-
tion of the wait time for entrance visas for foreigners who had been expelled before (from 2 to 3
years in 2001). Also the requirements for people applying for a temporary stay permit (visa) and
conducting business were increased as well as the authorities limited the educational reasons of
granting a temporary stay permit to university education. The restrictive character of the regula-
tions was also seen in the denial of including the period of studying as residence period or pro-
Studies & Proceedings of Polish Association for Knowledge Management No. 61, 2012
Lidia Nowakowska Management problems of the modern state in the perspective Polish immigration policy evolution
92
longing naturalization waiting time up to 10 years. The migration barrier was also created by the
decision to make immigrants’ children born in Poland undergo the whole naturalization procedure
[23, 17–18].
The necessity to adjust Polish law to EU standards contributed to passing in June 1997 the act
on foreigners that annulled the formerly amended act from 1963 [17]. In October 1997, the New
Constitution guaranteed foreigners rights to gain the status of a refugee, maintaining at the same
time a traditional Polish institution of an asylum. The amended act on foreigners introduced vari-
ous visa categories: staying visa, staying with work permit, transit and repatriate ones. It also
determined situations that allowed for the refusal of granting a visa (posing threat to country’s
interests, being suspected of drug and weapon trafficking, allowing others to illegally cross the
border), introduced temporary residence permit and for settling down. The act dealt finally with
the problem of invitations allowing foreigners to enter and stay in Poland as well as their detailed
registration and checking. The inviting party was burdened with the costs of stay, medical treat-
ment or potential expulsion. This decision concerned mainly immigrants from neighbouring east-
ern countries and contributed to worsening relations with them [11, 58–59]. The legislation of that
period concentrated mainly on foreigners’ obligations and avoided their rights. In that aspect it was
stricter than the corresponding regulations in Western European countries. It is worth emphasizing
that until 2003 pursuant to the act, immigration decisions were to a large extent left to administra-
tion – their taking depended on the decisions made by clerks.
In 2001 a central body of government administration – Repatriation and Foreigners’ Office
(UdRiC) was created. The Minister of Foreign Affairs was excluded from the decision making
process and the establishment of the above institution deprived the Minister of Internal Affairs of
the responsibility for this field. Institutional disorganization was even deepened by the fact of
transferring to the Minister of Economy, Labour and Social Policy of the supervision of European
funds destined for helping refugees and immigrants (European Social Fund, EQUAL Community
Initiative, Refugees’ Fund). The dispersion of authority with the lack of interest of migration is-
sues by politicians (except the Senate – Upper Chamber of the Parliament that dealt actively with
issues connected with the Polish community abroad) made it impossible to work out one migration
strategy of the State at that period [11, 51].
International cooperation, however, contributed to the ordering of the migration system during
the transformation period. In 1991, Poland ratified the Convention devoted to the refugees’ status
(Geneva Convention) from 1951 and the New York Protocol from 1967. In 1992, a Connection
Office of the UN High Commissionar for Refugees in Warsaw was set up. In 1993 Poland also
became a signatory of the European Convention on Protection of Human Rights and Basic Free-
doms adopted by the Council of Europe in 1950. Moreover, many readmission agreements were
signed, including the one with Germany and the Ukraine.
The next stage of the migration policy (2002–2003) was marked as the time of intensive prep-
arations to join the EU. The crucial problem was making Poland’s eastern border better secured as
it was to become external EU border. The need to adjust Polish law to that of the EU gave rise to
the preparation of new regulations. The regulations governing entrance and stay of citizens of EU
93
member states [18]1 and on foreigners [19] were adopted, as well as those aimed at providing for-
eigners protection on the territory of the country [20]. In the Polish legislation, institutions of asy-
lum and status of a refugee were introduced by the Act of 1997. As asylum is a symbol of state’s
sovereignty, it is mainly granted because of important state interest. In Poland asylum applications
are extremely rare and in the case of their rejections the applicant usually tries to gain the status of
a refugee. Until 2003, over 30,000 applications for refugee status had been submitted (it was
granted to 1,419 foreigners). The biggest groups of applicants came from Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Russia (mainly of Chechen nationality), Somalia, Sri Lanka and Afghanistan. However, in 2003,
there were only 6,909 people who applied for refugee status (216 of them received it, whereas 23
were granted permit for tolerated stay) Most applicants were Chechens with others coming from
Afghanistan, India, Pakistan and Armenia [11, 64–65]. The Act of 2003, besides prescribing rules
for obtaining visas and the visa obligations for eastern neighbours, introduced also a new form of
legalizing a foreigner’s stay in Poland – tolerated stay. It may be granted if the immigrant does not
meet the requirements of a refugee as well as requirements to be granted complementary protec-
tion. The granting of a residence permit (for the period of 12 months) gives the same advantages
(being able to work without additional permit, access to social benefits and education) as is en-
joyed by a person whom a permit for living for definite period was granted.
At this stage of migration policy development preceding joining EU, Poland made use of the
financial funds from the European Refugee Fund established in 2000 by the Council of the Euro-
pean Union. According to the Council’s decision, the Fund’s support was to be destined for the
improvement of conditions of receiving refugees, integration of people whose stay in the member
state is long-term and help in voluntary repatriations. The total amount of funds transferred to
Polish beneficiaries amounted to 414,000 euro in 2004. Though at that time migration to Poland
was on the increase; the scale of the phenomenon as compared to western countries was negligible.
According to data collected during the General Census from 2002, there were 14,500 foreigners
staying permanently, whereas the stay of 24.100 was temporary [3]. Registered data show that
from 1990–2008 over 100,000 immigrants became registered to live un Poland [24]. The scale of
the phenomenon shows that gradually the State adopted international standards and was adjusting
to them in accordance with the country’s economic possibilities. Still, however, the developing
migration policy lacked precisely-defined national goals and the actions taken were aimed at meet-
ing the EU requirements.
This direction was maintained in the next stage, i.e. after May 1, 2004 when Poland became
an EU member. It is mostly characterized by actions resulting from EU cooperation, especially
taking part in designing the EU migration policy. It is manifested in two forms: an internal one that
relates to the moving of EU citizens and their families and an external one concerning citizens of
third countries (from outside the EU). The joint framework of acting of member states was deter-
mined by the European Council in 2004 by the adopted so-called Hague Programme that was also
a summary of the agreements reached thus far regarding that policy (among others from Tampere).
It mentions several priorities: strengthening of basic and civil rights, intensification of activities
against international terrorism, defining a sustainable attitude towards migration processes (both
1 Currently these issues in Polish legislation are regulated by the Act of 14 July 2006 on the entry on the territory of Poland, the stay and exit from the territory by nationals of EU Member States and their family members, Dz. U. 2006, Nr 144, poz. 1043.
Studies & Proceedings of Polish Association for Knowledge Management No. 61, 2012
Lidia Nowakowska Management problems of the modern state in the perspective Polish immigration policy evolution
94
legal and illegal), establishing joint asylum procedures, maximalization of the positive influence of
migration, development of an integrated system of managing external EU borders, reaching
a proper balance between one’s right to privacy and safety in the process of information exchange,
preventing organized crime, development of European justice area as well as the division of re-
sponsibility and solidarity of the member states [6]. The programme extends the EU breakthrough
areas of migration activities as emphasized in the Treaty establishing the European Union (1992)
and the Amsterdam Treaty (1997), to which, by virtue of one of the protocols, the Schengen acquis
was incorporated into mainstream European Union law.2
One of the basic rights guaranteed in the European law is the freedom of movement. Initially,
it concerned only economic migrant (employees) citizens of the members states, but since 1993 all
UE citizens have been included. The freedom to move and settle down within EU was of crucial
importance for the intensification of migration in Europe, also the inflow of third-country nation-
als. As a result, the EU's main purpose became external border protection, visa and asylum policies
that concentrates on harmonization of regulations, application of cooperation and coordination
mechanisms, the establishment of an integrated system of risk evaluation and analysis as well as
preparing management staff. In order to manage the system of protecting external borders effi-
ciently, in 2004 a special EU Frontex Agency was established in Poland (European Agency for
Management of Operational Cooperation at External Borders of the Member States of the EU).
The decision was taken in reaction to a sudden increase in illegal immigration from North Africa
through the Spanish and Italian borders. Steps were also taken to create joint mobile troops of
border protection (European Corps of Border Protection). The influx of immigrants into the EU is
controlled in accordance with common visa policy settlements. It is based on making lists of third
countries whose citizens are obliged to have visas to stay within EU territory, common visa proce-
dures and requirements or common visa forms. In 2004 the Council of the European Union took
the decision (2004/512/EC) to establish the Visa Information System (VIS) that allows the ex-
change of visa data between Member States, and enables authorized national authorities to enter
and update visa data and to consult these data electronically. The possession of a visa of a member
state authorizes to move freely (with some limitations) over the whole EU territory.
The regulations and other EU legal instruments reflect the creation of a common EU asylum
policy. In spite of efforts (Dublin convention of 1990 and Council Regulation of 2003, so-called
Dublin II – 343/2003/EC, Treaties of Maastricht and Amsterdam, establishment of Common Eu-
ropean Asylum System) defined standards are rather limited with regards to granting refugee status
and conditions of accepting asylum seekers in member states. However, it was defined which third
countries should be treated as safe. In 2003 EURODAC system started functioning – a database of
fingerprints of people applying for refugee status. EU member state has the right to grant subsidi-
ary protection and temporary protection (for one year) with rights similar to those of a refugee.
The institutions supporting the asylum policy are data collection and information exchange centres
as well as Schengen computer system and units of European Police (Europol), whereas financial
support is mainly provided by the European Refugee Fund.
2 This heritage includes mainly provisions of the Schengen Agreement June 14, 1985 on the gradual abolition of in-ternal border controls (signed by Benelux countries, France and Germany), the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement from 1990 and accesion agreements for new Member States. Poland joined the Schengen Area December 21, 2007.
95
The challenge for the EU is to create a Common European Asylum System, whose construc-
tion was planned to end in 2012. The aim is to establish a uniform definition of refugee status,
subsidiary and temporary protection, determination of the Member State responsible for an asylum
application, the adoption of common procedures for granting and withdrawing asylum status or
subsidiary protection. To achieve these objectives, two packages of so-called Asylum Directives
were prepared (in two periods). Of the five pieces of legislation discussed today, the Qualification
Directive (Directives 2011/95/EU of European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December
2011) has been adopted and the consensus has been reached on standards for the reception of asy-
lum seekers. The directive on asylum procedures, the “Dublin” Regulation and the EURODAC
Regulation are still in talks.
EU migration policy formulates also aims concerning immigrants’ integration with the hosting
society and state. The main directions of actions were defined as long as in 1999 at the Council of
Europe meeting in Tampere. It was there that the rule of fair treatment of third countries’ nationals
was adopted as well as the need to provide equal rights to long-term residents with those of EU
citizens and encourage them to naturalization. The process of integration should be supported by
fighting social exclusion, discrimination, racism and xenophobia. In 1998 the European Center for
Monitoring Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC) was created. The progress of the common integra-
tion policy is not big as the main obstacle is the perseverance of national models of integration
based on one’s own idea of national community, citizenship, and tradition but also depending on
the size and type of immigration, which results in different attitudes towards integration problems
and ways of solving them.
The European Union in order to achieve its aims of migration policy, started a new framework
programme Solidarity and managing migration flows from 2007–2013 (in two stages of planning).
It assumes the establishment of instruments and funds, besides the above mentioned European
Fund of External Borders and European Fund for Refugees, European Fund for Return of Immi-
grants and European Fund for the Integration of Third-country Nationals. The programmes’ im-
plementation should be applied within the management division between member states and the
European Commission. The countries have the right to choose suitable measures as a result of
individual analysis of needs and strategies adjusted to one’s own internal situation after discussing
them with the European Commission.
Polish EU membership has accelerated the process of legal and organizational modernization.
Pursuant to the act from 2003 UdRC was replaced in 2007 by the Office for Foreigners, and the
rights to deal with matters connected with repatriation and citizenship were transferred to the Min-
istry of Internal Affairs and Administration (currently MIA). The Office is competent to handle
cases connected with granting and depriving of the status of a refugee or asylum seeker. It is sec-
ond appeal instance from the head of the province’s decision as regards stay legalization. It also
supervises the head of the province as it pertains to his/her implementation of tasks connected with
migration and exile matters. It also functions as a central visa institution. The Office holds a cen-
tral register of data regarding the granting or losing of Polish citizenship and Polish collection of
registers and files concerning foreigners – “Pobyt”. The Office has also an electronic database of
information about foreigners’ origin countries – “�wiatowid” managed by the head of the Office.
The Office supervises 12 refugee centres [16].
The establishment of the Office was the next attempt to consolidate subjects managing migra-
tions. The leading role is played by the Minister of Internal Affairs, who coordinates activities
Studies & Proceedings of Polish Association for Knowledge Management No. 61, 2012
Lidia Nowakowska Management problems of the modern state in the perspective Polish immigration policy evolution
96
connected with migration policy and supervises the head of the Office, Police and Border Protec-
tion as well as the Minister of Labour and Social Policy, State Labour Inspection, Minister of For-
eign Affairs and heads of the provinces. The foreign issues are also handled by other ministries
(such as the Ministry of Economy, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of National Education, Ministry
of Science and Higher Education etc) as well as various central institutions (such as Internal Safety
Agency) and inter-departmental offices. The tasks in the field of social welfare and education are
carried out by municipalities and counties. Administrative courts are proper institutions for for-
eigners’ cases (16 provincial courts and a Central Administrative Court). A special role is played
by the President of the Republic of Poland (he grants Polish citizenship and agrees to resignation
from it). The division of competence among so many subjects does not facilitate conducting
a uniform migration policy. Specifically, the lack of coherence in relations between heads of prov-
inces and the Office is emphasized. Moreover, such complicated structure becomes less efficient
as it takes up new, more numerous tasks connected with European cooperation. Therefore, a con-
centration of the system by strengthening the Office’s competence is proposed. In many EU coun-
tries such systems are centralized and most migration duties are performed by governmental agen-
cies. Such concentration allows for the easier exchange of information; it also, harmonizes and
shortens the decision-making process and facilitates international communication [24].
3. Proposals of the immigration policy reforms
From the point of view of the modern state, experiences of immigration states and perceived
deficiencies, Polish migration policy (including immigration sector) is waiting for final settlement
of many basic problems and consideration of submitted proposals.
1. Migration policy should have global character with clearly defined long-term goals. Its
short-term designing is not sufficient, which is proved by experiences of some European
countries e.g. economic migrations in Germany gave rise to many social and political
problems [15, 4–6; 10, 7; 4; 8, 44–45].
2. Migration strategy should take into account directions of national foreign policy and
relate to them in its activities within the EU. Currently, a sign of such an attempt is
adopted by the Council of Europe in 2009 Polish initiative of Eastern Partner Agreement
directed towards Ukraine, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia and Moldova. It is
aimed at getting these countries and its communities closer to the EU. A visible result
was the establishment of “small border crossing conception” with the Ukraine (in 2009)
and Belarus (in 2010) as well as with Russia (visa free crossing borders with Kaliningrad
Circle). However, there is a need to establish institutional mechanisms of cooperation as
it pertains to promoting mobility, freedom of people flow, workforce, students and
preventing threats to EU’s and Poland’s internal safety. It would be beneficial to take up
the initiative of extending the plan of the European Commission’s Global Attitude
towards Migration [5] by countries of Central Asia as well as to develop cooperation with
third countries resulting in the increase of readmission agreements. The constructed
strategy should have a direct relation to the developed trend of exclusion of European
migration system and European-stronghold.
3. The issues of integration should be resolved according to the model of integration
accepted by the hosting society. Classical migration conceptions – pluralistic and
97
assimilative ones face severe confrontation in contemporary Europe [14, 21–42, 131–134; 1, 378–395]. Despite many deficiencies of both systems – republican, assimilative
system represented by France that assumes integration based on values and order of the
secular country, and multicultural model of Great Britain3, it is necessary to determine
borders for an immigrant functioning within the public area. The European Commission’s
recommendation points to the assimilative direction [7]. In the atmosphere of increasing
xenophobia in Europe, fear of “strangers” and instrumentation of immigration matters by
political parties for their election aims, it seems that cultural-based integration should be
supported.
4. The ghetto character of immigrants’ clusters does not contribute to integration. The
experiences of “immigration countries” prove that the source of social conflicts is the
cultural closing of immigrants’ ethnic communities resulting from occupying a certain
territory [15, 6; 8, 39]. The state should as part of its immigration policy predict the
possibility of geographical allocation of immigrants. Currently, the biggest immigration
communities may be found in mazowieckie province, where the work offer is the best.
5. Naturalization allows the acceleration of immigrants’ integration. Unfortunately, a new
act on Polish citizenship has not shortened the required time of foreigner’s lawful stay
that allows him/her to apply to be granted citizenship [21]. Some categories of immigrants
are required to live lawfully for at least 10 years. It facilitated, however, the citizenship
granting to EU citizens, introduced administrative granting procedures (decision by the
head of the province) as well as checking of the command of Polish. Under certain
conditions, it can be applied to refugees, stateless people and their children. In Polish
legislation still the rule of ius sanguinis (origin circumstances) is in force, and the
application of ius soli (settlement circumstances) is substantially limited. As a result,
children of lawful immigrants born in Poland were not offerred any more convenient way
of acquiring citizenship. The restrictive origin rule, as proved by German experiences [13,63–64], hampers integration and maintains the situation of isolation. Poland, contrary to
many European countries, has conducted so far very few acts of granting citizenship,
though new regulations have brought it closer to ratification of the European Convention
on Citizenship by the Council of Europe.
6. An important aspect of the migration policy is the participation in public and political life.
Obtaining the ability to take part in political life takes place at the regional level by
granting immigrants both political and voting rights. In Poland, citizens of third countries,
having legal residence status, gain full political rights only after being granted Polish
citizenship although they have access to some political freedoms (freedom to organize
and take part in peaceful gatherings, to join political parties and trade unions, social,
professional or employers’ organizations) [9, 75]. Foreigners in Poland also enjoy the
right to unite, set up foundations and apply to the Polish Ombudsman. In most European
countries (for example in Holland or Great Britain) immigrants of such category enjoy at
least the active voting right in local election, and consulting bodies consisting of the
government and immigration communities are created [8, 49–50; 2]. In Poland, there are
3 Germany's and Great Britain's Prime Ministers oficially declared a failure of multiculturalism policy (Angela Mer-kel in 2010, David Cameron in 2011).
Studies & Proceedings of Polish Association for Knowledge Management No. 61, 2012
Lidia Nowakowska Management problems of the modern state in the perspective Polish immigration policy evolution
98
no such advisory bodies where the immigrants’ participation would guarantee their
influence on the decision making process.
7. The conception of managing economically-motivated immigration (EU project of Blue
Card or German Green Card [15, 15]), the aim of which is recruiting desirable (both
highly skilled and unskilled) foreign workers based on certain quotas and point systems
(following the Australian example) should offer unlimited right of residence. The
proposed 2-year period is not an attractive proposal for potential economic immigrants
nor it is a remedy for demographic problems. Currently, in Poland economic immigration
has circulative character but such situation may change if the trend of increasing inflow
of Chinese workers is maintained.
8. Institutional changes should take into account the establishment of an independent
integration body reporting to the head of Office for Foreigners that would coordinate all-
comprising system of migration programmes, monitor the situation of foreigners
legalizing their stay in Poland by collecting information and making it accessible to the
relevant offices as well as participate in shaping immigration policy. Such a central office
should also have the task of running a register of immigrants’ organizations and
associations taking into account their economic, social and cultural profile. Institutional
reform should also assume the establishment of a body responsible for promoting an open
attitude and tolerance towards foreigners by the hosting society. Such solutions are
applied by the German Federal Office for Migration and Refugees or French l’Office
Nationale d’Integration, whose activities are highly regarded.
9. In the field of integration it is essential to implement pre-integration programs for people
in detention centers (guarded). Such programs, implemented for example in Sweden,
fasten and make integration easier with the host society.
10. Polish legislation allows for the expulsion of a foreigner during the proceedings before
the administrative court. The appeal procedure against decisions of the administrative
authority for refugee status should include the right to suspend the expulsion before the
court judgment is delivered.
11. Preventing illegal immigration by legalization programmes (amnesty, abolition) should
be harmonized at the EU level. In 2003, 2007 and 2011 [22]. Poland adopted regulations
allowing legalization of the stay by foreigners’ with unclear legal status. However, the
positive results may be overshadowed by the threat of attracting other immigrants, who
will count on abolition.4 In the situation when a lawful stay gives the right to move freely
within Schengen zone, harmonization of EU rules offers chance to avoid disputes over
responsibility for spreading illegal immigration, costs and lack of border checks. The
effects of the amnesty in Spain or Italy show the scale of the problem.
12. Effective management requires a modern central monitoring system, which will not only
facilitate the control of immigration based on gathered data but also will contribute to the
creation of an immigration policy. In Poland, to a large extent, the data on immigration
issues rests at the disposal of bodies carrying out specific tasks in the field of migration
and foreigners' affairs. Therefore, it is necessary to create an integrated database that
4 Until 27.08.12, 9,520 abolition applications had been registered, i.e. more than the total amount from previous years. Most applications were submitted by the citizens of Vietnam, the Ukraine and Pakistan.
99
would enable a comprehensive analysis. In addition, such a monitoring system should
include the collection of data on the needs of different segments of the labor market,
qualifications of immigrants, as well as the place and period of their stay. This would help
to determine the required labor migration. “Map Aliens”, a program led since 2009 by the
Border Guard Headquarters (the creation of data set on activities and location of
immigrants) seems to partly meet the needs of such monitoring. For the same reasons, the
modernization of the “Stay” program, which includes national registry records in the field
of immigration, and a running INEX system (a database that allows configuring pre-
defined data) and modernization of the social security system have the potential to
become an important instrument in monitoring. However, there is also a need for a rapid
integration of agencies managing the records at both central and local government level,
and for unification of basic concepts (in accordance with the EU) associated with the stay
of foreigners. Today, it is also necessary to monitor the effectiveness of integration
programs, to track foreigners who benefited from amnesty and to study Polish society's
sentiments against immigrants. These actions will help to assess the effectiveness of
integration policies and to prevent negative phenomena, such as racism and xenophobia.
4. Conclusions
The aforementioned problems do not fully address the multi-aspect problem of managing mi-
gration. The State’s policy in this respect is determined by strong historical, national, cultural,
economic and political issues. The small size of the current immigration in Poland does not release
the State from shaping an independent migration policy. The efficiency of the management will
depend on its reaction speed to the migration phenomena and on the choice of suitable measures to
facilitate such management. Legal and institutional changes are needed, as well as enriching finan-
cial instruments and improving monitoring. Polish migration policy is shaped by our conditions of
EU membership. The process of two-dimensional (national and international) management of
migration, though very complex, creates opportunities of multiplying benefits and avoiding mis-
takes of some more experienced immigration countries. One can believe that the currently negoti-
ated EU Asylum Package and the provisions of the Stockholm Programme (2010), which provides
a roadmap for European Union work in the area of justice, freedom and security for the period
2010–14 will modernize the European and Polish model of migration management.
Bibliography
[1] Fish, S. Boutique Multiculturalism, or Why Liberals Are Incapable of Thinking about Hale Speech, Critical Inquiry, The University of Chicago Press, Vol. 23, no. 2, 1997. [Online].
Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1343988.
[2] Geyer, F. Trends in the EU- 27 regarding participation of third country nationals in the host country's political life. European Parliament PE.378.303, Brussels, 2007.
[3] GUS. [Online]. Available at: http://demografia.stat.gov.pl/bazademografia/Tables. aspx.
[4] Hubert U., Geschichte der Ausländerpolitik in Deutschland. Saisonarbeiter, Zwangsarbeiter, Gastarbeiter, Flüchtlinge, München 2001.
[5] Komunikat Komisji dla Rady i Parlamentu Europejskiego, Podej�cie globalne do migracji w rok póniej: ku kompleksowej europejskiej polityce migracyjnej, Bruksela 30.11.2006, COM
Studies & Proceedings of Polish Association for Knowledge Management No. 61, 2012
Lidia Nowakowska Management problems of the modern state in the perspective Polish immigration policy evolution
100
(2006) 735. [Online]. Available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/ LexUriS-
erv.do?uri=COM:2006:0735:FIN:PL:PDF.
[6] Komunikat Komisji do Rady i Parlamentu Europejskiego, Program haski: dziesi�� prioryte-tów na najbli�sze pi�� lat. Partnerstwo na rzecz odnowy europejskiej w dziedzinie wolno�ci, bezpiecze�stwa i sprawiedliwo�ci, Bruksela 10.05.2005, COM (2005) 184. [Online]. Availa-
ble at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2005:0184:FIN:
PL:PDF.
[7] Komunikat Komisji do Rady, Parlamentu Europejskiego, Europejskiego Komitetu Ekono-
miczno-Społecznego oraz Komitetu Regionów, Wspólna agenda na rzecz integracji. Ramy integracji obywateli pa�stw trzecich w Unii Europejskiej, Bruksela 1.09.2005, COM (2005)
389. [Online]. Available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri
=COM:2005:0389:FIN:PL:PDF.
[8] Lesi�ska, M. Polityka Niemiec wobec imigrantów – od systemu Gastarbeiter do systemu kraju imigracji, in: Europa – ziemia obiecana? Do�wiadczenia krajów europejskich w inte-gracji imigrantów, ed. P. Matusz- Protasiewicz, E. Stadtmüller, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu
Wrocławskiego, Wrocław, 2007.
[9] Malinowska, I. Ochrona praw i wolno�ci w Polsce, Dom Wydawniczy Elipsa, Warszawa,
2009.
[10] Mehrländer, U. and Schultze, G. Einwanderungskonzept für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Fakten, Argumente, Forschläge, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Gesprächskreis Arbeit und
Soziales, no. 7, Bonn, 1992.
[11] Pacek, M. Polska polityka migracyjna na na tle rozwi�za� i do�wiadcze� Unii Europejskiej, Studia Europejskie 2005/4.
[12] Rajkiewicz, A. Raport w sprawie polityki migracyjnej pa�stwa, according to M. Pacek, Pol-ska polityka migracyjna na na tle rozwi�za� i do�wiadcze� Unii Europejskiej, Studia Euro-
pejskie 2005/4.
[13] Schultze, G. Od polityki w kwestii cudzoziemców do polityki imigracyjnej w Niemczech, Pol-
ska Fundacja Spraw Mi�dzynarodowych, Zeszyty Niemcoznawcze 2003/1.
[14] Szahaj, A. E pluribus unum? Dylematy wielokulturowo�ci i politycznej poprawno�ci, Univer-
sitas, Kraków, 2004.
[15] Szaniawska-Schwabe, M. Polityka imigracyjna Republiki Federalnej Niemiec, Przegl�d
Zachodni 2009, no. 4.
[16] Urz�d do Spraw Cudzoziemców. [Online]. Available at: http://www.udsc.gov.pl.
[17] Ustawa z dnia 25 czerwca 1997 r. o cudzoziemcach, Dz. U. 1997, Nr 114, poz. 739.
[18] Ustawa z dnia 27 lipca 2002 r. o zasadach i warunkach wjazdu i pobytu obywateli pa�stw
członkowskich Unii Europejskiej oraz członków ich rodzin na terytorium Rzeczypospolitej
Polskiej, Dz. U. 2002, Nr. 141, poz. 1180.
[19] Ustawa z dnia 13 czerwca 2003 r.o cudzoziemcach, Dz. U. 2003, Nr 128, poz. 1175.
[20] Ustawa z dnia 13 czerwca 2003 r. o udzielaniu cudzoziemcom ochrony na terytorium Rze-
czypospolitej Polskiej, Dz. U. 2003, Nr 128, poz. 1176.
[21] Ustawa z dnia 2 kwietnia 2009 r. o obywatelstwie polskim, Dz. U. 2012, Nr 0, poz. 161.
[22] Ustawa z dnia 28 lipca 2011 r. o zalegalizowaniu pobytu niektórych cudzoziemców na tery-
torium Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej, Dz. U. 2011, Nr 191, poz. 1133.
101
[23] Weinar, A. Europeizacja polskiej polityki wobec cudzoziemców, Wydawnictwo Naukowe
Scholar, Warszawa, 2006.
[24] Zespół do Spraw Migracji, Polityka migracyjna Polski – stan obecny i postulowane działa-nia. [Online]. Available at: http://www.osw.waw.pl/sites/default/files/Polityka_migracyjna
_Polski_-_wersja_06-04-2011.pdf.
PROBLEMY ZARZ�DZANIA NOWOCZESNYM PA�STWEM W PERSPEKTYWIE
EWOLUCJI POLSKIEJ POLITYKI IMIGRACYJNEJ
Streszczenie
Na skutek napływu imigrantów powstaj� nowe obszary działania pa�stwa. W artykule przedstawiono modele polityki nowoczesnego pa�stwa wobec imigran-tów. Problematyk� ukazano na tle praktyki krajów Unii Europejskiej. Zaproponowa-no w nim katalog instrumentów usprawniaj�cych zarz�dzanie sfer� imigracji.
Słowa kluczowe: zarz�dzanie pa�stwem, polska polityka imigracyjna, modele polityki
imigracyjnej
Lidia Nowakowska
Katedra Marketingu
Wydział Zarz�dzania
Uniwersytet Technologiczno-Przyrodniczy w Bydgoszczy
ul. Fordo�ska 430, 85-790 Bydgoszcz
e-mail: [email protected]
Studies & Proceedings of Polish Association for Knowledge Management No. 61, 2012