From the Record of Republic of Armeniagovernment Session

Non-official translation

EXTRACT

FROM THE RECORD OF REPUBLIC OF ARMENIAGOVERNMENT SESSION

N 51December 30, 2010

33. ON APPROVING THE CONCEPT FOR THE POLICY OF

STATE REGULATION OF MIGRATION

IN THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA

To approve the Concept for the Policy of State Regulation of Migration in the Republic of Armenia in accordance withthe Appendix.

PRIME MINISTER

OF THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA TIGRAN SARGSYAN

13 January, 2011

Yerevan

APPENDIX

TO REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA

GOVERNMENT SESSION RECORD

DECISION# 51 DATED 30 DECEMBER 30, 2010

CONCEPT FOR THE POLICY OF

STATE REGULATION OF MIGRATION

IN THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA

Yerevan 2010

CONCEPT FOR THE POLICY OF STATE REGULATION OF MIGRATION IN THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA

Table of Content

Introduction
Section 1. Assessment of the Migration Situation in the Republic of Armenia, the Goal and Principles of the Policy of State Regulation of Migration
Chapter 1. Assessment of the Migration Situation in the Republic of Armenia
Chapter 2. The Goal and Principles of the Policy of State Regulation of Migration
Section 2.The Main Problems of the RA Policy of State Regulation of Migration and the Key Directions of their Solution
Chapter 1. Main Migration Problems to be Solved via Strategies Adopted in Various Sectors of the RA Public Administration
Chapter 2. Priority Problems of State Regulation of Migration and the Key Directions of their Solution

Draft

CONCEPT FOR THE POLICY OF STATE REGULATION OF MIGRATION IN THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA

INTRODUCTION

In the years preceding and succeeding the independence of 1991, the Republic of Armeniahas had to face diverse challenges conditioned by intensive migration processes.Therefore, at present the RA Government recognizes that solving the problem of effective state regulation of migration is a fundamental direction of its activities.

The last twenty years have seen substantial changes in the migration processes involving the RA, the causes and consequences engendering them, the groups directly or indirectly engaged in migration processes and their problems, as well as in the perceptions on how to solve these problems by means of state regulation. Naturally, these changes have an impact on the RA system of public administration and the implemented migration policy, conditioning its development progress, which may be broken down into the following main stages:

The first stage – 1988-1999: the state regulation policy implemented by the RA in the area of migration was mainly directed at the solution of the problems of the large refugee masses coming from Azerbaijan, Nagorno Karabagh and other former USSR territories. Although in 1993 Armenia joined the UN 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, this step was, however, not followed by the improvement of the national legislation and, for this reason, the policy of state regulation of this area was mainly based on day-to-day management. Institutionally, this stage was also marked by a number of changes. Firstly, in 1990 a distinct state RA body responsible for refugee issues was established, which, in1995as a result of structural changes within the RA Government, was reorganized into a structural subdivision of the RA Ministry of Labour and Social Issues. However, neither of these two structures had policy development and, more importantly, policy implementation functions.

The second stage of state regulation of RA migration starts in 2000. At this stage:

The spectrum of the state regulation of migration was substantially expanded overstepping the boundaries of the solution of the refugee issues only.
Grounds were laid for the national legislation in the area of migration: the RA laws on Refugees (1999), on the legal and socioeconomic guarantees for persons that had forcedly migrated from the Republic of Azerbaijan in 1988-1992 and acquired citizenship of the Republic of Armenia (2000), on Political Asylum (2001), on the State Border, on the Border-Guard Troops, on the State Register of the Population (2002), on Foreigners (2007),on Social Protection in case ofEmployment and Unemploymentof Population (2007), as well as a number of other legislative and sub-legislative acts related to the state regulation of migration processes. In 2008, a new law on Refugees and Asylum was adopted, whereby the legislative framework for granting asylum to foreigners in the Republic of Armenia was harmonized with international standards.
The issue of migration regulation was also placedon the agenda of the RA interstate relations. Bilateral interstate agreements for regulating relations in the area of migration were concluded with more than 10 states. The RA acceded to the conventions relating to the Status of Stateless Persons (1954), for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (1950), on the Nationality of Married Women (1957), Concerning Discrimination in Respect of Employment and Occupation, the Strasbourg Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (1995), the ILO Migration for Employment Convention C97/revised/, the ILO Guarantee No 86 Relating to Labor Migrants.
From an institutional perspective, a public administration body charged with competences to develop and implement migration policy – the Department for Refugees and Migration under the RA Government – was established, which in 2005 was reorganized into an agency operating under the RA Ministry of Territorial Administration (RA MoTA) and deprived of migration policy development and co-ordination competences (these competences were conferred on the RA MoTA). At the turn of 2009 Migration State Service was created within the RA MoTA, which was charged with coordination of policy developmentfunctions in the given field.
Serious steps toward integration of the policy in the area of migration were taken. In 2000 and 2004, the RA Government adopted two concepts for state regulation of population migration in the RA. However, part of the political priorities set in these concepts was incorporated into this one due to the failure to solve them in whole or in part in the framework of the previous concepts.[1]

In recent years, under the influence of globalization and international integration processes, as well as new economic and geopolitical realities, new imperatives that did not feature in the previous concepts, have risen in front of the RA state system of migration regulation. Their urgency and timeliness were emphasized even more by the global financial crisis, as a result of which strengthened the negative impacts of migration processes and, on the contrary, weakened the positive ones. In addition to this, since 2005 a number of political, legislative and institutional changes occurred in the administration of the RA migration processes, which, in their turn, created pre-conditions for commencing a new state regulation of the RA field of migration.

In particular:

The RA authorities have declared European integration as a political priority for the development of the Republic of Armenia as demonstrated inthe launch of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) with the EU, which has recently been upgraded into a qualitatively new stage – theEastern Partnership Programme – inthe framework of which Armenia has undertaken the obligation to legislatively and institutionally approximate its migration administration system with that of the EU’s.
By the Decree of the RA President and the RA Government Decisions a number of strategic documents in the area of state regulation of migration processes (The Republic of Armenia National Security Strategy, the Sustainable Development Programme, the Concept for the Development of Co-operation between Armenia and the Diaspora, the RA Demographic Policy Strategy, etc.), which regards unmanaged and illegal migration, particularly, the drain of educational, scientific and cultural potential as a threat to the country’s national security and pay sufficient attention to the causal links between migration processes and various problems of the country’s public life.
The attitude of the RA authorities towards migration processes, as well as their causes and consequences has also changed into a more proactive one. In particular, in its 2008-2012 Programme, the RA Government stipulated proportional territorial development and active demographic policy as a priority action and assumed the obligation to direct all public policy instruments towards prevention of population migration from high mountainous and bordering regions, suspension of emigration from the country and encouragement of immigration to Armenia. It also envisages taking specific steps for civilized integration of the RA into the international labour market, improving the protection granted by the RA to stateless persons on humanitarian grounds, the system of border controls as well as introducing biometric electronic passports and identification cards in the RA.

The experience of recent years has demonstrated that the RA state system of migration regulation along with the political approaches,as well as the former institutional and administrative mechanisms, was incapable of effectively solving the migration problems faced by the RA. It is also evident that up until now the day-to-day, reactive policy of the RA directed, as a matter of priority, at the consolidation of the legislation in this area could not automatically lead to improved positive impact of the RA migration policies and the prevention and reduction of their negative consequences. Therefore, it is now time to switch from a passive-contemplative and operative-reactive policy to proactive-foreseeable migration policy.It implies adoption of new approaches of state regulation of migration processes, improvement of legislative, institutional and administrative mechanisms to ensurethe efficiency of the system, which, in turn, conditions the development of this concept for the policy of state regulation of migration (hereinafter: the Concept).

The following methodological principles underlie the elaboration of this Concept:

In view of the fact that the phenomenon of migration has strong causal links with the problemsin almost all spheres of public life, the solution of migration problems implies solution to diverse problems of public administration, which cannot be included in one strategic document and implemented by means of a single, even though interagency public administration system.
At the same time, in view of the fact that the state migration regulation sub-system is part of the overall public administration system, and the state migration regulation policy is part of the state socioeconomic policy of the country and has to be logically connected with the rest of public administration sub-systems, it will be impossible to circumvent the problems having substantial causal links with migration processes that are to be mainly or predominantly solved by means of policies in other public administration sectors.
Based on these considerations, the main problems in the RA area of migration are divided into two main groups in the Concept:

The first group comprises problems having causal links with migration processes that are to be solved by means of public policy strategies in various spheres of the RA public administration. These problems are included in the second section of the first chapter of this Concept. The Concept does not foresee political priorities aimed at the solution of the problems of this group. Neither does it indicate administrative mechanisms or entities responsible for their implementation. The Concept merely lays down the general description of these problems and makes references to those key RA public administration strategic documents, which lay down political actions for the solution of these problems, clearly indicating the cases when the adopted approaches are insufficient. This approach ensures the logical connection of the Concept with state regulation strategies in other sectors so that the migration aspect is reflected in all other sectoral policies, as well as creates the grounds for co-operation between the public administration bodies directly included in the state migration regulation sub-system and other agencies.

The second group comprises problems that are to be solved solely by means of the state regulation strategy in the area of migration:these are essentially the problems of the administrative governance sub-system of the state regulatory system of migration processes. It is this second group of problems that underlies the political priorities recommended by the Concept. The problems of this group as well as the priority and fundamental directions for their solution are presented in the second sub-chapter of chapter two of this Concept.

This approach is justified inasmuch as the realistic view of policy implementation in a distinct sector is maintained and, at the same time, a logical connection of the actions to be taken for state regulation of the problems in this area with the problems in the rest of the sectors of the national system of public administration is ensured.

The Concept has the following structure:

Introduction.

First Section–The assessment ofmigration situation in the RA, the goal and principles of the policy of state regulation of migration, which, in its turn, is divided into two

The first chapter lays down an assessment of the migration situation in the Republic of Armenia

The second chapter lays down the goal and principles of the RA state migration regulation policy.

Second Section–The main problems of the RA policy of state regulation of migration and the key directions of their solution.

This sectionis also divided into two chapters.

The first chapterpresents the migration problems to be solved by means of the strategies adopted in various sectors of the RA public administration;

whilethe second chapter – mainly the problems of the administrative governance sub-system of the public administration system of the migration processes, as well as the priority and fundamental policy directions aiming at their solution.

Section 1. The Assessment of Migration Situation in the RA, the Goal and Principles of the Policy of State Regulation of Migration

Chapter 1.Assessment of the Migration Situation in the Republic of Armenia

Since the end of the 80s of the previous century, the influence of the revolutionary changes in political, economic and social systems, the Karabagh crisis, the blockade of Armenia and the Spitak disaster, has brought about abrupt changes in the migration situation in Armenia.

The destabilization of the external migration situation started with the influx of refugees. In 1988-1992, the country hosted about 420000 refugees. The majority of this mass, which was equal to 12% of the population of those years – 360000 – were from Azerbaijan, the rest – from other zones of internal conflicts of the collapsing empire. With some delay, in 1990-1992 this was followed by an outflow of 160000 Azeris living in Armenia.

The first substantial wave of external migration was the exodus of around 200000 homeless inhabitants from the disaster zone in 1989 to other USSR countries. 3/4 of them returned in the subsequent 1-2 years, the rest, living in emigration in the course of time attracted their families and other relations.

The years 1989-1992, also witnessed the emigration of the population layer, which appeared in a socially unfavourable condition as a result of the socio-political disturbances of these years. The majority of this mass, comprising more than 200000 people –asignificant element of brain and capital drain – headedfor Russia with almost all of them settling there for permanent residence.

The peak of emigration activity was the years of 1992-1994, the heaviest from politico-military, socio-economic and living-and-housing perspectives – departure of over 1 million people. The majority of this large outflow -about 600000 persons, did not return due to inadequate positive shifts. 18% of the population – having higher than secondary education (which testifies to the phenomenon of the ‘brain drain’) were men at the age of active reproduction with 75-80% of them settling in the CIS countries (7 out of 10 in the RF).

In the subsequent years of 1995-2000, as a result of some improvement in the country’s situation and the previous overly high mobility of emigration the annual figure of departures was 3.5 times less than the maximum in 1992-1994. The 'social-living' flow was substituted by the smaller and, as a rule, more permanent sub-flow of ‘family reunion.’ Included among the factors of this were the slow pace of the positive moves, the undermined moral-psychological atmosphere, and the low faith in the future. There was an even greater increase in the share of labour sub-flow – for up to 2/3, which resulted in a more emphasized socio-demographic and distribution structure among countries. It should be mentioned that the number of that unreturned migrants was 250000 persons, approximately 2.5 times less than in 1992-1994.).

Thus, as a result of the outflow of 1988-2001, around 1.1 million RA nationals, or more than 1/3 of the current permanent population have found themselves abroad. It is obvious that this mass phenomenon has had a substantial impact on the realities of the country.

Thedemographic composition of the country, having undermined the age-gender structure of those remaining in the country, has seriously 'contributed'to the crisis of the demographic situation re-increase. Birth rate reduced about 2.5 times and marriages reduced almost 3 times.

On the other hand, the money imported/transferred by migrants into the country, by allaying the problem of insolvency of the population, contributed to the overcoming of the living-and-housing and economic paralysis of the 90s and to the start of the economic growth. It was also thanks to this that the danger of serious social disturbances and explosions has been averted, acting as an important factor for the consolidation of our statehood. It should be emphasized that the external migration has always been a human development factor in the country – poverty reduction, lessening of health care problems, educational incentives, etc.

In addition, the alienation of the considerable segment of the active element of the population in this process has undoubtedly served as one of the causes of the emergence and taking root of the negative features and phenomena typical of political, social and economic systems.

The length of the absence of this ‘new Diaspora’ (on the average 17 years) gives no reason to expect the re-emigration of their large groups. However, the facts of continuation of connection with the motherland, which is conditioned by transfers growth trend, practices of keeping the accommodation, of buying real estate in the country, etc., in their turn, give no reason to exclude neither its re-emigration potential nor its exodus generating role.

The first mass outflow of migrants – the exodus of about 400000 victims from the earthquake zone – happened as a consequence of an emergency. Part of them settled in new places of permanent residence, deepened the disproporionality of territorial distribution and the tiers of the resettlement system – the socio-demographic potential of Shirak and Lori regions, Gyumri and Vanadzor – the 2nd and 3rd towns of the country – dropped. This was followed by the forced internal displacement of about 72000 people from the zone of border clashes. The majority of them returned to their previous residence places after the ceasefire of 1994. However, another part stayed or emigrated, thereby weakening the demographic, social and economic potential of border regions, which are of strategic importance to the country.