Migrant Integration Policy Index III (2011)

Page 95

MIGRANT INTEGRATION POLICY INDEX III

91

PASSPORT

PASSPORT

PASSPORT

PASSPORT

PASSPORT

PASSPORT

PASSPORT

HALFWAY TO BEST

PASSPORT

PASSPORT

ACCESS TO NATIONALITY

MIPEX III %

MIPEX II %

ELIGIBILITY

90

ACQUISITION CONDITIONS

33

18

SECURITY OF STATUS

64

50

DUAL NATIONALITY

50

ACCESS TO NATIONALITY

59

52

Since 1999, permanent residents have clear citizenship paths as in many major and reforming immigration countries: first generation by entitlement (someway in 9 others) and second generation by birth (14). Applicants enjoy improving and secure legal procedures, and the more professional ‘citizenship test’ (see box). Some parties support ‘turbo naturalisation’ to shorten residence requirements (currently 7 to 8 years). Even though becoming German can actually speed up integration, applicants are rejected if not already well integrated economically (as in only 11 others) and linguistically (explicitly in 6). To promote naturalisation, 18 countries embrace multiple nationality; Germany accepts it for just EU nationals since 2007. Despite calls for reform, soon roughly 320,000 German-born may need to choose between the two.

PASSPORT

SLIGHTLY FAVOURABLE

ANTI-DISCRIMINATION

MIPEX III %

DEFINITIONS AND CONCEPTS

50

FIELDS OF APPLICATION

75

ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS

50

EQUALITY POLICIES

17

ANTI-DISCRIMINATION

48

(SAME AS MIPEX II)

Weak equality policies Germany has made comparatively few commitments to equality. According to 9 MIPEX countries’ laws, authorities must ensure people know about discrimination and their rights. Several high-scoring European countries (NO, SE, UK) maintain strong State equality duties to encourage candidates and entrepreneurs from disadvantaged backgrounds. Recently, länder expressed interest in diversifying public sectors (see earlier). 2007’s UNFAVOURABLE ‘Charter of Diversity,’ borrowing French practice, has symbolic goals that are hard to evaluate in practice, since companies make vague commitments (e.g. cultivate corporate culture of respect, reassess recruitment procedures).

Germany’s laws may be ineffective against discrimination because potential victims do not get the support they need from weak equality bodies and State commitments (see box). The law goes beyond current EU minimum requirements. Racial, ethnic and religious discrimination is prohibited in most areas of life, and nationality discrimination in some. Despite some improvements in 2008, NGOs have both more limited legal roles and actions than in 14 MIPEX countries. The Federal Anti-discrimination Agency also has weaker powers to help victims than in 24. It can make limited investigations of their case, but not its own alternative dispute procedures (12), claims for victims in court (12), or its own proceedings (13). SLIGHTLY UNFAVOURABLE

FAVOURABLE

GERMANY

More secure and objective A 2006 Federal Constitutional Court’s ruling found that 5 years was sufficient for authorities to detect fraud or deceit after naturalisation. Also in 2006, länder interior ministers took one step to standardise and harmonise naturalisation requirements, which were leading to unequal treatment and accusations of discrimination. Language requirements aside, the new ‘citizenship’ test (scoring 83) better supports applicants to succeed. They can prepare with free courses and test questions and then take more objective and professional tests. If successful, länders’ naturalisation rates may increase and converge.

See NL, NO, PT, SE, UK.

Path to citizenship like major and reforming countries of immigration. Areas of weakness: national political participation, equality policies/bodies.


Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.