En su llegada a Ginebra, la sociedad civil celebra una reunión preparatoria antes de la 14ª Cumbre del FMMD (31 Enero 2024, Global)
©Nora Teylouni/ICMC
Traducir:
This article provides an overview of the Civil Society GFMD Preparatory Meeting that occurred before the 14th GFMD Summit in Geneva in January 2024. The Forum represents a relevant advocacy process for partners involved in Phase 2 of the FOWLS Project.
Arriving in Geneva, Civil Society Holds Final Preparatory Meeting Ahead of the 14th GFMD Summit
January 24, 2024
The day before the 14th GFMD Summit began in Geneva, the third and final Civil Society GFMD Preparatory Meeting focused on shrinking space for civil society and the global state of play for migration and human rights.
The 14th Summit of the 2022-24 Global Forum on Migration and Development (GFMD) process under the French Chairmanship is taking place in Geneva from 23 to 25 January 2024.
Civil society began building its own year-long civil society process to feed into GFMD activities early in 2023, launched at the Abuja Civil Society Forum from 30 January to 1 February 2023, and progressing through a wide range of subsequent self-organised GFMD civil society preparatory activities together known as the civil society ‘Road from Abuja to Geneva.’ These preparations culminated in the third global Civil Society Preparatory Meeting (CSPM3), which took place in person in Geneva on 22 January 2024, the day before the GFMD Summit.
Putting the GFMD in context: the third Civil Society Preparatory Meeting
Leading into the Summit, two online global Civil Society Preparatory Meetings have served to communicate the outcomes of the various preceding consultations and prepare all delegates to participate.
CSPM1 took place on 7 December 2023 and provided an online space to reflect on the preceding program of consultations on the ‘Road from Abuja to Geneva.’ CSPM2 also took place online, on 11 January 2024, and enabled delegates to engage in focused discussions on shared civil society advocacy priorities to take forward into the Summit.
Extending civil society discussions beyond the GFMD’s six thematic priorities, CSPM3 focused on the increasingly shrinking space for civil society in global migration governance and policymaking, and the state of migration and human rights worldwide in the midst of global conflicts.
Attended by 120 civil society delegates, alongside representatives of the Migration Youth and Children Platform (MYCP) , CSPM3 opened with a plenary discussion during which civil society delegates presented regional perspectives on the meeting’s key themes. A series of ten breakout groups, held in English, French and Spanish, allowed delegates to further explore issues raised in the opening panel.
Breakout discussions were structured around three guiding questions:
- Are conditions better for migrants now than before? Why/why not?
- Are civil society spaces shrinking? What is the state of affairs in your local context?
- What are the main issues facing our organisations and networks in terms of stalling, hindering or reversing the progress of migrant rights and protection? Are there any improvements, good practices, or progress that can be shared and built on?
A final plenary gathered delegates’ ideas for short-, medium-, and long-term actions to build on issues identified during the breakout discussions.
A shrinking space for civil society? Delegate perspectives and priorities
The space available for civil society in migration discussions, policymaking, and action at all governance levels, was a key priority for civil society delegates. Contributions to the CSPM3 plenary and breakout discussions brought together a range of civil society experiences from across global regions and highlighted several common themes:
- Civil society at the GFMD Summit: access, participation, and dialogue
Delegates consistently highlighted the broader context of conflict and inequality within which the 14th GFMD Summit is taking place and the impact on the extent to which civil society can participate in an inclusive and meaningful way.
“We’re in the 76th year of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the world is split because we are not equal,” noted one participant from the Asian region. “We can see this at the GFMD with delegates from the Global South being denied visas or granted very limited stays. We are not a security threat.”
They were echoed by another civil society delegate from the African diaspora, who reflected on how different the GFMD civil society delegation would look were the Summit held in the Global South. “If we were in an African capital, there would be far less entry and visa problems, and far more of us from the GFMD Africa Group around the table,” they said.
In a powerful intervention drawing attention to the ongoing Israeli action in Gaza, Milena Franke of the Migration Youth and Children Platform shared the anger and frustration prompted by the requirement to engage in positive dialogue with states remaining silent on this action. “25,000 people are dead and many more are injured, and we are supposed to just continue to engage?” she said. “We must use every opportunity within the GFMD, other global processes, and in our general work to call for an immediate ceasefire.”
Dialogue or instrumentalisation? State engagement with civil society
Several delegates critiqued the way in which states engage with civil society, both within and outside of the GFMD process, at the national and international levels.
“States propose shiny solutions that on the surface appear to be quite reasonable, such as temporary labour migration programmes,” said one breakout group participant. “But when we as civil society point out the problems with this approach, such as a lack of social protections and the impact of family separation, we are ignored by many States.”
Delegates pointed to further examples of a lack of meaningful dialogue with civil society, notably drawing on the current experiences of civil society supporting refugees and migrants on the ground. “Some States are very happy to have civil society get on with providing this support, because it means they don’t have to do it via public services or with public money. They effectively outsource the management of crises to us, but interfere when we demand political rights and a seat at the table to influence policy,” said one participant.
Delegates similarly noted a decline in some States’ engagement with diaspora organizations. Participants also highlighted examples of governments willing to use frameworks such as the Global Compact for Migration (GCM) solely when its provisions act to endorse their policy choices. “When it suits them they refer to the GCM,” said a delegate from Europe. “But when they don’t want to do something that the GCM provides for and that we as civil society are pushing, the GCM becomes ‘non-binding’.”
Delegates strongly indicated their frustration with civil society’s limited input regarding the agenda of international discussions on migration. “The extent to which we’re able to influence the agenda varies a great deal over time, but at this moment we very much feel that it’s a case of ‘take it or leave it’,” said one delegate during the breakout session.
Civil society capacity and resources: challenges at the national and international levels
National and regional migration policy developments and wider political environments were highlighted as key challenges for civil society capacity and resources. Participants noted that some State practices in the context of migration have become increasingly repressive, in some instances causing civil society to move away from prior activities due to harassment.
Together with more repressive state practices, reduced state funding for migrant organisations is also having an impact on the work of civil society, in particular on their ability to support and mobilise migrant communities. “These factors mean that the grassroots level is non-existent in many contexts. Migrants are not mobilising because it’s not safe and they have no resources,” said a delegate from the Asian region.
Paddy Siyanga Knudsen of the Global Research Forum on Diaspora & Transnationalism struck a more positive note, describing the GFMD Africa Group’s success in engaging member states both within and outside of Africa in the lead-up to the GFMD Summit. “The Abuja Statement, developed directly from the Abuja Forum, has provided us with a strong basis to engage states and other stakeholders, across a range of different arenas,” she stated. “It shows how effective we can be as a collective.”
Taking a global perspective: the state of play for migration and human rights
The contributions of 120 civil society delegates working in diverse contexts enabled CSPM3 discussions to produce a comprehensive assessment of the state of play for migration and human rights around the world:
- Whose rights? Racism and discrimination in migration policy
Many delegates pointed to the differing policy approaches taken by states in relation to migrants and refugees from different backgrounds. “When we talk about the human rights situation for migrants, it really depends which migrants we’re talking about,” said one delegate. “It’s pretty clear that for states, some migrants are more acceptable than others.” The delegate gave the example of a number of countries that established pathways for Ukrainians immediately after the beginning of the war, while other refugee populations who have been in great need for long periods of time remain widely unsupported. “It’s not that Ukrainians don’t need or deserve assistance: it’s about equity and non-discrimination,” added one breakout participant.
Wider national legal and policy changes such as bans on religious symbols in public spaces and education systems, affect the living situation of migrants who settle in states in the Global North. “These types of initiatives are presented as general measures, but in reality they target religious and national minorities,” said one delegate. “Some groups are clearly considered unworthy of the rights afforded to others, and this has severe implications for integration.”
- Securing rights and agency for migrant workers
When discussing the rights of migrant workers, delegates highlighted the vastly different perspectives of civil society on the one hand, and states and businesses on the other. “Some States and some big corporations understand migrant workers as commodities,” said a delegate during the opening panel. “At this Summit, a key priority for civil society must be to demand and secure the rights of migrant workers to organise themselves, access justice and demand accountability.”
A delegate from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region emphasised the ongoing negative impacts of the kafala, a migrant labour sponsorship system that gives near absolute control of migrant workers’ lives to the private citizens that hire them. They noted the adverse effect the system has on the rights and well-being of migrant workers across the region. “We have seen some recent positive developments in countries such Morocco, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates, including measures such as written contracts, minimum wage, and paid holidays,” they explained. “But severe challenges remain, and these can be attributed largely due to the kafala system.”
Delegates offered examples of how state approaches are exacerbating challenges faced by those leaving the country to take up employment overseas. “Some States with high recruitment costs for migrant workers continue to grant licenses to the recruitment agencies that levy these charges,” said one breakout participant from the Asian region. “There’s no attempt to solve the problem, and no political will to do so.”
- Securitisation of migration and criminalisation of assistance
Delegates highlighted regional examples of the increasingly precarious situations of many migrants caused by migration policies focused on securitisation and deterrence.
“The current ‘crisis’ in Latin America is not a migration crisis, but a border crisis,” said one delegate. “Across the region we are seeing the increased militarisation of borders and securitisation in migration policymaking. Migrants are not seen as a group with rights that need to be protected, but as a problem and a threat, and this criminalisation of migration is a regional trend.”
One delegate from the European region noted that those assisting migrants are facing an increasingly restrictive and unsafe environment due to increased legal action, harassement and intimidation. They noted the parallels between this situation and the situation of indigenous people in Latin America. “Both groups are targeted for speaking out, and both risk their livelihoods, reputation, family and personal safety to do so.”
Looking to the future: civil society proposals for action
The final CSPM3 plenary gathered a range of delegate suggestions and ideas for short, medium, and long-term action to address the shrinking space for civil society and the current global situation for migration and human rights:
- Short-term actions:
Shrinking civil society space:
- Expand geographical and thematic civil society collaboration.
- Emphasise the shrinking space for civil society participation during the Summit and beyond
- Advocate for better civil society access to information in order to be more relevant stakeholders in migration policy.
State of migration and human rights:
- Expand civil society collaboration with social partners to influence state policies and processes.
- Better include refugees, asylum seekers, and those with disabilities in civil society cooperation and coordination.
- Prioritise civil society focus on labour rights and access to justice for migrant workers, and expand support for migrant workers to organise and create strong movements on the ground.
- Highlight best practices of migrant and diaspora organisations working on migration issues.
- Medium-term actions:
Shrinking civil society space:
- Advocate to create space for dialogue with institutions.
- Seek alternative sources of funding away from state financing.
- Better engage with local governments, make direct proposals.
- Engage the GFMD Civil Society Mechanism to follow up on outcomes of these types of civil society discussions and on dialogue at GFMD and other international processes.
- Strategic litigation to protect civil society interests.
State of migration and human rights:
- Create a global civil society task force to coordinate legal migration processes.
- Monitor the nexus between tech, states, and business, in particular ‘big tech’ corporations with the potential to compromise civil society data.
- Advocate for the portability of social welfare and access to social insurance and compensation, including in countries of origin.
- Improve and expand civil society work on women’s and indigenous people’s rights as workers.
- Long-term actions:
Shrinking civil society space:
- Mobilise on a far broader scale to engage public opinion in supporting the changes that civil society is advocating for.
- Maintain and improve coordination processes amongst different non-state migration stakeholders.
- Demand changes in current international migration processes.
State of migration and human rights:
- Mentor individual migrants in host communities to support their ability to independently access their rights.
- Better frame migration as an essential part of human rights in all exchanges with institutions and authorities.
- Establish a permanent global civil society programme to counter hate speech.
- Better mobilise civil society and societies at large to challenge right-wing narratives of migration.
- Build civil society’s capacity to incorporate disability inclusion mechanisms in their work.
- Monitor if and how best practices highlighted in international migration processes are finally integrated into wider policymaking and programming.
- Provide support to organisations working on issues concerning missing migrants.
- Build capacity of migrant communities to self-organise – provide training, capacity-building, and funding.
- Decentralise approaches to migration governance, including by civil society working directly with local government and receiving communities, to find solutions and improve reception capacities.
- Improve civil society data security and protection.
This article was published at the website of the GFMD Civil Society Mechanism: