Dispute resolution in immigration issues
Dispute resolution in immigration issues
The immigration department faces issues, barriers, and conflicts between different parties in regular operation, making it hard to achieve the different goals and objectives, thus requiring dispute resolution to handle arising and future issues. The immigration department deals with operations relating to people’s international movement to countries of their destination where they are not citizens or natives to settle (Berman, 2019). People move to different countries for work opportunities, seek better living conditions, marriage and union family reasons, escape troubled countries, and seek good education opportunities. Consequently, the immigration departments have different functions and responsibilities to facilitate entry and other related activities into the immigrants’ destination country (Ansley and Shefner, 2009). In this case, the immigration department is tasked with regulating people entry and exit of people in and out of a country to uphold security, issue and verification travel documents to determine the eligibility of immigrants, monitoring, tracking, apprehending, deporting, and repatriating illegal immigrant in the interest of safety and security. Moreover, the immigration department’s operations have different issues and challenges such as deterrence of unlawful entry, termination of residences, naturalization issues, and facilitation of entry and residency issues. The immigration department plays significant roles in the international movement of people for different reasons, and thus the arising issues and conflicts need to be handled under dispute resolution strategies and alternatives to ensure that the department operates with effectiveness and efficiency.
Resolving disputes in immigration
There are different disputes in the immigration department introducing barriers in operation, thus incorporating different dispute resolution strategies. In most cases, citizens and immigrants avoid conflicts, but they are inevitable. The avoidance of conflict does not solve conflicts, and thus there is a need for a lasting or sustainable solution to address the different issues (Menkel, 2011). Parties involved in different disputes try to solve them within themselves without involving external parties. Equally important, the disputing parties can seek external intervention through actors such as dispute resolution professionals, social workers, courts, and the police. The external dispute resolution strategies are adopted as a last resort, but they serve as amicable dispute resolution strategies. In this regard, there are formal dispute resolution, informal dispute resolution, and alternative dispute resolution available to conflicting parties on immigration issues.
Formal Dispute resolution
The immigration disputes that go beyond family issues or cannot be solved at a family level are solved through formal dispute resolution strategies. Disputes cannot be avoided, ignored, and in the case, the immigrants want to avoid embarrassment and further conflicts seek a formal approach to dispute resolution (Ousey and Kubrin, 2018). The immigration avoids courts because the immigrants are affected by the language barrier, lack financial resources, and the judicial process can be long and expensive.
The immigrants seek legal action when they believe that it is a viable course of action. Immigrants’ ability to opt for the professional help from arbitrators, negotiators, mediators, counselors, and lawyers depends on knowledge and awareness of the service, practical barriers experienced in the access of the service, and the capability to meet the financial costs. However, many ethnocultural communities view courts as strict and complicated thus;, they seek to solve their immigration disputes, community-centric alternatives, and culturally appropriate dispute resolution options (Ousey and Kubrin, 2018). The formal dispute resolution at the immigration is adopted as a last resort since there are other dispute resolution strategies and solutions.
Nations have immigration issues that need to be addressed through dispute resolution strategies that do not hurt or harm the respective migrating parties. In this case, solidarity conferences can be held between nations to ensure that immigration issues in regions are solved and addressed in immigrants’ interest and the respective countries. The mass immigration from one nation to another due to unbearable conditions such as weather or civil conflicts results in undue pressure on the destination country (Melanson, 2015). For instance, the destination countries experience refugee crises that overwhelm the country. The conferences ensure that nations and international agencies address the source of the conflicts and aftermath in the interest of handling the issues. For instance, the Venezuela crisis resulted in mass migration in the neighboring countries such as Colombia and Peru, thus resulting in immigration issues addressed in the solidarity conference in Brussels. Therefore, the solidarity conference between countries and international agencies ensures that immigration issues between nations are adequately addressed to ensure that all actions and operations are founded on a humanitarian basis.
The immigration disputes are effectively resolved through lobbying by different parties worldwide to address the issues. The immigration issues arise as a result of the violation of international laws, conventions, or regulations. Lobbying ensures that parties violate the law or are involved in acts of commission or omission, resulting in immigration issues to act accordingly (Melanson, 2015). For instance, the lobby groups engage the involved parties in talks or interaction against violence, population movement, and long unrest in the interest of restoring order in the immigration. For instance, the Syrian immigration crisis to other nations caused undue pressure on the neighboring nation, thus making the European lobby against Turkish invasion in Syria to restore order. The Turkish invasion resulted in internal mass displacement leading to immigration issues that could only be addressed by convincing Turkey to end the invasion and make peace with Syria.
Aid and trade Tariff threats
The country’s immigration issues can be effectively resolved through the adoption of Aid and trade tariff threats against the nation, causing immigration issues to ensure that they take responsibility to combat the crisis. Some nations directly contribute to the immigration issues in other nations through engaging in mass migration of its citizens to other nations (Freedman, 2017). The control of entry and exit into a nation must be vital to the respective nation’s security and safety. For instance, under President Trump, the American administration issued threats of trade tariffs and cancellation of foreign aid to pressure Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, and Mexico to play an active role in ensuring that asylum seekers and other migrants are prevented from entering the United States. In this regard, the United States required the different nations to adhere to the asylum cooperation agreement leading to the address of the different immigration issues arising from the increased influx of immigrants and asylum seekers (Freedman, 2017). The increased number of immigrants and asylum seekers leads to the rise in different crime forms such as violent crimes, drug-related crimes, human trafficking, and other related crimes. In this regard, the US would ensure that the immigration issue and its related issues could be handled from the source through issuing foreign and trade Threats to the respective nation to take action on their people.
The immigration issues can be resolved by adopting a global response that the United Nations General Assembly initiated to ensure that the crisis resulting from the immigration issues is effectively handled. Large-scale crises in regions result in cross-border mass displacement in other nations, thus causing the immigration crisis that overwhelms the destination country. Crisis such as conflict, drought, and other natural catastrophes results in mass displacement of the people, leading to crisis in the destination countries (Freedman, 2017). For instance, the crisis in the Sahel region that includes countries such as Nigeria, Niger, Mauritania, Mali, Chad, and parts of Burkina Faso resulted in internal mass displacement of people in Burkina Faso, thus overwhelming the nation. The Sahel has a combination of conflict, changing climate issues, violent attacks, and drought cases, making the condition unbearable in the region. On the other hand, in regions with large scale localized attacks for terrorist groups such as al Qaeda and the Islamic State cause massive displacement of people leading to crisis in destination naTions. In this regard, the immigration issues resulting from the large-scale attacks, conflicts, and groups affecting many people are addressed through global response strategies that take a comprehensive approach to global issues by including a multi-agency approach to crisis facing people and their nation.
Pushing of borders outwards
The immigration issues are effectively countered by pushing borders outwards, thus preventing the immigrants from getting to the countries of their destination. Immigrants are compelled to consistently move to developed countries for economic, social, and political reasons. The developed nations are stable socially, economically, and politically; thus, they attract people worldwide. The high influx of people in a specified country results in immigration issues and crises; thus, there is a need to control immigrants’ entry and exit through different resolutions (Peers, 2016). For instance, the United States is a developed nation with an influx of immigrants from Mexico, thus resulting in unbearable. The government experiencing an influx of immigrants has adopted remote control policies or informal practices to turn back immigrants. The preventive measures taken by the government ensures that immigration issues are avoided while maintaining people. The US government resolves to implement the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) to ensure that a few can only access the asylum system to meet people, thus controlling the entry into the US. The MPP policies are directed to seal the gaps that allow illegal immigrants or asylum seekers from accessing the US while sending away the existing illegal immigrants. Therefore, the resolution to use offshoring policies, MPP, and pushing borders outwards ensures that the immigration issues by restoring sanity.
Nations have adopted the policies to return failed asylum seekers and other immigrants with no reason to remain in the host nations back to their countries of origin to address the immigration crisis. The asylum seekers and immigrants are accommodated due to the crises in their countries of origin, and thus they need to go back voluntarily. The International Organization for Migration runs an assisted voluntary return and integration program for asylum seekers and immigrants. The affected nations negotiate with the country of origin for the immigrants and the asylum seekers to be accommodated back upon the end of crises to ease the migration issues (Hampshire, 2016). For instance, under President Trump, America has entered into negotiated immigration agreements with countries such as Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador to enable the US to return immigrants and asylum seekers to their countries of origin and later restore terminated aid. More so, the EU seeks a partnership arrangement that includes development assistant and other benefits to incline the immigrants and asylum seekers to return to their countries of origin. Moreover, the European Union has enhanced efforts to increase the paltry rate of return for sub-Saharan Africans to solve the immigration crisis. The success of immigrants and asylum seekers’ return depends on the agreements and relations between the affected countries and countries of origin. The return agreements are contentious since the return objective is closely and strictly watched under the Orderly Migration and Global Compact for Safe. Therefore, the return policies and agreements are directed to ensure that the immigration issues are effectively addressed despite the respective nation or individuals’ resistance.
Anti-immigration and anti-foreigners policies
Countries have been inclined to adopt anti-migration agendas by the far-right populist parties and leaders, thus addressing the immigration crisis. The far-right populist parties have been on consistently and effortlessly campaigned for the harsh rhetoric and anti-immigration policies that determine parties’ political relevance. The hard and harsh anti-foreigner agenda significantly impacts the outcome of the election, thus making the immigration aspect an issue of great concern (Aboud, 2020). For instance, the Italian political parties have been keen and harsh on the anti-foreigner agenda in the interest of the natives of their countries. The far-right Freedom Party of Austria has fiercely campaigned for anti-foreigner agenda. The developed countries have continually pushed the anti-foreigner agenda to ensure immigrants and asylum seekers are repatriated to their native countries. The anti-foreigner agenda has risen as a populist agenda in Europe and North America, seeking a permanent solution for immigration issues. Therefore, the political parties and administrations worldwide have instituted anti-foreigner and anti-migration policies to solve immigration issues.
Ending Statelessness Campaigns
The UN campaigns to end statelessness have been directed towards addressing the immigration issues experienced in different parts of the world. The fact that some people and communities are considered stateless introduces the immigration problems worldwide as victims seek asylum in different nations. The UN campaign seeks to resolve the statelessness issue by ensuring that the people’s status issues are resolved. The stateless people are estimated to be 10 million to 15 million, such as the Rohingya community (Menchaca, 2011). The statelessness has been achieved in some is some regions such as Kyrgyzstan. Additionally, Colombia has made efforts to give citizenship to 24,000 babies born to Venezuelan mothers that set a precedent to end statehood for generations. Therefore, the campaign and operations to end statelessness worldwide ensure that the immigration issues are addressed such that the nations can manage their people and operation.
Nations Worldwide experience immigration issues occasioned by the influx of immigrants and asylum seekers from different locations, thus posing economic, social, and political challenges to host countries; thus, resolutions are needed to end the issues. The host nation’s citizens experience constraints due to limited resources and amenities to cater to the excess populations. The resolution to combat immigration issues is addressed by the respective nations and the international communities by making relevant policies. Nations use a combination of respective policies, strategies, and solutions to end immigration issues. The solutions on immigration issues need to be addressed for the individual to national levels, thus ensuring that sustainable solutions are developed.
Aboud, A. (2020). Labor Rights And Immigration Issues In Qatar.
Ansley, F., & Shefner, J. (Eds.). (2009). Global connections & local receptions: new Latino immigration to the southeastern United States. Univ. of Tennessee Press.
Berman, C. (2019). Crossing the Border Or Crossing the Line? Why Alternative Dispute Resolution Is the Best Route to Reunite Families of Immigrant Children Separated at the US-Mexico Border. Cardozo J. Conflict Resol., 21, 465.
Freedman, J. (2017). Immigration and insecurity in France. Taylor & Francis.
Hampshire, J. (2016). European migration governance since the Lisbon treaty: introduction to the special issue. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 42(4), 537-553.
Melanson, N. M. (2015). Improving Claims Resolution: Alternative Processes in Canada’s Immigration System.
Menchaca, M. (2011). Naturalizing Mexican Immigrants: A Texas History. University of Texas Press.
Menkel-Meadow, C. (2011). Scaling up deliberative democracy as dispute resolution in healthcare reform: A work in progress. Law & Contemp. Probs., 74, 1.
Ousey, G. C., & Kubrin, C. E. (2018). Immigration and crime: Assessing a contentious issue. Annual Review of Criminology, 1, 63-84.
Peers, S. (2016). EU Immigration and Asylum Law. A Companion to European Union Law and International Law, 519-533.