Next, apply the ideas and concepts from our previous readings and videos to link together theory and practice for your specific country.  Go back through the readings and any notes you took, then use the glossary/bibliography/index as tools for this part of the case study.

I’m working on a political science multi-part question and need a sample draft to help me study.

 

Get Your Custom Essay Written From Scratch
We have worked on a similar problem. If you need help click order now button and submit your assignment instructions.
Just from $9/Page
Order Now

Readings

The Age of Migration, pp. 275–296. book is too big, so i attached the book on the google drive: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wUREHqTHnGqwzuxe6…

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/17/us/politics/bid…

https://www.loc.gov/law/help/undocumented-migrants…

PLEASE COMPLETE TWO PARTS SEPARATELY IN TWO FILES

part 1: Reflective Journal  due May 2

ssignment: Please write a Reflective Journal on the country you are researching for the Refugee Policy Simulation. (writing a reflective journal not to exceed 3 pages)

instructions:see attached file (how to write a reflective journal)

part 2:

Case Study 3(due May 10)

Please take two weeks to write this case study.  It will be due Monday May 10, 2021.

Word count for this assignment is 1500 words.

Choose a receiving country that claims to have problems with irregular immigration.  First define the different categories and discourse used to describe irregular immigration.

Then discuss how your country and its public opinion specifically frame or talk about irregular immigration.  What are the perceptions your country’s population has about irregular immigrants?

Next, apply the ideas and concepts from our previous readings and videos to link together theory and practice for your specific country.  Go back through the readings and any notes you took, then use the glossary/bibliography/index as tools for this part of the case study.

Please be sure to include a bibliography of sources and use citations and quotations.

Include any specific page numbers where you got an idea or concept, or if you quote anything from the sources.

 

UNFORMATTED ATTACHMENT PREVIEW

Undocumented migrants and refugees in Malaysia: Raids, Detention and Discrimination INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………4 CHAPTER I – THE MALAYSIAN CONTEXT………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..6 CHAPTER II – THE DE FACTO STATUS OF REFUGEES AND ASYLUM SEEKERS ……………………………………………………..9 CHAPTER III – RELA, THE PEOPLE’S VOLUNTEER CORPS …………………………………………………………………………………..11 CHAPTER IV – JUDICIAL REMEDIES AND DEPRIVATION OF LIBERTY …………………………………………………………………..14 CHAPTER V – THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN……………………………………………………………………………………………………….15 CHAPTER VI – CONDITIONS OF DETENTION, PUNISHMENT AND SANCTIONS………………………………………………………18 RECOMMENDATIONS……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………23 APPENDICE: LIST OF PERSONS MET BY THE MISSION ………………………………………………………………………………………..29 March 2008 – N°489/2 Undocumented migrants and refugees in Malaysia: Raids, Detention and Discrimination TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 CHAPTER I – THE MALAYSIAN CONTEXT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Domestic context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. International context. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Legislative framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6 7 7 CHAPTER II – THE DE FACTO STATUS OF REFUGEES AND ASYLUM SEEKERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 1. Status and treatment of refugees and asylum seekers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2. IMM 13 Permits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 CHAPTER III – RELA, THE PEOPLE’S VOLUNTEER CORPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2. Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 3. Recent developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 CHAPTER IV – JUDICIAL REMEDIES AND DEPRIVATION OF LIBERTY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 1. Detention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2. Judicial remedies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 CHAPTER V – THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Daily life of children refugees and asylum seekers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Detention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. Recent developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 15 15 15 16 CHAPTER VI – CONDITIONS OF DETENTION, PUNISHMENT AND SANCTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Overcrowding facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Breaches of basic standards of hygiene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Diet and health care. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. Ill-treatment and punishment of detained migrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. Immigration depots failing to meet international standards and lack of effective redress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. Punishment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. Improving conditions of detention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8. Speaking out about violations of migrants’ human rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 18 18 19 19 20 20 21 21 RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 APPENDICE: LIST OF PERSONS MET BY THE MISSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 FIDH-SUARAM / 3 Undocumented migrants and refugees in Malaysia: Raids, Detention and Discrimination INTRODUCTION The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) completed an international fact-finding mission in Malaysia from 18 – 24 January 2007. The mission was assisted by its member organisation in Malaysia, Suara Rakyat Malaysia (Suaram). In particular, the mission was assisted by Ms. Koula Koumis, a Suaram volunteer, who accompanied the mission to many meetings, assisted in facilitating and briefing the mission members for meetings with refugee groups and worked tirelessly to confirm arrangements. Koula died tragically in a road traffic accident on 4 March 2007 in Kuala Lumpur. This report is dedicated to her and to the impact she made on the lives and human rights of so many people. The objective of the mission was to investigate the situation of undocumented migrants, refugees and asylum seekers in Malaysia. Its main focus was on the provisions of the Immigration Act and the process of enforcement of immigration laws and policies. The conditions of detention in the immigration depots and the process of removal of persons who contravene the Immigration Act were also addressed. It was not intended to cover issues such as the working conditions of documented and undocumented workers, assess the claims of persons to protection under the Geneva Refugee Convention or deal with the questions relating to trafficking in persons in any depth. By meeting with a range of actors at the national level, the mission sought to gather information provided by those individuals and groups on these issues and to use this information provided as a basis for formulating recommendations in order to guide Malaysia developing and strengthening its human rights protections for these vulnerable groups and remedy shortcomings in the current system. It must be emphasised that due to the breadth of the mission and its short time frame, it was not possible to treat all issues in significant depth. This report seeks mainly to raise the main issues in the process as it currently stands and highlight some areas that would need to be improved. It is based on the most credible, accurate and detailed information the mission was able to gather through all efforts to seek information from the authorities and other key actors. The mission was geographically restricted to the area of Kuala Lumpur and this report reflects the situation on the peninsula, and not necessarily on the whole Malaysian territory. The mission sought to meet with the broadest possible range of government, non-governmental and civil society groups, including affected individuals. FIDH aims to do this during the international fact-finding missions it conducts as it ensures that opposing views are gathered and more is learnt with regard to the challenges and concerns relating to particular human rights issues. This facilitates the production of a report that seeks to be balanced, pragmatic and amenable to practical implementation by law and policy-makers. It was disappointing that the majority of the government authorities that the FIDH requested to interview declined to participate. Furthermore, a significant number of government authorities did not clearly respond to the request and only declined the request at the conclusion of the mission. Regrettably, the mission was denied access to immigration detention centres, after one week of constant telephone contacts from mission organisers. The written refusal of access to Lenggeng and Semenyih immigration depots was only received on 29 January 2007 after the mission concluded. As a result, the mission sought to obtain information on detention centres from exdetainees and community groups who currently visit detainees. As the mission found during its investigations, the refusal of access is part of a concerning trend in Malaysia towards denying access to international organisations and local non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to immigration depots. The small number of meetings that were held with officials were approached in a spirit of openness and the relevant authorities sought to answer the questions posed by the delegation. The mission was notably able to meet with the police and the immigration department. The mission was also supported by the active network of NGOs and various refugee and migrant community groups that welcomed the mission and gave their time to provide information to the delegation. FIDH also wishes to express its gratitude to Suaram for its assistance during the mission. The mission was able to meet with 110 migrants, nine communities, two lawyers, two journalists, the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia and twelve NGOs, labour organisations and international organisations. Where relevant, details that would have enabled the identification FIDH-SUARAM / 4 Undocumented migrants and refugees in Malaysia: Raids, Detention and Discrimination of persons spoken to by the mission have been omitted to ensure their protection The report includes Chapter I, explaining the current immigration context in Malaysia from both a domestic and international perspective; Chapter II sets out how refugees and asylum seekers are treated on the ground in Malaysia, their precarious status and the role of the essential IMM 13 Permits; Chapter III examines the legal grounds for detention and also the relative paucity of judicial remedies available to refugees and asylum seekers; Chapter IV is concerned with the specific plight of refugee and asylum seeker children in Malaysia; Chapter V then examines and enumerates the multiple causes for concern regarding conditions of detention and potential punishments. The report concludes with recommendations based on the findings of the mission. FIDH-SUARAM / 5 Undocumented migrants and refugees in Malaysia: Raids, Detention and Discrimination CHAPTER I – THE MALAYSIAN CONTEXT 1. Domestic context Malaysia has experienced successful economic growth over recent decades. Since 2006 and in the context of Vision 2020 national program which aims to propel the country towards a developed nation1 by the year 2020, the government is implementing the Ninth Malaysia Plan (2006 – 2010): a five year development program to address economic, social and cultural challenges. With its gross domestic product (GDP) estimated to be increasing by an average of 5,2% per year since the regional economic crisis in 1997-1998, Malaysia is fast on the way to becoming an industrialised nation. To assume this economic expansion, the country is having recourse to a 3 million additional workforce2 to the locally-available labour market. Statistics and figures on the number of migrants, refugees, asylum seekers and documented migrants present on the Malaysian territory are uncertain due to an absence of publicly available statistics. On 29 December 2006, the UNHCR had a file load including 9.186 individuals seeking refugee status, 27,109 individuals under Temporary Protection and 10,061 individuals recognised as refugees, a total of 46,356 persons. The main recognised groups of refugees in Malaysia are Acehnese, Rohingya, Burmese (the Chin, Shan, Kareni, Arakan, Kachin and Mon) and Nepali. The number of Sri Lankan refugees is increasing in Malaysia. The largest groups of refugees are 14,804 Acehnese who were granted Temporary Protection and 12,133 Rohingya who were also granted Temporary Protection. Of the individually recognised refugees, the Chin from Burma makes up the largest group (6,630 people). According to the Director of Enforcement of the Immigration Department met by the mission, there are reportedly 1,9 million foreign workers in Malaysia and 5 to 600 000 people would be there illegally. In December 2006, Mr. Syed Shahir, President MTUC, confirmed that there are about 1,8 million registered (or documented) migrant workers in Malaysia. He added that according to government estimates, there is an equivalent number of unregistered (or undocumented) migrant workers in Malaysia. According to him, the actual figure of unregistered (or undocumented) migrant workers in Malaysia could be about 5 million. Malaysian labour force for the 3rd quarter of 2005 according to the Malaysian Department of Statistics was 10,498,600 and that means the number of migrant workers (both documented and undocumented) is about 30% to 50% of the total Malaysian labour force. 3 The major consideration of government responses to migrants and refugees has been driven by concerns about their large numbers and the need to control further irregular migration. The foreign workers come from twelve countries in the region (ASEAN countries and neighbouring countries)4 supplying a much needed workforce in Malaysia’s agricultural, construction, manufacturing and services sectors. Of the 1,8 million persons registered in the statistics by the Ministry of Home Affairs, the largest number of migrants come from Indonesia (1,2 million) and works mainly in the plantation sector (381,582 of them) followed by Nepali (192,332 persons registered) mostly represented in the manufacturing industry (159,990). According to the figures, Indian workers (134946) are legally employed in the same sector (34685) but also in the services (61,273) and in the plantations (27,759). Other sending countries include Burma (88,573), Vietnam (81,194), Bangladesh (55,389), Philippines (21,694), Pakistan (13,296), Cambodia (5,832), Thailand (5,753), Sri Lanka (3,050) and China (1,295). 5 Based on official figures, the foreign working force seems to be constantly growing. However, no consistent national immigration policy has been decided by the authorities. There is a total absence of coordination between the various national Ministries involved in the management of migrant workers. The absence of a written immigration policy or immigration quotas also reflects the ad hoc approach of the government; the policy in this field seems mainly reactive. Various members of civil society confirmed that the viability of the Malaysian economy is deeply related to this illegal immigration. Malaysia, as with many countries of immigration, relies on foreign workers for the ‘3D jobs’ (Dirty, Dangerous and Difficult), often eschewed by nationals. However, many persons met by the mission said that the status of migrants in Malaysia is not properly managed nor planned in the long term, and that they are not adequately protected against unscrupulous recruitment agencies and employers. The fact that the Memoranda of Understanding (MoU) signed between the countries of origin and Malaysia FIDH-SUARAM / 6 Undocumented migrants and refugees in Malaysia: Raids, Detention and Discrimination fall under the Official Secrets Acts makes it all the more difficult to control the terms of such agreements. In addition to the regular arrests and raids against undocumented migrants in the street as well as in their houses perpetrated by the police and the RELA (the national civil volunteer forces involved in the arrest of undocumented migrants), the government launches every two or three years huge crackdowns to regulate the number of undocumented foreigners in its territory. These crackdowns undoubtedly contribute to the creation of a climate of fear in the migrants’ communities. Organisations for the protection of human rights and labour rights denounced these operations as ‘abusive, intolerant and brutal’.6 The treatment of detainees in the immigration detention centres, the socalled ‘depots’, and the corporal punishments (whipping) against migrants are part of a policy of deterrence against them. Actually, this punitive approach unfortunately replaces any full-fledged migration policy. 2. International context Malaysia is not a party to many of the key international human rights instruments. Malaysia is not a party to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees nor to the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees, the key international instruments relating to the protection of refugees. As a result, Malaysia does not provide any specific formal protection to people who have fled their own country due to a fear of persecution on Convention grounds. In addition, Malaysia is a State Party to only two of international human rights instruments: the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), acceded to on 5 July 1995 and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), acceded to on 17 February 1995. 7 Regarding the latter, Malaysia maintains eight reservations concerning: 8 the principle of non-discrimination (Article 2), the obligation to make primary education compulsory and available free to all (Article 28(1)(a) and the prohibition of torture or other cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment, as well as arbitrary detention (Article 37).9 The paucity of Malaysia’s international obligations is a significant contribution to the poor situation of refugees, asylum seekers and undocumented migrants in that country. Malaysia has not ratified the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (ICPMW), the main international instrument for the protection of migrant workers and their families. Having entered into force on 1 July 2003, this Convention covers the protection of most aspects of the situation of both irregular and legal migrant workers including the protection of human rights (Part III) …
Purchase answer to see full attachment
Student has agreed that all tutoring, explanations, and answers provided by the tutor will be used to help in the learning process and in accordance with Studypool’s honor code & terms of service.
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? We have qualified writers to help you
Use our paper writing service to score better and meet your deadlines.
Order Now