The situation in the capital
Moscow became the leader among all regions in the number of deported migrants. As follows from the report of the Committee “Civil assistance”, a third of all decisions on the expulsion of migrants from Russia is accepted in the capital.
Report “Administrative expulsion from Russia — trial or mass expulsion?” was presented by the defenders on may 10. The study (has) was conducted on the basis of data of the Judicial Department at the Supreme court, the statistics of the FMS, the study of legislation and monitoring of a number of court hearings in district courts of Moscow.
Human rights activists say that the number of cases of administrative expulsion of foreign citizens in 2013 was 137,1 thousand (this is three times more compared to 2012). In 2014 this figure reached 198,4 thousand, and in 2015 fell to 177,8 thousand In the report, from 2013 to 2015 the court made 513,3 thousand on administrative expulsion, 98% of them were adopted under articles 18.8 and 18.10 of the administrative code.
Capital courts in 2013 took 36.7 per thousand of decisions on expulsion (an increase three times by 2012), for 2014 – 59,6 thousand, for the year 2015 is 58.2 thousand In the Committee note that over the past year in Russia as a whole began to expel less than 15%, while in Moscow no decline is recorded.
Moscow on the General background stands out due to the fact that the main flow of migrant flows in the capital, says a representative of “Civil assistance” Elena, Srapyan. The report stresses that Moscow, the Moscow region, Saint Petersburg and Leningrad oblast accounted for more than 50% of all decisions on expulsion issued in Russia.
The expulsion decision was made, for example, against the Syrian Sawy Mohamed, who in may 2013 received temporary asylum in Russia. Two years later, the UFMS of Russia in Moscow region refused to renew the certificate of temporary asylum. “I said you can return at your home, in Aleppo, it’s all right,” said Mohamed.
In court, the employee of the FMS insisted that Syrian is in Russia for economic reasons, and in Syria already stopped fighting, said the lawyer of the Network “Migration and law” centre “memorial”, Maiwand Abdul Ghani.
Changes in legislation
As stated in the document, a manifold increase in the number of expelled migrants occurred after the came into force changes in the legislation is the article “Violation by a foreign citizen or person without citizenship of rules of entrance to the Russian Federation or the regime of stay” and “Illegal implementation by the foreign citizen or the person without citizenship of labour activity in the Russian Federation” (h. 3 s. h. 2 18.8 and article 18.10 of the administrative code, respectively). These innovations allowed “to legitimize the beginning of mass expulsions were” I believe in the Committee.
The study notes that this is not the only change in migration legislation in recent years. “Trying to keep up with these changes requires special effort even on the part of Russian lawyers, not to mention foreign citizens without special education in the field of law, — the report says. — An important feature of this legislation was the growing role of mass expulsions and even more mass bans”.
Human rights activists believe that migration policy of Russia towards the former Soviet countries involves two main tasks: to preserve the visa-free regime and to tighten the regime of work and stay of foreigners, as well as to solve the problem of illegal migration with mass expulsions and restrictions on entry.
According to the FMS, in 2013, the ban on entry has been applied in respect 449,6 thousand people (an increase of more than six times in comparison with 2012), in 2014 — in relation to 676 thousand people, and in 2015 — in relation to 481,4 thousand people. Thus, only the FMS for three years was forbidden to enter Russia more than 1.6 million cases.
Tightening legislation and the increase in the number of expulsions has led to a significant increase in the number of migrants who live and work in Russia without the necessary documents, the report said.
Consideration of cases under part 3 of article 18.8 and part 2 of article 18.10 of the administrative code made in 2015, 81% of all reviewed in the district courts of Moscow administrative Affairs.
The report notes that the hearings for the expulsion of migrants often are held with numerous violations: it is, for example, to carry out collective proceedings, the absence of a binding pronouncement of the Protocol on administrative offense and the court decisions, etc. “there Were cases, when the hearing and as such was not conducted, instead of which brought to administrative responsibility for foreign citizens issued just ready copies of the arbitrator’s decision”, — emphasized in the study.
Human rights activists have identified the top performers among Metropolitan judges. So, the judge Chertanovo district court of Moscow Andrey Vasilyev from January to June 2015 reviewed more than 2,500 administrative cases, of which about 95% are things on the two articles of the administrative code.
“On average, a judge Vasiliev considered about 22 cases every working day. On some days the judge Vasiliev has issued more than 60 decisions, which was about 7 reviews per hour, or about 9 minutes on each case”, — the report says.
The record for the largest number of expulsions belongs to the Golovinsky court judge Sergey Bazarov. “23 Jan 2015, in a shortened Friday work day, he examined the case and expelled from Russia more than 90 people. It turns out that this day, even if he had nothing else to do, the judge Bazarov consideration was at speeds less than 5 minutes per case, including completion of all relevant paperwork”, — the “Civil assistance”.
In Golovinskaya, Dorogomilovsky, and Trinity Nagatinsky district courts in the first six months of 2015 was recorded 100% of the decisions about appointment of administrative punishment under part 3 of article 18.8 and part 2 of article 18.10 of the administrative code.
The punishment for these items can be administered in the form of “controlled independent exit” from the country, and in the form of forced removal. Human rights activists say that judges generally prefer the first option: thus, budgetary savings, and migrants themselves pay for their departure from Russia.