International law does not pronounce the definition of the notion of ‘migrant,’ and its meaning comes from the use made of it by international and national organizations. For example, according to the International Organization for Migration (IOM), the ‘migrant’ is a generic term reflecting common usage to designate any person who leaves their usual place of residence to settle temporarily or permanently and for various reasons, either in another region of the same country or in another country, thus crossing an international border. It encompasses many well-defined legal categories of persons, such as migrant workers, people whose particular types of movement are legally defined, and smuggled migrants, whose status and forms of travel are not expressly specified by international law, as reflected in the International Students’ Glossary on Migration or IOM policy papers.
This definition given by the IMO leaves a void on the length of time the person remains in the host territory to be considered a migrant. If the IOM definition may seem simple, the Comité Inter-Mouvements Auprès Des Évacués (La Cimade) calls for vigilance when it comes to using the notion of migrant.
In addition, La Cimade indicates that the term migrant makes it possible to distinguish people who leave their country by taking into account the reasons for their departure. Indeed, in practice, people who leave their country for economic reasons are called migrants, and those forced to do so for political reasons are considered refugees or asylum seekers. According to La Cimade, this distinction between different categories of ‘migrants’ is often arbitrary because of the merger of economic and political constraints.
France and immigration
The history of immigration shows that France is one of the first countries to experience the migratory phenomenon. The period of the First World War is considered a pivotal period for immigration. Indeed, France recruited foreigners and brought them to its territory to support the war economy (Cour des Comptes,2004).
The High Council for Integration (HCI) establishes a difference between immigrants and migrants and recommends defining an immigrant as someone born outside French territory but who entered France and resides there permanently. The migrant, according to the HCI (France), refers to one who is the subject of seasonal or temporary movements. According to a document published by HCI, it is better to rigorously define an immigrant as someone who was born abroad, who entered France, and who generally lives there permanently. The term ‘migrant’ is more appropriate for seasonal or temporary movements. In this article, I use the term foreigner to refer to people who do not have French nationality but have been on French soil for at least twelve months.
The precariousness of migrants
Unlike nationals, foreigners do not have an inherent right to remain on French territory. To access the French part, to stay there for more than a year, foreigners are confronted with institutions fulfilling sovereign functions of the State, such as the consulate, the police, and the prefecture (the institution which the foreigners should contact to validate their visas when arriving in France). Before entering France, refugees must send a request to the French consulate of their home country. When submitting the application, they must present a set of documents (financial means, place of accommodation, and means of repatriation) proving that they meet a group of required criteria, which indicate whether they can stay in France.
Everything is not over yet, even if they obtain the visas and pay for a plane ticket to land in France. Arriving at the border, they are obliged to present to the agents of the Central Directorate of Immigration Control and the Fight against Illegal Employment the same documents that he submitted to the consulate to obtain the visa, which, precisely, authorizes him to stay in France. If the DICCILEC agents consider that the people who move represent a potential danger to public order, they may be refused access to French territory (Lochak, 2000). Otherwise, the foreigner has the green light from the DICCILEC to access the French territory.
After his contact with the consulate and the DICCILEC, the foreigner will have to contact the prefecture (the institution which the foreigners should contact to validate their visas when arriving in France), which will issue a residence permit. The duration of the residence permit varies according to their situation. In the case of international students enrolled in the bachelor’s or master’s program, the residence permit is valid for one year. The residence permit must be renewed each year. With each request addressed to the prefecture, the person concerned must provide documents that are often exact as those he had submitted to analyze his request for obtaining the visa.
The foreigners are in a precarious situation due to their ambiguous status regarding the right of residence. This situation of precariousness has a negative impact on the possibility of finding accommodation, finding a job (if they hold a work permit), having access to loans, and continuing his studies in France.
Relations between foreign countries and the administration
The foreigner maintains unbalanced relations with the administration. This imbalance can be apprehended by analyzing the two aspects of the immigration policy developed since 1974, which aims to control migratory flows and combat illegal migration, on the one hand, leading to an approach of control and sanctions, while on the other hand, to integrate those who have arrived on the territory regularly (Lochak, 2000). This policy would imply allowing foreigners to access public services under conditions similar to those of nationals. But the reality is very different.
Foreigners do not have the right to access all public services like nationals. Abdelmalek Sayad, quoted by (Michèle Leclerc-Olivier,2002), speaks of a “demarcation line, invisible or barely perceptible, but whose effects are considerable, which radically separates “nationals” and “non-nationals”. This difference in treatment between the national and the migrant makes the situation of the latter fragile.
Indeed, the foreigner is instead seen as someone to be controlled. He must constantly prove that he complies with the administration and remains so.
However, certain conditions that do not depend on the foreigner’s will may prevent him from proving that he complies with the administration. One thinks particularly of the processing time of the application for renewal of the residence permit, and some requests may take several months to be processed. In this case, the foreigner may be issued a certificate of instruction-extension, which indicates the maintenance of the rights granted under the residence permit previously held.
Even in possession of this certificate of extension of instruction, the foreigner may find himself in undesirable circumstances for two reasons:
• the duration of its validity being too short;
• the rights granted by the previous residence permit are lost contrary to what is written there.
The foreigner is then blocked, and he cannot prove to the administration that he is in good standing by presenting the papers.
According to Danièle Lochak (2000), the relationship of subjugation and control materializes in a privileged connection with sovereign public services, which often takes repressive forms. Often a repressive approach remains predominant in contaminating foreigners’ relations with other foreigners ‘public services. This situation leads to doubt, distrust, and a lack of empathy.
Conclusion
The instability of foreigners in France demonstrated through this article is a major policy concern as it constitutes an obstacle to social cohesion. Indeed, the “National Plan for Social Cohesion” decreed in 2005 and whose objective is to reduce inequalities, particularly those faced by populations with an immigrant background- living in degraded living and housing conditions- can be successful only when these structures are taken into account. The precariousness faced by the foreigner in his de facto instability can lead to questions as to the actual political will for his social integration.
Bibliography
Danièle Lochak “ l’étranger et l’administration “ in Michel Le Clainche et Céline Wiener (dir.), Le citoyen et l’administration, L’Imprimerie nationale, 2000
Frédérique Cornuau et Xavier Dunezat « Immigration in France : Concepts, Outlines and Politics », ; 2008 ; p. 331-352
HCI, Pour un modèle français d’intégration, rapport au Premier ministre, La Documentation française, février 1991. Cité par Michèle Leclerc-Olivier dans « Territorialités de migrants », L’Homme & la Société, vol. 143-144, no. 1, 2002, pp. 105-124
International Organization for Migration, Glossary on migration, IML Series No. 34, 2019,
L’accueil des immigrants et l’inintégration des populations issues de l’immigration, Cour des comptes 2004
Leclerc-Olive, Michèle. « Territorialités de migrants », L’Homme & la Société, vol. 143-144, no. 1, 2002, pp. 105-124
Jesula SIMON holds a Master’s degree in Public Policy, and she is currently a University Diploma in Conflict Management and Resolution, Mediation and Interculturality. She is a human rights defender, works as a journalist, and has experience in communication and media, public policy, project management, education, protection, and community mobilizing with private media, public services, and international organizations. In her work, she particularly enjoys dealing with issues related to migration, and she works at Haiti Migration Group.