On the nineteenth of this month, after a heated debate, the French Parliament reached a vote on the immigration law, which received the approval of 349 deputies, while 186 deputies opposed it.
The debate continued after the vote about the vote itself. Opponents say: Without 88 votes from the National Rally (the extreme right), this law could not have passed, while the ruling majority, and those allied with it, say: It was able to ratify this law without the need for Voices of the National Front.
Regardless of the controversy of the numbers and the different angles of looking at them; Given that mathematical techniques give different numbers for the required majority, it must have been the more restrictive formulas introduced in the original version that made it pass so relatively easily.
Deep disagreements
It is now known that the more the economic crisis intensifies in France and the deeper the political differences become, the more immigration issues emerge to the surface, under multiple banners. This time, the dispute raged over what was known as the Immigration Law.
This law consists of twenty-six articles, and it is the twentieth law in approximately forty years, and I do not think that its fate will be better than the laws that preceded it in this particular field. Because the causes of the phenomenon of clandestine migration go deeper, and as long as its initial causes still exist – and the West continues to plunder the goods of other peoples, and impose regimes upon them whose primary mission is to take care of its interests – migrations that sacrifice their lives in order to secure the conditions of life will continue at a greater pace.
Peoples have despaired of changing their oppressive regimes. Because every time they find themselves back at square one, the capitalist system is in control even of those who revolted against it, and therefore there is no solution left for them other than the arduous death journeys to it to extract some of their rights. It is not possible, on the one hand, to curb human migration, and to open the doors wide to the movement of money and things, on the other hand.
What is the content of this law and what are the most important developments in it? What is the position of the political parties on it? What is the purpose of enacting the law?
This law addresses the following issues:
Procedures for deporting “deviants”, social benefits, regularizing the status of illegal immigrants, determining the proportion of immigrants, obtaining French citizenship, study residency, and state health assistance.
Basic materials
Deportation of deviants: Previously, deportation procedures included only those who posed a threat to state security, especially after the expansion of the application of the terrorism law. In the new law, deportation procedures extend to those sentenced to ten years or more in prison in criminal cases. To enjoy social benefits: the family grant, the housing grant, and other benefits, one must legally reside in French territory for one year. This order was not previously conditional.
It should be noted here that there are two parallel paths. As the number of influential people competing to plunder the wealth of other peoples increases, the level of plunder becomes weaker, and as a result, the state’s capabilities gradually diminish, and it is unable to fulfill its obligations and provide the means to which its citizens are accustomed to a comfortable life. Thus, it resorts – the first thing it resorts to – to abolishing the rights of immigrants, and gradually… Threatening to deprive them of it completely.
3- Settlement of the status of illegal immigrants: Settlement was possible for everyone who worked illegally, and everyone whose services the labor market needed. The settlement was now conditional on him remaining illegally in residence for three years, and working twelve months during the last two years.
However, even if these conditions are met, the files are studied case by case, and considerations estimated by the concerned administration may not necessarily lead to granting the candidate legal residency for a period of one year, subject to renewal.
Setting a maximum number of legal immigrants coming to French territory, excluding political asylum seekers, during the next three years, in clear violation of the country’s constitution.
French citizenship was automatic for everyone born on French soil; By virtue of the right to land, but the new immigration law requires that the candidate express his desire to obtain citizenship with an application that he submits between the ages of sixteen and eighteen, and of course the application will be presented to a committee for consideration, and it may find reasons that require its rejection.
Introducing the necessity of providing financial security for every student who wants to obtain study residency. The state grant allocated to legal residents has not been abolished, but obtaining a “sick migrant residence” will only be enjoyed by those who cannot be treated in their countries.
The position of political parties
The central idea governing this law is to reduce the chances of the National Rally (the extreme right) winning the upcoming presidential elections. Under the pretext that responding to his demands and vision on the issue of immigration will pull the rug from under his feet.
But – in our opinion – this is a losing gamble. Because the French voter, who has lost confidence in traditional politicians, may consider giving his vote to the original owners of these ideas and not to those who copied them from others.
However, this law has caused great confusion among political parties. The Revival Bloc (168 deputies) – the bloc supporting President Macron – voted in favor of the law, but 37 of its deputies voted against it; Considering that the text’s final form contradicted the original equation “at the same time”; Meaning controlling immigration while improving the conditions of immigrants, at the same time.
The Mudam Party – traditionally a centrist party (51 deputies) – thirty of whom voted in favor of the law, five deputies objected, and fifteen deputies had reservations. While the Republicans (62 representatives) believed that with this law, France had the means to regain its ability to control its immigration policy.
As for the National Rally Party – (88 deputies) – it voted “yes”, although it considers that the text – although it has achieved notable progress – is still far from what is required. For their part, the left-wing parties – led by the Rebel France Party (75 representatives) – voted and considered that the immigration law was a profound attack on fundamental freedoms and rights, and that they would work to object to it in all legal forms.
This law, in fact, reflects the impotence in the face of the very complex issue of clandestine immigration. Laws will not be able to address them, no matter how strict they are. What is called clandestine migration is a complex phenomenon, and it is a result of the relationship between the West, which is relatively civilized with itself and savage, with others.
It is a phenomenon that if its direct causes, represented by the policy of systematic plundering of other peoples’ goods, are not addressed, then laws will not succeed in reducing it, and waves of migration across land and sea will continue, defying all the barriers set by transit countries, and all the legal arsenal created by countries of material and political asylum.
