80

The Review of International Affairs

UDK: 341.231.14:339.923.061.1 Biblid 0543-3657, 60 (2009) Vol. LX, No. 113334, pp. 8093 Original Scientific Paper March 2009

New Problems Resulting from EU Enlargement: Freedom of movement A right, a privilege, or a problem
Vladimir Prvulovi*
ABSTRACT Free movement of people, goods, services and capital is one of the basic assumptions of EU. The accession of ten new member countries in 2004 first, and then of Bulgaria and Romania on 1st January 2007 has contributed to large migration from the East to the West from poorer to richer EU countries. With the latest economic crisis and the increase of unemployment, particular countries (Italy, Germany, Spain, France, and the UK) are facing a large number of migrants with EU passports in legal search for a job and better life. This results in the rise of xenophobic atmosphere and intolerance towards newcomer migrants, particularly among the unemployed or xenophobic political parties and movements. However, a question duly arises: are newcomers from Bulgaria, Romania, Poland and other EU members from Eastern Europe immigrants, and could they be treated as such having in mind that they have EU citizenship? Does EU have mechanisms of the allowed (legal) restrictions on free movement for EU citizens, particularly from the new EU countries? How will this influence further EU enlargement, particularly from the countries of the West Balkans? Key words: free movement of people, goods, services and capital, human rights and freedoms, Maastricht Agreement, Treaty of Lisbon, economic migrants, the third world countries, immigrants, EU enlargement, Schengen Agreement, White Schengen List.
* Professor Vladimir Prvulovi, Ph.D., Megatrend University, Belgrade.

The Review of International Affairs

81

Introductory notes Free movement of people, goods, services and capital is one of the fundamental assumptions of the European Union since it was established.1 It was one of the reasons the pioneers of the idea of EU and its founders pointed out to citizens of Europe as the basic motive for the achievement of this European integration. Up to the present days, the idea of free movement of people has passed through its evolution, transformation and concretisation. It does not only involve the right and freedom to move and settle in whatever EU member country you wish, but also to get a job, to enjoy the rights resulting from employment, and also to achieve, to some extent, voting and other political rights in the country of settlement. All this aroused excitement with citizens of then candidate countries who thought that they could come out of the isolation before the fall of the Berlin wall through a painstaking transition, finally entering EU as a pastry shop they could only watch through glass till then. By the enlargement of EU the idea of frontier-free Europe became quite real for 500 million of its citizens. These provisions were later elaborated in detail in the so-called consolidated versions of the Treaty on the European Union and they are as follows: the Maastricht Treaty of 7 February 1992, the Treaty of Amsterdam of 9 November 1997, the Treaty of Nice of 10 March 2001, the Brussels consolidated version of the Maastricht Treaty of 29 December 2006, the Lisbon Treaty of 13 December 2007 and finally the consolidated version of the Maastricht Treaty of 9 May 2008.2 However, all these fundamental EU
1 Treaty Establishing the European Economic Community (Treaty of Rome of 25.03.1965):

Third part: Community Policies, III Freedom of movement of people, freedom of movement of goods, services and capital, Chapter 1, Article 48: 1. Freedom of movement for workers shall be secured within the Community. 2. Such freedom of movement shall entail the abolition of any discrimination based on nationality between workers of the Members States as regards employment, remuneration, and other conditions of work and employment 3. It shall entail the right, subject to limitations justified on ground of public policy, public security and public health: (a) to accept offers of employment actually made; (b) to move freely within the territory of Member State for this purpose; (c) to stay in a Member State for the purpose of employment in accordance with the provisions governing the employment of nationals of that State laid down by law, regulation or administrative action), quoted from the book: Lopandi, Duko, Ugovor o Evropskoj uniji: Rim-Mastriht-Amsterdam, Medjunarodna politika, Slubeni list, Pravni fakultet, Institut ekonomskih nauka, Belgrade, Serbia,1999, p. 87. 2 Source: Versions consolides du Traite sur lUnion europeenne et du Traite instituant la Communaute europeenne du 29.12.2006, Journal officiel de lUnion europeenne N. C321, p.11, 57 et 59. The Brussels consolidated version of the Treaty on EU and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union of 9 May 2008.

82

The Review of International Affairs

documents are not untouchable.3 During the evolution of the European integration, they have been subject to continuous adaptation, improvement and promotion, this including, among other things, the field of the fundamental right of EU citizens to freedom of movement, employment, residence and settlement. Of course, those rights and freedoms are intended to be used as fully, appropriately and efficiently as possible. The below mentioned articles from the so-called consolidated versions of the basic EU treaties illustrate this. All of them, with the exception to some extent of the Amsterdam Treaty, further confirm, guarantee and elaborate freedom of movement of people (labour force) and prohibit restriction of this human right of EU citizens. However, are there bad aspects of this right? Can freedom of movement of EU citizens can be a danger for citizens of the receiving countries of newcomers? Can this freedom be restricted? All this has become current after the accession of the new members from Eastern Europe in 2004 and especially recently when Italy has stated that immigrants have caused enormous economic, political and security troubles, what makes it restrict the freedom or actually limit the number of settlers and immigrants. Are, for example, the Romanians and Bulgarians, citizens of the member countries, immigrants? I wish to discuss this issue in the paper. Reasons for alert Let us try to understand the seriousness of the Italian warnings and the reasons for alert. According to numerous official data that have been made public about 300,000 Romanians (most of them are Roma) have constantly resided in Italy with a 90-day permission to stay.4 Many of them, having the passports of an EU member country, are coming legally and settling in caravans and trailers in the suburbs of the Italian cities. They establish there an illegal market of new services: prostitution, begging, car thefts, burglaries, pickpocketing, sorcery practising and taking spells off, being also involved in small crime activities. Italy has been shocked by some new business reselling of flowers that have been stolen from the graves on the entrances of cemeteries in big cities. Playing music in public transportation and at city squares has already been organised
3 I am very grateful to Dragana Cvetojevi, who has helped in the verification of the data and

excerpts from the documents used here. I express my special gratefulness to Mr. Milo Prvulovi, EUROJUST Legal Officer, The Hague, Netherlands, for his help and suggestions. 4 Brady, Hugo, EU migration policy: An A-Z, Centre for European reform, London, 2007, p. 28.

The Review of International Affairs

83

well and one should say that this has been an accepted phenomenon performed by newcomers. Thus, they have established a new shallow underworld. However, the security of citizens of Rome, Milan, Florence and other Italian cities has never before been endangered as is it is now by the organised groups of new EU citizens. Italy made an attempt to resolve this problem by enforced expulsion of newcomers at its own expense after a 90-day period but this produced no effect. They would come back in the same, legal way performing their business. By all this, not all of them who stayed more than 90 days could be detected or returned to the countries they had come from. Moreover, the expenses of taking them into custody, finding them a place to stay as well as those of the organised collective deportations were enormous. Italy, then, alarmed the European institutions pointing to a great influx of immigrants from the East and threatened to introduce restrictive measures and limit broad freedoms of movement.5 However, does it have the right to do this and is it in accordance with the EU documents? Italy made a bilateral agreement with Romania on intensifying the control measures for coming out of the country
5 There is a lack of new EU official data on the number of migrants. The last official data on the

number of migrants from 10 candidate countries date from 20012002 period. According to them, 1,027,887 migrants had stayed in EU in that period and they came from 10 countries that acceded EU in 2004. According to those data, the greatest part of them had stayed in FR Germany and there were 597,137 of them, while in Italy there were 107,419 of these migrants. Source: Potential Migration from Central and Eastern Europe into the EU-15, Report for the European Commission, DG Employment and Social Affairs, Patricia Alvarez-Plata, Herbert Bruckler (coordinator), Boris Sliversons, DIW, Berlin, October 2003, p.14. For this reason I shall use the forecast data on the number of migrants from the new member countries in FR Germany for 2008, 2009 and 2010, focusing my attention especially on those coming from Bulgaria and Romania (by the so-called High Scenario and based on the model used by the below quoted authors): In 2008 in FR Germany will stay 1,804,246 migrants from 10 countries (acceded in 2004) (this including 383,629 from Bulgaria and Romania), in 2009 there will be 1,975,841 migrants (of which 420,155 from Bulgaria and Romania) and in 2010 there will be 2,115,436 migrants (of which 451,638) from Bulgaria and Romania. These are the forecasts, but in reality, they have gone far beyond. (commented by V.P.). Ibidem, p. 70. I will also quote a datum from the paper on the forecast number of foreign citizens in EU-15 that was made according to the Baseline-Scenario (table A.5) for 2008, 2009 and 2010 for FR Germany, Austria and Italy. These are the countries where there will be most of them and collectively it totals as follows: In 2008 FR Germany 1,591,203, Austria 325, 288, Italy 176,195 migrants, and EU-15 in total: 2,539,017 foreigners. In 2009 FR Germany 1,730,141, Austria 346,260, Italy 187,609 migrants, and EU-15 in total: 2,760,715 foreigners. In 2010 FR Germany 1,842,220, Austria 346,260, Italy 187,609 migrants, and EU-15 in total: 2,939,554 foreigners. The trends of constant rise in foreigners that have settled in these countries are obvious. In the meantime, EU enlarged to 27 member countries, thus making the total numbers much bigger.

84

The Review of International Affairs

and of organised deportation of persons who break the laws of the receiving country, especially when their stay is longer than 90 days. Taking into account the statements of the Italian officials and articles in their press, these measures have not produced satisfying results so far. There is another example that illustrates how serious this situation is. Since 1 January 2007, apart from Romania, Bulgaria has become a new member of EU. According to the official data, when it acceded EU there were 7.6 million inhabitants in Bulgaria.6 The accession of Bulgaria to EU is certainly a turning point in its transition transformation, this making a basis of great expectations of its citizens. Two years later, in 2009, also according to the unofficial data that have not been statistically recorded and which I received from Bulgaria scientists and representatives I made contacts with, Bulgaria has 5.3 million inhabitants! According to these data, in two years this country was left by 2.3 million inhabitants. These are mostly young, physically and mentally most capable Bulgarians that used their inviolable right to freedom. The main destinations of these new Europeans are the following: Germany (16 per cent), Spain (12 per cent), Italy (10 per cent), Great Britain, Cyprus and France (7 per cent each), Austria, Greece (5 per cent each), non-EU countries Canada, Australia and New Zealand. 7 It is hard to say what implications this produces for the receiving countries. But, Bulgarian newcomers have certainly made an additional pressure on meagre jobs creating a new army of unemployed getting on in their Bulgarian ways. Having come to their new destinations in a legal way and with passports of an EU member country they use freedom of movement searching for a new, better life, almost applying the American constitutional recipe of searching for
6 According to the 2007 official census, Bulgaria had 7,932,984 inhabitants. Due to the great

emigration and negative population growth (-0.813 per cent in 2008) according to the census in 1989 the population was reduced from 9,009,018 to 7,262,675 inhabitants (the official estimate from July 2008). According to the official data, the unemployment rate is 6.3 per cent. Source: CIA World Facebook. In this data mess, one can see that officially there is a big outflow of inhabitants of Bulgaria (1,746,343) from 9,009,018 in 1989 to 7,262,675 in 2008. The last unofficial data of 5.3 million inhabitants living in Bulgaria seems striking and very symptomatic. If they are true, it means that almost 4 million people (or more precisely 3,709,018) have left Bulgaria in the last 20 years. 7 According to the official estimates in late 2008, Bulgaria had 7,606,551 inhabitants. Taking into account those data, during 2008 due the negative population growth and migrations the number of inhabitants was reduced by 33,700 inhabitants. By the same data, the decrease is much bigger comparing it with 1990 when Bulgaria had 8,669,269 inhabitants. Since then the number of inhabitants have drastically decreased.

The Review of International Affairs

85

happiness. The unemployment rate in Europe 27 has already reached 8.2 per cent on average.8 Has anyone the right to abolish or restrict that freedom not violating the documents establishing EU as well as other legal ones. The third example and the reason for alert is the following: The Poles have almost flooded Great Britain, Ireland, Germany and to a lesser extent France (as if they had made an unwritten agreement with the Romanians and Bulgarians on the division of the target countries. All jobs that were in the past avoided by British, Irish, German and French workers have been taken by the Poles. With the feeling of solidarity, almost unknown, for example, to the British, they have invited and brought they countrymen creating comparatively compact colonies (the attachment to the Catholic Church has exerted its influence on this) and being ready for the adjustment and even assimilation. The blows of the world economic crisis and mass unemployment have made them become a sort of booke miser for most of the problems in those developed countries and true enemies of British, Irish, German and French workers who have lost their jobs or are unemployed. The xenophobic slogans and movements brutally made start a wave of violence and intolerance towards the immigrants. Above all, such a situation threw a negative publicity on the process of further EU enlargement and was one of the causes for the French rejection of the EU Constitution project at the referendum that took place in 2005. However, are newcomers immigrants at all and may the authorities and citizens of receiving countries treat them like this?

8 Since 2000, the decrease of unemployment rate was the biggest in 2006 in EU-27. The average

unemployment rate in EU-27 dropped from 9 per cent in 2005 to 8.2 per cent in 2006. Observing the EU countries individually there were some of them that recorded unemployment rate below 5 per cent and these are as follows: Denmark and Holland 3.9 per cent, Ireland 4.4 per cent, Cyprus 4.5 per cent and Austria and Luxembourg 4.7 per cent. However, three countries recorded unemployment rate that was above 10 per cent, and these are the following: Germany 10.2 per cent, Slovakia 13.4 per cent and Poland 13.9 per cent. Bulgaria, Romania and Italy reduced their number of long-term unemployed, while in 2006 more than half of unemployed persons in Bulgaria were searching for a job more than a year. Source: Eurostat regional yearbook 2008, Eurostat, European Commission, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2008, p. 85. Perhaps for the above mentioned, this is not the reference year for our research Since that time the situation has seriously aggravated, this particularly including the period from the beginning of the world economic crisis. This has also made a specific impact on the migration policy and economic immigrants in general.

86

The Review of International Affairs

The true nature and legal treatment of freedom of movement One should make a clear difference and consequently treat legally and administratively freedom of movement for: a) EU citizens, particularly those from the new member states who are searching for jobs, stay or settlement, what is in accordance with the rights granted by the EU basic documents, and b) immigrants from third countries. This is the way we are going to structure the study of the above mentioned problems in this paper. Freedom of movement for EU citizens The governments of the EU member countries have before themselves a logical question: how to restrict this huge inflow of citizens from new EU member countries not violating the guaranteed right to freedom of movement. After all, this freedom of movement within EU is not going only in one direction from poorer members states to richer ones. According to the data presented by Hugo Brady, it is estimated that about 750,000 British have settled in Spain in recent years.9 Some EU member countries that in the implementation of freedom of movement of EU citizens went the farthest signed the well-known Schengen Agreement that abolishes any border and passport control or restriction of freedom of movement within the EU borders.10 In other words, once they have passed control on the EU external borders that is being exercised by border polices and supervised by FRONTEX officers EU citizens, this including citizens from third countries move freely within the framework of Schengen Agreement zone of EU member states with no other obstacles, restrictions and controls, with the exception of measures and extraordinary situations related to the fight against various forms of organised crime. 11 The Schengen Agreement provides the zone of police and
9 Brady, Hugo, EU migration policy An A-Z, Centre for european reform Briefing, London,

2008, p. 18.
10 By the treaty signed in June 1985 in Schengen, FR Germany, Belgium, France, Luxembourg

and Holland agreed to gradually abolish their common border controls and introduce freedom of movement for all natural persons citizens of the signatory states, of other EU member countries or of third countries. The Schengen Convention was signed by the five mentioned states in 1990 providing guarantees for the implementation of freedom of movement. The original signatory states were later joined by Italy (1990), Portugal and Spain (1991), Greece (1992), Austria (1995), as well as Sweden, Finland and Denmark (1996). The Schengen Agreement and Convention, together with the decisions made on the part of the Schengen Executive Committee make the so-called acqui that was included in the text of the Amsterdam Treaty since it treats a part of its internal market freedom of movement of people. Source: http://www.mfa.gov.yu. 11 Frontex, the EU agency based in Warsaw, was created as a specialised and independent body tasked to coordinate the operational cooperation between Member States in the field of border security.

The Review of International Affairs

87

judicial co-operation in this field and co-operation in the area of Union external borders control. In the meantime, the principles that were of key significance for signing of the Schengen Agreement proved to be fully affirmative what made the so-called Schengen Zone extend to most of the EU member states. The extension of the Schengen Zone to the East was of historical significance and this occurred on 21 December 2007 when it was joined by the following new members: Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Cyprus, Poland, Slovenia, Slovakia and the Czech Republic. These countries implement this agreement autonomously (but partly) taking into consideration the fact the right to freedom of movement and employment of their labour force is suspended in the 7-year transition period (till 2011 or till 2014, respectively). The zone includes two non-EU countries Iceland and Norway, while Switzerland joined the Schengen Agreement in 2008. Only Bulgaria and Romania, as new member states are not yet ready to join the Schengen Agreement. Great Britain and Ireland, as old member states, decided not to join the agreement, maintaining control of their borders and freedom of movement within them. Approved measures for restricting freedom of movement of people within EU The above mentioned EU basic documents provide only some general and implicit legal restrictions of freedom of movement of EU citizens in other member countries. The Amsterdam Treaty of 10 November 1997 elaborates in detail the conditions, forms and mechanisms of restriction in the implementation of this fundamental human right of EU citizens.12 Various measures for holding back, restricting and legalising economic immigration are implemented in the countries that are most exposed to pressure caused by this phenomenon.13 By
12 Traite d Amsterdam du10.11.1997, Journal officieles Communautes eurpeens, C340, p. 28,

29, 30.
13 According to the latest data the number of economic immigrants in the EU countries with their

greatest inflow is as follows: FR Germany 3.5 million in total, of which 842,000 Turks, 385,000 Italians, 208,000 Serbs; Spain 1,826,000 in total of which 266,000 Ecuadorians, 251,000 Moroccans, 169,000 Romanians; Great Britain 1,773,00 in total of which 154,000 Indians, 152,000 Irish, 151,000 Poles; Italy 1,463,000 in total of which 191,000 Romanians, 164,000 Moroccans, 148,000 Albanians; France 1,456,000 in total of which 304,000 Portuguese, 184,000 Algerians and 181,000 Moroccans. I stress that these are only the officially registered and recorded migrant workers while an enormous number (almost twice as much of newcomers from the EU member states) is not registered or they are staying as tourists up to 90 days. It can be also noted that with the exception of several cases (Indians, Ecuadorians, Algerians, Moroccans, Turks, Albanians and Serbs, of which the latter three are on their way to joining EU) that most of them are EU citizens that cannot be treated as immigrants.

88

The Review of International Affairs

making a bit panicked statements by prime minister Berlusconi Italy was, at least rhetorically, most ardent in announcing that it would introduce greater control and even hold back the inflow of unemployed from the new EU member countries, even it had to change the provisions of the EU basic documents. In practice, it acts in a more balanced way. On the basis of the legitimate restrictions of freedom of movement provided by the EU documents not to violate public order, endanger security and health, Italy recently adopted the law according to which the local civil patrols (city police) had the right to check, search, and investigate suspicious immigrants, while medical doctors should report to the police all patients with no regular identity and work documents, this actually including visas, permissions to stay or certifications of permanent employment. Freedom of movement in EU for citizens of third countries According to the data presented by the quoted British researcher, the EU borders are annually crossed 300,000 times over 1,700 crossings.14 The already mentioned agency FRONTEX, whose Director is Finnish Ikka Laitinen and which is tasked to control the EU external borders and inflow of illegal immigration has at its disposal 21 aircraft, 27 helicopters and 116 ships and in the opinion of many people it has a small budget (68 million euros in 2008).15 Since it was founded, the Agency has made agreements with Libya, Mauritania, Morocco and Senegal, what enabled it to return numerous ships (with about 4,000 people) to the waters these countries control.
14 The EU Mediterranean states were taken by surprise by a sudden wave of mass migrations

from non-European and European countries that reached their ports and island by various vessels. Coast guards and rescue services were too busy rescuing the African and other shipwreck victims from the tragic death, who for the most part were exhausted and sick. The main points these illegal immigrants flew in were as follows: 1) Canary Islands (Spain) only in 2006 31,000 African migrants arrived there. A strict coast control and successful cooperation with Senegal and Morocco has considerably reduced the arrival of illegal immigrants in the following years. 2) Malta with 400,000 inhabitants the smallest EU member state is a very attractive destination for illegal immigrants from North Africa. It has been criticised as an EU weak point of defence from illegal immigration. 3) Lampedusa (Italy) the Italian island that as the geographically nearest European place in the Central Mediterranean is the most frequent destination of migrants from North Africa, especially with thousands of vessels travelling from Tunisia and Libya. According to the data of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Italy only in 2006, 178 vessels brought around 10,000 illegal immigrants to this island. There is a shelter and a reception centre for immigrants. 4) Samos (Greece) a Greek island in the Western Mediterranean is a very attractive destination for illegal immigrants from Albania, Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, etc. Only in the period from January to August 2007 the Greek police located there more than 70,000 illegal immigrants, what is by one quarter more than the previous year. Source: Hugo Brady, op.cit., p. 19, 20. 15 Laitinen, Ikka, Frontex Facts and Myths, November 2007, http://www.frontex.europa.eu.

The Review of International Affairs

89

According to the present data EU absorbs 2 million migrants a year what is in proportions in comparison with its own population more than any other region in the world, including North America... The increase of migration in Europe is a part of the global trend. Cheaper travels and more information bring qualified and unqualified workers from poor to rich countries. According to the current trend UN predicts the increase in the number of migrants by 40 per cent on the world level in the next 40 years (UN: Trends in total migrant stock: The 2005 revision, 2006)... Immigrants have become a subject of the growing severe political debates in many EU countries. Therefore, an information might be interesting on the number of foreign citizens (foreigners) in the total population of EU-25, EU-15 and in the states with the greatest number of foreigners in 2007 that is being presented in the EU official statistics.16 After the EU enlargement in 2004, the inflow of workers to Great Britain and Ireland was the greatest immigration ever recorded in these countries even for a two year period. In the last ten years, the Spanish population has increased by 400 per cent... At the same time, the robust increase of unemployment has contributed to growing concern over the impact of immigration on the local labour market... Many Europeans agree that the co-ordinated effort of EU to regulate migration is not only desirable but indispensable to maintain the right to freedom of movement of people, what is one of the preconditions for the operation of a single market. 17 A special problem in EU is the increasing number of asylum-seekers. Every year millions of people all over the world run away from wars, destruction or persecution searching for protection and shelter. International law has defined the rules to be implemented in the procedure concerning newcomer refugees and the decisions to be made on their requests. This is defined in the 1951 Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. For this reason in 2003, the EU member states agreed to adopt the policy in this field under the name the Dublin Regulation. It provides the uniform legislation treating the requests of potential refugees to be implemented by the EU countries they would first enter. The intention is to prevent economic immigrants that have been granted asylums in one country from using it in another that provides better working conditions or better social care. For this reason, the EU-wide database of applicants
16 The number of foreigners in the total population in 2007 is as follows: EU-25: 28,861,974

foreigners in total (estimate) of which in EU-15: 27,416,282; Germany: 7,255,949 foreigners (estimate); Spain: 4,606,474 foreigners (estimate); Great Britain: 3,659,900 foreigners (estimate) and Italy: 2,938,922 foreigners. Source: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat Site 3 TGM table, Population by citizenship Foreigners (persons). 17 Brady, Hugo, op. cit. p. 1.

90

The Review of International Affairs

fingerprints has been made under the name EURODAC. It enables to return asylum traders or EU applicants whose applications have been rejected to the EU country they first entered. In some official statistical documents EU points out that due to various criteria applied in the Union member states it is very difficult to measure migration exactly. Migration can be extremely difficult to measure. A variety of different data sources and definitions are used in the Member States, with the result that direct comparisons between national statistics can be difficult or misleading. The net migration figures here are not directly calculated from immigration and emigration flow figures. As many EU Member States do not have complete and comparable figures for immigration and emigration flows net migration is estimated here as the difference between the total population and the natural increase over the year. In effect, net migration equals all changes in total population that cannot be attributed to births and deaths.18 The increase of xenophobic and racist feelings and exclusiveness in the EU member states with the greatest number of immigrants and the highest unemployment rate is the cause of special concern. The intolerance to foreign workers is especially prominent in Great Britain where since the outbreak of the current global economic crisis over two million British have lost their jobs. This has been confirmed by the recent research of the London Financial Times. More than three quarters of the polled British (or more precisely 78 per cent) are of the opinion at this moment of crisis that immigrants should leave the island. At the same time, most of the polled British are against that citizens of other EU member states get jobs in their country. Spain has decided to apply a different model. It has offered all foreign workers who are willing to leave the country immediately and not return to Spain in the following three years at least to buy one-way tickets and pay unemployment compensation in regular instalments during this period. According to the official data, more than 5.3 million foreigners live legally in this country of which 2.8 million are not Europeans. Most of them have come from the former Spanish colonies in Latin America (newcomers from the Spanish speaking areas) and from the North African countries. They think that Spain is historically obliged to them, this making the problem more complicated. This is a well-known formula that is being used more and more on the part of the EU countries: to urge foreign economic migrants to return to their home countries by paying them financial compensation to start small and medium business and contribute in this way to the development of their countries and
18 Eurostat regional yearbook 2008, Eurostat, European Commission, Luxembourg: Office for

Official Publications of the European Communities, 2008, p. 25.

The Review of International Affairs

91

families. They sign that they will not return any more (or at least several years) to the countries whose stimulating financial support they have received. This was used in numerous bilateral readmission agreements (return) of our legal and illegal immigrants rejected asylum-seekers, economic emigrants, etc. that Serbia signed with most of the EU countries and Switzerland. This was a prerequisite to continue the European integration process and join the White Schengen List. In the meantime, Ministers of Internal Affairs of Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Poland and Spain meet every six months as the so-called G-6 group. The purpose is to strengthen the practical co-operation between security and immigration services within EU. In October 2008, during the French presidency of EU these countries adopted the European Pact on Migration.19 One of the priorities of the Pact is to put an end to the practice of granting mass amnesty for illegal immigrants in EU. The decision taken by Spain to make legal the stay of 750,000 illegal migrants in 2005 was particularly opposed. In this way, freedom of movement within EU was enabled to them. The fate of EU enlargement and freedom of movement of citizens from new member states. Big discussions in EU are going on the fate of further process of EU enlargement, this particularly concerning the West European countries. This is in accordance with the Thessaloniki Declaration adopted in 2003 and further documents confirming the EU enlargement policy. Regardless of the problems that have arisen after the rejection of France and Holland at their national referendums to ratify the EU Constitution project and the ratification of the Lisbon Agreement overcoming such a situation, we hope that this will not suspend the EU enlargement for a long-term period. For the West Balkan countries, including Serbia in particular, it is of crucial importance since they have reached national consensuses on their European future. At present, there are several options of influential member countries on the fate of the EU enlargement, this also including the enlargement of freedom of movement to new candidate countries or potential candidate countries. France advocates the idea of suspending the process of EU enlargement until the ratification of the Lisbon Agreement is reached and EU with 27 member states achieves its stabilisation. Germany supports the idea of receiving another candidate country Croatia and then to suspend the enlargement process until EU achieves its stabilisation. The other countries, among which are Austria, Sweden, Spain, Italy, the Czech Republic, Greece, Cyprus, Romania and some others support the idea, that after the legal and other harmonisations have been completed as
19 Brady, Hugo, op. cit. p. 11.

92

The Review of International Affairs

provided for by the EU documents, the West Balkan countries should become EU members with no delay or suspension of the EU enlargement process. Till the expected accession to EU on the part of the candidate countries (Turkey, Croatia and Macedonia), Montenegro that applied for candidacy in EU and the countries that endeavour to implement the road map and the requirements they should fulfil by the implementation of the Stabilisation and Association Agreement (Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Serbia) these countries have the opportunity to expand freedom of movement for their citizens within EU by abolishing the required visas or by joining the White Schengen List. Croatia is already on the White Schengen List. Serbia is passing through the final stage of the process of legislative, legal, administrative, police and border adjustment and fulfilment of the detailed requirements prescribed by EU in order to join the List by the end of 2009. In this way, it would enable its citizens freedom of movement within the Schengen Zone with no required visas. For this reason, it is very important to keep on pursuing this process and not restrict freedom of movement within EU or suspend the countries that are on the road to joining EU as their crucial, national priorities for the current economic crisis or the above mentioned internal problems with migrants. Otherwise, it would produce an adverse effect and seriously jeopardise and even probably suspend the process of accession of new member states to EU. These countries set much store by this process and it would also jeopardise the process of creation of a new political geography and the achievement of new stability in the region. Will citizens of the candidate countries or the new EU member states be treated even more severely after the accession to the European family considering the increased xenophobic tendencies and the growth of unemployment? We wish to believe that EU will find a way to overcome the existing problems without applying any serious restrictions of freedom of movement as one of the key assumptions of the European integration. Conclusion In spite of understanding for the serious situation and the reasons for concern expressed by Italy, Spain, Great Britain and other developed receiving countries that are under pressure of the newly arrived cheap labour force, but also of criminals and idlers I think that there are no legal bases in the EU documents for the restriction of freedom of movement of those immigrants. They cannot be treated as illegal immigrants regardless of the problems they cause to the receiving countries. In spite of this, taking into consideration the high unemployment rate, recession effects and the growth of xenophobic feelings and forces some

The Review of International Affairs

93

countries (Belgian Vlaams Blok, French National Front, German National Democratic Party that achieved success in the local and regional elections), after the enlargement in 2004 and especially after the accession of Bulgaria and Romania in 2007 the EU countries introduced a 7-year transition period before opening their labour markets for workers from new EU member states. However, when it ends in 2014 freedom of movements among EU member states will be completed. Then, only the provision on closing of the labour market in state of emergency will remain for restriction of the freedom. It would be implemented if the European Commission, to which the Council submits its proposal, adopts such a decision. Thus, freedom of movement of citizens of member states will remain guaranteed within EU. However, its effects increase tensions between some old and new EU member states, what is also present within the states that are exposed to such immigration. The tensions will be present all until economic reasons (to be eliminated by the accelerated development of new EU member states) for such economic move of citizens from the East to the West and from the South to the North of the European Union cause mass and legally approved migrations. Therefore, since it cannot directly abolish or restrict the right upon which it is based the European Union and its member states should search for new agreed and adopted ways within acquis communuautaire in order to resolve or limit the negative aspects and consequences of the guaranteed and undeniable freedom of movement of its citizens within EU. However, it is of key importance that such mechanisms and measures do not substantially jeopardise, suspend or permanently restrict this crucial right of EU citizens, the right of freedom of movement within EU.