The Rights of Undocumented Migrants in Finland
Different actors’ understanding and representation of the rights in the Finnish
newspapers
Mirkka Ollila
International Migration and Ethnic Relations Bachelor Thesis 15 credits
Spring 2020: IM245L Supervisor: Jacob Lind Word count: 12,867
Abstract
In this thesis I analyse how the rights of undocumented migrants are understood and represented by different actors, such as politicians, public sector representatives, and Finnish scholars, in Finnish newspapers between 2015-2019. I conduct an argumentation analysis of secondary source news articles, drawing on a theoretical framework of Differentiation Theory and Social Constructivist Approach. This study identifies some key factors, which have contributed to the construction of an unclear understanding of undocumented migrants’ rights. My results show that the identified factors have inter alia, led to significant municipal differences in the provision of rights. I argue that due to various factors, the understanding and representation of the rights of undocumented migrants differ widely, thus creating ambiguity to the overall understanding. The findings contribute to earlier research made on the rights of undocumented migrants in Finland as it examines how the rights are understood and represented and could potentially be employed both in policy development and understanding the concept itself.
Keywords: undocumented migrants, rights, Finland, illegality, ambiguity
Table of Contents
Abstract ... 2
Acknowledgements... 5
Introduction ... 6
Aim, hypothesis and research question ... 6
Thesis outline ... 7
Background ... 7
Literature review ... 9
The inadequacy of the law ... 10
The importance of the political context ... 11
Differences between municipalities ... 12
Filling research gaps ... 13
Theoretical framework ... 13
Ontological approach ... 13
Social Constructivist Approach ... 14
The construction of the used concepts ... 15
Differentiation Theory ... 17
Methodological framework ... 18
Sampling and data collection ... 18
Operationalization of the data ... 19
Interpretation of the data ... 20
Methodological implications ... 21
Limitations and delimitations of the study... 21
Validity and reliability of the research ... 21
Strengths and weaknesses ... 22
Empirical analysis ... 22
Differing positions of political parties ... 23
The inadequacy of the law ... 27
The differences between municipalities... 30
Conclusion ... 35
Bibliography ... 37
News articles ... 41
Appendix ... 45
Acknowledgements
I want to share my gratitude towards the Finnish Red Cross where I was able to learn more about the situation of undocumented migrants in Finland which gave me the inspiration to do this thesis;
thanks to my supervisor, who guided me through the whole work, and who shared the same interest to the subject;
and a big thank you to Krasimir who lived in quarantine with me during the whole writing process.
Introduction
Citizenship is often a ticket to various rights that open the door for individuals to enjoy comprehensive state support. A legal status often also defines our place in society (Balkin, 1997, p. 2313). But when the given status excludes a person from these rights the context becomes complex. The way Finland reacted to the increase in the number of asylum seekers in 2015, was to restrict their asylum-related policies. These changes however increased the number of negative asylum decisions, thus accelerating the growth of undocumentedness (Ahonen & Kallius, 2019, p. 95). Several Finnish studies have shown that the scope of the rights of undocumented migrants in Finland differs drastically between its municipalities (Kuusio et al., 2017; Jauhiainen et al., 2018; Ahonen & Kallius, 2019). The reason for this derives from the fact that Finland does not have a law that would regulate the scope of undocumented migrants’ rights nationwide (Finnish Refugee Advice Center: Accessed May 3, 2020). Nevertheless, such a law would be possible to introduce due to the Finnish state having the primary right to decide the scope of the rights through legislation (Jauhiainen et al., 2018, p. 12). As a result, the scope of the rights represented in the media has therefore been unclear. Hence, this thesis analyses the public debate about the rights of undocumented migrants in Finland. To do so, this study will identify the factors which have contributed to the understanding and representation of these rights during the years 2015–2019. The theories used are Social Constructivist Approach and Differentiation Theory, which are applied in the analysis of the material to identify the factors contributing to the presented actors’ overall understanding of the phenomenon.
Aim, hypothesis and research question
The aim of this study is to analyse the public debate about the rights of undocumented migrants in Finland in the years 2015–2019. The study discusses what factors have contributed to the ambiguous and differentiated understanding and scope of rights nationwide. Previous research has highlighted the vulnerability and the conflicting position of migrants in relation to their fundamental rights when they lack a legal identity (Ahonen & Kallius, 2019). Yet, Finland has not introduced a law that would specifically address the rights of undocumented migrants. Hence, this study builds on earlier research of the ambiguous understanding of undocumentedness in Finland and discusses how this ambiguity and the lack of specific
legislation has led to municipal differences in the provision of rights. This thesis argues that the unclear understanding of the concept and the representation of the legal situation has dramatic influences on the scope of the rights of undocumented migrants in Finland. The thesis is guided by the following research question: How are the rights of undocumented migrants understood and represented by different actors in the Finnish nationwide newspapers?
Thesis outline
The structure of this thesis will be the following. Firstly, the background of the research topic presents the current situation of undocumentedness in Finland and continues to cover relevant previous research. The studies reviewed in this section are collected from the fields of political science, social science, and law, and are all connected to the field of international migration and ethnic relations. Thirdly, the theoretical framework and the methodological tools will be outlined and presented. Fourthly, the chosen data is analysed in the analytical section with a discussion of the findings. Finally, the last part will summarize the findings in light of the theoretical and methodological implications as well as present the thesis’ contribution to possible future research.
Background
Despite the fact that undocumentedness as a concept is not new in the history of immigration policy in Finland, it has only recently appeared in its national debate. This is due to the restricted asylum policy caused by the 2015 “refugee crisis” which led to increasing numbers of people receiving negative decisions on asylum (Könönen, 2018, p. 366). In addition, the list of countries of origin designated as safe areas was expanded, the provisions on family reunification for refugees were tightened and the appeal period for those who had received a negative decision on asylum was shortened (Ahonen & Kallius, 2019, p. 95).
In July 2015, the conditions for humanitarian protection were first limited, and in 2016 it was completely removed from the Finnish legislation (Ahonen & Kallius, 2019, p. 96). Hence, residence permits and extended residence permits could no longer be granted on the basis of humanitarian protection (Finnish Immigration Services, 2016). As a result, all the formerly mentioned policy changes have led to a significant increase in the number of undocumented migrants in Finland.
Fundamental rights, such as the right to health, belong to everyone regardless of their immigration status, including undocumented migrants (Kuusio et al., 2017, p. 239). This has
been recognized in several international human rights treaties to which Finland has also acceded. As Kuusio et al., states:
“The most important of these is the UN Convention on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights1, the Convention on the Rights of the Child2, and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination3, and the revised European Social Charter4” (2017, p. 239).
Since 2015, according to Ahonen & Kallius (2019), no residence permit has been issued if, in the view of the authorities, the so-called voluntary return would be possible. In addition, as Jauhiainen et al., (2018) note, as Finland lacks a well-defined and socially accepted concept for the undocumented phenomenon, different names have been used to describe this group. Therefore, this can be partially seen as the reason why the term ”illegal” in the context of undocumented migrants has been embedded in the Finnish society (Jauhiainen et al., 2018, p. 12).
Moreover, this may be related to the way in which Finland has developed two fundamentally different perspectives on undocumentedness (ibid., p. 12). Simply put, the first perspective is an internationally used idea in which the state has the primary right to decide who is allowed to reside in a country, and the second perspective is more humanitarian, whose proponents see that everyone has the right to a dignified life (Jauhiainen et al., 2018, pp. 12-13). As the discussion is very politicized in Finland, and since the key actors have two completely different approaches to the understanding of the phenomenon, the concept itself becomes ambiguous - on the other hand, the ethical and humane perspectives regarding of the rights are recognized and on the other, there is an understanding that Finland should follow its laws and regulations when implementing rights (ibid., p.17). As Jauhiainen et al., (2018) notes, declining the services from undocumented migrants and thereby, pushing them to the margins of the society does not unequivocally eliminate the existing phenomenon (ibid., p. 19).
1 The UN Convention on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights SopS 6/1976, TSS-Sopimus.
https://www.finlex.fi/fi/sopimukset/sopsteksti/1976/19760006
2 The Convention on the Rights of the Child SopS 60/1991.
https://www.finlex.fi/fi/sopimukset/sopsteksti/1991/19910060/19910060_2
3 The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination SopS 68/1986.
https://www.finlex.fi/fi/sopimukset/sopsteksti/1986/19860068
4 The revised European Social Charter SopS 78/2002.
Fundamental rights secure our everyday lives in welfare states, like Finland. However, the lack of legal residence does not diminish the fact that these rights should also be available to undocumented migrants, and securing them, regardless of status, should be a priority for every state. It is therefore important and timely to examine the provision of the rights of undocumented migrants and their understanding in Finland.
There are different ways of having the status of “undocumented”, as well as there are many types of people positioned as undocumented. They are from single persons to families, from children to elderly, and from educated to uneducated (Jauhiainen & Gadd, 2018). This being the reality, the concerns of some state actors often turn to undocumented children due to the fact that their position in society is considered to be amongst the most vulnerable. In 2016, the perspective in the state’s highest administration was, that there would be no undocumented migrants in Finland if the state did not provide them support. However, it soon became clear that the lack of services would be against the law. Thus, at the end of the year 2016, the Ministerial Working Group on Immigration stated that the task of municipalities is to guarantee the necessary basic services for undocumented migrants. This ensured that the rights guaranteed by the Constitution could genuinely apply to undocumented migrants (Finnish Constitution 1999) (Jauhiainen et al., 2018, p. 39). Therefore, the Social and Health Ministry issued guidance in 2016, that municipalities should provide emergency accommodation, meals, and emergency healthcare to undocumented migrants nationally (Ahonen & Kallius, 2019, p. 96). Despite these minor instructions there are large regional differences in the services and access to care provided for undocumented migrants even though the public sector helps them in accordance with the regulations (Jauhiainen & Gadd, 2018).
Literature review
Different factors addressing statelessness and the lack of legal status have been studied, inter alia, as a human rights issue (Foster & Lambert, 2016). These studies range from different forms of human rights repercussions such as from social marginalization to dramatic abuses (Jauhiainen et al., 2018). In addition, when it comes to the rights of undocumented migrants, the political context has significant implications for the provision of services in Finnish society, which proved to be a criterion to delimit the specific studies which were focused on. Hence, relevant studies have been mainly found in the fields of social science, political science, and law. Thus, the field of scholars addressing issues related to the rights of undocumented
migrants is wide and covers many disciplines. Therefore, this chapter reviews previous studies to highlight the factors relevant to this study.
The inadequacy of the law
Undocumented migrants’ right to have rights is often involved in the debate when scholars address human rights issues. The term “right to have rights” is adopted from political theorist Hannah Arendt (1906-1975). By this term she refers to the fact that human rights belong theoretically to everyone, but most often in reality only to those who have citizenship (Kesby, 2012, p. 1). Undocumentedness can often result in discrimination in relation to accessing basic rights, such as healthcare and education (Foster & Lambert, 2016, p. 567). However, as Owen (2018) and Jørgensen (2012, p. 53) state, the approach to the way these rights (human rights) should be interpreted and implemented varies within countries. Therefore, national citizenship is often claimed to be the condition for meaningful possession of human rights, as Arendt has argued (Owen, 2018, pp. 299-300).
Different studies show that the lack of legal status restricts many fundamental encounters between the individual and the state. Moreover, according to Bhabha (2009), no consensus exists whether undocumented children have the right to rights in the national political domain (p. 416). Hence, even in the twenty-first century, undocumentedness has also considerable repercussions for children (Bhabha, 2011, p. 2). In Finland, the rights for undocumented migrants are not defined by laws or regulations, as there is no separate legislation for undocumentedness. Instead, the Social and Health Ministry has emphasized the responsibility of municipalities to provide essential services to undocumented migrants, such as access to emergency care as a general guideline in the absence of law (see p. 9) (Ahonen & Kallius, 2019, p. 100; Finnish Refugee Advice Center: Accessed April 17, 2020). Guaranteeing rights of preventive healthcare and primary education, as the commitment of Unicef declares, reduces human suffering, supports growth and well-being and is cost-effective (Unicef, 2012). In the absence of law the interpretation of the provision of the rights rests entirely with the local authorities (implementation of constitutional and human rights). According to Francesco Cecon (2017), the exercise of cross-referencing UN recommendations might be valuable in terms of pressure used on the state since the rights of undocumented migrants are cross-cutting. With this, Cecon emphasizes the fact that international conventions should apply to everyone regardless of their status (2017, pp. 146-147). This thesis sees that the lack of a
law that would regulate the provision of rights of undocumented migrants creates ambiguity in the overall understanding and accessibility to fundamental services.
The importance of the political context
As previous studies show, the political context is an essential factor in the interpretation and implementation of fundamental rights for undocumented migrants. According to Jørgensen (2012), the politicians in Sweden (apart from the populist parties) have taken more clear positions for addressing the rights of undocumented migrants (p. 55). This has led to an act on the right of undocumented migrants to health services which came into force in Sweden in July 2013 (Kuusio et al., 2017, p. 241). Norway and Denmark on the other hand are offering healthcare for undocumented migrants only in urgent cases (Kuusio et al., 2017, pp. 241-243). Failing to guarantee basic human rights, such as education for children and emergency medical treatment can be seen as a strategy for reducing stimulus for migration (Bartram, 2014, p. 146). For example, the previous government in Finland (Sipilä’s cabinet 2015-2019) represented by the center-right coalition, invoked a phenomenon called forum shopping during its term between 2015-2016, as a justification for restricting the legal position of asylum seekers (Välimäki, 2019, pp. 53-54). With the term forum shopping they referred to the assumption that asylum seekers were expected to make comparisons between EU countries and choose the one with the most comprehensive public services, the most likely asylum, or the highest social benefits (Välimäki, 2019, p. 53). In addition, the Finns Party was the first party in the parliament to bring the reduction of the number of asylum seekers in Finland to the core not only of their immigration policy approach but also as to their entire political goal (ibid., p. 55). However, Jauhiainen et al., (2018) argues that many studies have shown that” illegal” migration is increasing as a result of policy tightening (p. 20).
The use of the term ”illegal migration” in Finnish politics during Sipilä’s government, according to Ahonen and Kallius (2019), communicated implicitly that the immigration and border policies pursued by the state would not have any connection in the growth of undocumentedness in Finland. The amendments in the Finnish Aliens Act in 2016 were a part of these stricter immigration and border policies. This has also been made possible by the fact that Finnish law does not have a well-defined term for undocumented migrants (Jauhiainen et al., 2018, p. 12). The ambiguity of the term ”illegal” creates an opportunity to be used to incite fear, to create perceptions of the links between immigration and crime, as well as justifying tighter immigration policies (Ahonen & Kallius, 2019, p. 98). In addition, in 2017, the Finnish
Police Board avoided the use of the term “undocumented migrant”, but instead favored the term “illegal” (Jauhiainen et al., 2018, p. 12). As Ahonen and Kallius (2019), and Jauhiainen et al. (2017) points out, the deliberate use of certain concepts can be used to create ambiguous images of undocumented migrants to the political and social contexts. Hereby, this study analyses how the use of specific terms in relation to undocumented migrants can affect the understanding of the phenomenon.
Differences between municipalities
Finland is not an exception with its gap between the official guidelines and social reality in relation to the services offered for undocumented migrants (Jauhiainen et al., 2018, p. 19). The lack of clear instructions regarding the care and education of undocumented migrants complicates the work of various state actors also in Finland (ibid., p. 19). As Kuusio et al., (2017) states, the addressed instructions to healthcare services for undocumented migrants are not following any special laws, but an action plan which means that the guidelines are only a recommendation, leaving the power to decide on the scope of the treatment for the municipalities (p. 244).
In Finland, municipalities are responsible for organizing social and healthcare. The scope, content, and manner of organization of the services defined in the legislation are decided locally. The law defines the main social care, public health, and special care services that municipalities must organize, but does not detail the scope, content, or way in which the services are organized. Thus, there may be differences in the services provided by municipalities (Social and Health Ministry: Accessed May 7, 2020). According to Keith (2017), many risks for undocumented migrants arise from the practical challenges of irregular migration mixed with the systematic discrimination in civil registration and nationality procedures all around Europe (p. 267).
In addition, Finnish studies showed that the amount of undocumentedness increased during the years 2015-2019 (Kuusio et al., 2017; Jauhiainen & Gadd, 2018; Jauhiainen et al., 2018; Ahonen & Kallius, 2019). In 2017, it was noted that the change in undocumentedness that year had increased. However, the exact numbers are difficult to ascertain due to irregular migration (Jauhiainen et al., 2018, pp. 23-25). Despite this, it has also been found that there are relatively more undocumented migrants in the Helsinki metropolitan area than in other municipalities (ibid., p. 25). Undocumentedness thus is an urban phenomenon in Finland. The
study of Kuusio et al., (2017) also shows, that Helsinki and Turku offer the most comprehensive services for undocumented migrants (p. 240).
However, this does not eliminate the reality that there are undocumentedness all over Finland. Therefore, undocumented migrants are already in an unequal position in terms of access to services, depending on the municipality in which the person(s) resides (Kuusio et al., 2017, p. 243).
Finally, many of the Finnish scholars mentioned above have expressed their concerns regarding the lack of specific laws concerning the rights of undocumented migrants in Finland. Therefore, the contribution of this study in relation to earlier research is, to raise the awareness of how the scope of the rights of undocumented migrants is understood and presented in Finland.
Filling research gaps
Research about undocumented migrants has been conducted in many European countries and in the United States. However, there has been only a limited amount of studies concerning the scope of their rights in general. According to Cvajner and Sciortino (2010), this is due to that irregular migration is a rather recent phenomenon (p. 390) in such a wide context as it is in a contemporary global world at this moment. In Finland, research on undocumented migrants focuses on what has led to an increase in the phenomenon rather than on the scope of their rights. Hence, this study aims to analyse the public debate about the rights of undocumented migrants and examine the factors that have contributed to the understanding and representation of these rights. Finally, previous studies on this matter have not been comprehensively focused on the importance and ambiguity of the accessibility to fundamental rights, let alone pointing to the political debate which causes confusion to the overall understanding of the concept. Therefore, this study argues that these aspects should be taken into account and examined profoundly in order to widen the understanding of social patterns that are related to the phenomenon.
Theoretical framework
Ontological approachThis research adopts a constructivist approach as its ontology which recognizes social phenomena, such as “illegal migration”, as a product of our own making rather than as a part of our natural world (Moses & Knutsen, 2012, p. 9). The perspectives deriving from social
sciences, law, and political science were relevant to examine when researching the area around the explored phenomenon. Since undocumentedness is a complex phenomenon that the constructivist approach identifies as being a product of our own making, its understanding requires knowledge from several perspectives that can be embedded to supplement the knowledge of it. Therefore, when exploring the rights of undocumented migrants it is essential to take into account various factors that are related to the phenomenon and its formation in social life.
The constructivist approach sees the variety of realities constructing the knowledge and concepts of social phenomena, like undocumentedness, as this study is referring to. As Silverman states;
“The most important insight of constructionism is its emphasis on the rhetorical and constructive aspects of knowledge: that is, the realization that facts are socially constructed in a particular context” (Silverman, 2014, p. 31).
Although constructivists are intensely interested in what is going on in the social realities, they mainly raise questions about the processes through which these realities are constructed and sustained. Therefore, as Silverman mentions, the analytical focus is primarily on the construction of social realities (Silverman, 2014, p. 30). Consequently, this study examines the social realities of different state representatives in order to gain an understanding of the studied phenomenon.
Social Constructivist Approach
Social Constructivist approach is a theory that has developed from the Constructivist Approach as a relatively new approach that emerged at the beginning of the 1990s. The Social Constructivist approach takes international relations into consideration as a social relations network, which is essential to notify since the complexity of undocumentedness is a transnational problem. Due to the complexity of the undocumented phenomenon, Social Constructivist Approach identifies alternative viewpoints in order to form a better understanding of the studied subject (p. 146). Thus, Social Constructivist approach is capable of analysing and taking into account a variety of local factors affecting the rights of undocumented migrants - the relations between the state and the society (Büyüktanir, 2019, p. 147).
Moreover, Social Constructivism “(...) focuses mainly on how the agents and structures mutually construct each other and on identities, norms, and interests without wandering away completely from the rational standpoint” (Büyüktanir, 2019, p. 142). Therefore, as Büyüktanir explains, the effects of the 2015 ”refugee crisis” on the migration policies of the EU can be explained through identities and norms in addition to the economic reasons (ibid., p. 151). This perspective is important for the analysis section, due to it analyses the understanding and representations of different social actors as this study agrees with the constructivist point that the world is socially constructed. In this respect, the Social Constructivist Approach provides a wider framework for the recognition of various factors related to the understanding of the rights of undocumented migrants. In addition, Social Constructivist approach is capable, as mentioned before, to examine how different factors socially construct each other. This approach will be used to identify and to explain the main factors of the debate on the rights between different state actors.
In addition, Social Constructivist Approach helps this study to emphasize and understand those elements (arguments), which have caused approved or critical political and social reactions or attitudes towards undocumented migrants and their rights during the years 2015–2019 and are represented in the nationwide newspapers (Büyüktanir, 2019, p. 152). As a result, Büyüktanir argues that, for example, resistance to and/or acceptance of the changes brought to European countries by the 2015 “refugee crisis” has had an impact at the domestic, social and political levels (ibid., p. 152). Therefore, this study examines these levels in order to make an understanding of the implementation of the rights of undocumented migrants in Finland. Furthermore, the Social Constructivist Approach highlights also, that understanding the undocumented phenomenon can be built congruently with the state and the society involving in continuous and mutually constructive ways, as different interpretations are represented in the media for example (ibid., p. 150).
The construction of the used concepts
As Social Constructivist Approach sees that different factors are mutually constructing knowledge, which can also change within the social mobility of information, it is able to understand the continuum of phenomenona. Social phenomenona, like undocumentedness, changes when factors such as the political context towards it alters, as the previous research section showed. Therefore, this section addresses the concepts used in this study, since they
can be connected to the construction of knowledge and are able to change within the continuum of the phenomenon.
According to Jørgensen (2012), the deliberate use of the term “illegal migrant” can be seen as a policy tool in presenting such migrants as unentitled and thus, placing the migrants outside the law and norms of the society (p. 51). He also points out that the former term can be compared to terms such as irregular migrant, undocumented, paperless, and sans-papiers (ibid., 2012, p. 51). However, comparing these terms together without an understanding of their meaning can be misleading. Additionally, as Jauhiainen et al., explained, due to the lack of a well defined and socially accepted concept for the undocumented phenomenon, the term “illegal” has had a ground to embed into the Finnish society (Jauhiainen et al., 2018, p. 12). This study will not be using the term “illegal” to describe undocumented migrants due to “calling a certain group of people “illegal” denies them their humanity” (PICUM, 2020). Moreover, as mentioned earlier, “illegality” as a form of status can be used to justify a category of people who are undeserving of rights (PICUM, 2020). However, this term will appear in this text due to its use in the selected material for the analysis. It will be analysed in order to highlight that the use of the term “illegal” is discriminatory, implies criminality, and has impacts on policy and public perception (PICUM, 2020).
Instead, the term “undocumented migrant” will be used when referring to people who have overstayed their legal stay in the country and are in a risk of deportability (Jørgensen, 2012, p. 49; Bartram et al., 2014, pp. 144-145). The term “deportability” was introduced by anthropologist Nicholas de Genova (2002) and discussed by Sager and Öberg (2017). De Genova argues that “Migrant “illegality” is lived through a palpable sense of deportability, which is to say, the possibility of deportation, the possibility of being removed from the space of the nation-state” (De Genova 2002, p. 439). Migrant irregularity is connected to the continuum of deportability, as Sager and Öberg (2017) present, due to this categorisation is temporary, changing, and most importantly, constructed by nation-states through their control of human mobility (p. 4). Thus, deportability should be understood as a continuum and not a fixed state. Therefore, this thesis uses also the term “irregular migration” to express the irregularity of the status “undocumented migrant” as presented in this section.
In Finland one can end up as undocumented due to various reasons such as; a person residing in the country without a residence permit, coming outside the EU or EEA countries or Switzerland; the person’s residence permit has expired or entry/residence is not legal; a person who has come to Finland from a place other than EU or EEA country or Switzerland and whose
right of domicile is being processed or is unclear (Social and Health Ministry: Accessed April 11, 2020).
In Finnish, the common word used to describe undocumented migrants (used primarily to replace the concept of “illegal migrant”) is “paperiton”. The direct translation to English would be “paperless”. However, since there can be other “paperless” than just those who are facing the risk of deportation, I believe the term “undocumented migrant” describes the people who are a risk of deportability better, and the latter is therefore used in this study.
Differentiation Theory
Scholars Cvajner and Sciortino (2010) point out that the lack of empirical framework concerning the significance of irregular migration is notable also as a theoretical flaw, due to its effects can be seen in various social realities. Therefore, it is almost impossible to implement only one theory to explain the complex understanding of undocumentedness. Differentiation Theory, which stems as an approach from Social Theory (sociology), and anthropology is, however, used creatively in many migration studies to explain the difficulties of, for example, EU migration policies, the reasons for the lack of correspondence between societal interests and immigration policy outcomes, and the uses of expert knowledge in immigration policies (Cvajner & Sciortino, 2010, pp. 391-392). In addition, according to Albert and Buzan (2010), “differentiation is about how to distinguish and analyse the components that make up any social whole” (p. 315).
Moreover, the basic idea of the differentiation theory, according to Cvajner and Sciortino, “is that contemporary society has no head, no base, and no center, but is articulated in a plurality of specialized subsystems that have their own set of symbolic codes, leading values, operational programs, and regulative means'' (2010, p. 392). Moreover, the starting point for this approach is the assumption that world society is functionally differentiated, but in addition to that, each subsystem also has its own form of internal differentiation (ibid., p. 393). In relation to irregular migration, in a differentiated society, the externalities of other subsystems and the internal structure of the state both are producing a variety of constraints to states’ attempt to define who is the irregular foreigner (ibid., p. 395). In this thesis I argue that relevant factors concerning the unclear concept of undocumentedness can be found from the internal subsystems. These factors could be for example, the provision of public sector services which are acting in accordance with the way the state (i.e. politicians) is guiding them to act. More specifically, since there are no specific laws concerning the undocumented migrants’
right to rights in Finland, the functioning of different subsystems (e.g., schools and health care institutions) is independent of political decisions (Cvajner & Sciortino, 2010, p. 398).
A further implication of differentiation society, as Cvajner and Sciortino see, is the dissolution of any widespread criteria for inclusion or exclusion from society (2010, p. 397). However, this study focuses on identifying the internal subsystems related to the undocumented phenomenon. Furthermore, this theory will be used in this study due to its ability to emphasize the identified internal factors as a part of the understanding and representation of the rights of undocumented migrants.
Finally, the above theories have been chosen to support the analysis of this study because they address relevant findings for this analysis. An important consideration is also that the chosen theories support each other which is important when exploring undocumentedness since there are yet no singular theories that would cover the complexity of the phenomenon on a large scale. Since this study examines different actors’ understanding and representation of the rights of undocumented migrants, it is more reliable to use similar theories that address the possible factors differing only in their emphasis.
Methodological framework
Sampling and data collectionThis research presents the results of an analysis that has been produced by looking at indirect data. This refers to data collection where the researcher uses data that has been produced by someone or something else, for example, documents or photographs (Whitehead, 2016, p. 115). Indirect sources, or secondary sources are used for example in historical research, where the relevant data can be reached only by relying on secondary sources (Moses & Knutsen, 2012, p. 122). For constructivism, indirect data can be seen as relatively typical collection method, due to it being close to hermeneutics, which is a methodology of interpretation that mainly focuses on the interpretation of historical texts. This can be seen as a basic method for constructivists as it fits their ontological and epistemological tendencies - patterns are socially constructed and one can understand them in the context that gives them meaning (Moses & Knutsen, 2012, p. 201).
As a result, this study is an empirical study based on qualitative analysis. Qualitative research describes phenomena in context, interprets processes of meanings, uses theoretically based concepts, and seeks ‘understanding’ (Silverman, 2014, pp. 4-5). Therefore, this study
seeks to identify the factors that are contributing to the understanding and representation of the rights of undocumented migrants in Finland, by analysing indirect data.
The sampling for the study is chosen according to preselected criteria (aim(s)/research question) which was relevant for the analysis of the research. Hence, this type of sampling is called purposive (purposeful) sampling. This sampling is a popular approach in qualitative research (Whitehead, 2016, p. 112). Purposive sampling is seen to provide information-rich cases as the sample is carefully selected from the material which demonstrates that the content is necessary and relevant due to statuses, experience, and knowledge presented (ibid., p. 112).
Operationalization of the data
The sample for the analysis was selected from news articles which met the established criteria in order to analyse the understanding and representation of the rights of undocumented migrants in Finland. The sample is selected from national newspaper articles published during the years 2015–2019. These specific years were looked at in the analysis due to the actions which were taken in order to decrease the inflow of migrants after the 2015 “refugee crisis” (Könönen, 2018, p. 366).
According to the research of Digital News Report 2018, which was comparing the use of news in 37 countries, Finland was the country where news is trusted the most (Karvinen, 2018). The newspapers used in this study are all available online, and are called; Helsingin Sanomat, Yle uutiset, and Uusi Suomi. Helsingin Sanomat (Helsinki Newspaper, my translation) was chosen as a sample due to it being one of Finland’s most widely circulated newspapers. Yle uutiset (Yle news, my translation), according to the Digital News Report, is Finland’s most trusted news media (Karvinen, 2018). Uusi Suomi (New Finland, my translation) newspaper is nowadays only available online and it was chosen as a sample due to it representing the format being the number one media for political news and speeches (Almamedia). This study is looking at sixteen news articles and three opinion pieces in its analysis section.
In order to find articles that were connected to the phenomenon and the scope of the rights in Finland, the search had to be made in Finnish. The keywords used in the search for data were; paperittomat Suomessa (“paperless in Finland”, my translation) and paperittomat (“paperless”).
Using other terms in data search such as “laiton maahanmuuttaja” (“illegal immigrant”, my translation) showed articles that concerned mainly other countries than Finland, and was,
therefore, not used. Data retrieval facilitated when the name of the newspaper was added to the end of either keyword. The exact samples were chosen by going through approximately 40 articles manually, by including the ones which met the criteria and were relevant to look for the analysis and excluding the articles which did not meet the criteria. The set criteria were, that all articles were supposed to consider either undocumented migrants in Finland, their rights, the political context related to the latter, or present different actors related to the debate. The above measures proved to be the most pragmatic in terms of data breakdown.
Moreover, the idea for theme-related sections emerged while reading all the samples. Presenting the collected data in themes creates clarity in the structure of the analysis, as well as in the understanding of the phenomenon under consideration. Additionally, this is typical when performing the analysis by using argumentation analysis (see, next section). An analysis organized by themes gave me a chance to focus on specific viewpoints regarding the social construction of the understanding and ambiguity of the rights of undocumented migrants in Finland.
Interpretation of the data
The analytical part of this thesis will be based on the data collected from secondary sources. The three central themes of the analysis section were formed to concern specific factors which this study identifies as important to be viewed as influencing and contributing to the examined phenomenon. The research question was designed to leave space for the analysis to consider the results of the selected material and still address the rights of the undocumented migrants as represented by the various actors. The analysis focuses on the examination of the social realities around the studied phenomenon by addressing argumentation analysis.
Argumentation analysis “is about bringing argument into the foreground of social research on public debates” (Liakopoulos, 2011, p. 153). Argumentation analysis aims to offer a thorough methodological view of the argument structures so that the understanding of the factors influencing the development of public debates is improved (ibid., p. 2). As Liakopoulos explains, the traditional approach of argumentative analysis views arguments as a process and a product. With this he refers to the structure of the argument: the process is a series of statements used as claims, by following a series of statements used as justification for the former. Therefore, the product refers to the way the examined arguments become a part of an action in the general context of the debate (2011, p. 3). In addition, Liakopoulos mentions that argumentation analysis can be seen as a form of content analysis (p. 17). As an argumentative
analysis, content analysis is an accepted method of textual investigation which transforms certain important aspects of the text into themes or, and units of analysis (Silverman, 2014, p. 116). This thesis aims to analyse the arguments of the selected samples and thus form an understanding in order to answer the research question; How are the rights of undocumented migrants understood and represented by different actors in the Finnish nationwide newspapers?
Methodological implications
Limitations and delimitations of the study
The relevance of outlining the limitations and delimitations of this study is to show the understanding of the research topic and the factors influencing it. The delimitation of this study is expressed in the research question by addressing the rights of undocumented migrants in Finland. The chosen sample sets another delimitation to the topic. The main focus of this research is to analyse how the rights of undocumented migrants are understood and represented by different actors in Finland. The limitations that might influence the results is the lack of empirical studies made from the phenomenon in Finland (Ahonen, 2014; Kuusio et al., 2017; Jauhiainen et al., 2018) as well as the translation of the arguments analysed. Due to the selected material being in Finnish, it is possible to lose something in the translation which could be important for the analysis.
Validity and reliability of the research
To ensure the validity in this research the approach used is called comprehensive data treatment (Silverman, 2014, p. 102). By this approach, Silverman refers to a way where the researcher inspects and compares the data until the generalization is feasible to every piece of relevant data collected (ibid., p. 102). As the undocumented phenomenon has not yet been studied empirically in Finland, its validity has been able to be verified well. In addition, when dealing with a text (articles from newspapers), the data is already available and it does not need to be filtered from the notes from the field (ibid., p. 86). In principle, textual data, therefore, is more reliable than observations (ibid., p. 86).
Strengths and weaknesses
Secondary data, which is used in this research include various ways for data collection (e.g. documents, histories, newspapers, diaries, stories etc.) (Eriksson & Kovalainen, 2008, p. 82). Secondary data, or rather textual data in this context, therefore gives the viewer a broad platform from where to select sources that are relevant for the conduct of the research. As mentioned in the previous section, Silverman talks about comprehensive data treatment (Silverman, 2014, p. 102). Due to news articles being information which already exists, they have strength in explaining the research topic in depth and in detail, as the researcher can compare various articles and information and widen the understanding of the topic at various levels (ibid., p. 102). Therefore, new perspectives and approaches might arise during data collection. Additionally, textual data accepts and through critical appraisal creates a good foundation for the phenomenon that the study examines, but also leaves space for different discourses which may arise as a result of an examination of relevant matters.
In addition, news articles as secondary source materials are timely to be used as samples when analysing a relatively new phenomenon since the role of media influencing public opinions is another growing phenomenon in a globalized world, as Moses and Knutsen are referring to with an example of a study (Moses & Knutsen, 2012, p. 65). The phenomenon of undocumentedness has an important role in modern media as it is a factor in shaping political, economic, and social attitudes (ibid., p. 66). Furthermore, textual information provides factual information on how conventions and laws are regulated and enforced, which contributes to the understanding of the factors examined in this study. Textual data also offers flexibility in data collection as well as in the level of understanding the phenomenon.
Although the general assumption, as mentioned, is that textual data is more reliable than phenomenon observation, it is also possible that not all data is from reliable sources (Silverman, 2014, p. 102). As this can happen relatively easily, if the researcher does not check the reliability of the data, it might have a significant influence on the reliability of the whole research. Moreover, since secondary data can offer various forms of data, it can be very time consuming to check the reliability of all data, especially if there is a lot of information to analyse.
Empirical analysis
The analysed data will be presented in relation to three central themes that I have identified in the empirical material, namely: “The differing positions of political parties” “the inadequacy
of the law” and “the differences between municipalities”. These themes were emphasized in the previous research as well as in the collected material and were therefore chosen. In relation to these themes, I will identify different factors that have contributed to the understanding and representation of the rights of undocumented migrants in the Finnish public debate. The specific focus of my analysis is put on the arguments made by different actors arguing for different perspectives on the rights of undocumented migrants in Finland. Lastly, the analysis presents a discussion of the results.
Differing positions of political parties
In my material debates between different politicians’ understandings of, and political positions on the rights of undocumented migrants show that there are differences in perspectives and approaches at the national and local levels. Eight news articles from the selected data covered specifically the extension of the rights of undocumented migrants in Helsinki and the different approaches to them by political representatives. In these debates, different arguments for and against undocumented migrants’ rights occur, and through an analysis of these arguments different understandings and representations of these rights can be identified.
In 2015, the government (Stubb cabinet 2014-2015) had prepared a bill to expand the healthcare of undocumented migrants. The proposal had already been approved by the members of the Parliament, and it was therefore assumed to be clear. However, on Kari Rajamäki’s5 (Congressman of Social Democratic Party) proposal, Parliament left the Health
Care Act on the table just before the end of the Diet of Helsinki, and so the act was repealed (HS, 2018a)6. Pilvi Torsti, a member of the Social Democrats in the Helsinki City Council who supported the Healthcare Act, commented on her party colleague’s actions as follows: “The deliberate failure to present the initiative was fundamentally contrary to the global values of the Social Democrats” (HS, 2018a). Torsti sees that the health services for undocumented migrants should at least meet the guidelines and recommendations issued by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health and the Department of Health and Welfare in 2016. Due to Rajamäki’s actions, the healthcare of undocumented migrants in 2015 remained limited to treatment in urgent cases at their own expense in Helsinki (YLE, 2015a). This shows that the political division between the members of the Social Democrats has been present in the media
5 Rajamäki (Appendix, p. 45)
6 The quotations are in italics in order to highlight their importance when using argumentation analysis. The
abbreviations for the articles are HS (Helsinki Newspaper), YLE (Yle news), and US (Uusi Suomi “New Finland). The references for the articles can be found from pp. 41-44.
since 2015. The way in which Torsti refers to the Social Democratic Party’s global values refers to international agreements to which Finland has also acceded in order to respect its residents’ fundamental rights (see p. 7). Here, the Social Democratic Party’s understanding and representation of the rights of undocumented migrants’ is presented vaguely in my material since they are unable to agree on a coherent approach that would serve both national and local levels. This also sheds light on how complex the interpretation of this phenomenon in Finland appears to be. The differentiation in between the perspectives of these politicians could be understood through Differentiation Theory as they are constructed in “individual” subsystems (Cvajner & Sciortino, 2010).
In 2017, Veronika Honkasalo7 from the Left Alliance represented an initiative in the Helsinki City Council that concerned a significant extension of the rights of undocumented migrants in Helsinki and it was supported by the Green Party, the Left-Alliance and the Swedish People’s Party of Finland. The Coalition Party and the Finns Party opposed and the Social Democrats were split in two again (HS, 2017a). Despite the latter, the extension of the services was approved with numbers 45-39. The reinstatement was supported by the delegates of the Coalition Party, the Christian Democrats, the Finns Party, and six Social Democratic delegates (US, 2017a). Riikka Hurri, a writer of an article in Helsinki Newspaper clarified that: “The decision meant that from 2018, undocumented migrants would be entitled to treatment for chronic diseases, oral healthcare, and vaccinations in Helsinki. Prior to the decision, undocumented migrants were only entitled to emergency health services, such as first aid” (HS, 2019a). The chairman of the Finns Party, Jussi Halla-aho8 immediately commented the adoption of the initiative in 2017 the following way: “With its decision, the Helsinki City Council is actively destroying the credibility of the Aliens Act and the asylum procedure” (HS, 2017a). To which Mirita Saxberg, a member of the Coalition Party joined by saying, that: “(...)
those who are staying illegally in the country should rather be deported than having access to “free” treatment” (US, 2017a). Furthermore, Halla-aho went on to point out that: “The city government should ensure that Helsinki does not make proposals that are likely to increase illegal residence and are in conflict with the state’s goals of reducing illegal residence - the services of illegal residents cannot be better than the residents of the city of Helsinki” (US, 2017a). All and all, the word “illegal” was used three times in one article by Halla-aho. The term “illegal” appears in four different articles throughout the selected material. In each
context, the term is used either by Halla-aho himself or by one of the representatives of the Finns Party. With these comments, Halla-aho defends his party’s position not to exercise the wider rights of undocumented migrants by appealing it to the destruction of the credibility of the Aliens Act. Additionally, by referring to the state’s goal to reduce “illegal” residents from Helsinki it might appear, from the readers’ point of view that the initiative by Honkasalo in 2017 would be violating the law. In addition, the intentional use of the term “illegal” to describe undocumented migrants can be used to dehumanize, discriminate and incite fear, as well as create links between immigration and crime (Ahonen & Kallius, 2019, p. 98; PICUM, 2020). Therefore, it could be argued that the media representation of the Finns Party and Halla-aho concerning undocumented migrants and their rights creates an ambiguous and negative image by referring them as criminals.
After the adoption of the 2017 initiative in Helsinki, evidence has shown that access to healthcare of undocumented migrants had not increased the so-called attractiveness of Finland. Still, the Finns Party has continued to attempt to repeal the initiative (US, 2017a). In 2019, the Finns Party proposed that the city of Helsinki should only provide emergency medical care for undocumented migrants, and argued that the city is only required by law to provide emergency care. In the proposition, the Finns Party argued that “the security situation in our country has changed to such an extent that all pull factors that may contribute to staying illegally must be eliminated” (HS, 2019a). Furthermore, during the same year (2019) the Finns Party openly stated that “Finland must immediately introduce systematic detention of those who have received a negative asylum decision. The only direction for these people should be away from Finland” (US, 2019a). These comments reveal that still last year (2019), the Finns Party’s
representation of the rights of undocumented migrants focused on distorting the understanding of undocumentedness as well as to emphasize their “illegaliness”. This refers to Differentiation Theory where the understanding of social reality is constructed in subsystems (Cvajner & Sciortino, 2010). Therefore, this theory shows that the Finns Party’s understanding of undocumentedness is through what could be called “illegal-ness”. Moreover, by referring to the security of the country, and arguing for increased use of detention can be understood as an attempt to attach understandings of undocumentedness to criminality. The use of these terms can also be represented deliberately as political tools for justifying the Finns Party’s ideologies for stricter immigration policies. From a Social Constructivist Approach, their focus on demonizing the understanding of undocumentedness and their right to rights can be understood as an example of how there is an ongoing struggle over how social reality and social concepts should be understood. The pursuit of stricter immigration policy is also linked to the concept
of “continuum of deportability” presented by De Genova (2002), which emphasizes that deportability as a concept may change its shape as the policies concerning it alters (p. 439).
Lari Malmberg, the writer of an article in Helsinki Newspaper emphasizes in his piece that the arguments that arise in these discussions can be reduced to four categories - “The
proposal made by the city government to the city council is opposed above all by the so-called attraction theory. The initiative is defended at least with humanity, pragmatism, and rhetoric based on the interpretation of the law” (HS, 2017a). He clarifies that “Attraction Theory appears in the speeches of many members of the Coalition Party and the Finns Party. According to it, expanding social and health services would attract more undocumented migrants to the country” (HS, 2017a). Here, the four categories are; attraction theory, humanity, pragmatism and rhetorics, which Malmberg separates to two different approaches represented by the Finnish politicians above, and rather refers to it as an “ideological war” as he has written in the title of the article (HS, 2017a). These two approaches refer in particular to the dichotomy of political perspectives in this section (Jauhiainen et al., 2018, p. 12).
An interesting point is that in most of the eight articles in my material where the debate between different political parties emerges, the Finns Party’s ideologies were represented to a greater extent than those of those who have appealed for the extension of the rights, like the leftist parties. It is interesting due to the representation of the rights by the center-right parties has not exactly concerned the content of the rights, but has rather criticized its extension. The leftist’ parties representation of the rights however, includes also the explanation of the extended content. This could, therefore, refer that during 2015–2019 the overall understanding and political representation of undocumented migration in Finland was attached rather to negative than positive perspectives.
A member of the Green Party, Sanna Vesikansa9 explained to Helsinki Newspaper that: “the aim is for Helsinki to provide the necessary social and health services to all undocumented migrants. Now the extended services are only offered to pregnant women and children. It is hoped that undocumented migrants will have access to, for example, vaccinations and mental health services. They would receive the same services as asylum seekers” (HS, 2017b). When compared to Halla-aho’s comments on the extension of the rights, Vesikansa appeals to more humane and pragmatic reasons. Her understanding and representation of these rights are based on the content of the initiative itself, rather than how these would possibly affect negatively in Finnish society. However, when these two completely different approaches
are represented in the same article the overall understanding of the phenomenon becomes unclear in the public debate. Therefore, since there is no coherent approach for solving the issue, the representation once again becomes contested and ambiguous.
The inadequacy of the law
As the previous research section showed, the rightlessness of undocumented migrants can be seen as violating international human rights. Therefore, the extension of rights was defended by undocumented migrants’ right to constitutional and human rights. Several political actors have hoped that the extension of the rights will spread nationwide from Helsinki, so that Finland complies with the international conventions it has adopted, as well as its constitution. This section emphasizes the understanding and representation of undocumented migrants’ rights by appealing to the right to constitutional and human rights.
The chairman of the Feminist Party, Katja Aro commented on the adoption of the Helsinki bill (2017) in the following way: “the decision will set the direction for national policies on undocumented migrants’ services. Our party believes that the decision is intended to promote the well-being of vulnerable undocumented migrants and at the same time prevent marginalization” (US, 2017a). Aro adds: “With its decision, Helsinki safeguards the fundamental rights of undocumented migrants in accordance with the level required by human rights treaties. Helsinki shows that municipalities can act humanely and equally when the country’s government is unable to do so” (US, 2017a). Additionally, Vesikansa (the Green Party) has also pointed out that: “it is cost-effective to take care of chronic diseases systematically rather than leave it to the emergency care” (HS, 2017a). This could be understood through Social Constructivist Approach as it aims to identify factors which are mutually constructing knowledge about social phenomenon. The Feminist Party and the Green Party in this context are thus, representing their mutual understanding of the issue through humane and pragmatic perspectives (Büyüktanir, 2019); HS, 2017a). Furthermore, in her argument, Aro uses words such as vulnerable and marginalization which are used to point out, that undocumented migrants are also humans with rights and a life. Direct reference to safeguarding the fundamental rights required by human rights treaties expresses that the extension of healthcare for undocumented migrants is a national responsibility. Vesikansa, in turn, seeks to show a more pragmatic approach to the decision to adopt the initiative by referring to its economic viability.
Emma Kari10, a representative of the Green Party emphasizes the importance of securing the rights for undocumented migrant children by the following way: “Unfortunately, the current government admits the problem exists, but they are not going to do anything. This is a mess. So the situation continues and some children are not getting treatment in this country” (YLE, 2015b). With the first sentence in her argument Kari refers to the fact that Finland has no separate legislation for undocumented migrants which would regulate their rights (Finnish Refugee Advice Center: Accessed April 17, 2020). Aro also referred to this in the previous paragraph. However, Kari points out that: “They (children) have the same rights regardless of the status of their parents in society. The child is never to blame for his or her own situation. - Finland has also signed the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which commits all children to be on the same line in Finland'' (YLE, 2015b). She also stated that: “Of course, I would like this situation to be remedied throughout Finland and not just Helsinki. This government has been appealed to by all Finnish children’s organizations and human rights organizations. The Medical Association, for example, has been campaigning for years to get this law in place, but unfortunately there is no political will” (YLE, 2015b). Here Kari pays attention to two important themes. First of all, she points out that the provision of rights changes only in Helsinki, not nationally. This highlights the fact that, as Differentiation Theory explains, there can be subsystems inside of subsystems (Cvajner & Sciortino, 2010). Within Helsinki, there are many subsystems that are constructing their knowledge mutually (healthcare institutions, political institutions), but Helsinki can also be seen as a subsystem when compared to the whole of Finland. However, as knowledge is built within a subsystem, the understandings and representations have also differences. In this case, the reality of the interpretation of the phenomenon changes significantly in Helsinki. Secondly, she pays attention to that not only politicians are constructing the understanding of the undocumented phenomenon, but different organizations as well, which have their own interpretation and representation of the matter, which refers to both Differentiation Theory and Social Constructivist Approach (Büyüktanir, 2019). All and all, emphasizing the rights of children could be understood as appealing to humanistic universal values (The Undocumented project: Accessed April 17, 2020).
In addition to the representation in the media which refers to humanity, Professor of Law, Juha Lavapuro commented on the extension of the rights of undocumented in the following way: “The right of undocumented migrants to care for a dignified life is a fundamental and human right. The constitution requires that these rights be guaranteed to
everyone in Finland” (US, 2017b). He also added that “Helsinki is now operating here as it should be in accordance with the Constitution and human rights treaties” (US, 2017b). In addition to constitutional and human rights, these arguments are referring to that in Lavapuro’s opinion, these rights should be extended nationwide. Furthermore, Lavapuro makes an interesting point by saying that: “It is one thing to make Finland’s immigration policy, which is the responsibility of the government and parliament, and another thing to safeguard the human rights of individuals, and Helsinki has decided to take active steps to safeguard these rights. That is the key thing here - not what Finland’s immigration policy should look like” (US, 2017b). Here he emphasizes that clear instructions from the government concerning the municipalities would help the services to implement the rights of undocumented migrants and clarify their marginalized position in society (Foster & Lambert, 2016, p. 567). He also refers to the differentiation of responsibilities, which in this context occur at the national and local levels, as the national being the state and parliament, and the local being the municipalities. Here the fulfillment of responsibilities is differentiated within the understandings and actions made to improve the services for undocumented migrants. Therefore, this could be explained by using Differentiation Theory (Cvajner & Sciortino, 2010).
Two opinion articles in Helsinki Newspaper in 2017 and 2018 by Helsinki Deputy Mayor Nasima Razmyar and Marja Pentikäinen, the Head of Department of Helsinki Deaconess Institutewere issuing the undocumented phenomenon from the human rights, and welfare society perspectives. Razmyar commented on the situation in the following way: “There is a need for coherent national guidelines on how to ensure the necessary care required by the Constitution and international human rights treaties for every person, regardless of status. Creating a parallel system for those who do not have a legal residence permit is a challenging issue, but must take care that, for example, children and pregnant women are taken care of” (HS, 2017c). Additionally, Pentikäinen comments that “It is not part of the Finnish
welfare society that we drive people to the margins without hope. The next government must have the courage to make decisions that support both human dignity and economic well-being. These two things are not in conflict” (HS, 2018b). As Lavapuro, Razmyar is also emphasizing the need for coherent national guidelines to the undocumented migrants’ right to rights (Kesby, 2012, p. 1). Razmyar and Pentikäinen both, are pointing out that parallel system or/and marginalization is not solving the problem in Finland, on the contrary. Their articles are also presenting undocumented migrants as humans in a vulnerable position who should be secured by respecting human rights.
