States have the prerogative (along with the attitude) to be as silent as to visa requirements and reasonable (or unreasonable) as to the satisfaction of these requirements. There must be explanations for this: anti-immigration policies, prevention of foreign trafficking, profiling (especially Filipinas), etc. It is also possible that this is some form of overt discrimination against foreign applicants. They can’t do it directly, so they make it difficult in terms of paperwork. What is really the core explanation which we should openly discuss?
It may also be that some Filipinos, knowing or not knowing the consequences of their actions, have made it difficult for other Filipinos who have legitimate reasons (at least in the eyes of the state of entry) for travel to actually get visas. For instance, if you are looking for work, why go on a tourist visa? Why is this happening? There are also anecdotes about Filipinos working in foreign embassies being more draconian and more disrespectful than the foreign nationals working in those same foreign embassies. This is the so-called “nang-iipit” syndrome. What could explain this?
It may also be that we need their visa approval; therefore, we are subject to their rules and ways of doing things. For instance, I applied for a visa in a French embassy in Germany. The requirements were a bit vague and I needed to clarify with my contact in the embassy. My contact can’t seem to answer the most basic of questions. (What kind of photos would you want? Biometric or regular?) I brought everything which I think would be required along with the bare minimums and I made tons of copies (just to be safe). When I got there, it took only half an hour and I got the visa right there. The contact was quick and courteous, but the email correspondence was frustrating.
The influx of immigrants is always thought to be a bad thing by some, especially when an immigrant can be paid cheaper. This stirs up a lot of emotions about lost jobs in politicians’ rhetoric, further fueling the usually neutral sentiments of the state’s citizens. When living in a welfare state, children of immigrant families or children of mixed-race families get coverage as with children of “real” citizens. This latter statement is very unfortunate despite people willing to tolerate, wanting to embrace or learning more about other cultures. But you will hear this or something analogous when it comes to letting foreigners into a country. It is highly doubtful that reciprocity can solve this. In fact, reciprocity will arise once the core problem of anti-immigration sentiment has been solved.
Incidentally, a little economics, a little faith in market forces and a little seeing what is unseen could help in shedding light on these immigration-related problems. Hopefully, we could discuss this in another post.
Thank you M. Romero for your contribution!
4 comments
Comments feed for this article
June 12, 2012 at 11:07 am
A contribution and a response 1 |
[…] to content Home ← Assorted Links 2 Response to “Inconvenient to be Juan” → June 11, 2012 · 4:30 pm ↓ Jump to […]
June 13, 2012 at 3:04 pm
Jacq Romero
I think that states are being overcautious. I agree, we can not blame them because it is their prerogative. However, I think the the government should address this overcautiousness. Surely one should not equate every visitor to illegal immigrant, especially if there is a specific purpose (e.g. conferences, meetings with collaborators). Unfortunately I do not think our government recognises the problem, the status quo has been the status quo for years (as with many other things of course!). I hope that someday we will live in a world where we don’t just have to suck it up because we are Filipinos.
June 13, 2012 at 3:49 pm
Andrew Pua
I agree that certain states are overcautious. Unfortunately, our government does not have enough bargaining power to effect changes to the status quo. But I think things will change slowly once we see foreign citizens moving to the Philippines (especially with the European crisis and the yet to be fulfilled potential of the Philippine economy).
In fairness, I think the government recognizes the problem, especially with the highly controversial POEA clearance. The government (AFAIK) also filters some of the foreign requests for manpower. The good intentions behind these measures is to protect Filipino workers from abuse by ensuring that contract terms are favorable, insurance is made available to the worker, etc. One of the good side-effects is that the government is in effect sharing in the burden of uncovering illegal workers. One of the bad side-effects is the non-optional setting of any Filipino wishing to work abroad as an OFW (with corresponding fees and dues to be paid to POEA). Having the government participate in this problem might not be so straightforward.
July 17, 2012 at 7:13 pm
ilcapitano
Visa and immigration policies are certainly conditioned by a lot of politics and the states’ experience with people coming into their country and, unfortunately, coming from a developing country which apparently doesn’t have a lot of strong ties or bargaining power, we are at the inconvenienced end of the scale…
Another inconvenience, which I know personally, is as to how our country views this brain drain issue and the mechanisms we take to act on this… in particular, I’m referring to the case of DOST scholars who are, in a sense, encouraged by the government to take science courses in our country (through the scholarships) but, however, are restricted to take chances on professional development abroad (e.g. graduate studies)… It is possible for a scholar to go abroad to study, yes (e.g. I am here in Italy now!) but one has to jump through “extra hoops” to do so… another inconvenience, in a sense… and after formal studies (which ends in a PhD), further restrictions are imposed for pursuing further training (scientific training in the rest of the world, obviously does not end with a PhD)…
I think that these policies (although I know that these have been questioned during a recent debacle featuring the DOJ and the Supreme Court) are restrictive and are, ontologically, punitive rather than reinforcingly positive and reflects a somewhat “narrow perspective” of the government on scientific and professional formation.
———-
On another note, personally, I’ve never experienced any “extra barriers” in visa applications for different countries by virtue of me being Filipino — usually, the fact that I’m a “scientist-in-training” trumps that… but then again, other than for Europe, my only other experience was in Japan.