The Economic and Social Council (CES) has warned of an ‘allegal market’ for administrative appointments in its “Report on the reality of migration in Spain: Priorities for public policies”, which, it warns, leaves migrants in a ‘dead end’. The department headed by Elma Saiz requested the study from the CES ‘to contribute to the diagnosis of this reality and to provide proposals for action with the aim of achieving orderly, safe and regular migration’. The document, was collected by Europa Press at the headquarters of the Ministry of Inclusion, Social Security and Migration in Madrid.
The document reveals that the ‘difficulties’ of accessing an appointment via the Internet ‘have been exacerbated by the proliferation of practices that automatically hoard appointments online and divert them to private circuits, making them available only to certain professional services and in exchange for high fees’.
‘These practices have created an alegal market that profits from foreigners in need and excludes those who do not have sufficient financial resources to pay for the procedures, making it difficult in practice to promote their rights or legitimate interests before the administration,’ says the CES. The CES considers the term ‘alegal’ to be an ‘important nuance’ because this practice is not legal, but it is also not classified as a crime.
This circumstance adds to ‘the difficulties, or outright impossibility for many people, of carrying out procedures electronically due to a lack of means and/or preparation. The combination of all these factors places many migrants in an administrative dead end that can jeopardise their immigration status, access to the labour market or access to certain services,’ it stresses.
For the CES, ‘it is necessary to continue efforts to put an end to the aforementioned practices that can make it impossible to obtain an appointment and to additionally implement alternative mechanisms for obtaining one’. It also highlights the ‘need’ to provide ‘sufficient channels’ for in-person assistance ‘in order to avoid the creation of this type of administrative barrier, both for obtaining appointments and for completing the required procedures.’
With regard to procedures relating to authorisations, access to documents (NIE, TIE, ‘red card’ for applicants for international protection), it warns of ‘considerable territorial disparity’, both in terms of average resolution times and the percentage of applications resolved within the legal deadline of three months. ‘There is thus evidence of excessive delays, with these deadlines being exceeded in some provinces and periods in these procedures,’ it notes.
It calls for ‘greater coordination, simplification and streamlining’ of administrative procedures for migration management and says that it is “essential” to provide ‘adequate’ staffing and material resources to the entire network of offices. In addition, it urges that access to assistance for migrants be guaranteed in consular and immigration offices, ‘avoiding the use of electronic resources for communication and processing, which is positive in itself, from creating new barriers.’