Reykjavík Grapevine - 25.08.2006, Síða 10

Referees and judges in football,
baseball and tennis are like shad-
ows, and don’t make us strongly
aware of their existence. But we
sports fans know how important
they are in creating great matches.
Unfair refereeing in a football game
or poor judging of whether the ball
is “in” or “out” in tennis can really
ruin a game.
Iceland is a democratic republic
which is governed by the rule of
law. Though we might be imper-
fect, we do a fairly good job of this.
Citizens here are required to follow
the rules that the nation decides
and provides, as are foreigners who
are staying here with a residence
permit, and in spite of some
exceptions, most of us immigrants
respect the laws of the nation and
are trying to follow the rules.
There are several things that
I want to point out by making an
analogy between the immigrant
experience and a sports match, but
first I will take up the importance
of “good refereeing”. I mean here,
with the word “refereeing,” the way
that we handle immigrants’ need
to be shown what to do in order to
live and work in Iceland. And the
referee here is the Directorate of
Immigration (Útlendingastofnun).
My work is all about immigrant
life in Iceland. Administrative or
judicial matters aren’t a direct part
of my work, yet I am involved in
them every now and then. I have
observed some examples of “bad
refereeing” by the Directorate of
Immigration in the last few years.
Let’s take first some examples
where the referee has done a bad
job of explaining the rules to the
players:
1. Two men from an EU nation
came to Iceland to work as interns
at an institute for a little over six
months as part of their university
studies. They went to the Directo-
rate of Immigration and filled out
the form to apply for a residence
permit. After waiting for two hours
to speak with someone, they were
told that they didn’t have to apply
because they were only staying for
a short time. After they returned
to their office, their boss wondered
if this was really true, and called
the Directorate of Immigration. It
turned out that these fellows were
in fact supposed to apply for the
residence permit after all. They had
to go back and repeat the whole
process from the beginning.
2. A man from outside the EU lives
here under a permanent residence
permit. He had to go back home
to take care of his sick parents and
wound up staying longer than he
planned. I cautioned him that he
was supposed to tell the Directo-
rate of Immigration if he would be
away longer than 18 months. His
daughter contacted the Directorate,
but was told he didn’t need to do
anything. My colleague wanted to
confirm this, and asked again. It
turned out that he in fact did need
to file a statement with the Direc-
torate that he intended to return to
Iceland.
3. An Asian student came to
Iceland to study for one year. Her
residence permit was valid only for
the first semester, after which she
had to renew it. The Directorate
of Immigration’s website said that
she had to submit information
about her “success in her studies.”
She got a letter from the school
saying that she was doing fine. The
Directorate of Immigration replied
that what “success in her studies”
really meant was that she had to
submit her first semester grades,
which were not ready yet. This was
nowhere explained on the website.
They also required her to resubmit
proof of her finances, even though
the bank statement she had origi-
nally submitted showed enough
funds for the entire year.
These are just a few examples but
the point is clear. One officer says
A, and then another officer says B,
and the real answer can even be C!
Such incidents happen so often that
I feel like “Ah, not again...,” almost
without being surprised. This lax
attitude towards giving people
the correct information was not a
problem a few years ago, when the
Directorate of Immigration was
very f lexible and always willing to
consider each immigrant’s indi-
vidual circumstances. Now that the
Directorate is stricter, immigrants
need to be clearly told the rules of
the game.
Another sort of problem arises
when the referee does not treat the
players with dignity and respect, or
forgets how important the referee is
as a moral example to the players.
At the Directorate of Immigration,
there is, for example, an unwilling
attitude at reception, and one must
stand and talk to the staff through
a window rather than sitting down
in mutual respect at a table. If you
call, you must wait for a long time
on the phone and sometimes you
get cut off. Surprisingly often, the
Directorate loses application forms
and supporting documents, includ-
ing difficult-to-replace originals
from the applicant’s home country.
I would like to emphasise this
next point very strongly: In every
single case of mis-refereeing by the
Directorate, it is we immigrants
who get yellow cards and even red
cards. And then we are “out” of the
game.
I am not trying to make a personal
attack on the Directorate. I hardly
know the staff personally and on
principle I try to avoid making
their acquaintance. I am trying
to point out the fact that a lot of
undesirable mis-refereeing is really
happening, and I want the Directo-
rate to make some effort to reduce
those cases.
This doesn’t mean at all that
the staff in the office is unfriendly
or irresponsible. I know that the
Directorate is making an effort to
bridge the gap between the office
and the immigrants, among other
ways by hiring staff of foreign
origin. I know that the number of
cases that the office has to cope
with is increasing enormously.
Nevertheless, that should not
be an excuse for misguiding immi-
grants or handling them unfairly.
My broader criticism goes
in a different direction from the
Directorate itself. It is f irst to the
authorities in the Icelandic govern-
ment who are charged with the
fair and appropriate administration
of the laws in this country. If it
is obvious that the Directorate of
Immigration is under too much of a
burden, why haven’t these authori-
ties acted to maintain the quantity
and quality of the Directorate’s
staff? Maybe in part because they
aren’t hearing any complaints by
immigrants.
And this leads me to a second
broader criticism. Why do we never
hear complaints about the Directo-
rate of Immigration in any public
forum, even though they are in the
air all around us? This is because
in most of the cases we immigrants
are not in a secure enough posi-
tion to make public complaints
free of risk. Who dares to offend
the referee who is holding one’s
destiny in his hands? But this keeps
us voiceless. I think the respon-
sible authorities and the public
media should pay more attention
to the existence of immigrants and
should try to dig up what is really
in our minds instead of asking the
stereotypical questions of “How do
you like Iceland?” or “Is Icelandic
difficult to learn?”.
A good referee is not a gift
from Heaven. S/He is created by
society and is living proof of that
society’s democracy, freedom and
maturity.
Toshiki Toma is the pastor for im-
migrants in Iceland.
Fair Play Needs a
Good Referee
by toshiki toma
opinion
In every single case of mis-refereeing by
the Directorate, it is we immigrants who
get yellow cards and even red cards. And
then we are “out” of the game.
How to stay alive
in the North Atlantic
Lysi Cod Liver Oil is a rich source of polyunsaturated fatty acids and vitamins A and D with added vitamin E. The omega-3
fatty acids EPA and DHA have been a special focus of interest for researchers worldwide. These fatty acids are known to
play an important role in preserving health. Lysi Cod Liver Oil has been an important part of the Icelandic diet for decades
and is perhaps one of the contributing factors to the longevity of the nation.
Natural, lemon and fruit flavors