How difficult is it to settle down and have a life in Mexico; and to what extent does it

First of all, it is not difficult for most of the nationalities to enter and stay in Mexico since Mexico does not require a visa (Maria, personal interview, May 2, 2017) and provides a potential 180 days stay in the country as a tourist. Although having an employment, studying or staying in the country permanently do require a valid visa. (Ley de Migración, 2016)

As for the government’s standpoint on migration; Mexico has a double-sided migration policy: the emigration of masses of Mexicans to the United States is dealt with as a priority; however on the other hand, the issue of immigration to the territory of Mexico has no great importance (Zoltán, personal conversation, April 11, 2017), what is more the

“government limits the rights of foreigners” (González-Murphy & Koslowski, 2011, p.

1). It is due to three reasons: First of all, the issue of Mexicans in the US involves substantial economic considerations as already discussed in the previous chapters: the remittances Mexican migrants send home yearly highly contribute to the economic situation of the country, as well as to the welfare system. However, Escobar and Janssen (2006) state, that the geographical patterns of emigration are not linked to the level of poverty (p. 10).

Secondly, the Mexican migration policy does not favour great extent of immigration to the country. Especially not the immigration of people from less developed countries, such as from Central America. (Zoltán, personal conversation, April 11, 2017) In the legislation of migration one can find evidence of possible restrictive measures against

large migration flows, for instance in the Ley General de Población (González-Murphy

& Koslowski, 2011, p. 4; Zoltán, personal conversation, April 11, 2017). Thirdly, the influx of immigrants to the country is not significant compared to the population of Mexico (Zoltán, personal conversation, April 11, 2017), especially since only a very small percentage of those who enter the country decide to stay; the majority is in transit towards the United States (Maria, personal interview, May 2, 2017).

In general the migrants did not note major difficulties in settling down in Mexico, however one of the migrants in COMI (Migrant 1 of Migrants in COMI, group discussion, May 2, 2017) stated that his asylum request was rejected. Most of them in COMI were staying in Mexico without documentation or with a humanitarian visa. Those who are legal immigrants in Mexico, such as Cálix (video interview, May 4, 2017) and Mesri (personal interview, April 11, 2017) have never experienced difficulties during the official procedures. Although, as Mesri (personal interview, April 11, 2017) noted we must distinguish “privileged” immigrants – those who come of their own free will with an affluent, educated background – from those who decide to leave their country due to coercive factors. For the so-called “leisure migrants” for instance who come from developed countries mostly from the United States and Canada, to a smaller extent from countries such as Switzerland or Italy, Mexico can provide a high quality life without major difficulties. These leisure migrants are usually old aged pensioners who come to Mexico to escape from the colder months in their country or because they have health problems such as asthma or rheumatism. In addition, their currency – usually dollars – is more valuable in Mexico: they can afford buying their own property and the access to private health care. (Benson, 2015, pp. 12-13; González-Murphy & Koslowski, 2011, p.

7; Maria, personal interview, May 2, 2017; José, personal interview, May 3, 2017) However, the public insecurity, the presence of criminal groups and corruption in the country might be deterrent factors (Zoltán, personal conversation, April 11, 2017).

As already discussed, the high level of corruption is one of the biggest problems in Mexico that affects basically every segment of the everyday life of residents. According to Mesri (personal interview, April 11, 2017) and José (personal interview, May 3, 2017),

there is a general institutional transparency in the country: for instance the information about the laws and regulations, on the legal procedures are publicly accessible. The salaries of public officials, the structure of institutions are also published. According to them the problem with the bureaucracy is the high level of corruption and that only the above-mentioned type of technical details are transparent, but there is no transparency in the political decision making and the cash flow accompanying it.

Concerning the general image of the National Institution of Migration (INM), as public opinion surveys and the findings of my randomly spread survey also demonstrate, the population of Mexico trusts the agency to a low extent. (Alba & Castillo, 2012, p. 7) On the rating scale for the question “To what extent do you consider the authorities, the police and the security forces correct, reliable and transparent?” 6 out of 13 respondents of the survey chose the most negative option: “not at all, and I am afraid of them”. No one chose the top of the scale “they are always reliable” answer.

These findings correspond with the fact that INM is often criticized for being corrupt and for taking measures it is not authorized for; what is more for being involved in violations, abuses against migrants such as kidnappings and tortures. On the other hand, since officials often cooperate with criminal organizations and smugglers, they might guarantee the “detention-free” journey of migrants in exchange for money.

I personally experienced the lack of harmonization of the INM institutions of different states: theoretically the local migration institutions are coordinated on a federal level, therefore the regulations must be the same in every state. However, when I asked for an official permit to stay twenty more days in the country after my tourist visa (180 days) expired, the following happened: I travelled to Oaxaca – using my personal connections – to apply for the paper. I paid the official price of the procedure and received a permit that allowed me to stay for an additional 20 days in the country. The official in charge retained my migration form – the paper tourists have to fill in at the airport and save it until they leave the country – saying the new paper I received substitutes the migration form. Two weeks later in the state of Quintana Roo, when I tried to check in at the airport

the personnel refused giving me the travel documents since I had no migration form.

After four hours of dispute and phone calls to the head of migration affairs – who was my personal contact -, the only solution was to pay the fine for loosing the migration form – same amount I paid for the extension of the visa – then filling in the form once again.

As my personal experience shows, even though there is public information on the legal procedures one can still have difficulties in complying with the regulations. Although, as Fuentes (personal interview, April 27, 2017) stated, “if you have money, all the laws are available for you.” In connection to the issue José (personal interview, May 3, 2017) noted that local migration authorities create internal regulations that are not published and are often unconstitutional. Alba and Castillo (2012) state in their study, “there is evidence that INM is trying to improve its public image and, in doing so, gradually becoming more effective” (p. 7).