Strategies without Registration

5.3.3 Strategies without Registration

As illustrated above, people without registration in Osh experience far-reaching limitations of their basic services and rights. On some services, they ca n’t just disclaim. Therefore they develop alternative practices without registration. Generally, practices which alleviate the effects of lacking registration operate against the effectiveness of the registration system. If internal migrants find practices which help them to receive services without being registered, they transform the registration system in terms of its diminishing importance. This can again be explained by Mitchell ’s (1991) definition of state as a structural effect: All the practices of society concerning the registration system are more than only the sum of it. Through their practice institutions are reproduced. If internal migrants develop alternative strategies in relation to the registration system, they don’t contribute to the reproduction of the registration system, but reproduce new entities, new sums of practices which create non-state entities which challenge state institutions.

5.3.3.1 Getting Access to Basic Services and Rights through the Domkom spravka

According to the explanation through an interviewed organization and through the research assistant, the city of Osh is divided in territorial units, which are administrated through a house committee, called Domkom. It is elected by the residents of the area. They are responsible to provide communal services and record who is living in which apartments or houses of the area and provide the residents a spravka (certificate) as an evidence that they live in that address.

In the past few chapters we learned that in many cases where usually a registration was required, the internal migrants could help themselves to get access with that spravka of the Domkom. To sum up, mostly they could enter policlinics with that prove that they live in the correspondent area, sometimes also hospitals and sc hools. There were only very few people who even didn’t know about Domkom, or they said that there is no active Domkom in that area.

During the interviews, the researcher had the impression that it seems rather easy to register at Domkom, as almost all of the interviewees had this spravka. If somebody is coming to live in the house of his/her parents in law, he/she has to show the marriage certificate to receive the spravka of the Domkom that he/she lives in that place.

It can be concluded that for some basic services the spravka of the Domkom operates like a substitute for the city registration. Some limitations of basic rights and services become compensated through the acceptance of this spravka through service providers. Restrictions of the state are alleviated to a certain extent, which makes the Domkom to an actor with certain power. The Domkom can be compared to the Mahallah committees in Ubekistan, mentioned by Luong (2004), which are actors representing both state and society. Luong denominate this kind of actor as It can be concluded that for some basic services the spravka of the Domkom operates like a substitute for the city registration. Some limitations of basic rights and services become compensated through the acceptance of this spravka through service providers. Restrictions of the state are alleviated to a certain extent, which makes the Domkom to an actor with certain power. The Domkom can be compared to the Mahallah committees in Ubekistan, mentioned by Luong (2004), which are actors representing both state and society. Luong denominate this kind of actor as

5.3.3.2 Getting Access to Rights and Basic Services through Bribery

Another factor which diminished the importance of a city registration for getting access to basic services is bribery. This practice between internal migrants and service providers like doctors and teachers is again an alternative way to get access to basic services. Because the importance of a city registration diminishes, a registration system with a high prevalence of not registered internal migrants is reproduced. As demonstrated in the chapters above, many interviewed migrants helped themselves to get access to some services with the help of a bribe. Especially for getting access to kindergartens, schools and to medical treatment bribes where often asked if the person didn’t have

a registration. It seems that there, bribery is widely accepted, many migrants just talked about it as a usual circumstance. Some of them didn’t even call it a bribe but as extra money somebody pay from his own wish to get a better treatment:

“We have such kind of bribes, like pocket bribe, own wish, and we just give. They are used to get such bribes. And if you will give some money or something for them, they will look after you very carefully and good. […] And it’s also guilt, the administrative guilty, and guilty by people also. Because they by themselves give money, and they are used for it, the doctors and other offi cials. It is like a habit.” (Nilufar, Osh 201о)

This quotation also shows how this system is kept alive through the bribe giving as well as the bribe receiving person. People pay bribes by their own wish, not because they are asked to pay. But with that, the expectations of the doctors or other officials grow to receive a bribe, because, as the migrant said, they become used to receive bribes, and it becomes to a habit. People know that and think that they have to pay a bribe in order to receive a good treatment. In that way, bribery is continuously reproduced by the people as well as the people who receive. Despite the fact that for most people the wide-spread existence of bribery seemed to be something usual, there was some evidence that it still has some negative attachment: There was one interviewee who didn’t want to tell about his bribery experiences, because he was ashamed of it and di dn’t want to give the researcher a negative impression about the habits of people.

5.3.3.3 Going Back to the Village to Get Services and Rights

“I went to hospital, they asked: Where do you live? Where is your permanent place? If you didn’t grow up here, you have to go to that place and treat there. Not only me, but mostly the internal migrants have this problem. I made a research on it. They couldn’t get treatment here and they went back to their own villages and get this treatment. Or they should give some bribe s for it.” (Bakyt, Osh 2013)

As discussed above in some chapters, many people just go back to their village in situations they would need a registration in Osh. This is especially the case when they need medical treatment, or if they want to participate in the election. Some interviewees told that on election days, there are even transports organized and all internal migrants from the same village travel there together in order to participate on elections. Some migrants even prefer to elect in the village in that way. This aspect shows that some alternative practices of people without registration already became everyday practices; they aren’t questioned or seen as a disadvantage. They are just accepted as a common practice, and the importance of the registration in this certain aspect becomes marginal. Alternative solutions, organized through society by itself, replace state-provided structures, which challenges state as an actor with far-reaching power and challenges its role as the main provider which penetrates society.

Mostly, the travel back to the villages was not considered to be problematic as it wasn’t that faraway and thus wasn’t very costly or time-consuming. Consequently, the less problematic the travel back to the village is considered, the less important it is for the internal migrants to be registered in Osh, in relation to access to basic services and rights. The interviews left the impression that it’s quite everyday practice to go back to the village in order to get certain services and righ ts, it wasn’t seen as something challenging.

5.3.3.4 Pragmatic Reasons not to Register in Osh

During the interviews the researcher came across some cases where internal migrants intentionally decided not to register in Osh. Pragmatic reasons led them to the decision to rather leave the registration in the village: Despite all these limitations of access to basic services and rights, it is not always self-evident for internal migrants that the best solution would be to register in Osh.

Considering the complex administrative procedure to obtain a city registration and the effort the migrants have to put in that procedure, it can be assumed that many migrants just don’t want to bother themselves with that effort. One respondent explained that it would be just easier to stay registered in the village. Some of the interviewees are working every day, so it is difficult for them to make this time-consuming effort to register:

“They said that if I go to the office where propiska is given, they explain how to get it. But I work every day, so that’s why I really don’t have time.” (Sabiha, Osh 201о)

Regarding that most interviewed migrants stated that they didn’t plan from beginning if they come to Osh temporal or permanent because it depends on the opportunities they find in Osh, it is comprehensible that they don’t think too much about register themselves. From FVLWB the researcher learned that this uncertainty is often a reason why migrants don’t think about getting registered. If they aren’t sure about their staying, they don’t think about bothering themselves with complicated administrative procedures to get registered. The complicated nature of the registration discourages internal migrants to register and therefore reproduces the practice to leave the

registration in the village rather than registering in Osh. There is also a fear to lose the registration at all, because they have to deregister in their place of

origin first, before they can get registered in the new place of residence. So if they don’t succeed to origin first, before they can get registered in the new place of residence. So if they don’t succeed to

“Two, three times I tried to get registered. They said that first I should deregister from the origin village to receive propiska but in the village I was warned that what if I was not able to register in Osh. They said I should take care, what will be if I’m not able to register again. So I hesitated because I wasn’t sure that I get registration here, I gave up this ide a.” (Chinara, Osh 201о)

Some people might leave the registration in the village because they aren’t well informed about the law and thus are afraid to lose some rights if they change something. Thus they prefer to leave everything like it is. There were some examples encountered during the interviews where people preferred to leave the registration in the village because they were scared to lose their plot of land if they deregister there. The land was given to them by the government for 99 years, so technically they just lend it rather than possessing it. However, according to the Advocacy Centre and the officials of the passport office and the department for internal affairs, it isn’t possible to lose these property rights through deregistering as these ar en’t depending on registration. Anyhow, all of the interviewed officials mentioned this fear as an important reason why migrants prefer to be registered in the village.

“In 199с or 1998 we were on the list for receiving land. We got much land for our family, and land for field working, and also land for animals. We even rented our land. If we would change the propiska, this land would be lost.[…] Maybe it is just – we thought about it that they only want to fear us. […] But I don’t know about an exact law about taking away the land. Because these lands were given for 98 years, for renting.” (Asel, Osh 201о)

“Because I can’t deregister from Alai, because I have there a land share and all other property over there, so it is better to leave the propiska over t here” (Danyiar, Osh 2013)

These statements show that either the unclear or even incorrect information provided by state or the inappropriate search for information by internal migrants reproduce some fears of internal migrants to lose rights. This reproduction of fear again has implications on the registration system as it reproduces the fear of contact with registration issues.

Beside of these reasons there are more pragmatic reasons which also play a role in the decision where to register:

“From all these residents here, about 25 people have propiska, the others have not propiska because of different reasons. For example social benefits or pensions is given in the village that is why propiska is needed in the village. Most people here have no Domovaya Kniga, because they do not register their ownership in Gosregistry.” (Chinara, Osh 2013)

Indeed in this quote it is mentioned that most inhabitants of the relevant dormitory don’t have appropriate property documents, the interviewee emphasized that there are other reasons like social benefits or pension receiving contributing to the decision not to register in Osh. They are afraid to lose their social benefits which they still receive in the village, if they deregister there:

“If I register here in Osh and deregister from Alai, I will not be able to receive social benefits for two of my kids in Alai. So it is better to not deregister in Alai, in order to keep the benefits.” (Aidana, Osh 201о)

“For example in my case, my husband is a disabled person, he has a category as a disabled person. That’s why we get social benefits. In order not to danger his benefits on disability I don’t make propiska in Osh. […] I still need to receive social benefits in the village I will never change my propiska to Osh.” (Chinara, Osh 2013)

The access to social benefits was often an important factor for the decision where to be registered – in the origin village or in Osh. Migrants who still get social benefits from the villages didn’t want to deregister there, in order not to lose these social benefits from there.

The same considerations were made in relation to the pension. Due to the fact that the pension age in Kyrgyzstan is related to the altitude above sea-level, in many villages people receive the pension much earlier than in Osh. Thus one woman told that she wants to stay registered in her place of origin, because there she will be pensioned already after the age of 45. She didn’t know in which age she would be pensioned in Osh, but she knew that it must be later. So to the question if she would change her registration to Osh, she answered that first she would check the conditions of pension in Osh, and would change her registration to Osh by the age she received the pension age also in Osh.

To the pension as well as to social benefits there seem to be some confusion: While many interviewed migrants plan to stay registered in the place of origin in order to get pension there, there were also respondents who explained that they can only get pension in Osh because they worked there, so they have to change their registration to Osh to be eligible to receive a pension.

These examples demonstrate that the reason why internal migrants aren’t registered in their place of residence is not always that they aren’t able to register; in some cases they intentionally decide not to register because they see advantages in leaving their registration in their place of origin. Thus the high requirements reproduce the fear to lose certain rights and basic services and therefore again reproduce the practice of society not to register in the place of residence.