Information about the Registration System

5.2.2 Information about the Registration System

The information provided from the state directly determines how much the society knows about the registration system. The knowledge again influences their practices in the context of registration. Therefore this chapter should reveal in what extent the state informs, and further the implications of the extent of information on society should be revealed.

5.2.2.1 Passport Offices

As already mentioned before, procedures related to registration take place in the passport office (see photo 13). As Gupta (1995) argues, interactions between state and society usually happen on the local scale through officials on the lower levels of bureaucracy. The passport office is the physical space where state and society actors meet and interactions emerge. As every city has its own registration office, this interaction happens on the low level of bureaucracy, the level of local self-governance. Internal migrants who want to register in Osh encounter the officials who issue the city registration. As the registration process happens in those passport offices, they can be identified as the main spaces of state-society interaction in relation to the registration system. According to Gupta (1995), those interactions on lower levels of bureaucracy basically contribute to the way how the society imagines the state. The way how the passport office operates provides insight in which extent the Kyrgyz state corresponds to the model of Bureaucracy of Weber (1968). Thus the state-society interactions on the local level of the passport office are of high importance for state-society relations and should be analysed closer in order to detect interactions of state and society which reproduce each other in relation to the registration system.

In Osh, there is one single passport office. Up to three years ago, it used to be a part of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. There, the passport and registration control was also subject to the passport office while nowadays it doesn’t have such responsibilities anymore. Moreover, after this reorganization the passport office works according to the one-window-approach. This means that for all the issues related to passport and registration somebody can go to this one single place instead of running from one department to another. According to some interviewees this saves much time and also gives less room for corruption because there are fewer steps in collecting all the documents. This can be approved by the observations of the researcher: Everything was in one room, and the officials worked on desks, covered with glass. There was a cashier desk where all the payments have to be done. In this way, everything seemed to be quite open and transparent. In comparison the researcher visited some other registration office in villages around Osh, where officials worked in a separated office, and the clients had to enter the office one by one. This way allows less transparency and openness. The one-window approach complies with the second principle of Weber’s Bureaucracy model which informs about the supervision: “The principle of In Osh, there is one single passport office. Up to three years ago, it used to be a part of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. There, the passport and registration control was also subject to the passport office while nowadays it doesn’t have such responsibilities anymore. Moreover, after this reorganization the passport office works according to the one-window-approach. This means that for all the issues related to passport and registration somebody can go to this one single place instead of running from one department to another. According to some interviewees this saves much time and also gives less room for corruption because there are fewer steps in collecting all the documents. This can be approved by the observations of the researcher: Everything was in one room, and the officials worked on desks, covered with glass. There was a cashier desk where all the payments have to be done. In this way, everything seemed to be quite open and transparent. In comparison the researcher visited some other registration office in villages around Osh, where officials worked in a separated office, and the clients had to enter the office one by one. This way allows less transparency and openness. The one-window approach complies with the second principle of Weber’s Bureaucracy model which informs about the supervision: “The principle of

Photo 13 & 14: Passport office in Osh (left) and table in the passport office with templates of forms (right)

(Source: own photo)

5.2.2.2 Communication and Information on Registration through the Passport Office

The passport office is responsible to provide information about the registration procedure. If somebody visits the passport office, he first has to go to the information desk and tell what he needs. There he will be either sent to another desk which is responsible for his need, or he will get the needed information. The information can be either written or orally. During the observation the researcher noticed that there are many written information about topics related to passport issues: there were 14 little lists which provided all the information about the required documents for specific passport issues. Howeve r, for registration issues, there weren’t such lists. In comparison to other registration offices around Osh, neither there was a blackboard which would provide information. The information about registration and deregistration issues are only provided orally from the worker on the information desk. Nevertheless there was some help provided for completing the relevant forms: In the middle of the passport office, there are some tables where someone can find examples of completed forms which are required for the registration or deregistration, which seem to be intensely used (see photo 14). According to the third principle of Weber’s Bureaucracy model “the management of the modern office is based upon written documents” (Weber, 1968, p.50), impersonality and objectivity can be guaranteed through the transparency emerging out of the compliance with this principle. Written documents are the same for everyone, while oral information is more depending on the person, thus the objectivity and impersonality can’t be guaranteed. Thus it can be stated that the provision of information on the registration system in Osh doesn’t conform with Weber’s model of Bureaucracy as it is not highly transparent.

The interviewees without registration who asked in the passport office about the needed documents told that the officials there were supportive and helpful. They explained which documents are required for the registration. When the question was asked to the officials, how they support internal migrants in the registration pro cess, they said that that they aren’t able to do anything for people who don’t have all the documents. If they bring all the documents, they can register them; otherwise it isn’t possible to do something. In general, they don’t provide support for people who have difficulties with collecting documents, but if someone has no own property to register, they told that they suggest to register in someone else’s place. This can be approved by the answers of the internal migrants: They also reported that they went there to ask what to do if they don’t have a property to register, and the officials suggested them to find a relatives place to register.

Generally, it seems to be rather rarely that somebody went to the passport office to get information about the registration in the first place. When the researcher asked the internal migrants who didn’t have a registration in Osh where they can receive information or if they go to the passport office to inform themselves, mostly they negated. Yet many of them didn’t know exactly which documents they need for the registration, mostly they didn’t seek information in the passport office.

In addition to that statements, the researcher never encountered people who just went to the passport office to inform themselves in her three half-day visits on the passport office. People came there to handle specific issues with their registration while they knew exactly which documents they need for that. If they were asked why they don’t ask for information, they answered either that t hey didn’t know that the passport office provides these information or that they don’t think they have a chance to register anyway.

Internal migrants might not see the officials as providers of support. They more interact with officials if they already know what they have to do. If the internal migrants don’t know that the passport office provides information on the registration process, it is a sign that the communication from the side of the state is not well established. A further reason why internal migrants avoid looking for information in the passport office might be that the trust in state actors is rather small. They don’t expect any support from the state. According to Ruget and Usmanalieva (2007), the low level of trust in state can be a consequence of the weakness of the state. As discussed above, the passport office doesn’t provide any written documents which contain information on the registration procedure, they just inform orally. Therefore trust would be important for state-society relations in the context of the registration procedure as there is no guarantee that the officials act objectively and give true information if it is only orally. However, it can be also assumed that the internal migrants don’t look for information because they fear to get punishment instead of help, as they don’t comply with the law if they aren’t registered. Considering that the registration office formerly was a part of the Ministry for Internal Affairs and therefore shared the building with the police department, it is quite likely that in the minds of people, the registration office is still connected with the ministry of internal affairs and therefore with police and control. As Gupta (1995) describes, the imagination of state becomes constructed through the interactions with state actors, mainly on the local level. If internal migrants already interacted with the passport office by Internal migrants might not see the officials as providers of support. They more interact with officials if they already know what they have to do. If the internal migrants don’t know that the passport office provides information on the registration process, it is a sign that the communication from the side of the state is not well established. A further reason why internal migrants avoid looking for information in the passport office might be that the trust in state actors is rather small. They don’t expect any support from the state. According to Ruget and Usmanalieva (2007), the low level of trust in state can be a consequence of the weakness of the state. As discussed above, the passport office doesn’t provide any written documents which contain information on the registration procedure, they just inform orally. Therefore trust would be important for state-society relations in the context of the registration procedure as there is no guarantee that the officials act objectively and give true information if it is only orally. However, it can be also assumed that the internal migrants don’t look for information because they fear to get punishment instead of help, as they don’t comply with the law if they aren’t registered. Considering that the registration office formerly was a part of the Ministry for Internal Affairs and therefore shared the building with the police department, it is quite likely that in the minds of people, the registration office is still connected with the ministry of internal affairs and therefore with police and control. As Gupta (1995) describes, the imagination of state becomes constructed through the interactions with state actors, mainly on the local level. If internal migrants already interacted with the passport office by

5.2.2.3 Other Sources of Information and Support

Some internal migrants wanted to inform themselves about the registration procedure, but didn’t know where to find information. For example, one woman told that she would go back to the village and look for information there. Others asked in different departments or in the major’s office. Again another migrant answered that, if she would look for information, she would ask the Domkom in her own village. This lack of knowledge again indicates that state doesn’t inform adequately about itself and its institutions. For some parts of the society like those internal migrants who don’t know about fact that they can find information on the registration procedure in the passport office, the interaction with state seems to be very rare. Many migrant s didn’t even made that step to go to an official place to ask about the registration system. They used their informal contacts and just asked familiar people or their family:

“I have sisters, and also there is one uncle. He is well educated and always advise us what to do and h ow to do. We will ask him.” (Aidana, Osh 201о)

Support of Civil Society Actors

There are mainly two NGO ’s operating in Osh which – amongst other things – are specialized on problems of internal migrants with registration issues. One of these organisations, the Advocacy Centre for Human Rights, works mainly through awareness raising and supporting self- organization. Their clients are organized in groups which always determine leaders, for whom the organization provides trainings to build capacity and support their mobilization:

“Our mission is – first of all – the support of internal migrants, they are illiterate, they don’t have self-organization, they don’t have attitude solving problems and following laws, and they can go to the protesting to squares, and within such internal migrant communities we have leaders, we provide them trainings, train them to build their capacity, we teach them the mechanism of social mobilization, teach them how to be involved in decision-making process, the access to information, teach them methods looking for investing, proposal working and we solve their problems within legal frame. We render them legal support, we work on system problems raised within the system and other individual problem and we involve people of local authorities to become aware of internal migration problems. Making awareness within local authorities of internal migration issues and we involve t hem to solve their problems.” (Representative of Advocacy Centre for Human Rights, Osh 2013)

The quote above shows that they deal with the problems of internal migrants occurring and rooting in different fields, and they support them in all the fields where they see problems. The researcher conducted some focus group discussions with the clients of the Advocacy Centre for Human Rights – all of them are dealing with registration issues. Most of them seemed to know their rights very well and actively handling their problems.

As mentioned above, there is a second organisation supporting internal migrants with registration issues: Ferghana Valley Lawyers without Borders (FVLWB). Despite their main focus is on citizenship problems, they have clients with registration problems as well. Their main offering is free legal support for the migrants with their issues, and recently they started an information campaign about the registration system. The aim was awareness raising and with it they promoted to abandon the system of registration and pleaded for free movement (see photo 15). They also submitted a proposal to the parliament to abandon or at least to simplify the registration system. As an alternative to the contemporary registration system they propose a general, central database which covers the whole population and records their movements. In the parliament it was discussed in a working group, but according to FVLWB nothing more happened yet, whereas they the strongest opponent against those changes would be the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

Photo 15: Flyer of campaign to abandon Propiska

(source: own photo) There are two other organisations dealing with registration issues, but only marginally. One of

them is Interbilim. Their main work is to provide legal assistance for problems with property documents. But concerning that the property documents are required to get registered, their clients can have problems with the registration procedure as well. Another organization is Foundation for Tolerance International (FTI), but they are rather monitoring the situation then working directly with the affected internal migrants.

Certainly, these organisations seem to contribute with their work to the awareness of the problems of internal migrants as well as to improve their legal education. However, besides these interviewees of the focus group discussion which arranged through that organisation, the Certainly, these organisations seem to contribute with their work to the awareness of the problems of internal migrants as well as to improve their legal education. However, besides these interviewees of the focus group discussion which arranged through that organisation, the

5.2.2.4 Knowledge of Internal Migrants about the Registration System

The majority of the interviewees didn’t know exactly which kinds of documents are needed for the registration in Osh. Many of them roughly had a clue about some of the documents, but they weren’t sure about it. Some migrants heard about required documents but didn’t know exactly what kind of document it is, for example this woman:

"There should be one certificate which should be given from the community level, someone out of the community; I do not know what kind of certificate it is. I asked a lot, no one can even explain me which paper, but I heard that this should also be required along with house prop erty paper and ID card.” (Nargiza, Osh 201о)

This quotation shows two things: First, the interviewee was interested in getting registered and wanted to find out about the needed documents, but she didn’t find out about the exact requirements. Second, while she talks about the search for information on the registration procedure, she neve r mentioned the passport office. Therefore it can be assumed that she don’t know about the provision of information through the passport office. It happens that even migrants who actively try to find information about the registration procedure did n’t always succeed.

One third of the interviewed migrants didn’t know at all which documents they would need to be able to register. However, most of the people who don’t know about the documents, they also never thought about registering.

“I never thought about it and I don’t know how to get.” (Aigul, Osh 201о) “No, we did not [ask about the documents]. And we know nothing about them.”

(Aksana, Osh 2013) Some interviewees didn’t know exactly what a registration is or they were confused and mixed the

temporal registration, permanent registration and the spravka from the Domkom. For example one student told that she is permanently registered in Osh, but the address on her ID card – which is the address of registration – was Alai, so she probably had a temporal registration. Another woman thought that she has a temporal registration in Osh but during the interview it became clear that she talked about the spravka of the Domkom.

The knowledge about the temporal registration seems to be even smaller. As mentioned before, the researcher encountered only some students who have a temporal registration. Other people rarely thought about it, and the majority of them did n’t even know anything about the temporal registration.

“I heard about the temporal propiska for three or six months. However, I never try to get it.” (Djamila, Osh 201о)

These results match to the explanation from one interviewed NGO which stated that it is a big problem that most of the internal migrants aren’t used to solve problems by themselves and to follow the law, because they are often illiterate in relation to the laws. They wouldn’t have enough knowledge about the rules and the functioning of the registration system and therefore they aren’t able to sort out their difficulties related to registration. In a discussion with officials of the passport office, it became clear that they opine that many internal migrants are uneducated and don’t know their rights. They actually identified this illiteracy as the main reason why many migrants aren’t able to register. This lack of knowledge is on the one hand a consequence of society practice. If it isn’t important to internal migrants to register, they don’t inform themselves. On the other hand, this lack of knowledge is also reproduced by state, which doesn’t inform appropriately, and as discussed above, trust in state might be low, so the internal migrants don’t expect state to provide them information. Therefore it is also a consequence of lacking state-society interactions: As internal migrants don’t consider the state as an actor who provides information, they don’t go to the passport office and interact with state to get information. As the interaction diminishes, also the knowledge about institutions like the registration system diminishes.

5.2.2.5 Reproduction of Society through the Provision of Information

Information about the registration in Osh isn’t very straightforward. Indeed the one-window approach is a step towards more transparency as it offers less room to corruption, as according to Foucault’s (1977) model of Panopticism, supervision and surveillance motivate people to act according to the law, as they fear to get punished if they don’t do so. This supervision is also set out in the second principle of Weber’s (1968) bureaucracy: The lower hierarchies should be supervised from the higher one. The one window approach even goes further as the officials aren’t only supervised by higher levels of bureaucracy; moreover all of their actions are transparent and visible for everyone. This visibility might not allow the officials to easily ask for bribes without anyone else seeing it. Yet this disciplinary effect only works if corruption isn’t everyday practice and tolerated of the other people who are supervising. However, the data of this thesis don’t provide deep insight to that problem. If corruption really decreases due to the one window approach, the state-society boundaries become reinforced which, according to Migdal (2001) and Ruget and Usmanalieva (2007), contributes to a strong image of the state. If the boundaries between state and society are strong, it has a positive effect on state power, as this distinction is inherent to the ideal type model of Weber’s (1968) bureaucracy, and according to Brown (1995), efficient bureaucracy again has a disciplinary effect through which enforce social control and thus the domination of the state.

However, as the information on the requirements for registering is only given orally from the officials, there is no transparency in the exchange of information. If there is no written list, the information which an applicant receives strongly depends on the behaviour of the official. It can happen that they don’t fully inform someone about all the requirements in the first time, and the person have to come again and again; it happened to the researcher in her own registration. This makes the whole administrative procedure more complicated and time-consuming for the applicant and might discourage from getting registered.

The intransparent information practice of state reprodu ces an uninformed society, which doesn’t know about how to register and therefore might not even try to register. Generally it can be said that state contributes with this lacking information practice to the reproduction of a society which doesn’t know about their duties and rights. The knowledge of the internal migrants about the registration supports the assumption that state don’t inform well enough about the registration system. Many internal migrants have quite a little or almost no knowledge about the registration system. They are confused about the different types of registration, and there is a low interaction between state and society in relation to information exchange: M any internal migrants don’t even know that the passport office would provide them information, and they look for other sources of information and support. This low level of knowledge again weakens the registration system and reproduces the fact that only few internal migrants register in their place of residence. Internal migrants w ho don’t know about the registration system don’t reproduce it. Since they don’t know about the registration procedure and only seldom search assistance in the registration office, it can

be argued that state does n’t penetrate society in the context of providing information on the registration system. If we judge the provision of information as part of a tool to transform society, state doesn’t succeed in doing so. According to Migdal (1989), this would be a criterion for a weak state.

Furthermore, through the suggestion of the passport office to register in someone else ’s place, internal migrants are encouraged to violate the law and act in a way which doesn’t reproduce the purpose of the registration system to record the actual place of living of the citizens, moreover it contradicts to the purpose of the registration system and undercut it: If citizens aren’t registered in their actual place of living, state loses control about their residing. Refering to Foucault ’s (1977) concept of disciplinary power, it can be argued that on this micro-level, the officials – which are actors of the state and therefore state itself – weaken the practices of internal migrants to act according to the law and register in their place of residence, which would contribute to the power of state through their practices of discipline. The registration system is weakened as it doesn’t fulfil its main purpose anymore to provide information about the place of residence of the population. Thus the disciplinary power diminishes through the weakening of the registration system. Furthermore state reproduces a not law-abiding society in the context of the registration system if suggests them to violate the law.