1

Annual Report on Asylum and Migration

Statistics for Luxembourg

Reference Year 2007

Luxembourg National Contact Point

European Migration Network

2

University of Luxembourg

- National EMN Contact Point -

P. O. Box 2

7201 Walferdange, Luxembourg

www.emnluxembourg.lu

email: coordination@emnluxembourg.lu

June 2010

3

1. INTRODUCTION

The present report was produced by the Luxembourg National Contact Point (LU NCP) of the

European Migration Network (EMN). Initiated in 2002, the EMN has been established by

Council Decision 2008/381/EC1 and is coordinated by the Directorate-General for Justice,

Freedom and Security of the European Commission to meet the information needs of

Community institutions and of Member States‟ authorities and institutions and to support policy-

making in the European Union. It does so by providing up-to-date, objective, reliable and

comparable information on migration and asylum. The EMN also serves to furnish the general

public with such information.

The Annual Reports on Asylum and Migration Statistics provide an analysis of statistical trends

on migration, asylum, illegal entry and return in the respective Member States. Having been

established in late 2008, this is the first contribution of the LU NCP to the EMN Statistical

Report series. Given their relevance, due reference is made to the particularities and specificities

of the migration situation in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. The country looks back on a long

history of immigration that began with the discovery of iron metal deposits around 1870 and

since then has attracted both qualified and non-qualified workers from near and far. Today,

Luxembourg has the largest percentage of non-nationals in the European Union and at the same

time the highest proportion of immigrants from other Member States. In addition, cross-border

workers from France, Belgium and Germany, who commute every day to their workplace in

Luxembourg, play a crucial role for the country's economy. It is therefore essential to include

migration flows of EU citizens in the analysis, even though the National Report is supposed to

focus primarily on third-country (i.e. non-EU-27) nationals.

1.1 Methodology

Regulation 862/2007/EC on Community statistics on migration and international protection2

adopted by the European Parliament and the Council on 11 July 2007 requires Member States to

provide the Commission with various national asylum and migration figures in a systematic

manner and on a regular basis from 2008 onwards. National data collection needs to be adjusted

accordingly, a process which has not been concluded yet in Luxembourg. As a consequence of

this, not all required data are available for the year 2007. Likewise, it was not feasible to follow

1 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2008:131:0007:0012:EN:PDF 2 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2007:199:0023:0029:EN:PDF

4

the agreed procedure and have the data initially provided by the Statistical Office of the

European Union (EUROSTAT) and then verified in collaboration with STATEC, the official

data provider of EUROSTAT in Luxembourg.

Instead, the present report was produced on the basis of data provided by the following national

sources: (1) Luxembourg Central Service for Statistics and Economic Studies (STATEC –

„Service central de la statistique et des études économiques‟); (2) Ministry of Foreign Affairs and

Immigration (MAE – „Ministère des Affaires étrangères et de l`Immigration‟); (3) Ministry of

Justice (MJ – „Ministère de la Justice‟); (4) General Inspectorate for Social Security (IGSS –

„Inspection générale de la Sécurité Sociale‟); (5) the General Register of Natural Persons (RGPP

– „Répertoire général des personnes physiques‟) and (6) the Centre for Information Technology

(CTIE – „Centre des technologies de l'information de l'Etat‟). If necessary, further information

on data collection is given in the respective subsections.

2. ASYLUM

2.1 Analysis and interpretation of asylum statistics

2.1.1 Asylum applications

The development of the number of asylum applications filed in Luxembourg since the late 1990s

has been multidirectional. In 1999, Luxembourg was the EU country with the highest share of

arrivals in proportion to its inhabitants3. The number of new asylum applications dropped

subsequently until it reached another peak in 2004. Since then, their numbers have strongly and

continuously decreased. A total of 463 individuals lodged an asylum application in 2007, i.e. 60

persons less than in the previous year.

Table 1. Development of annual first-time asylum application figures since 1998

Year 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

N° of individuals 1.707 2.920 627 690 1.048 1.550 1.577 803 523 463

N° of files 893 1.425 365 423 671 1.210 1.346 669 380 299

Individuals/file 1.91 2.05 1.71 1.63 1.56 1.28 1.17 1.2 1.38 1.46

Source: MAE

3 European Commission (2002) Statistiques démographiques, Luxembourg: Eurostat, pp. 59-122.

5

While in the late 1990s, the majority of asylum-seekers arrived with their family members,

asylum applications have been increasingly filed by single persons. Since 2005, however, a

reverse trend can be observed.

The majority of asylum-seekers in Luxembourg are of European origin, mainly from the Balkan

region. In 1970, Luxembourg had signed a guest-worker agreement with the Former Republic of

Yugoslavia to satisfy its labour demand, thus strengthening previous bilateral relations. These

official and, in the form of migration networks, personal links help to explain why a relatively

large number of people affected by the Yugoslav Wars and subsequent conflicts came to

Luxembourg. Temporary protection has been provided on an ad hoc basis to those who arrived

between 1992 and 1995. At that time, there was no legal framework for applicants for

international protection. From 1996 onwards, they underwent the regular refugee status

determination procedures that have been established by the Law of 3 April 19964. A temporary

protection regime has subsequently been created by the Law of 18 March 20005 to provide

immediate and temporary protection in the event of a mass influx of persons fleeing from armed

conflict, war or generalized violence. In 2006, a new Asylum Law (Law of 5 May 2006)6 has

been introduced transposing European Directives into national law.

The main countries of origin of asylum-seekers who came to Luxembourg in 2007 were Kosovo

(49.1% of first-time applications), Bosnia and Herzegovina (5.6%) and Albania (3.8%). Of the

209 individuals from Kosovo, 86 applicants were ethnic Serbs, 55 Bosnians, 53 Albanians, 13

Gorani, 1 Roma and 1 Ashkali. The number of applicants from North and Sub-Saharan Africa

dropped from 126 applicants in 2006 (24.1% of total applications) to 58 applicants in 2007

(13.6%).

Table 2. Asylum application by region of origin since 1998 (in percentages)

Year 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Ex-Yugoslavia 93.6 95.5 66.5 59.0 64.6 44.6 29.1 37.5 43.4 65.7

Africa 1.4 0.7 6.9 10.8 12.8 32.3 53.8 38.5 24.1 13.6

Former SU + EE7 2.2 2.6 20.0 20.2 15.3 15.9 10.3 11.4 18.6 14.5

Other 2.8 1.2 6.6 10.0 7.3 7.2 6.8 12.6 13.9 6.2

Source: MAE

4 Mémorial A – N° 30 of 7 May 1996, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/1996/0030/a030.pdf#page=2 5 Mémorial A – N° 25 of 27 March 2000, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2000/0025/a025.pdf#page=2 6 Mémorial A – N° 78 of 9 May 2006, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2006/0078/a078.pdf#page=2 7 Former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe before EU accession.

6

2.1.2 Asylum decisions

The total number of asylum decisions has differed strongly over the past years. Compared to the

previous year, a considerable increase in the number of asylum-seekers who were granted

refugee status can be observed in 2007. In addition, seven applicants were eligible for subsidiary

protection as substantial grounds have been shown for believing that, if returned to their country

of origin, they would face a real risk of suffering serious harm. This form of complementary

protection has been introduced by the new Asylum Law of 5 May 20068. The overall recognition

rate9 went up from 6.3% in 2006 to 26.1% in 2007.

Beyond that, the Government of Luxembourg granted, on a case-by-case basis, temporary

residence permits for humanitarian reasons (ASP - „autorisation de séjour temporaire‟). Among

past beneficiaries were (1) young, failed asylum applicants in their last year of secondary

education or vocational training; (2) exceptional cases of families who arrived after 1 August

2001 and had at least one child who completed secondary school in Luxembourg; (3) persons

with the recognized right to protection of their private and family life as provided in Article 8 of

the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms10

on

the right to respect for private and family life; (4) long-term asylum-seekers, primarily from

Serbia and Montenegro. If the latter can produce a work contract, their temporary residence

permits will be renewed. In 2007, almost twice as many temporary residence permits (increase

of 46%) were granted than during the previous year.

Introduced by the Asylum Law of 18 March 200011

and subsequently stipulated by Article 22 of

the new Asylum Law of 5 May 200612

, exceptional leave to remain („mesure de tolérance‟) is

granted to failed asylum applicants who are obliged to leave the country but in whose case the

execution of their removal is impossible due to current circumstances. This provision has been

applied to (1) ethnic minorities from Kosovo; (2) individuals from regions of armed conflict; (3)

individuals who shall return to countries in which appropriate means of transport are not

available or safe; and (4) applicants rejected in the final year of their secondary education or

vocational training. The number of individuals who received exceptional leave to remain

dropped from 230 in 2006 to 155 in 2007. Unfortunately, no further information, such as on

their country of citizenship, is available that would allow for a meaningful interpretation of these

8 Mémorial A – N° 78 of 9 May 2006, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2006/0078/a078.pdf#page=2 9The recognition rate was calculated by dividing the number of positive decisions (refugee status plus subsidiary

protection) by the sum of positive and negative decisions (i.e., excluding temporary residence permits, exceptional

leave to remain and formal decisions) in 2006 and 2007 respectively. 10 http://conventions.coe.int/treaty/en/Treaties/Html/005.htm 11 Mémorial A – N° 25 of 27 March 2000, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2000/0025/a025.pdf#page=2 12 Mémorial A – N° 78 of 9 May 2006, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2006/0078/a078.pdf#page=2

7

figures.

Table 3. Total number of final decisions (on the basis of persons) 2006 and 2007

2006 2007

Positive decisions

- refugee status

- subsidiary protection

TOTAL

37

-

37

160

7

167

Negative decisions

- rejection (unfounded application)

- exclusion (Art. 1F 1951 Refugee Convention)

- inadmissibility

TOTAL

507

1

41

549

425

-

49

474

Temporary residence permits

(ASP - ‘autorisation de séjour provisoire’)

- granted on humanitarian grounds

121

224

Exceptional leave to remain

(‘mesure de tolérance’)

230 155

Formal decisions

- incompetence

- revocation

TOTAL

184

3

187

73

21

94

Source: MAE

40.6% of all asylum-seekers who have been recognized in 2007 as persons entitled to refugee

protection pursuant to Asylum Law of 5 May 2006, Section 1 (c)13

were individuals from

Kosovo. The second largest group constituted refugees from Iran (16.3%), followed by

successful applicants from Iraq (8.1%), Democratic Republic of Congo (6.3%) and Russian

Federation (5.0%). In addition, seven individuals from Albania, Angola, Bangladesh and Sierra

Leone received subsidiary protection in 2007.

13 Mémorial A – N° 78 of 9 May 2006, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2006/0078/a078.pdf#page=2

8

Table 4. Number of positive decisions by legal basis and country of citizenship, 2007

Recognition as person entitled to

refugee protection [Law of 5

May 2006, Section 1(c)]14

Subsidiary protection

[Law of 5 May 2006,

Section 1(e)]

Afghanistan 2 -

Albania 2 3

Angola 5 2

Bangladesh - 1

Belarus 1 -

DR Congo 10 -

Eritrea 3 -

Ethiopia 6 -

Guinea-Conakry 2 -

Iraq 13 -

Iran 26 -

Kosovo 65 -

Mauritania 1 -

Montenegro 2 -

Nigeria 2 -

Peru 2 -

Russian Federation 8 -

Rwanda 1 -

Sierra Leone - 1

Somalia 6 -

Togo 1 -

Turkey 1 -

Uzbekistan 1 -

Total 160 7

Source: MAE

2.1.3 Explanations for changes concerning the forms of protection granted

As mentioned above, the subsidiary protection status has only been recently introduced in

Luxembourg by the Asylum Law of 5 May 200615

for those individuals who do not qualify as

refugee as defined by Article 1 of the 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees as

amended by the 1967 Protocol16

but are still in need of international protection. This is one of

14 These numbers include the status granted to children of recognized refugees born in the Grand Duchy of

Luxembourg. 15 Mémorial A – N° 78 of 9 May 2006, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2006/0078/a078.pdf#page=2 16 http://www.unhcr.org/protect/PROTECTION/3b66c2aa10.pdf

9

the explanations why, in 2006, asylum applicants have not benefited from this new

complimentary protection measure yet.

Kosovo, Albania, Iran and Bosnia and Herzegovina constituted the main countries of citizenship

of asylum applicants who were granted refugee status in 2006.

Table 5. Number of positive decisions by country of citizenship, 2006

Recognition as person entitled to

refugee protection [asylum law of 5

May 2006, Section 1(c)]17

Albania 6

Azerbaijan 1

Bosnia and Herzegovina 5

DR Congo 1

Ethiopia 1

Guinea-Conakry 1

Iran 5

Kosovo 12

Rwanda 1

Somalia 1

Togo 1

Turkey 2

Total 37

Source: MAE

2.2 Contextual interpretations

2.2.1 New or amended laws effective in 2007

The above-described developments in 2007 might be interpreted as a delayed effect of the new

Asylum Law of 5 May 200618

which lays down clear criteria for the determination of refugee

status and introduced further protection statuses.

Also, the new Asylum Law of 5 May 2006 was modified in 2007 (Law of 17 July 2007)19

for

the first time following a judgment of the administrative court concerning reapplications for

international protection. The Law of 5 May 2006 had introduced subsidiary protection as a

17 These numbers include the status granted to children of recognized refugees born in the Grand Duchy of

Luxembourg. 18 Mémorial A – N° 78 of 9 May 2006, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2006/0078/a078.pdf#page=2 19 Mémorial A – N° 121 of 19 July 2007, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2007/0121/a121.pdf

10

complementary protection status to the refugee status governed by the 1951 Geneva Convention.

On 16 May 2007, the court ruled that asylum-seekers whose application had been dismissed

under the previous Asylum Law of 18 March 200020

could reapply for subsidiary protection

under the new Asylum Law of 5 May 200621

. The authorities should examine the new

application, even if the subsidiary protection status did not exist at the time of the first

application. Fearing a high number of reapplications, the authorities requested a modification

(Law of 17 July 2007)22

of the Asylum Law of 5 May 2006, which was quickly passed.

According to the revised provision, individuals whose claim for international protections has

been dismissed under the old legislation can lodge a new application. In this case, however, only

the admissibility of their action will be examined but not the merits of their claim.

2.2.2 Procedural changes effective in 2007

The increase in both the total number and positive asylum decisions taken in 2007 in comparison

to the previous year can also be explained by the fact that the responsible department increased

their personnel which resulted in faster decisions and the clearance of some backlog asylum

cases.

2.2.3 European and international factors

In line with the position of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

(UNHCR) on the continued international protection needs of individuals from Kosovo23

,

Luxembourg authorities refrained from repatriating ethnic minorities from Kosovo whose

asylum applications were not successful but whose returning would constitute a risk to their

mental and physical integrity. This mainly concerns Kosovo Serbs, Roma and Albanians in

situations where these groups constitute a minority. They receive an exceptional leave to remain

(„mesure de tolérance‟), a temporary permission to stay in Luxembourg, and may apply for a

temporary work permit (AOT – „autorisation d‟occupation temporaire‟)24

.

20 Mémorial A – N° 25 of 27 March 2000, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2000/0025/a025.pdf#page=2 21 Mémorial A – N° 78 of 9 May 2006, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2006/0078/a078.pdf#page=2 22 Mémorial A – N° 121 of 19 July 2007, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2007/0121/a121.pdf 23

UNCHR (June 2006) UNHCR’s Position on the Continued International Protection Needs of Individuals from

Kosovo, Geneva, http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/pdfid/449664ea2.pdf 24 Article 14 of the Asylum Law of 5 May 2006 stipulates that, if an asylum decision has not been taken within nine

months after the filing of an application, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Immigration issues a special temporary

work permit (AOT) which is valid for a period of six months and renewable. However, the issuance or renewal of

the AOT can be denied in light of the economic situation and labour market evolution or reorganisation. The work

permit is also restricted to a particular employer and a single profession.

11

Furthermore, the Grand-Ducal Regulation of 21 December 200725

established a list of safe

countries of origin within the provisions defined by the Asylum Law of 5 May 2006 and

following recommendations of the Council Directive 2005/85/EC26

of 1 December 2005 on

minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee

status.

3. MIGRATION

3.1 Analysis and interpretation of migration statistics

3.1.1 Migration flows

Between 1980 and 2007, Luxembourg has experienced an increase of 31% of its resident

population from 363.500 to 476.200 inhabitants. This development, rather untypical in the

European context, is largely determined by continuous migration inflows. The figures from a file

Table 6. Migration flows since 198027

Natural flow Migration flow

Year Population

(1 Jan)

Increase Births Deaths Natural

balance

Arrivals Departures Migration

balance

1980 363.500 1.400 4.169 4.113 56 7.362 6.003 1.359

1985 366.200 900 4.104 4.027 77 6.582 5.758 824

1990 379.300 5.100 4.936 3.773 1.163 10.281 6.339 3.942

1995 406.650 5.900 5.421 3.797 1.624 10.325 5.989 4.336

2000 433.600 5.400 5.723 3.754 1.969 11.765 8.334 3.431

2001 439.000 5.050 5.459 3.719 1.740 12.135 8.824 3.311

2002 444.050 4.250 5.345 3.744 1.601 12.101 9.452 2.649

2003 448.300 6.659 5.303 4.053 1.250 13.158 7.746 5.412

2004 454.950 6.300 5.452 3.578 1.874 12.872 8.480 4.392

2005 461.250 7.850 5.371 3.621 1.750 14.397 8.287 6.110

2006 469.100 7.100 5.514 3.766 1.748 14.252 9.001 5.351

2007 476.200 7.600 5.477 3.866 1.611 16.675 10.674 6.001

Source: STATEC and CTIE-RGPP

25 Mémorial A – N° 245 of 31 December 2007, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2007/0245/a245.pdf 26 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2005:326:0013:0034:EN:PDF 27 These data include employees of international organizations who are usually excluded from other databases due

to their separate social security systems.

12

extracted from the General Register of Natural Persons and transmitted by the Centre of

Information Technology (CTIE) to STATEC show a positive migration balance of 6.001

(16.675 arrivals and 10.674 departures of both nationals and non-nationals) for 2007.

Asylum-seekers are counted among the flow and stock data. In 2007, they represented 2.78% of

the total arrivals. Yet their share is considerably lower than during previous years. In 2003 and

2004, asylum applicants constituted 11.78% and 12.25% respectively. As mentioned before,

Luxembourg was the EU country with the highest share of arrivals in proportion to its

inhabitants in 199928

. In that year, asylum-seekers, predominantly from the Balkan region, made

up even 23% of the total migration inflow.

Table 7. Proportion of asylum-seekers in the migration inflow

Year Migration inflow/

Total Arrivals

Asylum-seekers

(individuals)

Proportion of asylum-seekers in

the migration inflow (%)

1998 11.630 1.707 14.68

1999 12.794 2.920 22.82

2000 11.765 627 5.33

2001 12.135 690 5.69

2002 12.101 1.048 8.66

2003 13.158 1.550 11.78

2004 12.872 1.577 12.25

2005 14.397 803 5.58

2006 14.252 523 3.67

2007 16.675 463 2.78

Source: STATEC and MAE

The overwhelming majority of arrivals are of European origin. In 2007, they constituted 89% of

all immigrants. The main origin countries were Portugal, France, Germany and Belgium. As

mentioned in the introduction of this report, Luxembourg looks back on a long history of

immigration that began with the country‟s industrialization in the last quarter of the 19th

century.

Workers, mainly single men from Germany and Italy, were recruited until the 1950s to meet the

labour demand in the mining and steel industry. In response to the Post-World War II economic

boom and sinking national birth rates, Luxembourg favoured family-based immigration since

the early 1960s and signed labour recruitment agreements with Portugal and the former Republic

28 European Commission (2002) Statistiques démographiques, Luxembourg: Eurostat, pp. 59-122.

13

Table 8. Migration inflows since 1980 by citizenship – Europe

Year 1980 1990 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Belgian 791 931 1.295 1.490 1.294 1.062 1.012 1.007 911 935

Dutch 204 305 225 201 187 177 179 216 250 218

French 1.623 1.129 2.271 2.123 1.895 1.866 1.957 2.227 2.510 2.799

German 617 562 631 657 646 741 802 781 929 1.045

Italian 494 378 617 602 479 513 486 560 619 646

Portuguese 2.222 3.388 2.193 2.293 2.767 3.857 3.542 3.761 3.796 4.385

Spanish 60 79 158 152 154 173 151 195 168 165

Other 733 2.325 3.305 3.482 3.411 3.277 3.048 4.077 3.720 4.574

Total 6.744 9.097 7.390 11.000 10.833 11.666 11.177 12.824 12.903 14.767

Source: STATEC

of Yugoslavia in 197029

. The Portuguese have since then become the largest immigrant group in

the country representing 15.83% of the total population and 37.20% of the non-national resident

population (STATEC, 01.01.2008).

Together with the Portuguese, Cape Verdean immigrants have been coming to Luxembourg

since the 1960s, either with a Portuguese passport (to which, as former colonial subjects, they

had an eased access since the end of the 19th

century), via the bilateral agreement of 1970, or a

Cape Verdean passport. According to estimations by national authorities, the “visible” (with

passport) Cape Verdeans represent one-third of those currently living in Luxembourg, while the

other two-third either hold a Luxembourgish (via naturalization) or Portuguese passport (colony

or naturalization in Portugal)30

.

29 Hartmann-Hirsch, C. (2007) Les étrangers et le marché de l’emploi, Cahier PSELL N° 157, Differdange:

CEPS/INSTEAD, pp. 20. 30 von Kunitzki, N. (2007) „La compétitivité de l‟économie luxembourgeoise: vers un troisième Koweït?„, in

Allegrezza, S., Hirsch, M and von Kunitzki, N. (eds.) L’immigration au Luxembourg: et après?, Amsterdam: Dutch

University Press, as cited by Hartmann-Hirsch 2007.

14

Table 9. Migration inflows since 1980 by citizenship – non-Europe

Year 1980 1990 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

U.S. American 218 314 262 163 148 285 215 303 302 308

African countries 153 193 248 393 488 670 841 604 429 554

Other 239 620 483 488 542 483 591 600 690 1.010

Not known 8 57 77 91 90 54 48 66 28 36

Total 618 1.184 1.070 1.135 1.268 1.492 1.695 1.573 1.572 1.908

Source: STATEC

While, despite the labour recruitment agreement, the inflow of migrant workers from Portugal

has always been more important than those from (former) Yugoslavia, a large number of

Yugoslavian asylum-seekers, in many cases using their social networks to economic

Yugoslavian immigrants, came to Luxembourg during the 1990s to escape violent conflict in

their regions of origin. Henceforth, citizens from former Yugoslavia are either long-standing

economic immigrants or asylums-seekers/refugees.

Next to the above-described immigration of workers from Italy, Portugal, former Yugoslavia,

Cape Verde and other African countries, Luxembourg has always had an important share of

highly-qualified immigrants since the end of the 19th

century31

. The geographic origins of

present highly-qualified immigrants, often working in the country‟s strong private and financial

sector but also for the numerous EU institutions based in Luxembourg, are the neighbouring

countries France, Germany and Belgium, other EU or EFTA countries as well as Japan, Canada

or the USA, to name but a few.

3.1.2 Population by citizenship

Due to its high prevalence in Luxembourg, intra-EU migration and mobility are incorporated

into the subsequent analysis. Official population statistics are provided by STATEC, the

government statistics service of Luxembourg. However, these data do not allow for a

disaggregation by citizenship for third-country nationals. This important information is available

from the Centre for Information Technology and the General Register of Natural Persons (CTIE-

RGPP). Due to different methods of data collection, however, the STATEC and CTIE-RGPP

31 von Kunitzki 2007, see footnote 26.

15

figures diverge. STATEC extrapolates the annual population statistics on basis of the decennial

censuses, with the last one having been conducted in 2001. Between two censuses, the

population on 1 January of year x is estimated by adding to the population of 1 January of year

x-1 the natural balance (births minus deaths) and net migration (arrivals minus departures) of

that year. CTIE-RGPP figures, on the other hand, are based on registration and deregistration

with the municipality. These data, however, are slightly over-estimated due to the fact that,

while non-nationals are registered upon their arrival and therefore included, they very often do

not declare their departure to the authorities when leaving the country and continue to appear in

the data. Regarding the data on third-country nationals, however, the differences between them

are rather negligible (28.800 for STATEC and 29.015 for CTIE-RGPP, i.e. 28.159 TCN‟s plus

648 individuals with unknown nationality and 208 stateless persons). In the following, STATEC

data is presented and CTIE-RGPP data consulted for additional information.

Table 10. Population of Luxembourg by citizenship (01.01.2008)

Population Absolute Number Proportion of

Total Population

(in %)

Proportion of Non-

National Population

(in %)

Total Population 483.800 100 -

Nationals 277.900 57.44 -

Non-Nationals 205.900 42.56 100

Total EU-27 Nationals 177.100 36.61 86.01

Portuguese 76.600 15.83 37.20

French 26.600 5.50 12.92

Italian 19.100 3.95 9.28

Belgian 16.500 3.41 8.01

German 11.600 2.40 5.63

British 5.000 1.03 2.43

Dutch 3.800 0.79 1.85

Other EU-27 17.900 3.70 8.69

Total Non-EU-27 Nationals 28.800 5.95 13.99

Source: STATEC

On 1 January 2008, 42.56% of the 483.800 inhabitants of Luxembourg were of non-national

origin. Of these non-nationals, 86.01% came from an EU-27 country. The largest national

groups were the Portuguese, French, Italian, Belgian, German, British, and Dutch.

16

Table 11. Population of Luxembourg by citizenship (01.01.2008)

Population Absolute Value Proportion of Total

Population (in %)

Proportion of Non-

National Population (in %)

Total Population 495.360 100 -

Total EU-27 Nationals 188.037 37.96 86.05

Total EFTA 1.476 0.30 0.68

Swiss 634 0.13 2.04

Icelandic 534 0.11 0.29

Norwegian 301 0.06 0.24

Lichtenstein 7 0.00 0.14

Total Non-EU-27 Nationals 28.159 5.68 12.45

Former Yugoslavian32 12.989 2.62 5.94

Cape Verdean 2.279 0.46 1.04

US American 1.658 0.33 0.76

Chinese 1.544 0.31 0.71

Russian 961 0.19 0.44

Brazilian 860 0.17 0.39

Japanese 484 0.10 0.22

Ukrainian 441 0.09 0.20

Moroccan 427 0.09 0.20

Canadian 386 0.08 0.18

Turkish 386 0.08 0.18

Indian 376 0.08 0.17

Albanian 339 0.07 0.16

Iranian 294 0.06 0.13

Thai 291 0.06 0.13

Philippine 271 0.05 0.12

Other Non-EU-27 Nationals 2.373 0.84 1.09

Unknown Nationality 648 0.13 0.30

Stateless Persons 208 0.04 0.10

Source: CTIE-RGPP

32 The umbrella term „Former Yugoslavian“ combines the now independent countries Bosnia and Herzegovina,

Croatia, FYR of Macedonia, Montenegro and Republic of Serbia (including Kosovo) as well as the former Serbia

and Montenegro, Former Yugoslavia and Yugoslavia. This variety of terms can be explained by the fact that the

local administration in Luxembourg used the respective official name at the time of registration. Even if these

countries have ceased to exist in the meantime, the individuals concerned continue to be registered under this

category unless they change it afterwards, e.g. when applying for a new passport of their country of nationality.

17

According to CTIE-RGPP data, 1.476 nationals of an EFTA country (Iceland, Lichtenstein,

Norway, and Switzerland) and 28.159 third-country nationals resided in Luxembourg on 1

January 2008. As such, non-EU-27 nationals constituted less than 6% of the total Luxembourg

population. The main countries of nationality were former Yugoslavia, the by far largest group,

followed by Cape Verde, United States of America, China, Russian Federation, Brazil, Japan,

Ukraine, Morocco and Canada. Furthermore, it is noteworthy that third-country nationals above

the age of 18 from Brazil (74.1%), the Philippines (89.7%), Russia (68.6%), Thailand (93.4%),

and the Ukraine (92.8%) were overwhelmingly women, indicating specific female migration

patterns from these countries.

3.1.3 Residence permits issued in 2007

In 2007, a total of 37.624 residence permits, including seasonal workers and intra-corporate

migration, were issued, 6.355 more (or 16.9%) than during the previous year. Unfortunately, the

available data neither allows for a distinction between residence permits issued for the first time

and renewals on the one hand and the disaggregation by citizenship on the other hand.

Table 12. Residence permits (first issues and renewals) 2006 and 2007

Type of permit 2006 2007

Residence card (‘carte de séjour’)

EU citizens: employee 15.790 17.591

EU citizens: student, freelancer, retiree 4.609 7.394

Family members33 of EU citizens 1.418 1.714

Citizens of EFTA Member States 167 143

Citizen of new EU Member States requiring

a work permit

49 121

Residence permit (‘permis de séjour’)

Third-country nationals 6.957 8.188

Certificate for staff of EU institutions

(‘titre de légitimation’)

EU officials

2.279

2.473

TOTAL 31.269 37.624

Source: MAE

33 This category refers to family members of EU citizens who are themselves third-country nationals, i.e. they do

not have the nationality of a member state of the European Union, the European Economic Area and Switzerland.

18

Given Luxembourg‟s migration profile, the majority of permits (71.7%) („carte de séjour‟) were

issued to EU-citizens, mainly employees (17.591), students, freelancers and retired persons

(7.394), but also to third-country national family members of EU-citizens (1.714), citizens of

EFTA member states (143), as well as citizens of new EU Member States requiring a work

permit (121). 8.188 third-country nationals were issued a residence permit („permis de séjour‟)

in 2007, that 1.231 or 15% more than in 2006. Since Luxembourg hosts the Secretariat of the

European Parliament, the European Court of Justice, the European Court of Auditors and the

European Investment Bank, a relatively large number of EU officials reside in the country. 2.473

certificates for staff of EU institutions („titre de légitimation‟) were issued in 2007. Dependants

are included in these figures if they hold a residence permit as family member.

3.2 Contextual interpretations

3.2.1 Main trends in Luxembourg migration policy

In 2007, a comprehensive reform of the country‟s immigration and asylum legislation was

initiated and entailed a vivid political debate between the political actors, the Economic and

Social Council of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (CES)34

, trade unions, employers, NGOs

and other civil society actors on the draft bills. In 2008, the Law on free movement of persons

and immigration (Law of 29 August 2008)35

, rendering the amended Law of 28 March 1972

concerning the entry and residence of foreigners36

ineffective, the Law on the Luxembourg

nationality (Law of 23 October 2008)37

, and the Law regarding the reception and integration of

foreigners (Law of 16 December 2008)38

were adopted.

In order to transpose the provisions of Directive 2004/38/EC on free movement of EU citizens

and their families39

and in anticipation of the new Law on free movement of persons and

immigration, the Luxembourg authorities adopted the Grand Ducal Regulation of 21 December

200740

.

34 Economic and Social Council (2006) For an immigration and active integration policy (opinion), Luxembourg,

http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/5th_enlargement/facts_figures/immigration2006_fr.pdf 35 Mémorial A – N° 138 of 10 September 2008, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2008/0138/a138.pdf 36 Mémorial A – N° 230 of 27 December 2006,

http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2006/0230/a230.pdf#page=4 (coordinated text) 37 Mémorial A – N° 158 of 27 October 2008, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2008/0158/a158.pdf 38 Mémorial A – N° 209 of 24 December 2008, http://www.olai.public.lu/pdf/loi-16-12-2008.pdf 39 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2004:158:0077:0123:EN:PDF 40 Mémorial A – N° 245 of 31 December 2007, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2007/0245/a245.pdf

19

In November 2007, eight of the ten new EU Member States41

were awarded free movement via a

government declaration42

. As a consequence, the restrictions applied to workers from these

countries, who until then needed to apply for a work permit, were lifted. The procedures to

obtain a work permit for Bulgarians and Romanians working in agriculture, the hospitality

sector and certain financial domains have also been simplified43

.

3.2.2 Categories of admission

The amended Law of 28 March 197244

does not provide for different grounds for admission of

immigrants. The only category explicitly mentioned is “foreign worker”. However, the

administrative practice distinguishes between different categories when issuing residence

permits to third-country nationals. Those categories include (1) employee; (2) self-employed; (3)

family member; (4) student; and (5) other.

Article 2 of the same law stipulates the conditions under which entry, stay and issuance

of a residence permit can be refused. These include (1) lack of required identity documents and

visa, if necessary; (2) risk to compromise the public order, security and health; and (3) lack of

sufficient means to cover travel expenses and support themselves.

3.2.3 European and international factors

While the Government Programme (2004-2009)45

stipulated reforms in the field of immigration

and asylum, integration and citizenship, the legislator also transposed EU Directives into

national law. This is, for instance, was the case with the Law of 29 August 2008 on free

movement of persons and immigration46

which transposes the Council Directive 2004/38/EC47

on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within

the territory of the Member States.

41 These include the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia. Nationals

of Malta and Cyprus have already enjoyed free movement before. 42 http://www.gouvernement.lu/salle_presse/actualite/2007/09/20schmit_travailleurs/index.html 43 http://www.euractiv.com/fr/elargissement/libre-circulation-travailleurs-ue-27/article-129653 44 Mémorial A – N° 230 of 27 December 2006,

http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2006/0230/a230.pdf#page=4 (coordinated text) 45 http://www.gouvernement.lu/gouvernement/programme-2009/programme-2004/programme2004/ programme _

accord.pdf 46 Mémorial A – N° 138 of 10 September 2008, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2008/0138/a138.pdf 47 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2004:158:0077:0123:EN:PDF

20

4. REFUSALS, APPREHENSIONS AND REMOVALS

4.1 Analysis and interpretation of statistics

4.1.1 Entry refusals

Individuals can be denied entry at the border on the basis of Article 2 of the Law of 28 March

197248

if they (1) do not have the necessary identity documents and/or visa; (2) may compromise

the security, peace, public order or health; and/or (3) do not possess sufficient means to cover the

costs associated with their travel and stay. The country‟ only Schengen external border is the

airport of Luxembourg and entry refusals is the competence of the border police at the airport.

Unfortunately, the respective enforcement statistics were not available for the purpose of the

present report.

4.1.2 Apprehensions

Article 15 of the Law of 28 March 1972 as amended by the Law of 7 November 199649

stipulates that non-nationals without legal permission to reside in Luxembourg but whose

removal is not possible due to current circumstances can, by order of the Minister of Justice and

after decision of the Government Council, be held for a maximum period of six months in a

detention centre. The number of persons in detention 50

awaiting their removal dropped about

22% from 308 individuals in 2006 to 244 in 200751

. Unfortunately, information on the countries

of citizenship of these persons is not available. Likewise, no information on otherwise

apprehended irregular resident non-nationals can be provided.

4.1.3 Removals

Regarding the issue of return, differentiations are made according to the degree of voluntariness

(voluntary assisted or forced return) on the one hand and the categories of persons affected

48 Memorial A – N° 24 of 13 April 1972, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/1972/0024/a024.pdf#page=2 49 Memorial A – N° 79 of 19 November 1996, http://comas.oec.lu/media/loi_du_7_novembre_1996.pdf 50 Memorial A – N° 119 of 29 May 2009, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2009/0119/a119.pdf#page=2 51 Activity Reports of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Immigration,

2006: http://www.mae.lu/images/biblio/biblio-52-86_grkho_3317_162_4313.pdf

2007: http://www.mae.lu/images/biblio/biblio-163-7_luofy_8970_1518_4950.pdf

21

(failed asylum-seekers or irregular migrants) on the other hand.52

In 2007, slightly more failed

asylum-seekers chose to return to their country of origin voluntarily than were forced to leave

the territory of Luxembourg, i.e. 77 vis-à-vis 69 individuals. By contrast, 79 irregular migrants

were expelled. Compared to the previous year, the total number of persons returned in 2007

decreased by 35.5% from 349 to 225 individuals. Further comparison also shows that, unlike in

2007, the number of returnees was not distributed equally across the different categories.

Significantly more failed asylum-seekers were forced to return (48.6%) than did return

voluntarily (15.5%). Their number is also higher than that of irregular migrants who were

deported (35.8%).

Table 13. Return of failed asylum-seekers and irregular migrants 2006 and 2007

Year Failed asylum seekers Irregular migrants Total

Voluntary assisted return Forced return

2006 125 170 54 349

2007 77 69 79 225

Source: MAE

The disaggregation by citizenship shows that, in 2007, the main countries of citizenship of

returned failed asylum-seekers were Kosovo, Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Nigeria and

the Russian Federation and those of returned irregular migrants France, Germany, Cape Verde,

Belgium, Portugal and Montenegro. Similarly, most failed asylum-seekers who returned to their

country of nationality in 2006 were from the Balkan region, namely Kosovo, Montenegro,

Albania, Serbia and Bosnia. The main countries of origin of irregular migrants were Brazil,

Cape Verde, Romania, Bosnia and Serbia.

Table 14. Return of failed asylum seekers and irregular migrants by citizenship, 2007

Nationality

Failed asylum-

seekers

Irregular

migrants

Voluntary assisted

return

Forced return Total Forced return Total

Europe

Albania 3 2 5 3 8

Austria - - - 1 1

Belarus 3 1 4 - 4

Belgium - - - 5 5

52 Article 9 (expulsion of irregular migrants) and 12 (deportation by police forces) of the Law of 28 March 1972 as

amended by the Law of 7 November 1996 constitute the legal basis for the forced return of migrants.

http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2006/0230/a230.pdf#page=4 (coordinated text)

22

Bosnia and Herzegovina 13 7 20 1 21

Bulgaria - - - 1 1

Croatia - - - 1 1

France - - - 28 28

Germany - - - 6 6

Italy - - - 2 2

Kosovo 20 20 40 - 40

FYR of Macedonia 2 1 3 3 6

Montenegro 17 16 33 4 37

Netherlands - - - 2 2

Poland - - - 1 1

Portugal - - - 4 4

Serbia 4 - 4 3 7

Sweden - - - 1 1

Ukraine 1 - 1 - 1

United Kingdom - - - 2 2

Eurasia

Russian Federation 4 3 7 - 7

Turkey 1 2 3 - 3

Armenia 2 - 2 - 2

Asia

Iran 2 - 2 - 2

Africa

Benin - - - 1 1

Cameroon - 1 1 - 1

Cape Verde - - - 6 6

Congo-Brazzaville 1 - 1 - 1

Gambia - 2 2 - 2

Guinea-Conakry 1 4 5 - 5

Morocco - - - 1 1

Nigeria 2 6 8 - 8

Sierra Leone - 2 2 - 2

Tanzania 1 - 1 - 1

Togo - 1 1 - 1

Americas

Brazil - - - 2 2

Haiti - 1 1 - 1

Venezuela - - - 1 1

Total 77 69 146 79 225

Source: MAE

Furthermore, 290 non-nationals received an official order to leave the country („arrêté de refus

d‟entrée et de séjour’) in 2007 given their irregular status. This represents a slight increase

23

(7.9%) compared to the previous year when 267 persons received such an order53

.

4.2 Contextual interpretations

4.2.1 New or amended laws effective in 2007

The coalition agreement of 2004 asserts the government‟s wish to promote voluntary return

through positive incentives such as cash grants and sanctions like re-entry bans while looking

for close cooperation “with the countries of origin of asylum-seekers, including through

development projects, in order to facilitate the return of failed asylum applicants”.54

The

coalition agreement also states that individuals whose asylum claim has been dismissed but who

have children undergoing secondary education can under certain circumstances stay in

Luxembourg with their children.

Since August 2007, forced returns have been conducted in the presence of the Red Cross, acting

as neutral observer.

The priority given to return has been implemented by means of readmission agreements. Two

readmission agreements concerning individuals lacking legal status, signed in 2006 by the

Benelux States with the countries of origin, were ratified by the Chamber of Deputies.55

The

protocol on the implementation of the agreement between the European Community and the

Republic of Albania on the readmission of irregular migrants staying in the Republic of Albania

or in the Benelux States was approved by the Law of 1 August 2007.56

In the absence of a

written readmission agreement, the authorities try to cooperate with the authorities of the

country of origin to facilitate the readmission, as it is the case with Nigeria, with whom a

Memorandum of Understanding was signed on 28 March 200857

. It defines the modalities of the

return of Nigerian citizens who lost the right to stay in the Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg.

53 Activity Reports of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Immigration,

2006: http://www.mae.lu/images/biblio/biblio-52-86_grkho_3317_162_4313.pdf

2007: http://www.mae.lu/images/biblio/biblio-163-7_luofy_8970_1518_4950.pdf 54 http://www.gouvernement.lu/gouvernement/programme-2009/programme-2004/programme2004/programme_

accord.pdf 55 Readmission agreement between Benelux States and Macedonia in Mémorial A – N° 61 of 20 April 2007,

http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2007/0061/a061.pdf, and readmission agreement between Benelux

States and Bosnia and Herzegovina in Memorial A – N° 166 of 13 November 2008,

http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2008/0166/a166.pdf 56 Mémorial A – N° 144 of 16 August 2007,

http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2007/0144/a144.pdf#page=2 57 http://www.gouvernement.lu/salle_presse/actualite/2006/03/28nigeria/index.html

24

4.2.2 Procedural changes effective in 2007

There have been no modifications to the procedure in cases of identified irregular entry,

irregular residence and return since the previous year.

5. OTHER DATA AVAILABLE

5.1 Naturalization

The number of foreign residents who acquired the Luxembourg nationality has increased

continuously over the past few years, particularly following the relaxation of the naturalization

procedure which came into effect on 1 January 2002 (Law of 24 July 2001)58

. It was only in

2001 when their number dropped by 32% from 692 to 474 individuals, which might be

explained by the wariness of potential applicants given the upcoming amendment of the

citizenship law.

The main rules governing Luxembourg nationality in 2007 are contained in the amended Law of

22 December 196859

. Luxembourg citizenship is acquired (1) by descent; (2) by voluntary

acquisition either through naturalization, a legislative procedure, or option, an administrative

procedure; or (3) by reinstatement of one‟s original Luxembourg nationality. "Jus sanguinis"

takes precedence over "jus soli", which is of secondary importance. Birth within the territory of

Luxembourg does not automatically confer citizenship. Dual citizenship is not recognized.

Acquisition of Luxembourg nationality is conditional on the original nationality being

relinquished.

As stipulated by Article 6 of the Law of 22 February 1968 as amended by the Law of 24 July

200160

, you must be over the age of 18, have a residence permit and have lived in Luxembourg

for at least five consecutive years prior to the application in order to become a citizen by

naturalization. Among other things, the successful applicant also needs to have a sufficient

active and passive knowledge of at least one of the languages mentioned in the Law of 24

February 198461

on the language regime (Luxembourgish, French and German) and have at least

a basic knowledge of Luxembourgish.

58 Mémorial A – N° 129 of 20 August 2001, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2001/0101/a101.pdf 59 Mémorial A – N° 129 of 26 October 2001,

http://www.mj.public.lu/legislation/nationalite/MEMORIAL_A_129_26_10_2001.pdf (coordinated text) 60 Mémorial A – N° 129 of 26 October 2001,

http://www.mj.public.lu/legislation/nationalite/MEMORIAL_A_129_26_10_2001.pdf (coordinated text) 61 Mémorial A – N° 16 of 27 February 1984, http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/1984/0016/a016.pdf

25

Table 15. Development of nationality acquisition figures by procedure since 1999

Year 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Naturalization 204 307 198 396 316 373 372 328 487

Option 393 375 263 419 396 468 612 745 815

Reinstatement 15 10 43 11 9 7 11 11 9

Total 612 692 474 826 721 848 995 1.084 1.311

Source: Ministry of Justice

Table 16. Acquisition of Luxembourg nationality by procedure and previous nationality, 2007

Previous nationality

(country)

Naturali-

zation

Option

19,1

Option

19,2

Option

19,3

Option

19,4

Option

19,5

Option

19,6

Total

Option

Reinsta-

tement 26

Reinsta-

tement 45

Total

Reinstat.

Total Pro-

cedures

Total EU-27 206 448 2 70 123 1 2 635 0 9 9 850

Portugal 54 229 0 12 88 0 0 329 0 0 0 383

Italy 13 99 0 5 11 0 0 115 0 3 3 131

Germany 49 26 0 21 7 0 0 54 0 0 0 103

France 25 55 0 13 6 0 0 63 0 6 6 94

Belgium 42 26 2 15 7 1 0 51 0 0 0 93

Other 23 13 0 4 4 0 2 23 0 0 0 46

Total Non-EU-27 281 24 ß 72 68 1 4 180 0 0 0 461

Bosnia-Herzegovina 46 2 0 4 25 0 0 31 0 0 0 77

Serbia-Montenegro 45 2 0 2 13 0 1 18 0 0 0 63

Cape Verde 30 5 0 5 6 0 0 16 0 0 0 46

China 32 1 0 5 0 0 1 7 0 0 0 39

Morocco 8 1 0 13 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 22

Other 120 13 0 43 24 1 2 94 0 0 0 214

TOTAL 487 472 2 142 191 2 6 815 0 9 9 1311

Source: Ministry of Justice

26

Acquisition of Luxembourg nationality by option is reserved for various categories of non-

nationals who have special ties with the country (Article 19 of the Law of 22 February 1968 as

amended by the Law of 11 December 1986)62

. You can “opt” for nationality (1) if you were born

in Luxembourg and didn‟t acquire the nationality from one of your parents (Art. 19 Sect. 1);

(2) if you were born abroad as a child of a person of Luxembourg origin (Art. 19 Sect. 2); (3) if

you marry a Luxembourg citizen or your spouse acquires or reinstates his or her Luxembourg

nationality (Art. 19 Sect. 3); (4) if you were born abroad to a non-national and have completed

your entire schooling in Luxembourg (Art. 19 Sect. 4); (5) if you have been adopted by a

Luxembourg citizen and have not lost your original nationality (Art. 19 Sect. 5); or (6) if the

person, who at the moment you attain majority exercises either sole or joint custody with

another person, acquires or reinstates the Luxembourg citizenship (Art. 19 Sect. 6).

Furthermore, you must meet the same residence and language requirements as foreseen in the

naturalization procedure and agree to renounce your former nationality. Citizenship is granted

by declaration, subject to the approval of the Minister of Justice.

A person of Luxembourg origin who lost his or her Luxembourg nationality can reinstate it

through a declaration at the local civil registrar (Article 26 of the Law of 22 February 1968 as

amended by the Law of 24 July 2001)63

. A Luxembourg woman who lost her Luxembourg

citizenship to acquire another nationality by way of marriage or via her husband‟s acquisition of

a foreign nationality, without an expressed statement on her part, can reinstate her Luxembourg

nationality by way of declaration (Article 45 of the Law of 22 February 1968 as amended by the

Law of 11 December 1986)64

.

In 2007, 1.311 individuals acquired the nationality of Luxembourg. 65% of these persons

previously held citizenship of an EU-27 country with Portugal, Italy, Germany, France and

Belgium being the main countries of nationality. Only 35% of the naturalized persons had been

third-country nationals, mainly from Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia and Montenegro, Cape

Verde, China and Morocco. Luxembourg‟s migration history and foreign population profile are

well reflected in these numbers.

On the whole, “option” represented the most important path to the acquisition of Luxembourg

citizenship in 2007 (62.2% of the total number), followed by naturalization (37.1%) and

reinstatement (0.7%). However, there is a salient difference between EU-27 citizens and third-

62 Mémorial A – N° 129 of 26 October 2001,

http://www.mj.public.lu/legislation/nationalite/MEMORIAL_A_129_26_10_2001.pdf (coordinated text) 63 Mémorial A – N° 129 of 26 October 2001,

http://www.mj.public.lu/legislation/nationalite/MEMORIAL_A_129_26_10_2001.pdf (coordinated text) 64 Mémorial A – N° 129 of 26 October 2001,

http://www.mj.public.lu/legislation/nationalite/MEMORIAL_A_129_26_10_2001.pdf (coordinated text)

27

country nationals. While 75% of EU-27 citizens “opted” for the Luxembourg citizenship, 24%

became Luxembourg nationals via the naturalization procedure and 1% reinstated their

Luxembourg nationality. The large majority of third-country nationals, on the contrary, acquired

Luxembourg citizenship through naturalization (61%) and only 39% by way of option. Again,

this might be explained by the different migration histories and ties to Luxembourg of the

respective national groups.

5.2 Cross-border labour employment

Since the beginning of the 1990s, Luxembourg has experienced a considerable increase of cross-

border workers65

(„frontaliers‟) from the neighbouring regions, who, by 2007, constituted about

43 percent of the national labour force. Their arrival is not the result of a specific government

policy but based on the free movement of workers guaranteed to EU nationals by the Treaty of

Rome and regulated by the Council Regulation No 1612/68/EEC66

. It is also determined by

elevated unemployment in the neighbouring regions, a considerable job creation capacity in

Luxembourg, cross-national salary differences as well as considerable differences in housing

prices, and not at least the country‟s multilingual character facilitating the communication of in

one of the official languages (French or German)67

.

Table 17. Composition of labour force in Luxembourg by nationality and residence, 1990-2007

(31.03. of reference year) (in percentages)

Specification 1990 1995 2000 2005 2006 2007 2008

National resident workers 53.9 44.5 37.5 32.6 31.7 30.5 29.3

Non-national resident workers: EU 24.3 25.1 24.8 24.2 24.2 24.0 24.1

Non-national resident workers: non-EU 2.2 2.7 2.9 2.8 2.9 2.9 2.9

Cross-border workers 19.6 27.7 34.9 40.4 41.3 42.6 43.7

Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Source: IGSS

65 The term cross-border worker refers to any person who is employed in an EU Member State but resides in

another, where he or she returns at least once a week (Source: http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/areas/

industrialrelations/dictionary/definitions/frontierworkers.htm). A distinction has been made between “true” cross-

border workers who originate from the “Grande Région” and “bogus” cross-border workers who chose to settle in

the neighboring regions upon their first employment in Luxembourg or even before (Berger 2005 as cited by

Hartmann-Hirsch 2007: 22). 66 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CONSLEG:1968R1612:20060430:EN:PDF 67 Hartmann-Hirsch 2007: 20pp., see footnote 25.

28

In 2007, almost half of all cross-border workers came from France (47.1%), followed by

Belgium (23.6%) and Germany (22.2%). They are often highly-educated, have valuable

international work experience and are at the upper end of the pay scale in Luxembourg.68

Interestingly enough, an increasing number of Luxembourg nationals move abroad and

commute to Luxembourg for work due to the high cost of housing and living in their native

country. They constituted 2% of all cross-border workers in 2007.

Table 18. Composition of cross-border workforce by nationality (31.12.2007)

Country of nationality Total Percentage

France 65.123 47.1

Belgium 32.706 23.6

Germany 30.696 22.2

Luxembourg 2.698 2.0

Portugal 2.093 1.5

Other 5004 3.6

Total 138.320 100

Source: IGSS

In addition to cross-border workers, non-national residents represented 27.0% of the workforce

in Luxembourg in 2007. The overwhelming majority of them (24.1%) are EU citizens. The

economy of Luxembourg thus depends on non-national workers for about 70 per cent of its

labour force.

Table 19. Composition of labour force in Luxembourg by employment status (31.12.2007)

Specification Worker Employee Civil Servant Total

National resident workers 23.970 47.675 24.588 96.233

Non-national resident workers: EU 42.876 33.502 297 76.675

Non-national resident workers: non-EU 6.413 2.728 6 9.147

Non-defined69 resident worker 49 31 0 80

Cross-border workers 60.394 77.488 438 138.320

Total 133.702 161.424 25.329 320.455

Source: IGSS

68 Hartmann-Hirsch 2007: 59p., see footnote 25. 69 Stateless persons and unknown nationality.

29

However, there are important differences between the groups in terms of their employment

status. In 2007, almost half of all Luxembourg nationals were employed („employé/e‟), a quarter

were workers („ouvrier/ère‟) and the other quarter civil servants („fonctionnaire‟). 56% of cross-

border workers, on the other hand, were employed, e.g. by companies, in the financial or real

estate sector, and 43.7% workers, e.g. in the construction sector.70

The majority of non-nationals

residing in Luxembourg were workers, reflecting their, on average, profile as low-skilled

immigrants, particularly those from Portugal, Italy and Former Yugoslavia. The worker-

employee divide is most pronounced in the case on non-EU resident migrants. In 2007, 70.1% of

them were workers compared to 55.9% of EU resident migrants.

Table 20. Composition of workforce in Luxembourg by employment status (31.12.2007)

(in percentages)

Specification Worker Employee Civil Servant Total

National resident workers 24.9 49.5 25.6 100

Non-national resident workers: EU 55.9 43.7 0.4 100

Non-national resident workers: non-EU 70.1 29.8 0.1 100

Non-defined71 resident worker 61.3 38.7 0 100

Cross-border workers 43.7 56.0 0.3 100

Source: IGSS

70 SOPEMI-OECD Report 2008 of the Rapporteur for the Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg, pp. 9. 71 Stateless persons and unknown nationality.