On Friday, a union described the publication of employee names from the Agency for Integration, Migration and Asylum (AIMA) in the Diário da República as a “serious violation” of worker protection. These names were associated with delegated powers to evaluate immigrant processes.
In response, AIMA stated that its Board of Directors approved “the subdelegation of powers necessary for carrying out responsibilities related to the granting and renewal of temporary residence permits and the issuance of voluntary departure notices to a group of agency employees.”
These employees were thus authorized “to perform the following administrative acts: issue decisions on the granting or denial of temporary residence permits, renewals, and notifications for voluntary departure from national territory,” the statement added.
Under the Administrative Procedure Code (Article 47 and Article 159), it is mandatory to specify the acts subdelegated employees may perform and to publicize them in the Diário da República,” AIMA emphasized.
Therefore, the directive of AIMA does not violate worker protection but complies with existing legislation, ensuring the legality of migrant population process evaluations.”, it highlighted.
AIMA also assured the “safety of its workers and collaborators concerning their work and respect for their rights.”
On Friday, AIMA published a list of 86 employee names in the Diário da República as part of the delegation of competencies to make decisions on granting, renewing, or denying temporary residence permits and voluntary territory departure notifications.
The Migration Technicians Union condemned the release of the decision-makers’ list, viewing it as a “serious violation of AIMA employees’ protection carrying out these roles,” according to a statement.
In light of this “worrying situation,” the union noted that voluntary territory departure notifications are sent to immigrants with the decision-maker’s full name.
“Given the existing tension within the migratory community residing in Portugal, making such a list with full names public at a time when personal information can easily be obtained via social media puts their safety at risk,” the union’s statement, also issued on Friday, stated.
The union viewed this as “another example of the total lack of management and responsibility demonstrated by AIMA’s direction,” adding that it would take “necessary and legal measures” to protect the involved employees.
Today, questioned by Lusa about AIMA’s reaction to the accusation, the union argued that “the clarification suggests that all decisions made by AIMA until now would be illegal since delegations of competencies have never been published, which stems from employee roles according to their category,” as is common in other Public Administration services, which also do not publicly identify employees or their roles.
Thus, according to the union, “to comply with the referred article and the necessary observance of GDPR, it would suffice to publish the employees’ internal identification numbers, ensuring the norm is met.”
The union vowed to ensure “appropriate consequences for this situation.”
