Institutional Transformation of Migration Governance in the Russian Federation: From Administrative Regulation to Securitization and Political Control
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33445/psssj.2026.7.2.7Keywords:
Russian Federation, Federal Migration Service, Ministry of Internal Affairs, Foreign CitizensAbstract
Purpose. To identify the main stages in the institutional transformation of the migration governance system in the Russian Federation between 1992 and 2026 and to determine how changes in the organizational status, subordination, and powers of the Federal Migration Service affected the balance between the administrative-service, control, and security functions of state migration policy. Method. The study employs a historical-institutional approach, process tracing, structural-functional analysis, and comparative temporal analysis. The empirical basis comprises regulatory and legal acts defining the status and competence of migration authorities in the Russian Federation, scholarly studies on migration governance and securitization, and reports of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights concerning the application of Russian administrative and legal mechanisms in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine. Findings. Four stages in the development of Russian migration governance are identified: institutional establishment and a socio-administrative orientation in 1992–2001; the integration of migration functions into the system of the Ministry of Internal Affairs in 2002–2011; the organizational autonomization of the Federal Migration Service in 2012–2016; and the reintegration of migration governance into the Ministry of Internal Affairs following the abolition of the Federal Migration Service in 2016. The findings demonstrate that these structural reorganizations did not constitute a linear transition from a “social” to a “repressive” institution. Nevertheless, they created conditions for the gradual predominance of control and security functions over service-oriented functions. Theoretical implications. The study refines the application of the securitization concept to the analysis of migration policies pursued by authoritarian states. Practical implications. The findings may be used to assess the risks faced by foreign nationals and residents of the temporarily occupied territories as a result of the application of Russian migration, registration, and citizenship procedures. Article type: Theoretical-analytical and historical-institutional article.
Downloads
References
Government of the Russian Federation. (1992). Issues of the Federal Migration Service of Russia: Resolution No. 740 of 22 September 1992.
Government of the Russian Federation. (2012). Issues of the Federal Migration Service: Resolution No. 711 of 13 July 2012.
Grigorieva, K. (2021). Migrants as “persons susceptible to terrorist ideology”: An institutional analysis of the Russian case of migration securitization. The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology, 24(3), 58–85. https://doi.org/10.31119/jssa.2021.24.3.4.
Heusala, A.-L. (2018). The Soviet legacy of national security in Russian migration policy. Europe-Asia Studies, 70(8), 1225–1246. https://doi.org/10.1163/2451-8921-00303006.
Hofmann, E. T., Carboni, J. L., Mitchneck, B., & Kuznetsov, I. (2016). Policy streams and immigration to Russia: Competing and complementary interests at the federal and local levels. International Migration, 54(2), 34–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/imig.12227.
Malakhov, V. S., & Simon, M. E. (2018). Labour migration policy in Russia: Considerations on governmentality. International Migration, 56(3), 61–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/imig.12402.
Mamedov, I., Abylkalikov, S., & Prudnikov, A. (2026). Securitization in autocratic settings: Framing migrants as threats in contemporary Russia. Problems of Post-Communism. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/10758216.2026.2666359.
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. (2024). Human rights situation during the Russian occupation of territory of Ukraine and its aftermath, 24 February 2022–31 December 2023. https://ukraine.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/2024-04/2024-03-20%20OHCHR%20Report%20on%20Occupation%20and%20Aftermath_EN.pdf
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. (2025). Situation of human rights in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine, including the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol: Report of the Secretary-General, 1 July–31 December 2024. https://ukraine.ohchr.org/en/Situation-of-human-rights-in-the-temporarily-occupied-territories-of-Ukraine-including-the-Autonomous-Republic-of-Crimea-and-the-city-of-Sevastopol-report-of-the-Secretary-General-1-July-31-December-2025
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. (2026). Forced displacement from territory of Ukraine occupied by the Russian Federation: Forcible transfer and deportation, barriers to return, and the rights of internally displaced persons, 24 February 2022–31 December 2025. https://ukraine.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/2026-04/2026-03-20%20OHCHR%20-%20Thematic%20report%20-%20Forced%20displacement.pdf
President of the Russian Federation. (1992). On the Federal Migration Service of Russia: Decree No. 626 of 14 June 1992.
President of the Russian Federation. (2004). Issues of the Federal Migration Service: Decree No. 928 of 19 July 2004.
President of the Russian Federation. (2016). On improving state administration in the sphere of control over narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and their precursors and in the sphere of migration: Decree No. 156 of 5 April 2016.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Volodymyr Hulyma, Serhii Pisnenko, Vitalii Kraskovskyi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The authors agree with the following conditions:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication (Download agreement) with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2. Authors have the right to complete individual additional agreements for the non-exclusive spreading of the journal’s published version of the work (for example, to post work in the electronic repository of the institution or to publish it as part of a monograph), with the reference to the first publication of the work in this journal.
3. Journal’s politics allows and encourages the placement on the Internet (for example, in the repositories of institutions, personal websites, SSRN, ResearchGate, MPRA, SSOAR, etc.) manuscript of the work by the authors, before and during the process of viewing it by this journal, because it can lead to a productive research discussion and positively affect the efficiency and dynamics of citing the published work (see The Effect of Open Access).
