1. Irregular migrants and migration law: some issues of definitions 27

Author(s):  
Sanja Milivojević

This chapter looks at the intersection of race, gender, and migration in the Western Balkans. Immobilizing mobile bodies from the Global South has increasingly been the focus of criminological inquiry. Such inquiry, however, has largely excluded the Western Balkans. A difficult place to research, comprising countries of the former Yugoslavia and Albania, the region is the second-largest route for irregular migrants in Europe (Frontex 2016). Indeed, EU expansion and global developments such as wars in Syria, Afghanistan, and Iraq have had a major impact on mobility and migration in the region. The chapter outlines racialized hierarchies in play in contemporary border policing in the region, and how these racialized and gendered practices target racially different Others and women irregular migrants and asylum seekers. Finally, this chapter maps the impact of such practices and calls for a shift in knowledge production in documenting and addressing such discriminatory practices.


2013 ◽  
Vol 62 (3) ◽  
pp. 599-627 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clíodhna Murphy

AbstractWhile the rights of domestic workers are expanding in international law, including through the adoption of the ILO Domestic Workers Convention in 2011, migrant domestic workers remain particularly vulnerable to employment-related abuse and exploitation. This article explores the intersection of the employment law and migration law regimes applicable to migrant domestic workers in the United Kingdom, France and Ireland. The article suggests that the precarious immigration status of many migrant domestic workers renders employment protections, such as they exist in each jurisdiction, largely illusory in practice for this group of workers. The labour standards contained in the Domestic Workers Convention, together with the recommendations of the UN Committee on Migrant Workers on the features of an appropriate immigration regime for migrant domestic workers, are identified as providing an alternative normative model for national regulatory frameworks.


2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 157-183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benedita Menezes Queiroz

Counter-terrorism and public security measures have significantly altered EU immigration law. Under the premise that EU instruments which regulate EU immigration databases influence the legal regime of irregularity of migrants’ statuses, the present article argues that the latest developments in the area of data technology contribute to the phenomenon of “crimmigration”. This is so not only because they may generate a sort of “digital illegality” due to their impact on the categorisation of migrants, but also because they enable a conflation of treatment of irregularity, asylum seeking and criminality. This article focuses on the recent amendments and proposals for amendments to the EURODAC Regulation, a database that regulates the asylum fingerprint system in the EU. This is revealing of the ongoing broadening of the purpose of that data and law enforcement access to the collected information. The argument finds its basis in three main trends common to these databases: the erosion of the principle of purpose limitation, the widening of access to data by law enforcement authorities, and the digitalisation of borders through biometrics. Ultimately, this article claims that the level of surveillance of certain categories of migrants that may cross the borders of the EU puts at risk the distinction between illegally staying irregular migrants and criminals, given that the treatment of their personal data is insufficiently clear in practice.


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maryann Bylander

In the context of sharply increasing levels of international migration, development actors across Southeast Asia have begun to focus their attention on programming intended to make migration safer for aspiring and current migrant workers. These projects, however, typically begin with the assumption that more regular, orderly migration is also safer for migrants, an idea built into the language of the Sustainable Development Goals and the Global Compact on Migration. This article questions this assumption. It takes as its starting point the observation that migrant workers who move through legal channels do not systematically experience better outcomes among a range of indicators. Based on data collected from Cambodian, Burmese, Laotian, and Vietnamese labor migrants recently returned from Thailand, this work highlights the limits of regular migration to provide meaningfully “safer” experiences. Although migrants moving through regular channels report better pay and working conditions than those who moved through irregular channels, they also systematically report working conditions that do not meet legal standards, and routinely experience contract substitution. In other areas, regular migrants generally fare similarly to or worse than irregular migrants. They are more likely to experience deception and to have written or verbal agreements broken in migration processes. On arrival in Thailand, they routinely have their documents held, and they are more likely than irregular migrants to experience harassment and abuse both in the migration process and at their worksites. They are also more likely to return involuntarily and to struggle with financial insecurity and indebtedness after returning. These findings challenge mainstream development discourses seeking to promote safer migration experiences through expanding migration infrastructure. At the same time, they highlight the need for policymakers, development actors, and migration practitioners to reconsider the conflation of “safe” with “regular and orderly” migration throughout their programming.


Author(s):  
Paola Pannia

AbstractThis chapter aims to explore and analyse the tangled interplay of political discourses, policies and legislations in the field of asylum and migration that runs across the countries under scrutiny (the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Italy, Switzerland and the UK, hereinafter SIRIUS countries). Building on empirical evidence, we highlight some main trends registered across SIRIUS countries: the narrowing and slowing down of access to international protection that results from the recourse to push-back operations and the construction of fences, but also procedures provided by the EU asylum acquis, such as the accelerated procedure. This restraining tendency is even more acute in the field of economic-related migration, where in most of the SIRIUS countries legal entry channels are mostly reserved for those who are considered eligible due to their economic resources or talent, such as high-skilled workers, investors or rich entrepreneurs. These restrictive measures often rely on narratives that question the sincerity of the asylum claim, and criminalise migration and humanitarian assistance. Meanwhile, legislative landscapes on migration and asylum are increasingly populated by symbolic laws, which downgrade foreigners’ rights and weaken standards. Their explicit aim is to dissuade migrants from coming to the country, while catering for natives’ fears and responding to domestic electoral consensus-building.


2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 465-467
Author(s):  
Jeffrey H. Cohen

This is a brief reflection on the Migration Conference 2018, the sixth event in our conference series, was hosted by the University of Lisbon, Portugal. The Conference brought together nearly 600 international researchers. The Migration Conference series builds upon the earliest conferences held at Regent’s University London and over time has grown to become the largest global gathering of migration scholars. The thematic tracks in the conference covered various aspects of human mobility ranging from identity issues to remittances and migration law. The audience has also enjoyed the keynote speeches by distinguished speakers including Joaquin Arango from Complutense University Madrid and Ruba Salih from SOAS University of London.


2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 276-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Walsh

Recent escalations in migration control involve the criminalization of non-citizens. In assessing this punitive turn criminologists have highlighted drastic expansions in state sovereignty and coercion. Focusing on the Australian context, this article examines a less noticed trend: the civilianization of migration policing. To facilitate irregular migrants’ removal the government has created tip-lines that encourage private citizens to conduct surveillance and anonymously ‘dob-in’ or report unlawful non-citizens. Approaching the initiative as a distinct responsibilization strategy that enrolls the entire citizen body as policing agents, this article explores its instrumental and symbolic goals, whether expanding official gazes or restoring an exclusive sense of national citizenship. Assessing the functions and effects of public vigilance reveals important tensions and ambiguities within the responsibilization process. In particular the case of participatory surveillance demonstrates how ‘adaptive’ approaches to order maintenance are not external to, but potentially promote and perpetuate, punitive forms of sovereign power.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document