Migration Control and Minority Policy: The Case of the Netherlands

We draw on the concept of deportability to show how unauthorized migrants who (used to) live in the Netherlands perceive and experience Dutch internal-control mechanisms. We first conclude that these migrants’ deportability has serious legal, social, and existential effects on them, which they feel long after their return or deportation to their home country. Second, we state that unauthorized migrants evaluate the Dutch internal-control mechanisms as “one system” in which they distinguish three important, interlinked layers, consisting of (1) divergent actors, (2) laws and policies inside and outside the migration control domains located within (3) different geographies. This implies that individual nation-states, through their internal control mechanisms, also contribute to the externalization of migration control at a supranational level. We conclude that the state’s internal migration controls bring about immobility not only in the countries of settlement but also in the transit and home countries.

Download Full-text

‘If you don’t have documents or a legal procedure, you are out!’ Making humanitarian organizations partner in migration control

European Journal of Criminology ◽

10.1177/1477370820932079 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 147737082093207

Author(s):

Mieke Kox ◽

Richard Staring

Keyword(s):

The Netherlands ◽

Legal Status ◽

Control Policies ◽

Migration Policies ◽

Legal Procedure ◽

Ethnographic Fieldwork ◽

Humanitarian Organizations ◽

Support Organizations ◽

Migration Control

The paradoxical merger of humanitarian care and securitization imperatives can be seen not only at external and externalized borders, but also at the internal borders in the Netherlands. Here, humanitarian organizations that sprang up to support migrants without a legal status in response to – and given their disagreement with – the state’s exclusionary migration policies have become involved in migration control. During a gradual and subtle responsibilization process, the Dutch authorities have used specific measures and redirected monetary flows in order to incorporate these organizations into its broader migration control policies. This has resulted in a decrease in the number of support organizations for unauthorized migrants, a reduction in their independence and autonomy, and an increased focus on selection and return. Ethnographic fieldwork amongst unauthorized migrants illustrates the consequences of this exclusionary control. These migrants experience exclusion, selection and enforcement by humanitarian organizations and doubt the trustworthiness of these organizations. This development seems to fit in with the broader trend of European states disarming humanitarian organizations for unauthorized migrants by either responsibilizing or criminalizing them. However, these strategies are not without consequences because they run the risk that unauthorized migrants will further withdraw and turn away from this type of assistance altogether. We use both a humanitarian and a pragmatic perspective to argue that it would make sense for states either to allow organizations to continue their – uncompromised and unconditional – support for unauthorized migrants or to adapt their migration policies in such a way that humanitarian support becomes redundant.

Download Full-text

The pains of being unauthorized in the Netherlands

Punishment & Society ◽

10.1177/1462474519887357 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 22 (4) ◽

pp. 534-552 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Mieke Kox ◽

Miranda Boone ◽

Richard Staring

Keyword(s):

The Netherlands ◽

Current System ◽

Living Conditions ◽

Collateral Consequences ◽

Geographical Mobility ◽

Ethnographic Fieldwork ◽

Nation States ◽

Migration Control

Ethnographic fieldwork amongst 105 unauthorized migrants in the Netherlands shows that unauthorized migrants suffer from the pains of being unauthorized. These migrants feel punished and are severely hurt by – amongst others – the deprivation of healthy and secure living conditions, social and geographical mobility and citizenship. These migrants’ pains are caused by current restrictive migration controls, something the Dutch authorities could and should be aware of given previous research that provides similar insights. While the Dutch authorities do provide – the legally required – provisions for unauthorized migrants, we argue on the basis of Hayes’ proximity model that these authorities accept the collateral consequences of (possibly) being subjected to migration controls and purposely inflict these pains on unauthorized migrants. This means that migration control is not only experienced as punishment by those subjected to it, but that it is also intended to punish. The current system of migration control has as such expanded the reach of penal power. This implies that ‘punishment and society’ scholarship should also look beyond the borders of nation-states and criminal laws in order to understand contemporary punishment.

Download Full-text

Migration Control and Minority Policy : The Case of the Netherlands

Mechanisms of Immigration Control : A Comparative Analysis of European Regulation Policies ◽

10.5040/9781474215237.ch-005 ◽

2015 ◽

Keyword(s):

The Netherlands ◽

Migration Control

Download Full-text

Governing Migration through COVID-19? Dutch Political and Media Discourse in Times of a Pandemic

Social Sciences ◽

10.3390/socsci10100379 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 10 (10) ◽

pp. 379

Author(s):

Maartje Van Der Van Der Woude ◽

Nanou Van Van Iersel

Keyword(s):

Discourse Analysis ◽

The Netherlands ◽

The Political ◽

Media Discourse ◽

Theoretical Frameworks ◽

Social Phenomena ◽

Strong Emphasis ◽

Migration Control ◽

And Migration

This article explores the political and media discourse in The Netherlands around COVID-19 and migration. In so doing, it asks to what extent the dynamics of ‘governing COVID-19 through migration’ are visible in this discourse. By asking this question, the article builds upon the theoretical frameworks of ‘governing through crime’ and ‘governing through migration control’. Both theoretical frameworks place a strong emphasis on the role of discourse in framing certain social phenomena as a threat, concern or risk. By carrying out a discourse analysis on Dutch political and media debates around COVID-19 and migration in the period 1 January 2020–1 November 2021, the article illustrates that despite the linking of migration and crime not only being very visible but also seemingly normalized in this discourse, the links made between COVID-19 and migration were much more nuanced. Furthermore, although COVID-19 and migration were discussed together, the discourse does not show any evidence of governing COVID-19 through migration by using the pandemic to push for very restrictive migration laws targeting only ‘vagabonds’ while still allowing the mobility of ‘tourists’).

Download Full-text

The Privatization of Control over Labour Migration in the Netherlands: In Whose Interest?

European Journal of Migration and Law ◽

10.1163/157181611x571277 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 13 (2) ◽

pp. 185-200 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Tesseltje de Lange*

Keyword(s):

The Netherlands ◽

Internal Control ◽

Migrant Workers ◽

The State ◽

State Action ◽

Employer Sanctions ◽

State And Society ◽

Private Policing ◽

Migration Control ◽

Skilled Migrant

AbstractMigration control has become subject to ‘privatization’ and is more often than not in the form of internal control, such as for example with employer sanctions. This privatization has taken place through coercive and permissive state action. Coercive state action is the implementation of employer sanctions. It is demonstrated how the drive for efficiency and the consequences of the implementation of employer sanctions in the Netherlands in the sphere of private law create a disaggregation between the state and society. In addition to their influence on contracts and civil law suits, employer sanctions in the Netherlands have created a system of private policing. Another form of privatization is the more permissive form of state action entailing the approval by the state of certain employers. These employers are entitled to fast-track and simple procedures, mainly for highly skilled migrant workers, in exchange for acts of migration control. The question is in whose interest these privatizations are taking place. It is argued that the consequences of privatization, however efficient it may be, may in the end not necessarily be in the interest of the nation-state.

Download Full-text