Suchergebnisse

Following Russia's on-going facilitation of migrants to the Finnish border since last fall, Finland's newly formed right-wing coalition government has closed the eastern land border indefinitely on 4 April 2024. Worried that this step will not be enough to ensure national security, the government is finalising a Draft Act on Temporary Measures to Combat Instrumentalised Migration, currently under revision.The draft bill allows for pushbacks in violation of non-refoulement and openly admits a conflict with Finland's human rights obligations, EU law and own constitutional system, which is unusual. The unprecedented nature of the proposed measures is particularly worrying given that the Act appears unlikely to effectively address the essentially political problem that "migrant instrumentalisation" poses.

Under Dutch Law juridical acts may conflict ? by their mere accomplishment, their content, or their purport ? with a statute, good morals, or public order. This may be a ground for nullity, produce other effects, or have no consequences at all. Though not conflicting with law in such a way, a juridical act will not be (fully) enforceable, if a performance under an act would result in a violation of statute, good morals, or public order. The Dutch condictio indebiti also covers performances other than giving money or any other property, e.g. services rendered. The Dutch Law of Restitution is remarkable in that generally both parties may reclaim what they performed on an illegal contract. Under the 1992 Civil Code, unlike beforehand, there is now some room for the in pari delicto defence, albeit very little. Only where a particular performance made by one party is so repugnant that it defies assessment of its value, this party may, sometimes, avail itself of this defence against the condictio indebiti of the other party. If a contract, though not null, is not enforceable but has nevertheless given rise to performances, condictiones indebiti may equally lie.

"The popular 1998 reformasi movement that brought down President Suharto's regime demanded an end to illegal practices by state officials, from human rights abuse to nepotistic investments. Yet today, such practices have proven more resistant to reform than people had hoped. Many have said corruption in Indonesia is 'entrenched'. We argue it is precisely this entrenched character that requires attention. What is state illegality entrenched in and how does it become entrenched? This involves The state and illegality in Indonesia studying actual cases. Our observations led us to rethink fundamental ideas about the nature of the state in Indonesia, especially regarding its socially embedded character. We conclude that illegal practices by state officials are not just aberrations to the state, they are the state. Almost invariably, illegality occurs as part of collective, patterned, organized and collaborative acts, linked to the competition for political power and access to state resources. While obviously excluding many without connections, corrupt behaviour also plays integrative and stabilizing functions. Especially at the lower end of the social ladder, it gets a lot of things done and is often considered legitimate. This book may be read as a defence of area studies approaches. Without the insights that grew from applying our area studies skills, we would still be constrained by highly stylised notions of the state, which bear little resemblance to the state's actual workings. The struggle against corruption is a long-term political process. Instead of trying to depoliticize it, we believe the key to progress is greater popular participation. With contributions from Simon Butt, Robert Cribb, Howard Dick, Michele Ford, Jun Honna, Tim Lindsey, Lenore Lyons, John McCarthy, Ross McLeod, Marcus Mietzner, Jeremy Mulholland, Gerben Nooteboom, J Danang Widoyoko and Ian Wilson. This book is the result of a series of workshops supported, among others, by the Australian-Netherlands Research Collaboration (ANRC)."An intriguing ... and thought-provoking volume on the nexus between the state and illegality. It treats illegality not as an abnormality, but as an integral aspect of statecraft and social life. The book advances theoretical discussions, embedding them in rich empirical material that sheds light on the ways in which people in different localities and sectors in Indonesia use, make sense of, and negotiate illegality. It will benefit students and scholars fro ...

What role does race play in the construction of illegality in the face of pervasive border control? Sociologists and anthropologists of migration have apprehended illegality as a constructed category, produced by immigration policies and laws aimed at 'illegalizing' established mobility flows. 'Illegality' operates as an exclusionary category not only because it is constructed by law, but also because it is activated by racialized forms of prejudice which structure societies according to hierarchies of dangerousness, visibility and deservedness. Scholars, however, have tended to examine the entanglement between race and illegality by focusing mostly on the experience of black and brown people, especially those coming from poor countries in the Global South, thus overlooking how whiteness influences and alters the workings of border control. Drawing on qualitative data gathered between 2013 and 2019 in Morocco, this article questions the category of 'illegality' as it is policed at the street level and experienced by different groups of foreigners in Morocco. Building on Sara Ahmed's understanding of whiteness as an 'orientation', in this article the author argues that illegality is a label which is racially altered and expanded by border bureaucrats, who use it to differentially police the presence of migrant bodies pre-emptively visualized as legal or illegal. Whereas black people undergo pervasive containment procedures, white privilege allows white migrants to be oblivious of the border, even when their administrative situation is not compliant with migration law.

The popular 1998 reformasi movement that brought down President Suharto's regime demanded an end to illegal practices by state officials, from human rights abuse to nepotistic investments. Yet today, such practices have proven more resistant to reform than people had hoped. Many have said corruption in Indonesia is "entrenched." We argue it is precisely this entrenched character that requires attention. What is state illegality entrenched in and how does it become entrenched? This involves studying actual cases. Our observations led us to rethink fundamental ideas about the nature of the state in Indonesia, especially regarding its socially embedded character. We conclude that illegal practices by state officials are not just aberrations to the state, they are the state. Almost invariably, illegality occurs as part of collective, patterned, organized and collaborative acts, linked to the competition for political power and access to state resources. While obviously excluding many without connections, corrupt behaviour also plays integrative and stabilizing functions. Especially at the lower end of the social ladder, it gets a lot of things done and is often considered legitimate. This book may be read as a defence of area studies approaches. Without the insights that grew from applying our area studies skills, we would still be constrained by highly stylised notions of the state, which bear little resemblance to the state's actual workings. The struggle against corruption is a long-term political process. Instead of trying to depoliticize it, we believe the key to progress is greater popular participation. With contributions from Simon Butt, Robert Cribb, Howard Dick, Michele Ford, Jun Honna, Tim Lindsey, Lenore Lyons, John McCarthy, Ross McLeod, Marcus Mietzner, Jeremy Mulholland, Gerben Nooteboom, J Danang Widoyoko and Ian Wilson. This book is the result of a series of workshops supported, among others, by the Australian-Netherlands Research Collaboration (ANRC).