Suchergebnisse

On January 14, 2008, under the wider program of the Arizona Denial Prosecution Initiative, Operation Streamline was put into effect in the Tucson Sector of the Mexico-US borderlands. Initially implemented in Del Rio, Texas, this program—aimed at mass incarceration of undocumented persons to reduce repeated migration attempts—has been most rigorously applied in the Tucson Sector, known as both the busiest and deadliest corridor for migration. Every day approximately seventy migrants are apprehended by the US Border Patrol and then sentenced for up to 180 days imprisonment. I consider Operation Streamline and its impacts on undocumented migrants through the lens of local organizing, particularly by the humanitarian aid group No More Deaths, asserting that such policies—which further militarize the border and justify criminalization of migrants in the public eye—put bodies at greater risk, even before they are prosecuted, through practices of spatial containment that add to the rigours of crossing the Sonoran Desert. In this work I explore the methods in which grassroots humanitarian aid groups apply practices of direct action to challenge such policies and promote freedom of movement. ; Le 14 Janvier 2008, dans le cadre de l'« Arizona Denial Prosecution Initiative », le programme « Operation Streamline » est entré en vigueur dans le secteur Tucson de la zone frontalière entre le Mexique et les États-Unis. D'abord mis en œuvre à Del Rio, Texas, ce programme visant l'incarcération massive des sans-papiers afin de réduire les tentatives répétées de migration a été le plus rigoureusement appliquée dans le secteur Tucson, couloir migratoire ayant la réputation d' être le plus achalandé et le plus meurtrier. Chaque jour, environ soixante-dix migrants sont appréhendés par la US Border Patrol, puis condamnés à un maximum de 180 jours d'emprisonnement. L'auteur considère le programme « Operation Streamline » et ses impacts sur les sans-papiers à travers le prisme de l'organi-sation locale, en particulier du groupe d'aide ...

AbstractWe evaluate the complexity of temporary migration schemes in contrast to the longstanding approach to immigration as a key aspect of nation‐building in settler societies. Until the early 1990s, predominantly one‐way, permanent immigration schemes were preferred in settler societies such as Australia. In an increasingly fluid global context, temporary migrants are more susceptible to forms of abuse and exploitation in a host society, with fewer forms of redress due to their status as non‐citizens and non‐permanent residents. Taking a specific focus upon Australia, we contextualize the experiences of temporary migrants both prior to and under the conditions of COVID‐19. Our key argument is that temporary migration schemes are organised and structured not only to favour states, as well as employers and businesses, but that the stripping back of rights to those who enter these schemes is a deliberative aspect of the state approach.

The crisis of borders and prisons can be seen starkly in statistics. In 2011 some 1,500 migrants died trying to enter Europe, and the United States deported nearly 400,000 and imprisoned some 2.3 million people-more than at any other time in history. International borders are increasingly militarized places embedded within domestic policing and imprisonment and entwined with expanding prison-industrial complexes. Beyond Walls and Cages offers scholarly and activist perspectives on these issues and explores how the international community can move toward a more humane future. Working at a range of geographic scales and locations, contributors examine concrete and ideological connections among prisons, migration policing and detention, border fortification, and militarization. They challenge the idea that prisons and borders create safety, security, and order, showing that they can be forms of coercive mobility that separate loved ones, disempower communities, and increase shared harms of poverty. Walls and cages can also fortify wealth and power inequalities, racism, and gender and sexual oppression. As governments increasingly rely on criminalization and violent measures of exclusion and containment, strategies for achieving change are essential. Beyond Walls and Cages develops abolitionist, no borders, and decolonial analyses and methods for social change, showing how seemingly disconnected forms of state violence are interconnected. Creating a more just and free world-whether in the Mexico-U.S. borderlands, the Morocco-Spain region, South Africa, Montana, or Philadelphia-requires that people who are most affected become central to building alternatives to global crosscurrents of criminalization and militarization. Contributors: Olga Aksyutina, Stokely Baksh, Cynthia Bejarano, Anne Bonds, Borderlands Autonomist, Collective, Andrew Burridge,

'Border hotels' have come to prominence during the COVID-19 pandemic as spaces of detention and quarantine. Despite the longer history of using hotels for immigrant detention, efforts to contain outbreaks have led to the proliferation of hotels used for border governance. Ad hoc quarantine facilities have been set up around the world acting as choke points for mobility. The use of hotels as sites of detention has also gained significant attention, with pandemic related restrictions impacting on access to services for detained refugees and asylum seekers. Inhumane conditions and mobilisations against these conditions have recently received substantial media coverage. This symposium initiates a discussion about 'border hotels', closely engaging with these developments. Contributors document the shifting infrastructures of the border, and explore how these sites are experienced and resisted. They draw attention to divergent experiences of immobility, belonging, exclusion, and intersections of detention and quarantine. In exploring different - and controversial - aspects of 'border hotels', this symposium theorises modalities of governance implemented through hotels. Following in the footsteps of the 'hotel geopolitics' agenda (Fregonese and Ramadan 2015) it illustrates how hotels become integrated into border regimes. In doing so, it contributes to debates on the material and infrastructural dimensions of bordering practices and specifically to the literature on carceral geographies, polymorphic bordering and the politics of mobility.

This paper focuses on the coerced mobilities associated with reporting, meaning the mandatory requirement to regularly check-in with authorities for the purpose of control. Drawing on recent calls for a politics of mobility and advances in carceral geographies, we attend to the forces, movements, speeds and affective materialities of reporting with a focus on deportable migrants and the UK Home Office. In doing so we develop two conceptual lenses through which to further understand the politics of mobility. First, we develop the concept of 'slickness' in the context of the process of becoming detained at a reporting event. We understand slickness as a property of bodies and objects that makes them easier to move. Second, we argue that reporting functions to 'tether' deportable migrants; thereby not only fixing them in place, but also forcing the expenditure of energy and the experience of punishment. The result is that reporting blurs the distinction between detention and 'freedom' by enacting the carceral in everyday spaces.

There is a widespread, and growing, expectation that no matter where a person seeks asylum, comparable procedures and consistent standards of fairness will be applied in assessing their claim under the Refugee Convention. Initial findings from a three-year study by researchers at the University of Exeter examining asylum determination procedures in the UK has found that there are considerable differences between the hearing centres where asylum applicants' appeals are heard, and significant inconsistencies in the practice of judges who decide such appeals. These findings have important implications. Inconsistencies in procedure undermine faith in the fairness of legal processes, and a reduced perception of fairness could result in further appeals, as appellants seek to challenge what feels like an unjust decision. Lack of adherence to procedures in particular could lead to erroneous decision making, with the grave consequence that asylum seekers may face forcible return, to face persecution or serious harm. Adapted from the source document.

Vulnerable groups' direct experiences and impressions of British courts and tribunals have often been overlooked by politicians and policy makers (JUSTICE, 2019). This paper takes a geographical, empirical approach to access to justice to respond to these concerns, paying attention to the atmosphere of First Tier Immigration and Asylum Tribunal hearings to explore the qualitative aspects of (in)access to justice during asylum appeals. It draws on 41 interviews with former appellants and 390 observations of hearings in the First tier immigration and asylum tribunal to unpack the lived experiences of tribunal users and to identify three ways in which the atmosphere in tribunals can constitute a barrier to access to justice. First, asylum appellants are frequently profoundly disorientated upon arrival at the tribunal. Second, appellants become distrustful of the courtroom when they cannot see it as independent of the state. Third they often experience the courtroom procedures and the interactions that take place as disrespectful, inhibiting their participation. These insights demonstrate how the concept of 'atmosphere' can illuminate legal debates in valuable ways. Additionally we argue that legal policy making must find better ways to take vulnerable litigants' experiences into account.

Cover -- Half Title -- Title -- Copyright -- Contents -- List of Illustrations -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction -- PART 1: Why Borders Should Be Open -- CHAPTER 1 Sanctuary, Solidarity, Status! -- CHAPTER 2 In Defense of Illegal Immigration -- CHAPTER 3 Toward a Politics of Freedom of Movement -- CHAPTER 4 Dispossessing Citizenship -- CHAPTER 5 Prison Abolitionist Perspectives on No Borders -- CHAPTER 6 Habeas Corpus and the New Abolitionism -- PART 2: The Problem with Borders -- CHAPTER 7 Migration as Reparations -- CHAPTER 8 Médecins Sans Frontières and the Practice of Universalist Humanitarianism -- CHAPTER 9 Border Walls and the Illusion of Deterrence -- CHAPTER 10 Open Internal Borders and Closed External Borders in the EU -- CHAPTER 11 Crumbling Walls and Mass Migration in the Twenty- First Century -- PART 3: Activism for Free Movement -- CHAPTER 12 Asylum Reporting as a Site of Anxiety, Detention, and Solidarity -- CHAPTER 13 Radical Migrant Solidarity in Calais -- CHAPTER 14 Violence, Resistance, and Bozas at the Spanish- Moroccan Border -- CHAPTER 15 Comunicados desde Chicagoiguala -- CHAPTER 16 Sanctuary Cities and Sanctuary Power -- CONCLUSION In Defense of Free Movement -- Contributors -- Index -- A -- B -- C -- D -- E -- F -- G -- H -- I -- J -- K -- L -- M -- N -- O -- P -- R -- S -- T -- U -- V -- W -- Y -- Z