Acknowledgments vii Introduction / Nathalie Peutz and Nicholas De Genova 1 Part One. Theoretical Overview The Deportation Regime: Sovereignty, Space, and the Freedom of Movement / Nicholas De Genova 33 Part Two. Sovereignty and Space 1. Deportation, Expulsion, and the International Police of Aliens / William Waltes 69 2. Immigration Detention and the Territoriality of Universal Rights / Galina Cornelisse 101 3. Mapping the European Space of Circulation / Serhat Karakayali and Enrica Rigo 123 Part Three. Spaces of Deportability 4. From Exception to Excess: Detention and Deportations across the Mediterranean Space / Rutvica Andrijasevic 147 5. Deportation in the U.S.-Mexico Borderlands: Anticipation, Experience, and Memory / Victor Talavera, Guillermina Gina Nunez, and Josiah Heyman 166 6. Engulfed: Indian Guest Workers, Bahraini Citizens, and the Structural Violence of the Kafala System / Andrew M. Gardner 196 7. Deportation at the Limits of "Tolerance": The Juridical, Institutional, and Social Construction of "Illegality" in Switzerland / Hans-Rudolf Wicker 224 8. Deportation Deferred: "Illegality," Visibility, and Recognition in Contemporary Germany / Heide Castaneda 245 9. Citizens, "Real" Others, and "Other" Others: The Biopolitics of Otherness and the Deportation of Unauthorized Migrant Workers from Tel Aviv, Israel / Sarah S. Willen 262 10. Radical Deportation: Alien Tales from Lodi and San Francisco / Sunaina Maira 295 Part Four. Forced Movement 11. Fictions of Law: The Trial of Sulaiman Oladokun, or Reading Kafka in an Immigration Court / Aashti Bhartia 329 12. Exiled by Law: Deportation and the Inviability of Life / Susan Bibler Coutin 351 13. "Criminal Alien" Deportees in Somaliland: An Ethnography of Removal / Nathalie Peutz 371 Part Five. Freedom 14. Abject Cosmopolitanism: The Politics of Protection in the Anti-Deportation Movement / Peter Nyers 413 References 443 Contributors 483 Index 497

The Deportation regime: sovereignty, space, and the freedom of movement

Buying time: The delayed crisis of democratic capitalism

The securitisation of migration in Western states has resulted in an array of restrictive laws and policies that raise important questions about the relationship between protection and the political. New technologies of control (such as detention) and strategies of exclusion (such as deportation) are rapidly undermining—indeed, effectively criminalising—national cultures of asylum. This article critically analyses how these measures are being contested and countered by the anti-deportation activism of undocumented non-citizen people in Canada. How are these campaigns re-casting the question of ‘protection’ in the face of deportation efforts by the Canadian state? This is a significant issue because the capacity to decide upon matters of inclusion and exclusion is a key element of sovereign power. In the case of asylum seekers, the ability to decide who will and will not be provided with protection is interpreted in this paper as a focal point where the state (re)founds its claim to monopolise the politica...

Abject Cosmopolitanism: the politics of protection in the anti-deportation movement

Traditionally a core aspect of state sovereignty, immigration control has first moved upwards to the intergovernmental sphere. It has then been brought closer to supranational governance, and is now gradually moving outwards towards the realm of EU foreign relations. This article interprets this move as the continuation of established patterns of transgovernmental cooperation in an altered geopolitical and institutional context. It explains internationalisation as a strategy of immigration ministers to increase their autonomy towards political, normative and institutional constraints on policy-making. Whereas these constraints were originally located at the national level, they are now increasingly perceived in communitarising immigration politics. The shift ‘outwards’ may thus be interpreted as a strategy to maximise the gains from Europeanisation while minimising the constraints resulting from deepening supranationalism. Yet this might in the long run also yield a widening of the external migration agen...

/pdf/shifting-up-and-out-the-foreign-policy-of-european-4gfakewv2i.pdf

Shifting up and out: The foreign policy of European immigration control

Compared with refugee or immigration policy, the historical and political analysis of deportation is poorly developed. This paper suggests some lines along which critical studies of deportation might proceed. First, it argues that we can historicize and denaturalize deportation by setting it within a wider field of political and administrative practices. This is done by comparing modern deportation practice with other historical forms of expulsion. Second, the paper interrogates the forms of governmentality which invest the practice of deportation, and asks what they might tell us about modern citizenship. It argues that deportation can be seen as one key element in the international police of aliens.

Deportation, Expulsion, and the International Police of Aliens

Evidentiary assessment in asylum procedures is an area largely unregulated by international law. While the EU Qualification Directive does not purport to fill this lacuna, its Article 4 offers a norm that does touch on a number of central aspects of evidentiary assessment. This article provides a detailed analysis of this complex provision and its practical implications. Amongst others, the Directive obliges Member States to communicate any information that impacts on the relevance of the applicant's statements.The processing of information and evidence is divided into three distinct stages. The first deals with the submission of information, the second seeks to establish the relevance of the information provided by the applicant and to assess it, while the third concerns evidentiary assessment in the narrow sense, considering the value of evidence and basing the decision on it. Implicitly, the Directive imposes a duty on the authorities to identify the applicant's claim, and concurrently, the themes of proof flowing from it. This might very well exceed present practice in Member States, and would thus translate into an improvement for the rule of law at large. (Less)

/pdf/evidentiary-assessment-in-refugee-status-determination-and-2hguk3tk70.pdf

Evidentiary assessment in refugee status determination and the EU qualification directive

Return of persons to states of origin and third states

An introduction to the special issue of the European Journal of Migration and Law dealing with undocumented migrants.

/pdf/introduction-the-laws-of-undocumented-migration-3eccn74zou.pdf

Introduction: The Laws of Undocumented Migration

Certain states resort to diplomatic assurances to facilitate and legitimise the removal of non-nationals to third states with dubious human rights records. Typically, these removals involve two countries where human rights are conceived of in different ways and institutionalised to different degrees. Given their practical importance in the U.S. programme of "extraordinary renditions" as part of the ongoing "war on terror", diplomatic assurances have definitely moved into the domain of high politics. Earlier, such assurances were mainly seen as a migration control tool. Now, cases are reported where they provided a prelude to the interrogation, or incapacitation of perceived enemies in less protective jurisdictions. In this working paper, I argue that the combination of diplomatic assurances and rendition represent a contemporary form of ban. Their main function is to perform a double move: to assure the rendering community of its own faithfulness to human rights law, while the captive is given to human rights law in its withdrawal. This argument is developed in three main steps. First, I will explore the effects of diplomatic assurances on the international law of human rights. In Section 2, I shall demonstrate that a specific diplomatic assurance constitutes an agreement to disagree on the precise content of the torture prohibition in international human rights law. Section 3 explains why diplomatic assurances must be regarded as treaties under international law. In Section 4, I explore the uneasy relationship between diplomatic assurances and multilateral human rights instruments, with treaty law unable to reduce ambiguity. Second, I will attempt to explain the structures of which diplomatic assurances form part, and show how such assurances deny the articulation of human rights violations on multiple levels: by courts, by the captive, by the monitoring diplomat, and by the norm itself. Section 5 will be devoted to this task. Finally, in the last step, I will argue that the silence thus produced is not accidental, but must be seen as an integral part of the productivity of human rights law in a system of nation-states.

Diplomatic Assurances and the Silence of Human Rights Law

Certain states resort to diplomatic assurances to facilitate and legitimise the removal of non-nationals to third states with dubious human rights records. Typically, these removals involve two countries where human rights are conceived of in different ways and institutionalised to different degrees. Given their practical importance in the U.S. programme of "extraordinary renditions" as part of the ongoing "war on terror", diplomatic assurances have definitely moved into the domain of high politics. Earlier, such assurances were mainly seen as a migration control tool. Now, cases are reported where they provided a prelude to the interrogation, or incapacitation of perceived enemies in less protective jurisdictions. In this working paper, I argue that the combination of diplomatic assurances and rendition represent a contemporary form of ban. Their main function is to perform a double move: to assure the rendering community of its own faithfulness to human rights law, while the captive is given to human rights law in its withdrawal.This argument is developed in three main steps. First, I will explore the effects of diplomatic assurances on the international law of human rights. In Section 2, I shall demonstrate that a specific diplomatic assurance constitutes an agreement to disagree on the precise content of the torture prohibition in international human rights law. Section 3 explains why diplomatic assurances must be regarded as treaties under international law. In Section 4, I explore the uneasy relationship between diplomatic assurances and multilateral human rights instruments, with treaty law unable to reduce ambiguity.Second, I will attempt to explain the structures of which diplomatic assurances form part, and show how such assurances deny the articulation of human rights violations on multiple levels: by courts, by the captive, by the monitoring diplomat, and by the norm itself. Section 5 will be devoted to this task. Finally, in the last step, I will argue that the silence thus produced is not accidental, but must be seen as an integral part of the productivity of human rights law in a system of nation-states. (Less)

Gregor Noll

Papers

Evidentiary assessment in refugee status determination and the EU qualification directive

Return of persons to states of origin and third states

Introduction: The Laws of Undocumented Migration

Diplomatic Assurances and the Silence of Human Rights Law

Diplomatic assurances and the silence of human rights law