Beyond criminalization: Immigration and the challenges for criminology

Multiple functions of immigration detention: Police measures in the governance of mobile populations

“…Rather than criminal justice, immigration enforcement measures targeting mobile poor people represent a mode of police governance in the public order and security framework (Dubber, 2018), historically resembling the control of vagrancy as a police matter (see Neocleous, 2021; Weber and Bowling, 2008). In addition to the administrative deprivation of liberty as a characteristic police measure (Campesi, 2020; Napoli, 2011; Velloso, 2022), the police can use other, less coercive means to control deportable migrants and advance removals alongside immigration detention. Ultimately, coercive and preventive police measures targeting foreign nationals are related to the enforcement of social order and the eradication of potential disorders and risks for society, irrespective of the rather negligible threats posed by irregular residency or minor offenses.…”

“…The legal regulation of immigration detention and the introduction of judicial supervision during recent decades have not intrinsically changed the nature of immigration detention as a police measure; instead, it can said to have "produced a mere proceduralization of the legal guarantees against arbitrary detention whose result has been to disguise police arbitrariness with a façade of legality" (Campesi, 2014: 162). Due to varying jurisdictions and institutional arrangements across countries, border guard or other security agencies can possess similar police powers to impose coercive measures (see Velloso, 2022); immigration enforcement also involves collaborations between different state institutions in detecting deportable noncitizens (Weber, 2013). Different forms of confinement intertwining humanitarian assistance with police control have also become an integral part of the humanitarian governance of refugees and asylum seekers (Agier, 2011).…”

“…In contrast to the well-regulated criminal justice system, immigration law provides the police with broad discretionary powers to control and detain foreign nationals through administrative measures. Notwithstanding similarities with prisons, the legal structure of immigration detention differs from that of criminal justice due to deportable foreign nationals’ limited rights and protections, and the prevalence of administrative police measures in immigration enforcement (see Campesi, 2020; Dubber, 2018; Napoli, 2011; Velloso, 2022). Preoccupation with the convergence of criminal and immigration law practices, together with “the focus on the state as the singular holder of the sovereignty” (Moffette and Pratt, 2020: 17), involves a risk of overlooking different operational rationalities, legal instruments, and administrative practices in immigration enforcement.…”

“…In this article, I discuss different functions of immigration detention as a part of the governance of migration, drawing on my research on the detention and removal system in Finland, and analysis of Finnish immigration policy documents. While I have discussed empirical findings in detail elsewhere, this article places more theoretical focus on police powers in immigration enforcement and administrative police measures as a distinguished form of governance from law and criminal justice (Dubber, 2018; Neocleous, 2021); notwithstanding some important contributions (e.g., Campesi, 2020; Velloso, 2022; Walters, 2002; Weber, 2013), these questions have received rather limited attention in the analysis of immigration detention. In addition to deprivation of liberty in the first place, police measures support removal procedures that continue during detention, as well as other administrative strategies to control deportable people.…”