Discipline and Punish? Analysis of the Purposes of Immigration Detention in Europe

Asyl und Missbrauch. Multidisziplinäre Perspektiven auf einen vorherrschenden Diskurs

“…En outre, une nouvelle forme de détention, appelée détention pour insoumission, est introduite : elle permet le con nement d'étranger•ère•s dont le renvoi ne peut pas être exécuté à cause de leur comportement ou manque de collaboration. En n, l'existence d'une condamnation pénale est introduite comme nouveau motif de détention en vue du renvoi, brouillant les frontières entre contrôle du crime et celui de la migration (Majcher et de Senarclens 2015). Ces évolutions con rment une tendance de plus en plus marquée de la détention administrative à devenir une mesure punitive et disciplinaire, ayant pour but de dissuader les personnes migrantes de se rendre ou de rester en Suisse, ainsi que de les forcer à collaborer à leur renvoi (Majcher et de Senarclens 2015).…”

In Defence of Invisiblized Noncitizens: Seeking Justice in the Canadian Immigration Detention System

“…In Chapter 2, I discuss the characteristics of administrative confinement, the different categories of immigration detainees, and the several ways in which nation states legitimize their deprivation of liberty with justifications ranging from reassertion of territorial sovereignty to general deterrence. This is followed by a critical analysis of the common claim of immigration detention as non-punitive, drawing upon literature on "crimmigration" or the increasing convergence of criminal and immigration law (Majcher & de Senarcles, 2015;Chacón, 2014;Leerkes & Broeders, 2010;Stumpf, 2006;Pratt, 2005;Miller, 2003). More specifically, I discuss the defining features of the Canadian immigration detention system, including its simultaneous use of immigration holding centres (IHC) and provincial prisons of the criminal justice system, its lack of time limits to detention, and the quasi-legal proceedings of detention review hearings.…”

“…A growing number of interdisciplinary scholars are particularly challenging the claim of non-punitiveness in the confinement of noncitizens. They argue detention is much more than exclusion for administrative purposes; it is about imposing deliberate punishment on whole categories of racialized people (Majcher & de Senarcles, 2015;Chacón, 2014;Silverman, 2014;Leerkes & Broeders, 2010;Pratt, 2005). These arguments emerged after observations of an increasing overlap between immigration and criminal law across different national contexts.…”

“…This convergence is described as the "criminalization of migration" (Miller, 2003: 616) or "crimmigration law" (Stumpf, 2006: 10). Scholars importantly suggest this is reflected in the intensifying resemblance between immigration detention and criminal incarceration as demonstrated in theoretical and empirical research on the criminalization of noncitizens (Aliverti, 2012;Chacón, 2012), and the increasing use of carceral logics, mechanisms, and spaces in the immigration setting (Kaufman, 2015;Majcher & de Senarcles, 2015;Leerkes & Broeders, 2010;Martin & Mitchelson, 2009). Qualitative studies on the lived experience of detainees also provide strong evidence of its implicit punitive nature (Silverman & Nethery, 2015;Bosworth, 2014;Pratt, 2005).…”

“…Qualitative studies on the lived experience of detainees also provide strong evidence of its implicit punitive nature (Silverman & Nethery, 2015;Bosworth, 2014;Pratt, 2005). Elsewhere, other scholars are calling attention to the misplaced justification of immigration detention for administrative purposes, arguing it allows nation states to remove legal safeguards normally guaranteed in the criminal context, such as rights to due process and judicial oversight (Majcher & de Senarcles, 2015;Hernández, 2014;Chacón, 2014;Wilsher, 2011). In sum, this literature suggests the holding of noncitizens is implicitly punitive as it increasingly integrates features of criminal law and incarceration, but fails to protect noncitizens against arbitrary detention by denying procedural safeguards.…”