Do Human Rights Reinforce Border Regimes? Differential Approaches to Human Rights in the Movement Opposing Border Regimes in Berlin

Perolini, Marco

doi:10.1080/07256868.2022.2146662

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While some insist on the right to seek and enjoy asylum, others claim the right to stay and unrestricted and universal freedom of movement for everyone (Perolini, 2022a). They embrace a different human rights politics, which is associated with a distinct potential for challenging border regimes and for elaborating notions of human rights that are emancipatory for migrants (Perolini, 2023). Radical organisations formulate non-legal notions of human rights, which include the right to stay.…”

Section: Berlin and The Multiplicity Of Its Actors Opposing Border Re...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This awareness inspires the elaboration of claims that they address towards state authorities through their participation in protests. These claims embed notions of rights, such as the right to stay and universal freedom of movement, which activists interpret as human rights (Perolini, 2023).…”

Section: Notions Of Human Rights Permeate Both State-oriented and Mor...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Limited Tools for Emancipation? Human Rights and Border Abolition

Perolini

2023

Sociology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human rights often fall short of challenging oppression because they are enmeshed with conservative institutions, such as the law and the state. Despite these shortcomings, grassroots organisations contesting border regimes in Berlin often make use of human rights in their everyday mobilisation. They engage in autonomous forms of mobilisation outside the state and construct non-legal notions of human rights that are emancipatory for racialised migrants. However, these same organisations also address demands to state authorities by using legal notions of human rights. In this article, I draw on the framework focusing on abolition and non-reformist reforms, which have been developed by activists and scholars in their resistance to policing and the Prison-Industrial Complex. I innovatively extend its use to propose a nuanced understanding of grassroots approaches to human rights. Specifically, I argue that these approaches entail the concurrent pursuit of short-term reformist reforms and border abolition.

show abstract

Section: Berlin and The Multiplicity Of Its Actors Opposing Border Re...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Notions Of Human Rights Permeate Both State-oriented and Mor...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Limited Tools for Emancipation? Human Rights and Border Abolition

Perolini

2023

Sociology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is no surprise, given the unsympathetic attitude of Libyan formal and informal authorities towards migrants and pro-migrant activities, and the fact that law in Libya “is created and used more than elsewhere in the region, but it serves to dismiss rights” (Perrin 2018: 78) rather than support them. In the current Libyan political context, there don’t seem to be the necessary conditions for any non-governmental initiative to go beyond a mere legalistic approach to human rights, one that sticks to those human rights that are codified and recognised by states (Perolini, 2022) – which is the approach typically promoted by externalisation (Stock, 2021). This is obviously the case for the human rights workshops held for Libyan DC guards (by CIR in a Tripoli hotel in 2018; by CEFA in Tunis in 2019), where beneficiaries were trained about the rights of refugees and detained migrants in Libya according to national and international law, also including international human rights conventions in the field of migration and asylum.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bridgeheads of EU border externalisation? NGOs/CSOs and migration in Libya

Cuttitta

2023

Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper analyses the work carried out by non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and civil society organisations (CSOs) in Libya from 2009 to 2020 to shed light on its ambivalent relationship to the EU externalisation of migration and border management. While also looking at Libyan organisations, and at initiatives such as EU-funded professionalisation projects, which aim to co-opt the nascent local civil society into the EU border externalisation mechanism, the paper largely focuses on international NGOs, with specific attention being paid to the Italian NGO CIR. The paper shows that even in the difficult Libyan context there is some potential for NGOs/CSOs to radically and effectively oppose EU externalisation, or at least try to do so through activities such as public information and advocacy. However, in a context in which migrants are systematically exposed to a wide range of abuses, and foreign or foreign-funded actors are seen with suspicion, NGOs/CSOs have limited room for manoeuvre. In fact, they mostly end up filling the gaps of the local migration and border management system on behalf of their (European) donors, thus supporting the smooth operation of externalised border management. This is also visible in the way NGOs/CSOs address human rights, interact with donors and local authorities, and perpetuate dichotomies and categorisations that support migration containment policies.

show abstract