Hindering the deportation machine: An ethnography of power and resistance in immigration detention

Abstract

The article explores the relationship between immigration detention and criminal justice by presenting the results of an ethnographic research that was carried out inside one of the main Italian pre-removal detention facilities. Challenging the idea that immigration detention centres are to be considered as legal black holes where migrants are reduced to ‘bare life’ and subjected to a form of absolute power, this article suggests that detained migrants possess an extraordinary ability to resist and undermine the deportation machine, reproducing a condition that, reversing Nicolas De Genova’s formula, I would define as of their ‘undeportability’. The article explores the microphysics of power relationships shaping detention conditions inside a pre-removal centre showing how in the clash between police attempting to deport migrants and their opposition to deportation, immigration detention turns into a de-facto punishment. While the overlapping of administrative and punitive functions under the framework of immigration law and policies has been extensively analysed, this research illustrates how it is produced in practice suggesting that the evolution of immigration detention into a deterrence tool is to be considered as the outcome of the failure of the Italian deportation machine rather than a conscious policy choice. Finally, this article provides an opportunity to explore further the relationship between migration control and what Michel Agier has defined as humanitarian government, showing the many paradoxes and contradictions incurred by humanitarian agencies when they are called upon to manage custodial facilities such as immigration detention centres

Ecology of Sites of Confinement: Everyday Life in a Detention Center for Illegalized Non‐citizens

“…Among these illegalized non‐citizens, 1441 were deported (48%), and 1166 (39%) were released with an expulsion order, and hence, continued to be “detainable” and “deportable” (De Genova, ). Given the unlimited number of detention orders that a person may be subject to, many people were detained several times (Campesi, ).…”

“…In particular, scholars from various disciplines—such as anthropology, sociology, political science, geography, law, criminology, and cultural studies—have been engaged on this issue, addressing detention within a broader analysis of border regimes (for an overview of the literature see Bosworth, ). However, due to limited access to detention facilities, only a few studies have documented the lived experiences of the people inside them (e.g., Bosworth, ; Campesi, ; Fili, ; Fischer, ; Hall, ).…”

“…Acknowledging said call, and aiming to adopt a community psychology perspective when examining migration‐related detention, this paper presents an ethnographic study conducted from March 2014 to January 2017 inside the Ponte Galeria detention center in Rome, the largest Italian migration‐related detention facility. This is the first academic study to be conducted at this site, and one of the few studies on life inside migration‐related detention in Italy (for other examples see Campesi, ; Iyengar et al., ). To analyze our findings, we adopt a previously developed ecological perspective with a focus on justice (Esposito et al, 2015b).…”

Pressured into a Preference to Leave? A Study on the “Specific” Deterrent Effects and Perceived Legitimacy of Immigration Detention

“…Two main types exist: (1) preadmission detention at the border, involving foreigners not admitted to the state's territory, and (2) pre‐expulsion detention of foreigners whose stay in the territory is, has, or is likely to become unauthorized. Although formally not a punishment, governments do use immigration detention to deter unwanted immigrants from the territory (Campesi , DeBono ; Hasselberg ; Kalhan ; Leerkes and Broeders ; Mainwaring ; Martin ; Pickering and Weber ). That claim rests on three main observations: (1) barring exceptions, detention occurs under regimes resembling criminal imprisonment; (2) immigration detainees tend to experience the detention as a kind of punishment, and (3) various policy makers have publicly stated that immigration detention is meant to pressure detainees into leaving.…”

“…Two main types exist: (1) preadmission detention at the border, involving foreigners not admitted to the state's territory, and (2) preexpulsion detention of foreigners whose stay in the territory is, has, or is likely to become unauthorized. Although formally not a punishment, governments do use immigration detention to deter unwanted immigrants from the territory (Campesi 2015, DeBono 2013Hasselberg 2014;Kalhan 2010;Leerkes and Broeders 2010;Mainwaring 2012;Martin 2012;Pickering and Weber 2014). That claim rests on three main observations: (1) barring…”