Immigration detention under international human rights law: the legal framework and the litmus test of human rights treaty bodies monitoring

Grange, Mariette; Majcher, Izabella

doi:10.4337/9781785368066.00021

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As with other EU member states, the legal framework for immigration detention in Britain and France sits within a wider structure of immigration and asylum law and practice (on which see Achermann et al, 2013; Grange and Majcher, 2017; Hailbronner and Thym, 2016). Since 1999, the EU has been working to create a Common European Asylum System (CEAS) to harmonize practices across the continent (Wilsher, 2007).…”

Section: Blurring the Lines Between Asylum Seeking And Detention: Thementioning

confidence: 99%

Blurred lines: Detaining asylum seekers in Britain and France

Bosworth

Vannier

2019

Journal of Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we explore the use of immigration detention for asylum seekers in Britain and France who are awaiting removal to other European Union (EU) member states for processing under the terms of the Dublin Convention. As we will show, the emphasis on risk assessment as the grounds for detaining these people recasts humanitarian protections as security matters, effectively folding asylum seekers into a broader criminalisation of migration. A punitive response to those seeking refuge, this practice blurs the line between detention and asylum, and thereby hollows out key international human rights protections that have been central to the European project.

show abstract

Section: Blurring the Lines Between Asylum Seeking And Detention: Thementioning

confidence: 99%

Blurred lines: Detaining asylum seekers in Britain and France

Bosworth

Vannier

2019

Journal of Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Australia imposes mandatory detention on any asylum seeker arriving by boat and places them on foreign states’ islands, 3,000 km away from its mainland (Aljazeera, ). In Malaysia, immigration detainees risk being caned (GDP, ), in South Africa they are placed in a centre run by a private company, notorious for widespread physical and verbal abuse (Hiropoulos, ), and in Russia they have less than 2.5m 2 /person (Grange and Majcher, ). Whereas it is proud of its human rights record, the European Union enacted legislation allowing its member states to detain migrants for up to 1.5 years while waiting for removal (EU, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… For detailed discussion on human rights obligations with respect to immigration detention, see Cornelisse (). For discussion on the practice of the UN human rights bodies, see Grange and Majcher () and for discussion on ICRMW's detention provisions, see Grange (). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Immigration Detention under the Global Compacts in the Light of Refugee and Human Rights Law Standards

Majcher¹

2019

International Migration

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article explores how immigration detention is addressed in the Global Compact on Refugees (GCR) and Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM) and investigates the potential implications of the compacts on the existing legal framework regulating the use of immigration detention. While Objective 13 of the GCM largely reflects detention‐related standards under international human rights law, the GCR makes only scarce references to detention in §60. Overall, the compacts risk inhibiting gradual endorsement of the norm of non‐detention of children. On the other hand, they rightly restate the priority for alternatives to detention for adults. States should implement the provisions of the compacts in line with their obligations under international human rights and refugee law. The compacts cannot be used as a pretext to lower domestic detention‐related standards or to diminish the validity of the existing framework governing immigration detention.

show abstract

“…Of these approaches, the detention of asylum seekers has been widely criticized as unjust and in violation of international norms (Goodwin‐Gill, 1986; Grange & Majcher, 2017). Critics also point to the adverse effects of detention on the mental health of vulnerable refugees (Silove et al., 2007; Von Werthern et al., 2018).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of immigration detention on the mental health of refugees and asylum seekers

Forrest

Steel

2023

Journal of Traumatic Stress

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies consistently report that asylum seekers held in immigration detention have relatively high rates of mental distress, yet evidence of the long‐term impact of immigration detention is limited. Using propensity score–based methods, we estimated the impact of immigration detention on the prevalence of nonspecific psychological distress, using the Kessler‐6, and probable posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), using the PTSD‐8, among participants in a national sample of asylum seekers in the 5 years following their resettlement in Australia (N = 334). At Wave 1, the prevalence of nonspecific psychological distress was high among all participants regardless of detainment status, OR = 0.28, 95% CI [0.04, 2.06], and did not change over time for either detainees (n = 222), OR = 1.01, 95% CI [0.46, 2.18], or nondetainees (n = 103), OR = 0.81, 95% CI [0.39, 1.67]. In contrast, the odds of probable PTSD were significantly higher for former detainees, OR = 8.20; 95% CI [2.61, 26.73], than nondetainees at Wave 1; although they declined among former detainees, OR = 0.56, 95% CI [0.38, 0.82]), and increased among nondetainees, OR = 1.57, 95% CI [1.11, 2.23], in the years following resettlement. These results imply the use of immigration detention to manage unauthorized migration increases the prevalence of probable PTSD in the short term among former detainees who have resettled in Australia.

show abstract

Immigration detention under international human rights law: the legal framework and the litmus test of human rights treaty bodies monitoring

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Blurred lines: Detaining asylum seekers in Britain and France

Blurred lines: Detaining asylum seekers in Britain and France

Immigration Detention under the Global Compacts in the Light of Refugee and Human Rights Law Standards

The impact of immigration detention on the mental health of refugees and asylum seekers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About