Suchergebnisse

This is the first monograph providing a comprehensive legal analysis of the criminalisation of migration in Europe. The book puts forward a definition of the criminalisation of migration as the three-fold process whereby migration management takes place via the adoption of substantive criminal law, via recourse to traditional criminal law enforcement mechanisms including surveillance and detention, and via the development of mechanisms of prevention and pre-emption. The book provides a typology of criminalisation of migration, structured on the basis of the three stages of the migrant experience: criminalisation before entry (examining criminalisation in the context of extraterritorial immigration control, delegation and privatisation in immigration control and the securitisation of migration); criminalisation during stay (examining how substantive criminal law is used to regulate migration in the territory); and criminalisation after entry and towards removal (examining efforts to exclude and remove migrants from the territory and jurisdiction of EU Member States and criminalisation through detention). The analysis focuses on the impact of the criminalisation of migration on human rights and the rule of law, and it highlights how European Union law (through the application of both the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and general principles of EU law) and ECHR law may contribute towards achieving decriminalisation of migration in Europe

Chapter 1. Italy and the 'refugee crisis': an introduction -- Chapter 2. The 'smuggling spectrum' and beyond: some analytical and methodological reflections -- Chapter 3. Criminalisation practices on the ground -- Chapter 4. Bottom-up dynamics and the role of institutional channels -- Chapter 5. From policy inputs to policy outputs: making anti-smuggling policies in and across the EU -- Chapter 6. Explaining the policing of mobility and the politics of immobility: some conclusions.

Abstract Between 2014 and April 2019, the government of Myanmar banned international migration for domestic work to Singapore and criminalised the brokering of such migration as well as predeparture training and placement of migrants as domestic workers in Singapore. These measures were taken in response to concerns over the alleged abuse of migrant women as well as international pressures to eliminate trafficking and debt bondage. Experienced brokers and recruitment agencies who were trading openly up until then were forced to cease operations. At the same time, large numbers of inexperienced and uncouth recruitment agencies emerged to take advantage of the black economy created by the ban. This resulted in women migrating irregularly from Myanmar to Singapore being exposed to greater risks which the paper traces. Four discernible impacts of the ban on the recruitment practices and working conditions faced by migrant women from Myanmar before departure and after arriving in Singapore were identified: a sharp increase in migration and placement costs, inadequate predeparture training, placement in forced labour conditions with extended and unclear repayment periods and no access to support from the Myanmar government while in Singapore. Although the ban has since been lifted, the resulting migration system had placed workers in conditions of extreme exploitation with little recourse to justice or having their voices heard. The paper ends by summarizing the unanticipated negative consequences of the criminalisation of migration brokerage in Myanmar and lessons for other countries that may be considering controls on female migration.

Between 2014 and April 2019, the government of Myanmar banned international migration for domestic work to Singapore and criminalised the brokering of such migration as well as predeparture training and placement of migrants as domestic workers in Singapore. These measures were taken in response to concerns over the alleged abuse of migrant women as well as international pressures to eliminate trafficking and debt-bondage. Experienced brokers and recruitment agencies who were trading openly up until then, were forced to cease operations. At the same time large numbers of inexperienced and uncouth recruitment agencies emerged to take advantage of the black economy created by the ban. This resulted in women migrating irregularly from Myanmar to Singapore being exposed to greater risks which the paper traces. Four discernible impacts of the ban on the recruitment practices and working conditions faced by migrant women from Myanmar before departure and after arriving in Singapore were identified: a sharp increase in migration and placement costs; inadequate predeparture training; placement in forced labour conditions with extended and unclear repayment periods and, no access to support from the Myanmar government while in Singapore. Although the ban has since been lifted, the resulting migration system had placed workers in conditions of extreme exploitation with little recourse to justice or having their voices heard. The paper ends by summarising the unanticipated negative consequences of the criminalisation of migration brokerage in Myanmar and lessons for other countries that may be considering controls on female migration.

The paper presents a critical discussion of the CJEU judgment in the JZ case (C 806/18), in which the Court interpreted Article 11 of Directive 2008/115 that regulates entry ban issuance. The author asks a question of whether an entry ban as a measure limiting the right to free movement has a moral and legal ground in international law and EU law. Moreover, the author focuses on the problem of the criminalisation of irregular migration – both in the context of the established line of the Court's case law and in the case of a vague national law standard that penalizes illegal stays – the possibility to apply the criminal law concept of error in law and thus exclusion of criminal liability of an illegal migrant. ; anna.kosinska1@usz.edu.pl ; Anna Magdalena Kosińska is an Associated Professor at the University of Szczecin, Poland. ; University of Szczecin, Poland ; Ad Hoc Query on 2020.81 Umbrella Inform – Covid-19 and Return – Part 2 (REG Practitioners and NCPs). Requested by COM on 21 December 2020. ; Bosworth M., Human Rights and Immigration Detention in the United Kingdom, (in:) M.B. Dembour, T. Kelly (eds.), Are Human Rights for Migrants? Critical Reflections on the Status of Irregular Migrants in Europe and the United States, London 2011. ; Carens J.H., The Ethics of Immigration, New York 2013. ; Chetail V., International Migration Law, Oxford 2019. ; Chin G.J., Illegal Entry as Crime, Deportation as Punishment: Immigration Status and the Criminal Process, "UCLA Law Review" 2011, https://www.uclalawreview.org/illegal-entry-as-crime-deportation-as-punishment-immigration-status-and-the-crim[inal-process/. ; Crosby A., The Political Potential of the Return Directive, "Laws" 2014, no. 3. ; di Molfetta E., Brouwer J., Unravelling the 'Crimmigration Knot': Penal Subjectivities, Punishment and the Censure Machine, "Criminology & Criminal Justice" 2020, vol. 20, no 3. ; Eule T.G., Borrelli L.M., Lindberg A., Wyss A., Migrants Before the Law. Contested Migration Control in Europe, London and Basingstoke 2019. ; European Migration Network (EMN), The Effectiveness of Return in EU Member States. Synthesis Report for the EMN Focussed Study, 2017, https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/what-we-do/networks/european_migration_network/reports_en. ; Grant S., The Recognition of Migrants' Rights within the UN Human Rights System: the first 60 years, (in:) M.B. Dembour, T. Kelly (eds.), Are Human Rights for Migrants? Critical Reflections on the Status of Irregular Migrants in Europe and the United States, London 2011. ; Grey C., Justice and Authority in Immigration Law, Oxford and Portland, OR 2017. ; Kolankiewicz M., Sager M., Clandestine Migration Facilitation and Border Spectacle: Criminalisation, Solidarity, Contestations, "Mobilities" 2012, vol. 16, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17450101.2021.1888628. ; Koronawirus a więzienia. Skargi do RPO – na brak środków ochrony, nieprzestrzeganie zaleceń sanitarnych, dostęp do badań, https://www.rpo.gov.pl/pl/content/koronawirus-a-wiezienia-skargi-rpo-od-osadzonych-i-rodzin. ; Kox M., Boone M., The Pains of Being Unauthorized in the Netherlands, "Punishment & Society" 2020, vol. 22, no. 4. ; Miller D., Strangers in Our Midst, The Political Philosophy of Immigration, Cambridge, MA 2016. ; Motomura H., Immigration Outside the Law, New York 2014. ; Pahladsingh A., The Legal Requirements of the Entry Ban: The Role of National Courts and Dialogue with the Court of Justice of the European Union, (in:) M. Moraru, G. Cornelisse, Ph. De Bruycker (eds.), Law and the Judicial Dialogue on the Return of Irregular Migrants from the European Union, Oxford 2020. ; Sanchez G., Achilli L., Stranded: The Impacts of COVID-19 on Irregular Migration and Migrant Smuggling, "Policy Briefs" 2020, no. 20. ; Strąk M., Polityka Unii Europejskiej w zakresie powrotów. Aspekty prawne, Warsaw 2019. ; Stumpf J.P., The Process is the Punishment in Crimmigration Law, (in:) K. Franko Aas, M. Bosworth (eds.), The Borders of Punishment. Migration, Citizenship, and Social Exclusion, Oxford 2013. ; Szklanna A., Ochrona prawna cudzoziemca w wietle orzecznictwa Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka, Warsaw 2010. ; Tsoukala A., Turning Immigrants into Security Threats: A Multi – Faceted Process, (in:) G. Lazardis (ed.), Security, Insecurity and Migration in Europe, London 2016. ; Waasdorp J., Pahladsingh A., Expulsion or Imprisonment? Criminal Law Sanctions for Breaching an Entry Ban in the Light of Crimmigration Law, "Bergen Journal of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice" 2019, vol. 4, no 2. ; Weissbrodt D., Divine M., International human rights of migrant, (in:) B. Opekin, R. Perruchoud, J. Redpath-Cross (eds.), Foundations of International Migration Law, Cambridge 2012. ; Zedner L., Is the Criminal Law Only for Citizens? A Problem at the Borders of Punishment, (in:) K. Franko Aas, M. Bosworth (eds.), The Borders of Punishment. Migration, Citizenship, and Social Exclusion, Oxford 2013. ; 26 ; 6 ; 207 ; 224

The criminalisation of irregular migrants – in relation to irregular entry, residence, and work – is considered against the 1975 and 1990 ILO Migrant Workers Conventions (MWC); the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966 (ICCPR); the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 1966 (ICESCR); the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG); and the Convention against Transnational Organized Crime 2000, including its Protocols to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children ('the Trafficking Protocol') and against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Sea and Air ('the Smuggling Protocol'). The creation of laws, which are generally applied only to foreigners – concerning irregular entry, residence, and work – increases costs and exposure to adverse labour conditions and social vulnerabilities, and also impedes access to justice. The possibilities of criminal conviction, resulting in fines, imprisonment and expulsion contribute to a precarious class of low-skilled migrant. The chapter argues that the criminalisation of migration exacerbates the migrant premium because it decreases income while increasing dependency on employers, smugglers and traffickers and complicates access to human rights protection. The chapter suggests that one of the policy propositions for the Global Compact should be an understanding of how the emphasis internationally, regionally and nationally on smuggling and trafficking and border control has resulted in the criminalisation of irregular migrants – both potential and actual - for the ways in which they enter, leave, reside and work in a country; and that migrants need to be able to manage their working needs in a flexible manner.

This article examines how Venezuelan forced migrants in Peru experience xenophobic discrimination, which has become increasingly linked to their criminalisation as thieves and murderers. Based on 12 months of qualitative fieldwork, including 72 in-depth interviews, five focus groups, and a survey (N116) in five Peruvian cities, we explore how Venezuelans experience, and make sense of, discrimination and criminalisation in everyday life. First, we discuss how criminalisation compares to general xenophobic discrimination, and other types of discrimination experiences. Second, we juxtapose the prevalence of xenophobic discrimination and criminalisation experiences across the five cities of our study, and between public spaces and the workspace. We then move to the qualitative discussion of the criminalisation experience in these different spaces. Fourth, we discuss how Venezuelan migrants perceive this criminalising discrimination as linked to their villanisation in the media and political discourses. Finally, we discuss our findings and make suggestion for further research. The paper contributes to the literature on migrant criminalisation by exploring how criminalisation processes play out in the context of large-scale intraregional forced displacement in the global South.