Border Criminology
Tracks
Track 2
Wednesday, July 10, 2024 |
10:15 AM - 11:45 AM |
Conference Room 4 (TIC) |
Speaker
Dr Violeta Kapageorgiadou
Research Assistant
Canterbury Christ Church University
‘(…)Just keep your head down and go(…)’[P7]: an exploration of perceptions and reactions to hate crime of refugees and asylum seekers in Greece.
Professor Alison Gerard
Professor Of Law/criminology
University Of Canberra
Performing the criminal justice system: Visa cancellation and cycles of injustice in Australia
Abstract
The notion of separate arms of the state operating independently from each other to implement border control is central to Australia’s construction of sovereignty and state legitimacy. This is particularly true of how Australia perceives itself as managing the cancellation of visas– visa cancellation being presented as an administrative process and separate from the criminal justice system. This paper examines the interactions between the criminal justice system and administrative/merits review of visa cancellation decisions concerning non-citizens in Australia. The introduction of mandatory visa cancellation provisions in 2014 has led to a dramatic increase in the numbers of people targeted for visa cancellation, many of whom go on to apply for revocation or merits review of the cancellation decision. Through documentary analysis of a sub-set of these cases, interactions between the criminal justice administrative review systems come into focus.
In this paper, I argue that the administrative review system operates in the shadow of the criminal justice system and is akin to a re-sentencing, drawing on similar artifacts and actuarial tools, and relying upon performances of ‘rehabilitation’ and ‘community protection’ alongside other purposes of sentencing in the criminal justice system. What results from administrative review trying to mimic the sentencing process has significant consequences for non-citizens. First, non-citizens are ‘stuck’ in fixed and time stamped understandings of themselves and their behaviour. Second, reliance on an incomplete picture, as all documents are often unavailable, enables assumptions about offences and an offender to continue unchecked. Third, questionable tools used to reach original decisions in the criminal justice system, that are then carried over to administrative review and are often given increased weight, hampers access to justice. Finally, decision-makers privilege assessments of risk over needs and ultimately ‘sentence’ non-citizens to release into the community without supports or explosion/containment in immigration detention. Whilst these insights affirm ‘crimmigration’ operating to make experiences for non-citizens more punitive, they also showcase how decision-makers assume the objective neutrality and fairness of criminal justice processes and perform their replication in the administrative law sphere, perpetuating cycles of injustice.
In this paper, I argue that the administrative review system operates in the shadow of the criminal justice system and is akin to a re-sentencing, drawing on similar artifacts and actuarial tools, and relying upon performances of ‘rehabilitation’ and ‘community protection’ alongside other purposes of sentencing in the criminal justice system. What results from administrative review trying to mimic the sentencing process has significant consequences for non-citizens. First, non-citizens are ‘stuck’ in fixed and time stamped understandings of themselves and their behaviour. Second, reliance on an incomplete picture, as all documents are often unavailable, enables assumptions about offences and an offender to continue unchecked. Third, questionable tools used to reach original decisions in the criminal justice system, that are then carried over to administrative review and are often given increased weight, hampers access to justice. Finally, decision-makers privilege assessments of risk over needs and ultimately ‘sentence’ non-citizens to release into the community without supports or explosion/containment in immigration detention. Whilst these insights affirm ‘crimmigration’ operating to make experiences for non-citizens more punitive, they also showcase how decision-makers assume the objective neutrality and fairness of criminal justice processes and perform their replication in the administrative law sphere, perpetuating cycles of injustice.
Associate Professor Faith Gordon
Associate Professor And Deputy Associate Dean Of Research
Australian National University
Pushed Out or Refused In: Crimmigration and the Legal Limbo of Children in Australia’s Migration System
Abstract
This paper considers two case studies: 1) the practices of pushing out (deporting) minors on character grounds, and 2) the refusal to return home the children of foreign fighters. Since 2014, the Australian government forecast its intention, wherever possible, to deport non-citizens involved in crime. Since then, this crimmigration practice has penetrated deeply into Australian society. This has resulted in families being separated and long-standing residents, refugees, First Nations people and suspected ‘gang’ members (with or without criminal convictions) being deported. This exclusionary approach to community safety has been referred to by a former Minister for Home Affairs as “taking out the trash”. The deportation to Aotearoa- New Zealand of a 15-year-old boy who had grown up in Australia, sparked criticism both at home in Australia and from the then New Zealand Prime Minister, who pointed out that Australia should be dealing more responsibly with its home-grown crime problems. The second case study explores the refusal of the Australian Government to bring home (repatriate) children who are citizens but are currently living in dangerous ISIS dominated camps in Syria. Both case studies shine a light onto the negative impacts of the crimmigration ‘creep’ and the legal limbo experienced by children in Australia’s migration system. These practices are something which most commentators would recognise as being at odds with Australia’s commitments under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989. The paper also considers what this means for the supremacy of crimmigration objectives over other competing legal and moral norms.
Dr Steve Kirkwood
Senior Lecturer
The University of Edinburgh
Restorative justice and the harms of the asylum system
Abstract
People who are forced to flee their homes due to war, conflict and persecution often experience a range of harms, including the effects of violence, oppression, human rights abuses, the loss of homes and property, as well as the many dangers associated with seeking safety. While the majority of those affected by forced migration are displaced within their countries of origin, and many others seek refuge in neighbouring countries, a proportion seek asylum in third countries, such as the United Kingdom. Given that asylum seekers and refugees have already experienced many harms and injustices, and are often traumatised, it would make sense that asylum systems were welcoming, supported recovery and facilitated belonging and stability. Unfortunately, many people who seek asylum in countries such as the United Kingdom experience hostile immigration rhetoric, policies and practices, which often compound trauma and create new harms. How could this be addressed? In this presentation, I will present findings from an exploratory study into the potential of restorative justice as a way of addressing the harms experienced by people of a refugee background. The study was based on a review of international literature on the topic, and interviews with restorative justice providers in England, asylum seekers and representatives from refugee organisations in Scotland, and practitioners delivering restorative practices within asylum centres in Belgium. I will present three examples: a grassroots refugee-led justice initiative in Scotland, restorative practices in Belgium asylum centres, and restorative justice services in England. I demonstrate how restorative practices and related approaches can attend to the trauma that refugees often experience, humanise their experiences, and help address some of the harm they may have experienced, offering a formulation for the restorative integration of refugees.
Ms Marya Al-Hindi
Phd Candidate
The University Of Edinburgh
Protecting forgotten refugees: The active marginalisation of Sudanese asylum seekers in Lebanon.
Abstract
By 2020, there were 2,014 Sudanese refugees registered with the UNHCR in Lebanon (UNHCR 2020b), they constituted 15% per cent of the approximately 18,000 “non-Syrian” population of concern (UNHCR 2018). Increasing attention is being drawn to their plight in Lebanon, particularly through labelling them as the “forgotten refugees”. Understanding their marginalization by international bodies and domestic criminal justice institution is essential; however, treating them as “forgotten”, neglects their active mistreatment at the hands of Lebanese social and governmental institutions. The racial implications of the contemporary global refugee policy will be the framework used for this paper, particularly drawing from border criminology and critical race theory. The article begins by drawing on histories of Lebanese racism as well as contemporary racial vocabulary used by the Lebanese populace, in order to elucidate the fact that without a change in societal racism, there will never be protection for the non-Syrian refugees in the country. Examples include the reference to Sudanese as “3abeed” (slaves) as well as the rejection of Sudanese workers’ children from schools. The section also notes how Sudanese refugees in Lebanon are thrust into historically mediated, racial hierarchies in which their ‘Arabness’ is not recognized (Fábos 2012: 234). The final section moves on to note that without a change in Lebanese governance of refugees, there will continue to be demand for disadvantaged people of color to fill gaps in services that the state has failed to provide. While recognizing the small number of refugees in comparison to Syrians, including Sudanese refugees in this paper was necessary because of the multiple forms of subordination they face in Lebanon. The paper concludes that when writing about refuge in Lebanon, Sudanese refugees must be incorporated to account for the overall structural and societal failures in refugee governance.
Dr Sofia Graca
Principal Lecturer
Canterbury Christ Church University
‘(…)Just keep your head down and go(…)’[P7]: an exploration of perceptions and reactions to hate crime of refugees and asylum seekers in Greece.
Abstract
Compared with other European countries, levels of reported hate crime in Greece are extremely low, both in general and in relation to refugees and asylum seekers specifically. This seems unusual, considering that Greece is at the crux of a volatile situation that would likely lead to the rise in this type of crime: it has been receiving a high number of refugees and asylum seekers on a daily basis, it experienced a severe economic downturn and it saw the rise in popularity of right-wing discourses, which portray members of these groups as dangerous and unwelcome. The aim of the research presented here is to explore the reasons behind the low reporting of hate crimes in this country among refugees and asylum seekers. It is based on empirical research conducted in Greece, in an attempt to shed light on perceptions and reactions to hate crime and associated under-reporting. The findings suggest that there is a complex combination of factors at play, including a lack of awareness of what hate crime is, the existence of competing priorities (such as, for housing and employment), the impact of experiences and expectations of law enforcement from home counties and Greece, a lack of in-group solidarity that reflects its heterogeneity, and a certain normalisation of the victimisation. These factors lead to seeing hate crime as expected, not attempting to resist ‘othering’ and even learning to accept it. The findings allow us to question the usefulness of a category of ‘hate crime’, from this group’s perspective, and suggest that better support and information is needed to address the situation and increase reporting levels.