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.
AasK.F.BosworthM. (eds) (2013) The Borders of Punishment: Migration, Citizenship, and Social Exclusion. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2.
AchermannA.KunzliJ.von Rutte, B.B. (2013) European Immigration Detention Rules: Existing Standards. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, URL (consulted 13 August 2019): https://tinyurl.com/ybbodj72
3.
AndersonJ.HollausJ.LindsayA.WilliamsonC. (2014) The Culture of Disbelief: An Ethnographic Approach to Understanding an Under-theorised Concept in the UK Asylum System. Working Paper Series 102. Oxford: Refugee Studies Centre, Oxford University, URL (consulted): https://www.rsc.ox.ac.uk/files/files-1/wp102-culture-of-disbelief-2014.pdf
Basilien-GaincheM.L. (2015) ‘Immigration Detention under the Return Directive: The CJEU Shadowed Lights’, European Journal of Migration and Law17(1): 104–26.
BaumardM (2018) ‘Pour Jacques Toubon, “le demandeur d’asile est mal traité” par le projet de loi sur l’immigration’, Le Monde23February, URL (consulted 13 August 2019): http://bit.ly/2tERa2H
8.
BhatiaM. (2015) ‘Turning Asylum Seekers into “Dangerous Criminals”: Experiences of the Criminal Justice System of Those Seeking Sanctuary’, International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy4(3): 97–111.
9.
BosworthM. (2014) Inside Immigration Detention. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10.
BosworthM. (2017) ‘Penal Humanitarianism? Punishment in an Era of Mass Migration’, New Criminal Law Review20(1): 39–65.
11.
BosworthM. (2018) ‘Immigration Detention, Punishment and the Transformation of Justice’, Social and Legal Studies28(1): 81–99.
12.
BosworthM.VannierM. (2016) ‘Comparing Immigration Detention in Britain and France: A Matter of Time?’, European Journal of Migration & Law18(2): 157–76.
13.
BosworthM.FiliA.PickeringS. (2018) ‘Women and Border Policing at the Edges of Europe’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies44(13): 2182–96.
14.
CanningV. (2017) Gendered Harm and Structural Violence in the British Asylum System. Abingdon: Routledge.
Goodwin-GillG. (1986) ‘International Law and the Detention of Refugees and Asylum Seekers’, International Migration Review20(2): 193–219.
33.
GrangeM.MajcherI. (2017) ‘Immigration Detention under International Human Rights Law: The Legal Framework and the Litmus Test of Human Rights Treaty Bodies Monitoring’, pp. 265–92 in FlynnM.FlynnM. (eds) Challenging Immigration Detention: Academics, Activists, Policymakers. London: Edward Elgar.
34.
HailbronnerK. (2007) ‘Detention of Asylum Seekers’, European Journal of Migration and Law9(2): 159–72.
35.
HailbronnerK.ThymD. (eds) (2016) EU Immigration and Asylum Law: A Commentary. Oxford: Hart.
36.
HallA. (2012) Border Watch: Cultures of Immigration Detention and Control. London: Pluto Press.
JubanyO. (2017) Screening Asylum in a Culture of Disbelief: Truths, Denials and Skeptical Borders. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
42.
LatourV. (2014) Le Royaume-Uni et la France au test de l’immigration et â l’épreuve de l’intégration: 1930–2012. Bordeaux: Presses Universitaires de Bordeaux.
43.
Legislation (2017) The Transfer for Determination of an Application for International Protection (Detention) (Significant Risk of Absconding Criteria) Regulations 2017. URL (consulted 21 October 2019): http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2017/405/contents/made
NollG. (2003) ‘Visions of the Exceptional: Legal and Theoretical Issues Raised by Transit Processing Centers and Protection Zones’, European Journal of Migration and Law5(3): 303–42.
49.
O’NionsH. (2008) ‘Exposing Flaws in the Detention of Asylum Seekers: A Critique ofSaadi’, Nottingham Law Journal17: 34–51.
50.
PichouM. (2016) ‘Reception or Detention Centres? The Detention of Migrants and the New EU “Hotspot” Approach in the Light of the European Convention on Human Rights’, Critical Quarterly for Legislation and Law2: 114–31.
SadowskiP. (2018) ‘A Sage Harbour or a Sinking Ship? On the Protection of Fundamental Rights of Asylum Seekers in Recent CJEU Judgements’, European Journal of Legal Studies11(2): 29–64.
SchabasW. (2015) The European Convention on Human Rights: A Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
55.
ShawS. (2016) Review into the Welfare in Detention of Vulnerable Persons: A Report to the Home Office by Stephen Shaw. Cm 9186. London: HMSO.
56.
ShawS. (2018) Assessment of Government Progress in Implementing the Report on the Welfare in Detention of Vulnerable Persons: A Follow-up Report to the Home Office by Stephen Shaw. Cm 9661. London: HMSO.
57.
StrbanG.RatajP.SabicZ. (2018) ‘Return Procedures Applicable to Rejected Asylum-seekers in the European Union and Options for their Regularisation’, Refugee Survey Quarterly37(1): 71–95.
58.
TsourdiE. (2016) ‘Asylum Detention in the EU: Falling Between Two Stools’, Refugee Survey Quarterly35: 7–28.
UNHCR (UN High Commissioner for Refugees) (2015) Beyond Detention: A Global Strategy to Support Governments to End the Detention of Asylum Seekers and Refugees. Geneva: UNHCR, URL (consulted 13 August 2019): http://www.unhcr.org/53aa929f6.pdf
61.
VavoulaN. (2019) ‘The Detention of Asylum Seekers Pending Transfer under the Dublin III Regulation: Al Chodor’, Common Market Law Review56(4): 1041–67.
62.
WilsherD. (2007) ‘Immigration Detention and the Common European Asylum Policy’, pp. 418–25 in BaldacciniA.GuildE.TonerH. (eds) Whose Freedom, Security and Justice? EU Immigration and Asylum Law after 1999. London: Hart Publishing.
63.
WilsherD. (2017) ‘Whither Presumption of Liberty? Constitutional Law and Immigration Detention’, pp. 66–81 in FlynnM.FlynnM. (eds) Challenging Immigration Detention: Academics, Activists, Policymakers. London: Edward Elgar.
64.
Al Chodor (2017) CJEU, Case C-528/15, Al Chodor, 15March 2017.
65.
Amayry (2017) CJEU, Case C-60/16, Mohammad Khir Amayry v Migrationsverket, 2017.
66.
Cour de Cassation (2017) Cour de Cassation. 1re civ., 27 Sept. 2017, no. 17-15.160.
67.
Ghezelbash (2016) CJEU, Case C-63/15, Mehrdad Ghezelbash v Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie, 2016.
68.
Hassan (2018) CJEU, Case C-647/16, Adil Hassan v Préfet du Pas-de-Calais, 2018.
69.
Lord Chancellor v Detention Action [2015] EWCA Civ 840.
70.
Migrationsverket (2009) Case CJEU, C-19/08, Migrationsverket v Edgar Petrosian and Others, 2009.
71.
Omar (2019) Omar v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWCA Civ 207, 21February 2019.
72.
R (Gureckis) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWHC 3298 (Admin.).
73.
R (on the application of Hemmati and Others) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 2122).
74.
Saadi v UK [2008] ECHR 13229/03.
75.
SS, R (2017) SS, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor [2017] EWHC 1295 (Admin) (26May2017).
