jus.uio.no/prosjekter/cctc/ heidi mork lomell: videoovervåkning av det offentlige rom
DESCRIPTION
http://www.jus.uio.no/prosjekter/cctc/ Heidi Mork Lomell: Videoovervåkning av det offentlige rom Helene Oppen Gundhus: IKT og politiarbeid Katja Franko Aas: Bruk av teknologi i grensekontroll. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Europeisk migrasjonskontroll:
”frihet, sikkerhet og rettferdighet” – for hvem?
Katja Franko Aas
Institutt for kriminologi og rettssosiologi
Universitet i Oslo
http://www.jus.uio.no/prosjekter/cctc/
Heidi Mork Lomell: Videoovervåkning av det offentlige rom
Helene Oppen Gundhus: IKT og politiarbeid
Katja Franko Aas: Bruk av teknologi i grensekontroll
Kriminalitetskontroll, risiko og teknologi
The border
• territorial demarcation – defining limits of the sovereign state,
national identity and membership
• global mobility is a highly stratified phenomenon
• globalization = a world in motion, the task of the border is to
distinguish between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ mobilities
• not a wall, but a membrane
• The EU border: de-nationalization of state sovereignty
• De-localizing the border & policing at-a-distance
Integrated border management (IBM)
1. Border controls (checks and surveillance)
2. Detecting and investigating cross-border crime in co-operation with relevant law enforcement authorities
3. The four-tier access control model (measures in third countries of origin / transit, cooperation with neighbouring countries, measures at external borders, measures within the common area of free movement)
4. Inter-agency cooperation in border management (customs, police, national security and other relevant authorities)
5. Coordination and coherence at the national and transnational level
From 1st to 2nd generation of IBM – interoperability: EPN (European Patrols Network), EUROSUR, entry / exit system, registered traveller system
‘Global Approach to Migration’
EU border / mobility governance
poly-centric, multi-level governance (trans-border, regional,
sub-state, privatised)
enlisting private actors in the task of border controls
(airlines, employers…)
EU treaties and conventions (Amsterdam, Schengen, Dublin,
Prüm conventions, Tampere decision, Hague programme…)
Transnationalization of policing (liaison officers, Frontex &
RABIT, Europol – ‘area of Freedom, Security and Justice’)
de-territorialisation of the border: governance-at-a-distance
‘The border is everywhere’ (Lyon, 2005) - biomeric ID cards,
visas, passports
The external dimension: The Global Approach to Migration
and ‘mobility partnerships’
CenFrFrontralised Records of Available Technical Equipment (CRATE): Initial Offers
fixed wing aircraft21
vessels117
3 Mobile radar units
23 Vehicles
71 Thermal / Infrared cameras
33 Mobile carbon dioxide detector
8 Heart beat detectors
1 Passive millimeter wave imager
Pieces of border control equipment, including:392
helicopters27
Grenser for solidaritet
A major problem has been the failure of some
Member States actually to make available the
resources they have promised. In July 2007 the
Central register of Available Technical
Egquipment (CRATE) was impressive - on paper –
and included 21 fixed wing aircraft, 27 helicopters
and 117 vessels. Of these, 32 were patrol vessels
pledged by Italy, yet […] not one Italian vessel
took part in operation NAUTILUS.
(House of Lords 2008: 35)
Externalisation of EU border controls
• Frontex: moving of the border to the outside (extra-territorialisation of
control)
• Global approach to migration built on billateral agreements and
mobility partnerships
• Outsourcing responsibility to non-EU states and authorities
• ‘Pre-arrival border controls’ built on the ‘presupposition of illegality’
(Carrera, 2007) – not treating individual cases but risk categories
• What are the consequences?
1. Human rights considerations & the principle of non-
refoulment
2. Principle of legality and the applicability of EU law
(Schengen Borders Code: the right to appeal, written
refusal, etc)
In Kufra the delegation visited the detention camp for illegal immigrants where 130 sub-Saharan citizens were detained. The condition of this structure can be described as rudimentary and lacking in basic amenities.
The mission was informed that, during 2006, the Libyan authorities had apprehended 32,164 illegal immigrants and had repatriated 53,842 during the same period. Furthermore, some 60,000 illegal migrants were currently detained.
Source: Report on the Frontex-led mission to Libya 28 May-5 June 2007
Frontex statistics and measures of success
Name of Activity
Illegal Migrants diverted back /
deterred
Facilitators arrested
Interviews carried out by experts
deployed by Frontex
HERA 2008 4791 294 1428
MT 2321
IT 16098
Total number of arrivals
7544
NAUTILUS 2008
7930 15
• Interviews carried out by experts deployed by Frontex
This category includes the number of interviews carried out by experts deployed by Frontex.
These experts are sent to the Member States hosting a Joint Operation in order to help interviewing migrants that illegally crossed the border. The interviews aim at gathering information on facilitation networks and details of the journey of migrants that can help improving the effectiveness of the Joint Operation.
The experts do not interview persons that have asked for asylum.
Source: http://www.frontex.europa.eu/newsroom/news_releases/art40.html
Criminalization of migration
• hybridization of administrative, penal, foreign relations and
military measures
• Criminalisation: making an activity illegal & linkage between the
activity and security
• Cholewinski :
a) criminalization: making an activity illegal by the imposition of
penal sanctions (sanctions against air carriers, penalization
of facilitation)
b) The culture of suspicion and distrust surrounding the
movement of 3rd country nationals (‘illegals’ /’irregulars’)
• Crime: a moral wrongdoing (mala in se) or a prohibition (mala
prohibita)
Criminalization of migration
•Securitization: discursive connection between ‘illegal migration,
terrorism and organised crime’
• priority given to law enforcement: the case of trafficking (victims
not given protection as victims but as witnesses in a criminal case)
• association of migration with the filed of crime and policing : VIS,
SIS II, Eurodac – central role of fingerprinting and biometrics
• the strategies of risk minimalisation and punitive preemption (‘
return directive’)
• detention centers resembling prisons
• Dilemmas of international co-operation & the principle of mutual
recognition: what are the consequences of poor decision-making in
third countries?
What is a prison?
Breakdown of Wanted Persons
Article of Schengen Convention• 95 (Extradition to a Schengen State) 15,460 • 96 (Third-country nationals who should bedenied entry) 751,954 • 97 (Missing persons—adults) 19,855• 97 (Missing persons—minors) 19,156• 98 (wanted as witnesses, for prosecution orfor enforcement of judgments) 45,189 • 99(2) (serious criminal offences) 31,013• Total 882,627
Source: House of Lords Report (2007) Schengen Information System II
Biometrics: coding the immigrant bodies
• Eurodac, SIS II, • VIS (the world largest
biometric database?)• Entry / Exit system• History of fingerprinting: crime,
colonialism and immigration (Cole 2001)
• ’The body does not lie’ (Aas 2006)
• Foreign prisoners (% of total prison population):
Greece 43,9%
Belgium 42,1%
Italy 37,6%
Spain 35,1%
Netherlands 30,5%
Libya 30,5%
Sweden 27,5%
Germany 26,9%
Norway 24,1%
France 19,2%
UK 13,4%
Source: World Prison Brief: http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/law/research/icps/worldbrief/
Whose security?
• securitization of migration focused on the nation-state rather
than on human security
• Human security approach: ‘secure states do not automatically
mean secure people’
• Extraterritorial border controls: state / EU security at the
expense of migrant / human security?
• Risk analysis = state risk, not migrant risk
• a need to challenge the domestic – international dichotomy –
against methodological nationalism
• What are our ethical responsibilities for at-a-distance security
practices?
Whose justice?
• Justice built on extensive use of information systems and
surveillance – ‘autopoietic justice’ (Luhman)
• Self-referential, built on one-way communication
• biometrics: information inequality, difficult to argue against
(Schartum & Bygrave 2008)
• Who is the subject of justice?
• ‘the injustice of mis-framing’ (Fraser, 2005)
• boundary drawing and ‘the right to have rights’ (Benhabib, 2004)
• Cosmopolitan theories of justice: creating new concepts of
membership not based on nation-state citizenship
• defending boundaries - re-creating the colonial subject?