Across the border and into the cold: hieleras and the punishment of asylum-seeking Central American women in the United States

Thousands of Central American families are fleeing from violence in their own countries and seeking protection in the US. However, once they enter the country they are immediately confined in temporary holding cells – also called hieleras (iceboxes) due to their extremely low temperatures, where they undergo violence and neglect. The hieleras become the site where the categories of the asylum-seeker, the immigrant, and the criminal become conflated. Asylum-seekers entering the country also enter an already existing racialized structure where Latina/o subjects have been criminalized. This article analyzes the hieleras through a Foucauldian and a transnational feminist lens, and argues that these holding cells work as a site for punishing border crossers and deterring them (and others like them) from pursuing the asylum process; which are displays of both sovereign power and disciplinary power.     

Reviews

Book reviews: Tim Cole, Selling the Holocaust: From Auschwitz to Schindler, How History Is Bought, Packaged and Sold (reviewed by Samuel Huston Goodfellow); Norman G. Finkelstein, The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering (reviewed by Samuel Huston Goodfellow); Peter Novick, The Holocaust in American Life (reviewed by Samuel Huston Goodfellow)     

Refugee status determination in Australia: breaking the rules?

This article looks at the asylum regime in Australia. In particular, it evaluates the procedures that are used to assess claims for asylum and the extent to which they meet international refugee and human rights standards. The article discusses four key issues in the adjudication programme: the appointment of decision-makers to tribunals that hear refugee applications, the accessibility of the review process by asylum seekers, questions relating to the efficiency of the procedures used and the mandatory detention system. It is argued that whereas Australia is party to the main international treaties that seek to protect refugees and asylum seekers, its asylum law and policy is in many ways inconsistent with international norms. To conclude, the author proposes the observance of human rights and refugee standards by asylum states. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

The future of claims to resist removal by non-nationals suffering from HIV/AIDS

The focus of this article is to consider the difficulties facing non-nationals suffering HIV/AIDS to resist removal to their countries of origin where there is no or inadequate medical treatment. The link between HIV/AIDS and migration will be explored illustrating the vulnerability of displaced people to the virus. The current UK legal position for those attempting to resist removal in such circumstances will be explored. The article will explore two potential avenues that may prevent removal of non-nationals with HIV/AIDS to countries with limited access to the necessary treatment. In the first instance consideration of Article 3 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) will be made with particular emphasis on mother and child claims. The second argument will examine the potential for refugee claims under Article 1A (2) Refugee Convention 1951 where an applicant may be able to demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution because of membership to a particular social group. The authors will particularly emphasise the argument that in certain countries sufferers will experience ostracism and victimisation where its severity may amount to treatment contrary to Article 3 ECHR and persecution under the Refugee Convention. Vanessa Bettinson and Dr Alwyn Jones, senior lecturers, De Montfort University. The authors would like to thank Professor Tony Barnett at London School of Economics for his useful and invaluable thoughts and comments. We would also like to thank our colleague Gavin Dingwall and the students in our 2006/07 Immigration and Refugee Law seminars for their very helpful feedback.     

Sustaining freedom,security and justice – from terrorism to immigration

This article focuses on two areas central to sustaining freedom, security and justice: terrorism and immigration. Their inter-relationship and the instruments and measures adopted to prosecute them have significantly advanced judicial co-operation, communitisation of security, and re-assessment of the nature and requirements of EU governance in an EU committed to human rights, liberal democracy and realising sustainable freedom, security and justice. The article outlines the background to EU involvement in judicial co-operation. It then explores EU competence, instruments and measures developed to (i) combat terrorism and international organized crime; and (ii) immigration and asylum. It concludes that the inextricable linkage between the two has serious implications for future EU democratic governance. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

International Migration and the European Union, Trends and Consequences

Member States of the European Union (EU) have undoubtedly changed into de facto countries of immigration. Since the upswing in migration in the late 1980s, net migration for the 15 EU Member States together has not been below 500,000. This article first focuses on trends in international migration (such as migration from former colonies, recruitment of temporary workers, and East-West migration) and special groups of immigrants (such as ethnic Germans, asylum seekers, and clandestine migrants). The second part of the article pays attention to immigrant settlement and migration policies, especially focusing on the European Union (trafficking and smuggling of humans, and the integration of migrants on the labour market). Detailed comparison of international migration flows is seriously hindered by a complexity of different national registration systems, and different countries display differences with regard to type and history of migration, country of origin, size of migration flows and immigrant populations.     

The provenance of émigrés: the validity of measuring knowledge of places

Establishing the origin of those seeking asylum is essential but difficult as asylum seekers often cannot corroborate their origin claim with documents. The aim of the present study was to assess whether asking knowledge questions, sketch questions and impossible questions are valid methods to determine the veracity of an origin claim. Participants (N?=?105) from Tilburg (truth-tellers), Maastricht (partial liars) and Gothenburg (full liars) were asked to convince an interviewer that they originated from Tilburg. Half of them prepared and half of them did not prepare themselves for the interview. They were asked 10 knowledge questions typically asked to assess the credibility of origin claims, 4 impossible questions and 1 sketch question. Participants from Tilburg answered more questions correctly than participants from Maastricht and Gothenburg. Performance also improved with preparation. Even though the results did provide some support for the validity of assessing claims about origin by asking knowledge questions, the differences between the groups were modest, and it was impossible to correctly identify all truth-tellers and liars. Changing the output modality from verbal answering to sketching contributed to the credibility assessment of origin claims, whereas impossible questions were not discriminatory.     

Campzenship: reimagining the camp as a social and political space

This article engages with current debates on the sociology of camps and camp-like institutions in contemporary society. Drawing on ethnographic material collected in Italy in ‘nomad camps’ where forcibly displaced Roma from former Yugoslavia were sheltered in the 1990s and 2000s, it argues that Agamben's conceptualisation of the camp as a space of exception, by constructing the camp as other to an idealised notion of citizenship and the rule of law, offers limited purchase for a sociological investigation of the complexity and ambivalence of social relations in and around camps as well as residents' everyday practices and experiences of political membership. Focusing on the resources, entitlements and ‘rights’ of camp residents and their interactions with state, regional and local authorities and non-governmental actors, this article invites to de-exceptionalise the camp and the experiences of its residents, and proposes the concept of ‘campzenship’ to capture the specific and situated form of political membership produced in and by the camp. Getting closer to the camp and its inhabitants through the adoption of an ethnographic gaze reveals the camp space as paradigmatic of the stratification and diversification of political membership in contemporary society, a social and political terrain where rights, entitlements and obligations are reshaped, bended, adjusted, neglected and activated by and through everyday interactions.     

Sudanese refugees in Victoria: An analysis of their treatment by the Australian Government

Following a brief historical account documenting developments in Australian Immigration politics and refugee and asylum seeker policies, this paper seeks to explain why Sudanese refugees in Victoria have recently been implicated in an increased involvement in crime by politicians and the media. It will be argued that the alleged increase involvement in crime has been constructed by the Government and the media – in order to justify the Australian Government's policy responses to the refugee crisis, to create public acceptance of such policies, and additionally for political gain. These policies were part of the Australian Government's wider policies on maintaining a homogenous Australian identity and have negatively impacted minority groups. Ultimately such policies encouraged racism and segregation in local communities, thus tarnishing Australia's multicultural standing.