1 / 21

Border Controls and Surveillance in the Globalized World

Explore the use of technology and global mobility in border control, including the challenges of distinguishing between different types of mobility. Learn about the de-nationalization of state sovereignty and the involvement of private actors in border controls.

wbridges
Download Presentation

Border Controls and Surveillance in the Globalized World

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. Border controls (checks and surveillance) • Detecting and investigating cross-border crime in co-operation with relevant law enforcement authorities • 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) • Inter-agency cooperation in border management (customs, police, national security and other relevant authorities) • 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’

  4. 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’

  5. 27 helicopters CenFrFrontralised Records of Available Technical Equipment (CRATE): Initial Offers 21 fixed wing aircraft 392 Pieces of border control equipment, including: 3 Mobile radar units 33 Mobile carbon dioxide detector 23 Vehicles 8 Heart beat detectors 71 Thermal / Infrared cameras 1 Passive millimeter wave imager 117 vessels

  6. 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)

  7. 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? • Human rights considerations & the principle of non-refoulment • Principle of legality and the applicability of EU law (Schengen Borders Code: the right to appeal, written refusal, etc)

  8. 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

  9. Frontex statistics and measures of success

  10. 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

  11. hybridization of administrative, penal, foreign relations and military measures • Criminalisation: making an activity illegal & linkage between the activity and security • Cholewinski : • criminalization: making an activity illegal by the imposition of penal sanctions (sanctions against air carriers, penalization of facilitation) • 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)

  12. 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?

  13. Breakdown of Wanted Persons Article of Schengen Convention • 95 (Extradition to a Schengen State) 15,460 • 96 (Third-country nationals who should be denied entry) 751,954 • 97 (Missing persons—adults) 19,855 • 97 (Missing persons—minors) 19,156 • 98 (wanted as witnesses, for prosecution or for 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

  14. 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)

  15. 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/

  16. 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?

  17. 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?

More Related