Read on Twitter
A number of people asked me yesterday why I have been raising the issue of deportations so passionately. There is often an assumption that because someobe is deported that they 'deserved' it. That's a fallacy.
Deportations are part of a larger immigration regime. They operate as a way for states to claim that they are deterring false claims or overstayers. But their deterrent effect is not what is claimed.
More often than not, deportations reflect poor or absent legal advice, political decisions about 'safe' countries, hurried procedures, or appellants who have given up in the face of a powerful system set up to cast appellants as suspect.
Deportations are rarely visible in a society - they target the most vulnerable and their worst effects are felt miles away, or amongst the most marginal here. We don't see the injustices, the ambiguous refusals, the fear, the shame and the silence.
Deportations are important to look at, however, if you want to see how robust are the rights of the most marginalised. That's why it is always worth asking who is being deported, when, how and after what procedures.
This week, as the offices of lawyers, political representatives and NGOs close for Christmas, there are 100s of families fearful of an early morning knock on the door from GNIB. Rushed removals to the UK this week are risking serious breaches of EU protection rights.
Amongst those who are scheduled for removal to the UK before 31/12 are those who already have Irish families. What purpose does deportation serve there?
For the academics amongst you, this edition of JEMS is worth a read - it looks at the interplay between deportation, perceptions of justice and national, institutional and personal anxieties https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1369183X.2014.957171
We also often hear about deportation in relation to 'crime', but many of the crimes that underlie deportation are in fact immigration offences - in other words, not crime as we mostly think of it, but breaches of immigration rules created by our political systems.
I was not always so vocal on deportation - like many people I've spoken to about this in the last week, I was nervous of how arguments against deportation might be perceived, or how they might undermine support for asylum seekers. But learning about deportation is an eye-opener.
Getting to know people under deportation orders, learning of the impact both here on our communities and on individuals and families deported, you can't but question how the system operates. There must be robust defence of rights around deportation, or else rights are worthless.
Deportation is also an area of public policy which is almost entirely unproven in its effects. Its deterrent effects are without statistical basis and there is no clear evidence for its effects. Despite this, government continues to defend its public interest importance.
Deportations are political. There is no objective decision-making about which countries are safe for whom, or whether someone 'deserves' protection. There are administrative highjumps, which you might be lucky to clear.
Deportations represent the anxieties of a country more than the worthiness of its deportees. In the US, Latin American immigrants represent 96% of all deportations from the United States since 2010. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Vanessa_Cruz_Nichols2/publication/324237077_Policing_Us_Sick_The_Health_of_Latinos_in_an_Era_of_Heightened_Deportations_and_Racialized_Policing/links/5c92521e299bf111693a0ab8/Policing-Us-Sick-The-Health-of-Latinos-in-an-Era-of-Heightened-Deportations-and-Racialized-Policing.pdf
The US is a good source of research too on whether deportation actually does what it's claimed to. For example, one claim is that deportation reduces violent crime.
Evidence from the US “Secure Communities” programme shows no discernible impact at all. https://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/file/does_immigration_enforcement_reduce_crime_082514.pdf
Evidence from the US “Secure Communities” programme shows no discernible impact at all. https://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/file/does_immigration_enforcement_reduce_crime_082514.pdf
It's worth reading Ronit Lentin and @ElenaMoreo on deportability in Ireland too - they argue that although deportation is presented as an integral part of asylum and immigration policies, it's actually something else entirely https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01419870.2014.948477
Sorry, there's a free access link to the Lentin and Moreo article here https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273961536_Migrant_deportability_Israel_and_Ireland_as_case_studies
Senator @LNBDublin raised the issue of Dublin III transfers in the Seanad this morning - if the govt are fudging the term 'deportation' in order to avoid scrutiny of DIII transfers, that's in bad faith. Yesterday's case of man transferred is to end in deportation by UK.
Dublin III regulation transfers are usually back to the member state where the applicant first sought asylum or where they have previously had a valid visa. Deportations then can be arranged by that country.
The issue with this week's transfers to the UK is that Ireland is trying to beat the Brexit deadline, and in doing so, acknowledges that anyone transferred there loses the rights accorded to them under the Common European Asylum System after 31/12 as the UK leaves the EU.
Here's a short guide to those CEAS rights which are accorded to asylum seekers in the EU. https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/e-library/docs/ceas-fact-sheets/ceas_factsheet_en.pdf
The UK is also in a hurry to get their Dublin III transfers done ahead of Brexit https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/dec/06/uk-races-to-deport-asylum-seekers-ahead-of-brexit
There are many other reasons to ask if it's a good idea to send people to the UK - 2 weeks ago, the UK government introduced new rules that allow them to deport foreign people who become homeless https://thetab.com/uk/2020/12/04/the-government-can-now-deport-foreign-people-who-become-homeless-185135
And earlier this year, human rights lawyers were accused by Home Office Ministers of 'retraumatising' deportees by launching (some successful) last-minute challenges to their deportations.
The home secretary’s rhetoric targeting 'activist lawyers' in the legal profession was the subject of warnings from other Ministers after it led a knife attack on an immigration law firm https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/18/top-ministers-urged-priti-patel-to-stop-attacks-on-activist-lawyers
