Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gq7q9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T22:00:35.362Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

5 - Security and immigration detention: the problem of internment in peacetime

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 November 2011

Daniel Wilsher
Affiliation:
City University, London and Immigration and Asylum Chamber of the First Tier Tribunal, UK
Get access

Summary

The aliens power: the permanent emergency power?

As we have seen, the most commonly stated rationale for immigration detention has been an instrumental one; to ensure expulsion is successful. Not infrequently, however, ‘immigration’ powers have been used to detain foreigners to achieve non-immigration objectives. Moral panics in relation to crime have coalesced around aliens and supported the use of preventive detention without trial pending deportation. The fear of anarchists in Edwardian England through to the American Red Scares in the 1920s and the Cold War all show the same pattern of incarceration aimed at the suppression of political activity by foreigners deemed subversive by the state. Whilst this has been ostensibly linked to deportation, citizens have been left free to engage in such action without internment. In more recent years, the risk posed by international terrorism has led governments to use ‘immigration’ powers to preventively detain unwanted foreigners. Detention of foreigners has proved a flexible political tool to meet many situations beyond merely expulsion goals. Governments have been able to employ what would normally be considered ‘emergency’ powers to preventively detain without generalizing the powers to all.

In this chapter we examine the contention that lack of immigration status serves as a justification for dispensing with orthodox notions of the rule of law and due process. There is, of course, no doubt that permanent incarceration will limit the risk of aliens committing harmful or unacceptable acts. Save for in exceptional circumstances, preventive detention of citizens is either unconstitutional or politically unacceptable. In the case of migrants, by contrast, far from being exceptional, preventive detention has become quite normal. This is very clear in the growth of mandatory detention for those convicted of even relatively minor criminal offences, but goes further to include persons merely suspected of posing a threat. Most importantly, in cases involving allegedly dangerous aliens, detention periods have been especially prolonged by executive agencies and legislators. In such cases, detention can drag on for years whilst diplomatic negotiations take place between countries, with only speculative chances of successful expulsion.

Type
Chapter
Information
Immigration Detention
Law, History, Politics
, pp. 207 - 255
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Kanstroom, D.Deportation NationCambridge, MAHarvard University Press 2007Google Scholar
Winder, R.Bloody Foreigners: the Story of Immigration to BritainLondon: Abacus 2004Google Scholar
Cole, D.Enemy AliensNew YorkNew Press 2003 233Google Scholar
Fleck, D.The Handbook of International Humanitarian LawOxford University Press 2008 368Google Scholar
Gillman, P.Gillman, L.Collar the Lot’: How Britain Interned its Wartime RefugeesLondon, New YorkQuartet Books 1982Google Scholar
Bird, J.C.The Control of Enemy Alien Citizens in Great Britain 1914–18New York and LondonGarland Publishers 1986Google Scholar
Krammer, A.Undue Process: the Untold Story of America's German Alien InterneesLondonRowman and Littlefield 1997Google Scholar
Overy, C.White, R.C.A.The European Convention on Human RightsOxford University Press 2006Google Scholar
Spjut, R.J.Internment and Detention without Trial in Northern Ireland 1971–75: Ministerial Policy and Practice 1986 49 MLR712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, A.W.B.In the Highest Degree OdiousOxfordClarendon Press 1992 163Google Scholar
Bonner, D.Cholewinski, R.The Response of the United Kingdom's Legal and Constitutional Orders to the 1991 Gulf War and the Post-9/11 “War” on TerrorismBaldaccini, A.Guild, E.Terrorism and the ForeignerAmsterdamMartinus Nijhoff 2005Google Scholar
Finnis, J.Nationality, Alienage and Constitutional Principle 2007 123 LQR418Google Scholar
Hiebert, J.L.Parliamentary Review of Terrorism Measures 2005 68 MLR676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ignatieff, M.The Lesser Evil: Political Ethics in an Age of TerrorEdinburgh University Press 2005 50Google Scholar
Tomkins, A. 2002
Hickman, T.R.Between Human Rights and the Rule of Law: Indefinite Detention and the Derogation Model of Constitutionalism 2005 68 MLR654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonner, D.Checking the Executive? Detention without Trial, Control Orders, Due Process and Human Rights 2006 12 EPL45Google Scholar
Gearty, C.Human Rights in an Age of Counter-terrorism: Injurious, Irrelevant or Indispensable? 2005 1 EHRLR25Google Scholar
Dickson, B.Law Versus Terrorism: Can Law Win? 2005 1 EHRLR11Google Scholar
Flynn, E.J.Counter Terrorism and Human Rights: the View from the United Nations 2005 1 EHRLR29Google Scholar
Finnis, J.Nationality, Alienage and Constitutional Principle 2007 123 LQR418Google Scholar
Warbrick, C.The European Response to Terrorism in an Age of Human Rights 2004 15 EJIL989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neuman, G.Comment, Counter-terrorist Operations and the Rule of Law 2004 15 EJIL1019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guild, E.Citizens, Immigrants, Terrorists and OthersWard, A.Peers, S.The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: Politics, Law and PolicyOxfordHart 2004 236Google Scholar
Gross, O.Chaos and Rules: Should Responses to Violent Crises Always be Constitutional? 2003 112 Yale L.J.1011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sunstein, C.Laws of FearOxford University Press 2007Google Scholar
Forsyth, C. 2007
Hanlon, L.UK Anti-terrorism Legislation: Still Disproportionate? 2007 11 IJHR481Google Scholar
Tomkins, A.Readings of 2005 3 PL259Google Scholar
Ewing, K.D. 2004
Bonner, D. 2006
Cole, D.In Aid of Removal: Due Process Limits on Immigration Detention 2002 51 Emory L.J.1003Google Scholar
Cole, D.Enemy Aliens: Double Standards and Constitutional Freedoms in the War on TerrorismNew YorkNew Press 2003 24Google Scholar
Cole, D.The Priority of Morality 2004 113 Yale L.J.1753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, D.Preventive Detention: Immigration Law Lessons for the Enemy Combatant Debate. Testimony Before the National Commission on Terrorists Attacks upon the Untied States, December 8 2003 2003 18 Geo. Immigrat. L.J.Google Scholar
Fallon, R.H.Meltzer, D.J.Habeas Corpus Jurisdiction, Substantive Rights, and the War on Terror 2007 120 Harv. L.R.2029Google Scholar
Zelman, J.Recent Developments in International Law: Anti-terrorism Legislation – Part Two: the Impact and Consequences 2002 11 J. Transnat. L. and Pol.421Google Scholar
Cole,
Cole,
Steyn, LordGuantanamo Bay: the Legal Black Hole 2004 53 ICLQ1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansilla, M.J.G.The United States Supreme Court and the Guantanamo Bay Prisoners 2006 80 Australian L.J.232Google Scholar
Guillaume, G.Terrorism and International Law 2004 52 ICLQ537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pariseault, J.R.Applying the Rule of Law in the War on Terror: an Examination of Guantanamo Bay through the Lens of the US Constitution and the Geneva Conventions 2005 28 Hastings Int'l and Comp. L. Rev.481Google Scholar
Legomsky, S.H.The USA and the Caribbean Interdiction Program 2006 18 Int. J. Refugee L.677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mikolic-Torreira, S.The Cuba Migration Agreement: Implications of the Clinton–Castro Immigration Policy 1994 8 Geo. Immigr. L.J.667Google Scholar
Wachs, J.The Need to Define the International Legal Status of Cubans Detained at Guantanamo 1996 11 Am. U. J. Int'l. L. and Pol.79Google Scholar
Neuman, G.L.Anomalous Zones 1996 48 Stan. L.R.1197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, T.D.A Human Rights Tragedy: The Cuban and Haitian Refugee Crises Revisited 1995 9 Georgetown Immig. L.J.479Google Scholar
Neuman, G.L.Closing the Guantanamo Loophole 2004 50 Loyola L. Rev1Google Scholar
Golove, D.United States: the Bush Administration's “War on Terrorism” in the Supreme Court 2005 3 I.J. Const. L128Google Scholar
Franck, T.M.Case Comment: United States: – Presidential Power in Wartime 2007 5 I.J. Const. L.380Google Scholar
Reisman, W.M.: a Failure to Apply International Law 2004 2 J. Int. Crim. Just.973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Booth, C.Du Plessis, M.Home Alone? The US Supreme Court and International and Transnational Judicial Learning 2005 2 EHRLR127Google Scholar
Fletcher, G.P.Guantanamo Disentangled? The US Supreme Court Steps In: Citizenship and Personhood in the Jurisprudence of War: Hamdi, Padilla and the Detainees in Guantanamo Bay 2004 2 J. Int. Crim. Just.953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dworkin, R.Why It Was a Great Victory 2008 55 New York Review of Books5Google Scholar
Fallon, R.H.Meltzer, D.J.Habeas Corpus Jurisdiction, Substantive Rights, and the War on Terror 2007 120 Harv. L.R.2029Google Scholar
Bradley, C. 2007
Stafford-Smith, C.Getting Your Friends in Trouble 2006 3 Muslim World J. of Human Rts6Google Scholar
Marks, J.H.9/11 + 3/11 +\7/7=? What Counts in Counterterrorism 2006 37 Colum. H.R.L. Rev.103Google Scholar
Gross,
Hoffman, P.Human Rights and Terrorism 2004 26 H.R.Q.932CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forsythe, D.P.United States Policy toward Enemy Detainees in the “War on Terrorism 2006 28 H.R.Q.465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerwin, D.The Use and Misuse of “National Security” Rationale in Crafting U.S. Refugee and Immigration Policies 2005 17 Int. J. Refugee L.749CrossRefGoogle Scholar
R. Dworkin, Terror and the Attack on Civil Liberties 2003 50 New York Review of BooksGoogle Scholar
Dauvergne, C.Making People Illegal: Migration Laws for Global TimesCambridge University Press 2008 117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, V.C.World Habeas Corpus 2006 91 Cornell L. Rev.303Google Scholar
Sunstein, C.Laws of FearOxford University Press 2007Google Scholar
Moeckli, D.Human Rights and Non-discrimination in the ‘War on Terror’Oxford University Press 2008CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×