Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Trapped Between Administrative Detention, Imprisonment, and Freedom-in-Limbo

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Immigration Detention, Risk and Human Rights

  • 1261 Accesses

Abstract

Recent decades have witnessed the increasing criminalisation of irregular migration in the European Union (EU). A notable move in many EU states has been the transformation of illegal entry and stay of third-country nationals (TCNs) into a crime, involving possible imprisonment. The Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) paved the way for the partial decriminalisation of illegal stay in the 2011 El Dridi and Achughbabian rulings. In these rulings, the CJEU interpreted the EU Directive on the return of illegally staying TCNs (Return Directive) as prohibiting member state legislation which provides for a sentence of imprisonment to be imposed on irregular migrants on the sole ground of their illegal stay. Irregular migrants may only be imprisoned if they have been subjected to every stage of a return procedure and if they have no justified ground for non-return. Academic focus has mainly been on the positive ramifications of these rulings for irregular migrants. While the two rulings laudably restricted member states’ ability to imprison TCNs for the offence of illegal stay, these rulings also shined a spotlight on an already very vulnerable category of irregular migrants in many EU states. In this chapter, I offer to take a closer and more specific look at the residual category of irregular migrants that the CJEU singled out as permissible targets for imprisonment. I examine who makes up this residual category of irregular migrants, the multiple forms of exclusion that they experience in certain member states, the impact of the CJEU rulings on their exclusionary plight, as well as the functions of this plight.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Before: ECJ, Cases C-261/08 and C-348/08, Zurita Garcia [2009] ECR I-10143. After: Article 6 of Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on the return of illegally staying third-country nationals, OJ 2008 L 348/98.

  2. 2.

    Notion borrowed from the following article and used in a slightly modified manner from Stumpf (2006), pp. 404–405.

  3. 3.

    CJEU, Case C-61/11, PPU El Dridi, alias Karim Soufi [2011] ECR I-03015; CJEU, Case C-329/11, Alexandre Achughbabian v. Préfet du Val-de-Marne [2011] ECR I-0000.

  4. 4.

    For more on the rationale and principle of effectiveness, see Mitsilegas (2013), pp. 107–109.

  5. 5.

    CJEU, Case C-430/11, Sagor [2012].

  6. 6.

    CJEU, Case-522/11, Mbaye [2013].

  7. 7.

    CJEU, Case 189/13, Da Silva (pending).

  8. 8.

    Based on data extracted from Eurostat Population Database. Enforcement of Immigration Legislation. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/eurostat/home/. Accessed 31 Jan 2014.

  9. 9.

    Ibid.

  10. 10.

    Article 15 of Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the return of illegally staying third-country nationals [2008] OJ L 348/98.

  11. 11.

    Article 14 of Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the return of illegally staying third-country nationals [2008] OJ L 348/98.

  12. 12.

    Article 15 (6) (b) of Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on the return of illegally staying third-country nationals, OJ 2008 L 348/98.

  13. 13.

    Interview with Mr S.I. (France terre d’asile, Paris, France, 10 July 2013). This interview took place within the framework of wider empirical research that I carried out for the NGO France terre d’asile on the deterrent effect of administrative detention in France on irregular migrants. It was a qualitative research project based on semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of irregular migrants. The final report will be published in Summer of 2014. Preliminary results of the research were presented at a conference on 23 January 2014: http://www.france-terre-asile.org/lagenda-de-pierre-henry/item/9254-experience-et-effets-dissuasifs-de-la-retention-en-france.

  14. 14.

    The word entrapment is not used here in the legal sense of luring an individual into committing a crime. It is used to describe the state of being caught in a trap.

  15. 15.

    For example, see information on Germany and the UK in: European Migration Network, Ad-hoc Query on Practices followed concerning Third Country Nationals whose compulsory removal is impossible. Compilation produced on 14 April 2010, pp. 7–8 and 14–15.

  16. 16.

    Code de l’entrée et du séjour des étrangers et du droit d’asile (Code on the Entry and Residence of Foreigners and on the Right of Asylum), former Article L.621-1. Illegal entry, on the other hand, has long been and continues to be a criminal offence: Code de l’entrée et du séjour des étrangers et du droit d’asile (Code on the Entry and Residence of Foreigners and on the Right of Asylum, consolidated version on 24 January 2014), Article L.621-2.

  17. 17.

    Ibid, Article L. 624.

  18. 18.

    Ministère de la Justice, Circulaire relative aux conditions de l’interpellation d’un étranger en situation irrégulière, garde à vue de l’étranger en situation irrégulière, réponse pénales. CRIM 2006 05 E1/21-02-2006; Ministre de la Justice et des Libertés, Portée de l’arrêt de la Cour de Justice de l’Union européenne (CJUE) “Achughbabian” du 6 décembre 2011 portant sur la compatibilité de l’article L.621-1 du CESEDA avec la directive 2008/115/CE dite “directive retour”. 11-04-C39, 13 décembre 2011.

  19. 19.

    Eurostat Population Database, Enforcement of Immigration Legislation. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/eurostat/home/. Accessed 27 Jan 2013.

  20. 20.

    Discussion via email with Mr A.B., Legal Adviser at France terre d’asile’s Department of Assistance for Detained Foreigners, 1 August 2013.

  21. 21.

    I am aware of these practices as I provided voluntary legal aid there in 2010.

  22. 22.

    Code de l’entrée et du séjour des étrangers et du droit d’asile (Code on the Entry and Residence of Foreigners and on the Right of Asylum, consolidated version on 24 January 2014), Article 624-1, para. 1.

  23. 23.

    ECJ, Case C-357/09, PPU Kadzoev [2009] ECR I-11189.

  24. 24.

    Interview with Mr F.S. (France terre d’asile, Paris, France on 17 July 2013). This interview took place within the research framework discussed in footnote 13.

  25. 25.

    This builds on William Walters’ analysis of the evolving motivations behind the power of deportation (Walters 2002, pp. 276–280).

  26. 26.

    Council doc. 13934/06, 18 October 2006, p. 3.

  27. 27.

    Also see: Robinson and Segrott (2002); Thielemann (2004). In the empirical research that I carried out for France terre d’asile, mentioned above in footnote 13, administrative detention in France was found to have little-to-no deterrent effect on our sample of irregular migrants. This research will be published in Summer of 2014.

  28. 28.

    CJEU, Case C-329/11, Alexandre Achughbabian v. Préfet du Val-de-Marne [2011] ECR I-0000, para. 28.

  29. 29.

    CJEU, Case C-329/11, Alexandre Achughbabian v. Préfet du Val-de-Marne [2011] ECR I-0000, para. 47; Commission Nationale Consultative des Droits de l’Homme (2004), p. 20.

  30. 30.

    CJEU, Case C-61/11, PPU El Dridi, alias Karim Soufi [2011] ECR I-03015, para. 52.

  31. 31.

    With regard to France, see: Code de l’entrée et du séjour des étrangers et du droit d’asile (Code on the Entry and Residence of Foreigners and on the Right of Asylum, consolidated version on 24 January 2014), Articles L621-2 and L624.With regard to the UK, see: Immigration Act 1971, Section 24; Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Act 2004, Section 35. In the UK, the offence of illegal stay is fragmented into various offences that are described as illegal entry and similar offences.

  32. 32.

    With regard to the UK, see: UK Legal Services Commission (2010) Simple cautions for foreign national offenders: pilot policy statement. http://ftp.legalservices.gov.uk/Simple_cautions_for_foreign_national_offenders_pilot_-_policy_statement.pdf. Accessed Oct 2011; The Law Society (2013) Conditional cautions for foreign national offenders. http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/advice/articles/conditional-cautions-for-foreign-national-offenders/. Accessed 30 Jun 2014.With regard to France, see: Ministère de la Justice, Circulaire relative aux conditions de l’interpellation d’un étranger en situation irrégulière, garde à vue de l’étranger en situation irrégulière, réponse pénales. CRIM 2006 05 E1/21-02-2006; Ministre de la Justice et des Libertés, “Portée de l’arrêt de la Cour de Justice de l’Union européenne (CJUE) “Achughbabian” du 6 décembre 2011 portant sur la compatibilité de l’article L.621-1 du CESEDA avec la directive 2008/115/CE dite “directive retour”. 11-04-C39 13 décembre 2011.

  33. 33.

    UK Legal Services Commission (2010) Simple cautions for foreign national offenders: pilot policy statement. http://ftp.legalservices.gov.uk/Simple_cautions_for_foreign_national_offenders_pilot_-_policy_statement.pdf. Accessed Oct 2011; The Law Society (2013) Conditional cautions for foreign national offenders. http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/advice/articles/conditional-cautions-for-foreign-national-offenders/. Last accessed 30 Jun 2014.

  34. 34.

    R (on the application of Feridon Rostami) v SSHD [2009] EWHC 2094 (QB).

  35. 35.

    R (on the application of Feridon Rostami) v SSHD [2009] EWHC 2094 (QB), para. 36.

  36. 36.

    R (on the application of Feridon Rostami) v SSHD [2009] EWHC 2094 (QB), para. 38.

  37. 37.

    R (on the application of Feridon Rostami) v SSHD [2009] EWHC 2094 (QB), para. 48.

  38. 38.

    R (on the application of Feridon Rostami) v SSHD [2009] EWHC 2094 (QB), para. 38.

  39. 39.

    Council doc. 13025/06, 16 October 2006, p. 7, footnote 6.

  40. 40.

    For an interesting analysis of the issue of deportability and desirability in the UK context, see: Paoletti (2010).

  41. 41.

    R (on the application of Feridon Rostami) v SSHD [2009] EWHC 2094 (QB), para. 52.

  42. 42.

    These concepts were borrowed from an article by Lindahl (2004).

References

  • Assfam, Forum Réfugiés, France terre d’asile, la Cimade, l’Ordre de Malte (2011) Centres et locaux de rétention administrative: rapport 2010. http://www.lacimade.org/publications/57. Last accessed 30 June 2014

  • Assfam, Forum Réfugiés, France terre d’asile, la Cimade, l’Ordre de Malte (2012) Centres et locaux de rétention administrative: rapport 2011. http://www.lacimade.org/publications/70. Last accessed 30 June 2014

  • Assfam, Forum Réfugiés, France terre d’asile, la Cimade, l’Ordre de Malte (2013) Centres et locaux de rétention administrative: rapport 2012. http://www.lacimade.org/publications/83. Accessed 30 June 2014

  • Baldwin-Edwards M, Kraler A (2009) REGINE regularisations in Europe: study on practices in the area of regularisation of illegally staying third-country nationals in the Member States of the EU. ICMPD, Vienna. http://research.icmpd.org/fileadmin/Research-Website/Project_material/REGINE/Regine_report_january_2009_en.pdf. Accessed 30 June 2014

  • Collinson S (2009) The political economy of migration processes: an agenda for migration research and analysis. International Migration Institute Working Paper 12

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission Nationale Consultative des Droits de l’Homme (2004) Etude sur les étrangers détenus (propositions). http://www.cncdh.fr/sites/default/files/04.11.18_etude_sur_les_etrangers_detenus.pdf. Accessed 30 June 2014

  • De Giorgi A (2010) Immigration control, post-Fordism, and less eligibility: a materialist critique of the criminalization of immigration across Europe. Punishment Soc 12:147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Directorate-General Home Affairs (2012) Management Plan. European Commission

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards A (2011) Back to basics: the right to liberty and security of person and ‘alternatives to detention’ of refugees, asylum-seekers, stateless persons and other migrants. Legal and Protection Policy Research Series. http://www.refworld.org/docid/4dc935fd2.html. Accessed 30 June 2014

  • Eriksson KI (2002) Removal – enforcement of return decisions: paper prepared for the European Commission hearing on a community return policy on illegal residents. http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-is-new/public-consultation/2002/pdf/contributions/sweden_en.pdf. Last accessed 30 June 2014

  • European Commission, Communication to the Council and the European Parliament on EU Return Policy COM (2014) 199 final

    Google Scholar 

  • European Migration Network (2010) Ad-hoc query on practices followed concerning Third Country Nationals whose compulsory removal is impossible. Compilation produced on 14 April 2010

    Google Scholar 

  • European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2011) Fundamental rights of migrants in an irregular situation in the European Union: comparative report. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg

    Google Scholar 

  • Guild E (2010) Criminalisation of migration in Europe: human rights implications. CommDH/IssuePaper

    Google Scholar 

  • Kostakopoulou T (2004) Irregular migration and migration theory: making state authorisation less relevant. In: Bogusz B, Cholewinski R, Cygan A, Szyszczak E (eds) Irregular migration and human rights: theoretical, European and international perspectives. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden

    Google Scholar 

  • La Cimade (2008) Centres et locaux de rétention administrative: rapport 2007. http://www.lacimade.org/publications/16. Accessed 30 June 2014

  • Le Contrôleur général des lieux de privation de liberté (2010) Rapport d’activité 2009. Editions Dalloz, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindahl H (2004) Finding a place for freedom, security and justice: the European Union’s claim to territorial unity. Eur Law Rev 29(4):461

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministère de l’Intérieur (2013) Circulaire n° NORINTK1300159C

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitsilegas V (2013) The changing landscape of the criminalisation of migration in Europe: the protective function of European Union law. In: Guia MJ, Van Der Woude M, Van Der Leun J (eds) Social control and justice: crimmigration in the age of fear. Eleven International Publishing, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Paoletti E (2010) Deportation, non-deportability and ideas of membership. Refugee Studies Centre Working Paper No 65

    Google Scholar 

  • Raffaelli R (2012) Case note: the Achughbabian case. Impact of the return directive on national criminal legislation. Diritto Penale Contemporaneo. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1998324. Accessed 30 June 2014

  • Ramboll, Eurasylum (2013) Study on the situation of third-country nationals pending return/removal in the EU Member States and the Schengen Associated Countries: Annex 1 – Country Reports. Study commissioned by the European Commission. http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/e-library/documents/policies/immigration/return-readmission/docs/11032013_sudy_report_on_immigration_return-removal_annex_1_en.pdf. Accessed 30 June 2014

  • Ravignan A (2010) La Cimade, grain de sable dans la machine à expulser. Alternatives économiques 9(294):48

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson V, Segrott J (2002) Understanding the decision-making of asylum seekers. Home Office Research Study 243, Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate. http://www.irr.org.uk/pdf/understand_asylum_decision.pdf. Accessed 30 June 2014

  • Rodier C, Saint-Saëns I (2007) Contrôler et filtrer: les camps au service des politiques migratoires de l’Europe. In: Caloz-Tshopp MC, Chetail V (eds) Mondialisation, Migrations, Droits de l’homme. Bruylant, Bruxelles

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenblum MR (2010) Immigration legalization in the United States and European Union: policy goals and program design. Migration Policy Institute Brief. http://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/legalization-policydesign.pdf. Accessed 30 June 2014

  • Secrétariat Général du Ministère de la Justice (2012) Annuaire statistique de la Justice: Edition 2011–2012. La Documentation française – Direction de l’information légale et administrative, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Stumpf J (2006) The crimmigration crisis: immigrants, crime and sovereign power. Am Univ Law Rev 56:367

    Google Scholar 

  • Thielemann E (2004) Why Asylum policy harmonisation undermines refugee burden-sharing. Eur J Migration Law 6:47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walters W (2002) Deportation, expulsion, and the international police of aliens. Citizenship Stud 6(3):265

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Sciences Po Law School, Paris, France

    Dr. Charles Gosme

Authors
  1. Dr. Charles Gosme
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Charles Gosme .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Coimbra, Portugal

    Maria João Guia

  2. College Park, Maryland, USA

    Robert Koulish

  3. Department of Law, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom

    Valsamis Mitsilegas

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gosme, C. (2016). Trapped Between Administrative Detention, Imprisonment, and Freedom-in-Limbo. In: Guia, M., Koulish, R., Mitsilegas, V. (eds) Immigration Detention, Risk and Human Rights. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24690-1_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24690-1_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-24688-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-24690-1

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation