Detention of Asylum-Seekers in the EU and Australia – Securitization or Legal Reform? Peter Stepper Tuesday 15.30 Seeking asylum: who is who in the field of refugee protection?

Seeking Asylum in the European Union 2012: 350.000 asylum-seekers Increasing number of subsequent applications High level of refusal: secondary migration Hard to track the movement of the applicants Detention of the applicants EURODAC, SIS II

Matrix of Security Five sectors horizontally Three stages vertically Political Economic Societal Environmental Military Three stages vertically Non-political Securitized The dynamics of vertical/horizontal movement are determined by Securitizing actors Referent objects

Securitization NON-POLITICIZED POLITICIZED SECURITIZED The issue is managed within the standard political system. It is‚ part of public policy, requiring government decision and reasource allocations. The issue is framed as a security question through an act of securitization. A securitizing actor articulates an already politicized issues as an existential threat to a referent object. The state does not cope with the issue The issue is not included in the public debate

Asylum-Seekers as a „Risk of Economic Security” The referent object is the employement rate, which is threatened by the foreigners. Securitizing actor can be a political party, media fora etc. Stereotypes and perceptions „Polish plumber” in the EU, 2005. Public discourse matters Asylum can be interpreted as an economic question and As a non-political, political or security issue.

International Protection vs. Security Concerns In order to ensure protection Housing, food supply, access to job market etc. Security deficit Significant number of application refusal encourage secondary migration Tracking system is not as reliable as it coud be EURODAC, Schengen Information System Open reception centers, quick and effective procedure Detention of asylum-seekers

U.N. Detention Guidelines The right to seek asylum must be respected. The rights to liberty and security of person and to freedom of movement apply to asylum- seekers. Detention must be in accordance with and authorised by law. Detention must not be arbitrary, and any decision to detain must be based on an assessment of individual’s particular circumstances. Detention must not be discriminatory. Indefinite detention is arbitrary and maximum limits on detention should be established in law Detentions to detain or to extend detention must be subject to minimum procedural safeguards. Conditions of detention must be humane and dignified. The special circumstances and needs of particular asylum-seekers must be taken into account. Detention should be subject to independent monitoring and inspection.

Detention as a Legal/Political Solution or an Extraordinary Measure? Detention shall be a measure of last resort and shall be based on individual assessment made by skillful experts. If a state perception is, that the survival of one referent object is threatened: States forget to use detention only as a last resort and They feel the individual analysis and assessment too long and expensive. De-securitiziation: manage to reset the discourse into the standard political process.

Off-shore detention policy of Australia Tampa-incident and Pacific Solution (2000) Aim to Reduce the number of ‚boat people’ Result: the number of asylum-seekers is still the same During wartime migration or natural disasters, because the logic of deterrence did not work.

Thank you for your attention!