Abstract:Critical border studies have shown that it is no longer very useful to think of borders as fixed demarcations at the edge of the nation state. Instead, such scholarship has illustrated how contemporary borders are enacted both beyond and within state territory-as well as how borders derive their meaning from the various bordering practices that determine who is (not) welcome on the 'inside'. In this study the role of corruption in such bordering practices take center stage. Drawing upon fieldwork conducted in … Show more
“…With regards to the latter, and as revealed in the stories of both Lin and Myo above, a key tactic was to pay the patrolling officers a bribe. In fact, all but very few of the respondents in this study stated that they had paid bribes to the police in order to avoid arrests as well as general hassle in identity controls (Franck, ). Asked to elaborate on how this corrupt arrangement played out in a police control, Myo stated the following:‘I want money,’ the police officer said.…”
Section: Il/legality As Street Politicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Being able to ‘outsmart’ the police, however, requires both spatial and social expertise (Koskela, ). From the interviews it was, for example, clear that those with more experience had an advantage in navigating around police controls (see also Azis, ) – but also a better ability to bargain with the police once an arrest had been made (see also Franck, ). With regards to the latter, and as revealed in the stories of both Lin and Myo above, a key tactic was to pay the patrolling officers a bribe.…”
Section: Il/legality As Street Politicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Corruption in the context of immigration enforcement can clearly be read from a number of perspectives (see Franck, ). Here, however, I am interested in exploring bribery in the context of ‘street politics’, and thus as an illustration of how migrants use an available means to bargain with the police (see also Lynge Madsen, ).…”
Immigration control constitutes a particular technique for regulating urban space and for controlling and disciplining migrant subjects within it. Unlike other manifestations of state power in exemplary urban settings, the architecture of urban immigration control is not recognisable through grand buildings or walls, but rather through its momentary presence and continuously shifting location: ad hoc identity controls in public spaces, roadblocks in neighbourhood streets or raids against workplaces. Building on fieldwork conducted in the Malaysian city of George Town, this article takes an interest in how migrants navigate this urban borderscape in order to avoid exploitation and encounters with the police. Read through Asef Bayat's notion of ‘street politics’, the article shows how migrants use the means (made) available to them in order to extend their room to manoeuvre. While such tactics are often driven by the force of necessity, they do nonetheless cumulatively encroach on the state's ability to produce migrants as (un)wanted or even (il)legal subjects in the city. Through this, migrants also challenge the very notion of what an exemplary urban space is as well as who is considered a legitimate part of it.
“…With regards to the latter, and as revealed in the stories of both Lin and Myo above, a key tactic was to pay the patrolling officers a bribe. In fact, all but very few of the respondents in this study stated that they had paid bribes to the police in order to avoid arrests as well as general hassle in identity controls (Franck, ). Asked to elaborate on how this corrupt arrangement played out in a police control, Myo stated the following:‘I want money,’ the police officer said.…”
Section: Il/legality As Street Politicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Being able to ‘outsmart’ the police, however, requires both spatial and social expertise (Koskela, ). From the interviews it was, for example, clear that those with more experience had an advantage in navigating around police controls (see also Azis, ) – but also a better ability to bargain with the police once an arrest had been made (see also Franck, ). With regards to the latter, and as revealed in the stories of both Lin and Myo above, a key tactic was to pay the patrolling officers a bribe.…”
Section: Il/legality As Street Politicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Corruption in the context of immigration enforcement can clearly be read from a number of perspectives (see Franck, ). Here, however, I am interested in exploring bribery in the context of ‘street politics’, and thus as an illustration of how migrants use an available means to bargain with the police (see also Lynge Madsen, ).…”
Immigration control constitutes a particular technique for regulating urban space and for controlling and disciplining migrant subjects within it. Unlike other manifestations of state power in exemplary urban settings, the architecture of urban immigration control is not recognisable through grand buildings or walls, but rather through its momentary presence and continuously shifting location: ad hoc identity controls in public spaces, roadblocks in neighbourhood streets or raids against workplaces. Building on fieldwork conducted in the Malaysian city of George Town, this article takes an interest in how migrants navigate this urban borderscape in order to avoid exploitation and encounters with the police. Read through Asef Bayat's notion of ‘street politics’, the article shows how migrants use the means (made) available to them in order to extend their room to manoeuvre. While such tactics are often driven by the force of necessity, they do nonetheless cumulatively encroach on the state's ability to produce migrants as (un)wanted or even (il)legal subjects in the city. Through this, migrants also challenge the very notion of what an exemplary urban space is as well as who is considered a legitimate part of it.
“…f. Acknowledging its porous borders, the Home Ministry announced today the set-up of a new agency to guard the country's entry and exit points in an effort to deal with the rise of a growing smuggling industry that has racked up losses of RM5 billion worth of subsidised goods to date. Porous boundaries, corruption by enforcement officers, costly surveillance instruments and non-effective laws may result ineffective border control, [14] Among the Border Control challenges faced by the Malaysia government are; a. To tighten border security with an integrated surveillance system, including the use of high technology gadgets, not just about having a physical barrier, but this must be combined with such a system.…”
Section: Malaysia Border Control Challengesmentioning
Trafficking in persons is syndicated internationally and domestically to victimize illegal migrants and profiteer from it. They are vulnerable thus exploited as forced labour, for debt bondage and commercial sex while in their perpetrators captivity. A significant number of them are lured from ASEAN countries. Malaysia enacted the Anti-Trafficking in Persons and Anti-Smuggling of Migrants Act 2007 (Act 670) (ATIPSOM Act), The Malaysian Border Security Agency Act 2017 (AKSEM) and other laws to prevent such activities. Malaysia also seeks cooperation from ASEAN countries to ensure effective border control. This study applied qualitative legal research methodology to unveil the challenges faced by the border security agencies and to examine Malaysia immigration policies and laws, to ensure peace regionally as ASEAN countries. The findings are (a) Trafficking in person victimize vulnerable people from Malaysia and other ASEAN countries. (b) Border control recognized ASEAN state sovereignty. (c) Border control in need of effective strategy and substantial monetary allocation, (d) Corruption among security officials have to be eradicated, and (e) Constant reviews on border control policies and laws can ensure State security. Similarly to other ASEAN countries, Malaysia is sovereign and entitled to enforce his fundamental right to prevent illegal migration via border control.
“…Modern immigration control regimes Ð consolidated in the 20 th century through decolonization Ð set the terms for ÔlegalÕ movement across territorial borders. Despite efforts to regulate entry and exit, borders in Southeast Asia have been porous, weakened by prevalent corruption (Franck, 2018) and the inability of states to maintain comprehensive border controls. Well-developed smuggling and trafficking networks cut through Southeast Asian states, often involving chains of agents in different countries (Larsen 2010;Lindquist, 2010).…”
Scholars have criticized the ways in ways in which policymakers, decision-makers and practitioners treat ÔrefugeesÕ and ÔmigrantsÕ as given categories, thus justifying the exclusion and containment of some people who move across borders. However, in places where ÔrefugeesÕ are not recognized in domestic law and where there is little public understanding about their circumstances, actors concerned about their protection have had to invest tremendous effort into signifying ÔrefugeesÕ as a legitimate type of non-citizen in need of protection. Focusing on Southeast Asia, and the case of Malaysia specifically, this paper examines how an international organisation with field presence, the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR), reinforces the distinction between ÔrefugeesÕ and ÔmigrantsÕ through regular, practices of identification, intervention, and advocacy. Conducted in environments hostile to migrants with irregular status, these resource-intensive practices have resulted in the partial, impermanent protection of some refugees. This article argues that in complex migration contexts, UNHCR may take on properties of a Ôsurrogate stateÕ but it does so without sovereignty. Instead, it negotiates the domestic level protection of refugees in urban and rural areas with ambiguous authority vis-ˆ-vis state authorities. This ambiguity results from the lack of clarity over its role and its powers as an international organization operating at the domestic level within a state. This ambiguity has resulted in protection gains for some refugees, but also causes uncertainty about the strength of UNHCRÕs negotiating position. Regional political developments shape the willingness of state authorities to cooperate with UNHCR. Especially since 2017, Rohingyas have become the archetypal refugee in Southeast Asia, easily recognised as deserving of protection. To the consternation of civil society actors, however, UNHCR has argued that other refugees in protracted situations Ð in particular, Chins from Myanmar Ð are no longer considered in need international protection. This article argues that contemporary constructions of ÔrefugeesÕ fail to address the complexities of migration but has become necessary in convincing states of the need to protect a certain Ôideal typeÕ of non-citizen. Alternative ways are needed to recognize and address the precarity of diverse mobile subjects living in the Southeast Asian region.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
