Pressured into a Preference to Leave? A Study on the “Specific” Deterrent Effects and Perceived Legitimacy of Immigration Detention

Abstract

Immigration detention is formally not a punishment, but governments do use it to deter illegal residence. This study examines whether and how immigration detention affects detainees’ decision‐making processes regarding departure, thereby possibly resulting in de facto “specific deterrence.” Semistructured face‐to‐face interviews were conducted in the Netherlands with 81 immigration detainees, and their case files were examined. Evidence is found for a limited, selective deterrence effect at the level of detainee's attitudes: most respondents considered immigration detention a painful and distressing experience, but only a minority—mostly labor migrants without family ties in the Netherlands—developed a preference to return to their country of citizenship in hopes of ending their exposure, including repeated exposure, to the detention. In line with defiance theory, we find that eventual deterrent effects mostly occurred among detainees who also attributed some measure of legitimacy to their detention. Among some detainees, the detention experience resulted in a preference to migrate to a neighboring European country.

The pains of being unauthorized in the Netherlands

“…They are living in a constant state of deportability as they are forced to leave the Dutch territory while they are for varying reasons not actually deported nor leaving the country independently (cf. De Genova, 2002; Hasselberg, 2016; Leerkes and Kox, 2016, 2017).…”

“…These differences in the perceived legitimacy are directly related to the experienced pains as the higher the perceived legitimacy, the less experienced pains. A contrary, pains are more salient if respondents perceive their subjection to migration controls less legitimate, something that Leerkes and Kox (2017: 923) call ‘the pain of perceived illegitimacy’. Those respondents who aspire legalization in the Netherlands usually consider the Dutch system of migration control – or the way it is being executed – less legitimate in comparison with investment and settlement migrants.…”

‘If you don’t have documents or a legal procedure, you are out!’ Making humanitarian organizations partner in migration control

“…On the other hand, there are the migrants who are not willing (yet) to return to their home country. However, the current exclusionary and deterrent approach is a modest incentive to return (Leerkes and Kox, 2017) and, meanwhile, it does contribute to 'the pains of being unauthorized' (Kox et al, 2020).…”

Living the spectre of forced return: negotiating deportability in British immigration detention

“…With few exceptions (Kox 2011;Bosworth 2014;Leerkes & Kox 2017;Gerlach 2018), little empirical research exists that examines how detainees experience the threat of expulsion from the confines of immigration detention. Most of the existing research considers former detainees' retrospective accounts of detention and their experiences of deportability in the community (e.g., Hasselberg 2014Hasselberg , 2016Golash-Boza 2015).…”

“…In so doing, it highlights the complexities and multiplicities of migrants' accounts of staying and going (see also Hasselberg 2016b; cf. Leerkes & Kox 2017).…”