Search results

Purpose – This is a comparison of the role of the police in the enforcement of immigration law in the interiors of three nations: Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

Methodology – The study builds upon research the authors have already done as well as desk research on recent developments. It uses three dimensions of the problem to focus the report: the hardware, software, and culture of police involvement in this issue.

Findings – In Germany, the local police are responsible for the enforcement of immigration control and have relatively fast and reliable means to identify undocumented immigrants. This is not the case in the United Kingdom and the United States, but there are trends toward more local police involvement, both by institutional cooperation and by the development of better databases and documents for faster identification. These trends are highly controversial in an environment that values community relations and is highly sensitive to racial profiling. However, there are also indications that the differences in typical police work such as traffic controls and crime investigation may not be as pronounced as the differences between the countries would suggest.

Research implications – This study highlights the need for ethnographic work with the police and with unauthorized immigrants to empirically describe and assess the role that the police are playing and its impact on police–community relations.

Practical implications – The German experience supports the value of a comprehensive information system for rapidly determining the immigration status of suspects, but it may not work as expected in the United States and the United Kingdom, where registration and identification obligations apply to foreign citizens only. With the US and UK experiences, one could predict that discriminating identification practices may become more sensitive issues in a Germany with increasing numbers of immigrated citizens.

The immigration conundrum to craft policy that ensures border security and safeguards human rights is grave and complex. Individuals fleeing religious persecution made finding refuge part of our heritage since colonial times. This American tradition has enshrined our values to the world. This essay is limited to summarizing the asylum process and recent events through the summer of 2018 which affect it. Policy changes are ongoing. The asylum process is complicated by illegal immigration. The surge in migrants arriving at and/or crossing the border has led to controversial policies over the years. Unlike those who illegally cross the border and remain unknown to law enforcement, everyone who makes an affirmative asylum claim to a United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) officer, or a defensive asylum claim in immigration court, has been thoroughly vetted through identity, criminality, and terrorism background checks. Granting refuge to those fleeing persecution reaffirms the values of a country that is, as Lincoln richly stated, the last best hope of Earth. Comprehensive immigration reform is needed on many immigration issues, two of which are to ensure border security and safeguard the asylum-seeking process.

Education is both a human right and an indispensable means of achieving other rights. Provision of education for irregular status migrant children tests the commitment of nation states to this basic right even as states curb irregular immigration. In the US, the right to go to school was guaranteed to irregular migrant children, by the case of Plyler v. Doe in 1982. This article argues that the right enshrined in that decision faces considerable risk of being eroded in the current political context. The article presents a detailed critical analysis of the rationale in the case, with a full consideration of the shaky constitutional framework on which the decision was based. It also examines the direct legal challenges to the right to education since Plyler, and the potential impact of new political and legal changes in contemporary times.

The purpose of the paper is to examine the Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (the Act), in particular, the sections of the Act that establish the serious organised crime agency (SOCA) and to anticipate the effectiveness of the Act against organised and serious crime in the UK.

The methodology employed is to examine Parts 1 and 2 of the Act, in light of the response of concerned professionals to the Act's passage through Parliament, concerns expressed both in the press and in legal journals, and to critically examine the novel features of the Act from the perspective of a professional who has worked in this same field (organised and serious crime) in Hong Kong for more than 20 years.

The Act is to be welcomed, in particular, gathering the investigative and intelligence functions of the police, customs and immigration service in one body SOCA, an elite limit to assist other UK police forces and law enforcement agencies. The introduction of statutory mechanisms to promote the co‐operation of defendants as potential witnesses is also to be welcomed. However, it is feared that the investigative powers created will be ineffective as the judiciary are not directly involved and the powers that are given to SOCA will be easily evaded by ruthless or experienced criminals.

It is hoped, the paper will promote interest in SOCA when it is “rolled out” operationally in April 2006. It is also hoped that SOCA will be appreciated from the outset as only a half‐hearted adoption of the US organised crime “model”. The UK has decided not to use telephone taps as a source of evidence, nor has it granted effective investigative powers to SOCA. Furthermore, there has been no comprehensive clean‐up of the present confusion of objectives that is so obvious in the sentencing policy as it concerns offenders who commit serious crime or are involved in organised criminal behaviour in the UK.

This chapter studies the cooperation of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, Frontex, with non-European Union (EU) countries, within the framework of externalization of EU's migration policies. Although the externalization of migration management has long been on the agenda of the EU, the increasing irregular migratory challenges, especially in the wake of the so-called refugee crisis of 2015, caused intensification of the preexisting extraterritorial border security measures. Founded in 2004 and expanded over time, as one of the specialized agencies of the EU, Frontex cooperates with non-EU countries alongside the Member States to address security threats related to irregular migration. While aiming at securing the EU's external borders, Frontex's cooperation with mostly nondemocratic third countries also raise some concerns on the conformity with EU's principles and norms. The chapter, thus, focuses on the empowerment of the agency's mandate leading increased cooperation with non-EU countries; elaborates on its aim, role, and tools while outsourcing the external border protection measures; as well as discusses risks and criticism raising from the externalization of migration management.

Discusses the legal information requirements of members of the general public with particular emphasis on the needs of the Third World. Defines the members of the public and highlights the reasons prompting the public to seek legal information. Describes the needs of the public and isolates institutions where the public can satisfy their information needs. Finds that while the public in the developed states have access to ample sources of legal information, the situation is different in the Third World.

This paper aims to investigate Thai stakeholders’ perceptions of developing a destination for international retirement migration (IRM). Increasingly, residents of developed nations such as Japan who retire from work are choosing to live in Thailand or other less-developed countries.

Qualitative approach was used, and data were collected through focus groups and in-depth interviews in Chiang Mai and Bangkok. Content analysis technique was used to analyze data after completing the interviews of 35 industry participants.

It was found from the participants that considerable new real estate development and services specifically for these retirees has been created in recent years, but that there is a lack of stakeholder collaboration in catering to this market. Moreover, local resident knowledge of the retirees’ culture and language is lacking, along with a need for policy and planning support from government.

A limitation of this study is that it explored only the perception of business stakeholders involved with Japanese IRM, a group of importance to the Thai Government due to their increasing numbers. Further study could look at local community attitudes toward IRM and how a community adapts to this new phenomenon.

This study provides guidelines for stakeholders, government and local communities. Especially, the role of government is to provide support with clear information about the visa process and legal documents.

This study contributes to the body of knowledge of destination development strategy for a specific international retirement tourist group.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of the Police Community Support Officer (PCSO) in the UK. The development of the role is charted from its inception under the Police Reform Act 2002. The present lived experiences of PCSOs, their colleagues and middle to senior managers have been used to assess the likely future direction of the role and responsibilities of these “public auxiliaries”.

Structured interviews and focus groups were conducted with 39 serving officers from three police forces. The corpus of data was analysed for ideal types identified in previous academic work, varying models or complete alternatives.

It was found that the PCSO role can be viewed as a continuum from what is termed in this piece, a “Junior Enforcer” role with a remit to assist constables to a “Bridge Builder” or uniformed community development worker at the other extreme. The study found that there is a marked drift towards the role of “Junior Enforcer” but that paradoxically this can assist, rather than be an alternative to “Bridge Builder” activities.

A strengthened enforcement role can assist with resolving community issues. The challenge going forward will be to maintain a balance between the extremes of the role. Too few or too less enforcement powers will undermine effectiveness, whereas a concentration on enforcement will ultimately damage the ability of the PCSO to engage with hard‐to‐reach communities.

Very little if any independent fieldwork is being done with UK “quasi‐police”, the most recent major studies having taken place soon after their inception in 2002. Exploration of the experiences of serving officers best illustrates the practical issues legislation, policy and procedure generate.

Purpose – Some local governments are asking their police departments to enforce federal immigration law more aggressively. However, there is little research or policy guidance available to assist police in balancing local immigration enforcement with the norms of community-oriented policing.

Methodology – This paper presents results from a national survey of municipal police chiefs.

Findings – The survey responses indicate substantial differences in the way that police departments are approaching unauthorized immigration.

Implications – The highly varied nature of policing practice on this issue is a function of the lack of clear policy guidance and models for local enforcement of immigration law.

According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the world is experiencing the greatest refugee crisis in recorded history alongside increasingly restrictive limits on asylum seekers and refugees. In 2020, the US administration established a ceiling for refugees of 18,000 people, the lowest number on record, and only 11,814 refugees were admitted to the United States. The Biden administration has expressed commitments to building a coherent asylum and refugee system and quickly reversing recent detrimental policies. But the administration has cautioned how quickly change might occur, given how “agencies and processes…have been so gutted.”¹

2016 to 2020 included an overwhelming series of changes to laws and policies affecting asylum seekers, often with little documented planning or communication, wreaking severe effects on conditions for asylum seekers at the US–Mexico border. These changes had significant consequences for human rights, most notably the linchpin right of access to information. At the US–Mexico border, must the right “to seek, receive and impart information” be fulfilled in order to fulfill the right to asylum?

While information professionals are not expected to be experts in law, they are experts in understanding the link between access to information and the realization of justice and human rights. This chapter investigates the role of the information professional in the fulfillment of the right to asylum, particularly in the context of contemporary asylum seekers at the US–Mexico border, volatile information landscapes, and the legal and historical framework in the United States for seeking asylum.