Author: Verhoef, J.
Title: Immigration Detention: penal regime or step towards deportation? About respecting human rights in immigration detention
Summary: The government wants people who are living in the Netherlands illegally to leave the country voluntarily. If they fail to do so, the government will take a number of steps. One of those steps is immigration detention. Detention is a measure that deprives people of their liberty. A foreign national will be locked up at a detention centre pending swift deportation. A total of 6,100 foreign nationals were kept in detention in 2010, for an average for 76 days. The National Ombudsman has observed that foreign nationals are being detained under an inappropriate regime that seriously strains the respect of fundamental rights. To some extent this is because immigration detention acts insufficiently as the last resort. Moreover, the government wrongly assumes that foreign nationals spend only a relatively short period of time in detention. The current regime fails to reflect the nature of a measure taken under administrative law. The sole purpose of detention is to prevent a foreign national from avoiding deportation. This measure is not intended to be a punishment. Yet in several respects foreign nationals are detained under a more austere regime than that of convicted criminals. Unlike convicted criminals, foreign nationals are kept as standard in two-person cells, for example, while they are not allowed to work, they may not receive any education and they must remain in their cells from 17:00 to 08:00 hrs. What’s more, foreign nationals are subject to the same security measures (frisk searches, strip searches and restraints during transportation) and disciplinary punishments and measures (such as segregation and solitary confinement). What is needed to bring about real improvements is the acknowledgement that immigration detention may be used only as a last resort. In the short term the Dutch government needs to develop less drastic alternatives to immigration detention. The National Ombudsman naturally welcomes as a positive step the government’s current elaboration of alternatives to immigration detention (such as the Reporting project and the Deposit project). In contrast, however, the pilot projects are being carried out only on a small scale, focus on specific target groups, and only last a short time. Immigration detention is the step that remains when the government, after due consideration, concludes that a less severe remedy for preventing a foreign national from avoiding deportation does not exist. When this occurs, it is important for the regime to reflect the nature of immigration detention, namely a measure focused solely on deportation. There should be no elements of punishment in immigration detention. As the Custodial Institutions Act was written with a view to punishment, it is important to give the regime of immigration detention its own dedicated embodiment. Another option is to develop an appropriate regime within the framework of the Custodial Institutions Act. The Act sets down only minimum standards and offers scope to adapt the different regimes. There are all kinds of different institutions for offenders based on the regime of the entire community, varying from closed to open prisons, and even a penitentiary programme that allow prisoners to stay outside the prison by means of electronic surveillance. The National Ombudsman observed that governors of detention centres involved in this study exhibit a willingness to change the approach from pressure and coercion to one of brainstorming and facilitating. Consideration is also being given to more moderate forms of the regime. The National Ombudsman regards this as a first step towards developing a more appropriate regime.
Details: The Hague: Netherlands National Ombudsman, 2012. 57p.
Source: Internet Resource: Report No. 2012/105: Accessed April 16, 2013 at:
Year: 2012
Country: Netherlands
URL:
Shelf Number: 128359
Keywords:
Human RightsIllegal ImmigrantsImmigrant Detention (Netherlands) |
