Misinformation as Immigration Control

Abstract

It is wrong to force refugees to return to the countries they fled from. It is similarly wrong, many argue, to force migrants back to countries with life-threatening conditions. I argue that it is additionally wrong to help such refugees and migrants voluntarily return whilst failing to inform them of the risks. Drawing on existing data, and original data from East Africa, I describe distinct types of cases where such a wrong arises. In ‘Misinformation Cases’ officials tell refugees that it is safe to return, when it is not, and refugees return who would have otherwise stayed. In ‘Omission Cases’ officials do not provide any information on countries of origin, and this omission causes refugees to repatriate. In ‘Relevancy Cases’ refugees are misinformed or uninformed, but would have returned even if better informed. In all of these cases, at least some state officials are blameworthy for their failure to inform refugees, and are engaging in a form of wrongful immigration control.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

  1. 1.

    Interview with Bol, Juba, 21 December, 2013; interview with Niko, Juba, 14 December 2013; interview with Tareza, Juba, 25 December 2013.

  2. 2.

    I assume that an agent can be responsible for an objectionable outcome without being culpable, but that one cannot be culpable without being responsible for an objectionable outcome.

  3. 3.

    I shall assume a largely utilitarian form of consequentialism (see Singer 2015), but nothing I argue is dependent on this formulation of consequentialism.

  4. 4.

    In this case, the government of Afghanistan warned of insecurity, but the case workers helping children repatriate may have still been misinformed themselves due to inaccurate reports from their superiors.

  5. 5.

    Interview with OBI, Jerusalem, 6 October 2010.

  6. 6.

    Even if such demands would ensure optimal consequences, they would create unequal burdens and may, as such, be unfair.

  7. 7.

    Interview with S, an OBI and HIAS staff member, Tel Aviv, 28 April 2012.

  8. 8.

    Such a reason would also be supported by deontologists and virtue ethicists who care about avoiding negative consequences.

  9. 9.

    Even theories which view virtuous motives as primary still determine the rightness of motives partly based on the extent of causal harm. If, for example, a virtuous person is one who cares about others, it seems that caring involves, at least some of the time, caring about whether one’s actions will case harm (see Slote 2001).

  10. 10.

    Interview with Yasmin, Aweil, 30 March 2012.

  11. 11.

    Discussion with Bok, Juba, 1 January 2013.

  12. 12.

    Strictly speaking, virtue ethicists may not couch this in terms of ‘blameworthiness’ but simply in terms of non-virtuous motives. There is much debate over what constitutes a non-virtuous motive. Regardless, if seems clear that one lacks a virtuous motive if one fails to call an ambulance for an individual in urgent need (see Slote 2001).

  13. 13.

    Interview with director of HIAS-Israel, Jerusalem, 11 December 2012.

  14. 14.

    Interview with Voluntary Return official, Tel Aviv, 7 August 2013.

  15. 15.

    Ibid.

References

  1. Al Jazeera. 2011. ‘Hundreds dead’ in South Sudan cattle raids. 22 August 2011, downloaded 10 January 2014 from http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2011/08/201182220946583842.html.

  2. Athanassoulis, Nafsika. 2000. A response to Harman: Virtue ethics and character traits. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society New Series 100: 215–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Barnett, Michael. 2001. UNHCR and the ethics of repatriation. Forced Migration Review 10: 31–34.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Barry, Christian, and Gerhard Overland. 2012. How much for the child? Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16: 189–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bennett, Jonathan. 1998. The act itself. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Betts, Alexander. 2010. Survival migration: A new protection framework. Global Governance 16(3): 361–382.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bradley, Megan. 2013. Refugee repatriation: Justice, responsibility, and redress. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Brown, Tim. 2006. South Sudan education emergency. Forced Migration Review (supplement): 20–21. Available at http://www.fmreview.org/sites/fmr/files/FMRdownloads/en/FMRpdfs/EducationSupplement/13.pdf.

  9. Cometto, Giorgio, Gyuri Fritsche, and Egbert Sondorp. 2010. Health sector recovery in early post-conflict environments: Experience from southern Sudan. Disasters 34(4): 885–909.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Callahan, Daniel. 1989. Killing and allowing to die. The Hastings Center Report 19: 5–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Carr, Helen. 2014. Returning ‘home’: Experiences of reintegration for asylum seekers and refugees. British Journal of Social Work 44: 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chimni, B.S. 2004. From repatriation to involuntary repatriation: Towards a critical history of durable solutions to refugee problems. Refugee Survey Quarterly 23(3): 55–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. ECtHR–Hirsi Jamaa and Others v Italy [GC], Application No. 27765/09.

  14. Fouda, Lauren. 2007. Compulsory voluntary repatriation: Why temporary protection for Sudanese asylum-seekers in Cairo amounts to refoulement. Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law 10(3): 511–538.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gammeltoft-Hansen, Thomas. 2011. Access to asylum: International refugee law and the globalization of migration control. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Geneva Convention for the Protection of Refugees. http://www.unhcr.org/protect/PROTECTION/3b66c2aa10.pdf.

  17. Gerver, Mollie. 2014. Testing repatriation contracts for unconscionability: The case of refugees in Israel. International Journal of Refugee Law 26(2): 198–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gerver, Mollie. Refugee repatriation and the problem of consent. British Journal of Political Science (forthcoming).

  19. Gibney, Matthew. 2004. The ethics and politics of asylum. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Goren, Yuval (Hebrew) Aid organizations: More than 22 refugees expelled to South Sudan killed this year. Maariv 5/6/2013.

  21. Green, Andrew. 2012. Healthcare in South Sudan at a crossroads. The Lancet 379(9826): 1578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Groll, Daniel. 2012. Paternalism, respect, and the will. Ethics 122(4): 692–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hidalgo, Javier. 2015. Resistance to unjust immigration restrictions. Journal of Political Philosophy. 23(4): 450–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Howard-Snyder, Frances. 2011. Doing versus allowing harm. In The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, ed. Edward N. Zalta (Winter 2011 Edition) http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2011/entries/doing-allowing/.

  25. Jackson, Frank. 1997. What Effects? In Reading parfit, ed. Jonathan Dancy. Oxford: Blackwell Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ferrie, Jared. 2012a. More Than 200 Die in South Sudan Tribal Feud, Official Says. CNN. 12 March 2012 http://edition.cnn.com/2012/03/12/world/africa/south-sudan-violence/.

  27. Ferrie, Jared. 2012b. More Than 200 Die in South Sudan Tribal Feud, Official Says. CNN. 12 March 2012 http://edition.cnn.com/2012/03/12/world/africa/south-sudan-violence/.

  28. Lemberg-Pedersen, Martin. 2015. The rise and fall of the ERPUM pilot: Tracing the European policy drive to deport unaccompanied minors. Refugee Studies Centre working paper no. 108.

  29. Long, Katy. 2013. The point of no return: Refugees, rights, and repatriation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Manson, Neil, and O’Neill Onora. 2007. Rethinking informed consent in bioethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Miller, David. 2005. Immigration: The case for its limits. In Contemporary debates in applied ethics, ed. A. Cohen, and C. Wellman, 193–204. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Miller, David. 2007. National responsibility and global justice. Oxford: Oxford University.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Miller, Frankiln, and Alan Wertheimer. 2009. Preface to a theory of consent transactions: Beyond valid consent. In The ethics of consent: Theory and practice, ed. Franklin Miller, and Alan Wertheimer, 79–106. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Morris, Helen and Michael Salomons. 2013. Difficult Decisions: A review of UNHCR’s engagement with Assisted Voluntary Return programs. UNHCR Policy Development and Evaluation Services.

  35. MSF. 2014. South Sudan: Violence against healthcare. 1 July http://www.msf.fr/actualite/publications/south-sudan-conflict-violence-against-healthcare.

  36. Osman v. United Kingdom, European Court of Human Rights, Application N. 23452/94, 28 October 1998, para. 1.

  37. Riiskjaer, Maria Helene Bak and T. Nielsson. 2008. Circular repatriation: The unsuccessful return and reintegration with refugee status in Denmark. Research Paper 165, New Issues in Refugee Research.

  38. Schuster, Liza, and Nassim Majidi. 2013. What happens post-deportation? The experience of deported Afghans. Migration Studies 1(2): 221–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Singer, Peter. 2015. The most good you can do. London: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Slote, Michael. 2001. Morals from motives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Small Arms Survey. 2011. Fighting for spoils: Armed insurgencies in Greater Upper Nile. November 2011. http://www.smallarmssurveysudan.org/fileadmin/docs/issue-briefs/HSBA-IB-18-Armed-insurgencies-Greater-Upper-Nile.pdf.

  42. Smith, Holly. 2011. Non-tracing cases of culpable ignorance. Criminal Law and Philosophy 5(2): 115–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Smith, Holly. 2014a. Negligence. In The international encyclopaedia of ethics, ed. Hugh LaFollette. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Smith, Holly. 2014b. The subjective moral duty to inform oneself before acting. Ethics 125(1): 11–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Strand, Arne. 2011. Review of two societies: Review of the Information, Return and Reintegration of Iraqi Nationals to Iraq (IRRINI) program. Chr. Michelson Institute. http://www.cmi.no/publications/publication/?4155=between-two-societies-review-of-the-information.

  46. Tognazzini, Neal and D. Justin Coates, 2016. Blame. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, ed. Edward N. Zalta.

  47. UNHCR. 2012. UNHCR. 2012. Displacement: The New 21st Century Problem. Available from http://www.unhcr.org.uk/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/UNHCR_Global_Trends_2012.pdf, accessed October 2014.

  48. United Nations. 2005. The Responsibility to Protect. Outcome Document of the 2005 United Nations World Summit, A/RES/60/1, para. 138-140, http://www.un.org/en/preventgenocide/adviser/responsibility.shtml.

  49. Van England-Nouri, Anisseh. 2008. Repatriation of Afghan and Iraqi refugees from Iran. International Journal on Multicultural Societies 10(2): 144–169.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Waldron, Jeremy. 1987. Theoretical foundations of liberalism. The Philosophical Quarterly 37: 127–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Walsh, Martha, Richard Black, and Khalid Koser. 1999. Repatriation from the European Union to Bosnia Herzegovino: The role of information. In The end of the refugee cycle? Refugee repatriation and reconstruction, ed. Richard Black, and Khalid Koser, 110–125. New York, NY: Berghahn Books.

    Google Scholar 

  52. World Bank. 2014. Unemployment, total (% of total labour force) (modelled ILO estimate). downloaded on 15 June 2015 from http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.UEM.TOTL.ZS.

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mollie Gerver.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gerver, M. Misinformation as Immigration Control. Res Publica 23, 495–511 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11158-016-9339-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • Immigration
  • Refugees
  • Informed consent
  • Deportation
  • Repatriation