Critical Rights Literacy as Foundational Learning:Lessons from Indigenous Migrant Communities

This paper highlights the importance of critical rights literacy (CRL) for migrant communities, drawing from three Guatemalan and Mexican examples. Civil society actors incorporate foundational learning to empower Indigenous migrant communities with movement and access rights. The paper contends that CRL is a vital aspect of foundational learning, showcasing trust and empathy as integral to its realisation among these communities

Critical Rights Literacy as Foundational Learning: Lessons from Indigenous Migrant Communities

This paper highlights the importance of critical rights literacy (CRL) for migrant communities, drawing from three Guatemalan and Mexican examples. Civil society actors incorporate foundational learning to empower Indigenous migrant communities with movement and access rights. The paper contends that CRL is a vital aspect of foundational learning, showcasing trust and empathy as integral to its realisation among these communities

Policing Humanitarianism: EU Policies Against Human Smuggling and their Impact on Civil Society. Research Paper. April 2019

The recently published book, Policing Humanitarianism: EU Policies Against Human Smuggling and their Impact on Civil Society, examines the ways in which European Union policies aimed at countering the phenomenon of migrant smuggling affects civil society actors’ activities in the provision of humanitarian assistance, access to rights for irregular immigrants and asylum seekers. It explores the effects of EU policies, laws and agencies’ operations in anti-migrant smuggling actions and their implementation in the following EU Member States: Italy, Greece, Hungary and the UK. The book critically studies policies designed and implemented since 2015, during the so called ‘European refugee humanitarian crisis’

The limits of procedural discretion:Unequal treatment and vulnerability in Britain’s asylum appeals

This is the final version of the article. Available from SAGE Publications via the DOI in this record.Studies of procedural in-court judicial discretion have highlighted a dilemma between the imperative to reduce it owing to its potential misuse and preserve it owing to its importance in protecting vulnerable groups. This article offers a new framework with which to enter this debate and new quantitative empirical evidence that favours the former position over the latter. Drawing upon 240 in-person observations of Britain’s First Tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber), the article demonstrates that judicial discretionary behaviour that is either vulnerability-neutral, vulnerability-amplifying or correlated with extraneous factors outweighs vulnerability-redressing behaviour, despite the sensitivity of this particular jurisdiction and the guidelines that consequently exist for judges. These findings lend support to calls to limit judicial procedural discretion. The article concludes by offering some cost-effective suggestions about how to do so.The research was funded by the Economic and Social Research Council, grant number ES/J023426/1

Fit for purpose? The Facilitation Directive and the criminalisation of humanitarian assistance to irregular migrants: 2018 Update. Study Requested by the PETI committee. CEPS Special Report, Decenber 2018

This study, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the PETI Committee, aims to update the 2016 study “Fit for purpose? The Facilitation Directive and the criminalisation of humanitarian assistance to irregular migrants”. It takes stock of and examines the latest developments that have taken place since 2016, specifically the legislative and policy changes, along with various forms and cases of criminalisation of humanitarian actors, migrants’ family members and basic service providers. The study uses the notion of ‘policing humanitarianism’ to describe not only cases of formal prosecution and sentencing in criminal justice procedures, but also wider dynamics of suspicion, intimidation, harassment and disciplining in five selected Member States – Belgium, France, Greece, Hungary and Italy. Policing humanitarianism negatively affects EU citizens’ rights – such as the freedom of assembly, freedom of speech and freedom of conscience. When civil society is effectively (self-)silenced and its accountability role undermined, policies to combat migrant smuggling may be overused and give rise to serious breaches of the EU’s founding values, notably the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights. Moreover, policing humanitarianism negatively affects wider societal trust and diverts the limited resources of law enforcement from investigating more serious crimes

Inconsistency in asylum appeal adjudication

Open access journalNew research findings indicate that factors such as the gender of the judge and of the appellant, and where the appellant lives, are influencing asylum appeal adjudication.Economic and Social Research Counci

The tribunal atmosphere: On qualitative barriers to access to justice

Vulnerable groups’ direct experiences and impressions of British courts and tribunals have often been overlooked by politicians and policy makers (JUSTICE, 2019). This paper takes a geographical, empirical approach to access to justice to respond to these concerns, paying attention to the atmosphere of First Tier Immigration and Asylum Tribunal hearings to explore the qualitative aspects of (in)access to justice during asylum appeals. It draws on 41 interviews with former appellants and 390 observations of hearings in the First tier immigration and asylum tribunal to unpack the lived experiences of tribunal users and to identify three ways in which the atmosphere in tribunals can constitute a barrier to access to justice. First, asylum appellants are frequently profoundly disorientated upon arrival at the tribunal. Second, appellants become distrustful of the courtroom when they cannot see it as independent of the state. Third they often experience the courtroom procedures and the interactions that take place as disrespectful, inhibiting their participation. These insights demonstrate how the concept of ‘atmosphere’ can illuminate legal debates in valuable ways. Additionally we argue that legal policy making must find better ways to take vulnerable litigants’ experiences into account