![Sample our Social Sciences journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110822/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Social-Sciences.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Scepticism often dominates the debate regarding the potential of human rights for eroding border regimes. Powerful actors make use of human rights to justify migration control. However, subaltern groups can also rely on human rights to challenge oppression.
In this article, I argue that the ambivalence of human rights must be contextualised within the wider human rights politics pursued by different social actors. By drawing on my ethnography of the social movement contesting border regimes in Berlin, I analyse how different social movement organisations contest deportation and I emphasise crucial differences in their approaches to human rights.
More specifically, human rights NGOs, which I conceptualise as moderate organisations, draw on legal notions of human rights and oppose deportations only partially. In contrast, radical organisations oppose all deportations by elaborating non-legal notions of human rights.
I contend that NGOs see human rights as imperatives that need to be upheld by the law and state institutions. In contrast, radical organisations conceive of human rights as aspirations for social justice and locate the source of human rights in social struggles. These differential approaches to human rights entail a distinctive potential for eroding border regimes as they underpin different models of migration governance.
Disclosure Statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 The call for the protest Unteilbar is available here: https://www.unteilbar.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Aufruf_Englisch.pdf
2 Phone conversation with Sara, an employee of Amnesty International, 3 October 2018.
3 See the government’s answer to a parliamentary question about deportations in 2018: http://dipbt.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/19/080/1908021.pdf
4 The press release is accessible here (in German): https://www.africa-live.de/demonstration-gegen-alle-abschiebungen-so-11-02-berlin-wedding/.
5 Ethnographic notes taken on 1 October 2018.
6 Manifesto published ahead of the anti-racist march that took place on 30 September in Hamburg, https://www.welcome-united.org/en/charta-2/.
7 Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 12.2 of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx.
8 Interview with Carmela, 11 June 2018.
9 Interview with Carmela, 11 June 2018.
10 Interview with Julia, 19 September 2018.
11 Article 12.2 of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx.
12 UN Human Rights Committee, General Comment 27: Article 12 (Freedom of movement), paras. 8 and 11, https://www.refworld.org/docid/45139c394.html.
13 UN Human Rights Committee, General Comment 27: Article 12 (Freedom of movement), https://www.refworld.org/docid/45139c394.html.
14 UNHCR, A guide to international refugee protection and build state asylum systems. The right to seek and enjoy asylum: What does it involve, p. 28, https://www.unhcr.org/3d4aba564.pdf
15 Further information is accessible here (in German): https://www.proasyl.de/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/2017-01-18-R%C3%BCcknahmeabkommen-Deutschland-Afghanistan.pdf. In December 2016, 34 Afghan individuals were deported by a charter flight. In 2018, the German government deported 284 people to Afghanistan. Further information is accessible here (in German): https://www.proasyl.de/hintergrund/hinweise-fuer-afghanische-fluechtlinge-und-ihre-beraterinnen/.
16 Amnesty International. Forced Back to Danger. Returns of asylum seekers from Europe to Afghanistan, https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/ASA1168662017ENGLISH.PDF. According to the principle of non-refoulement, no one shall be returned to any country where their life or freedom would be endangered because of their race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, or where they would be at risk of being subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. See International Review of the Red Cross, Note on migration and the principle of non-refoulement, 2018, https://www.icrc.org/en/international-review/article/note-migration-and-the-principle-of-non-refoulement.
17 Bundesweiter Flüchtlingstag: Amnesty International und PRO ASYL warnen Europa vor weiterer menschenverachtender Abschottung: https://www.proasyl.de/pressemitteilung/bundesweiter-fluechtlingstag-amnesty-international-und-pro-asyl-warnen-europa-vor-weiterer-menschenverachtender-abschottung/.
18 Amnesty International. Returns to Sudan violate the principle of non-refoulement, https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/EUR1478112018ENGLISH.pdf
19 Interview with Sabrina, 18 July 2018.
20 Interview with Ester, 11 September 2018.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Marco Perolini
Dr. Marco Perolini completed his PhD in Sociology at Goldsmiths College in December 2020. His research focuses on the construction of emancipatory and non-legal notions of human rights by the grassroots migrant resistance against border regimes in Berlin. In 2018, he conducted an 11-month ethnography in Berlin where he participated in the mobilisation of migrant-led grassroots organisations and networks. Until September 2021, Dr. Marco Perolini was a post-doctoral research fellow with the Centre for the Study of Global Media and Democracy at Goldsmiths. During his fellowship, he finalised three drafted journal articles, including this article. Marco Perolini works in the human rights sector as a researcher and policy adviser. He has expertise in the areas of discrimination, criminal justice, LGBT+ rights and sexual and reproductive health and rights.