Fraudulent Families? Investigating the Role of Paperwork in the Assessment of Refugees’ Family Reunification in Belgium

References

• Affolter, L. (2022). Trained to disbelieve: The normalisation of suspicion in a Swiss asylum administration office. Geopolitics, 27(4), 1069–1092. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2021.1897577
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agentschap voor Integratie en Inburgering. (2017). Geen legalisatie meer mogelijk van Somalische en Jemenitische documenten, noch afgifte van negatieve attesten. www.agii.be/nieuws/geen-legalisatie-meer-mogelijk-van-somalische-en-jemenitische-documenten-noch-afgifte-van-negatieve Retrieved December 16, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Asylum Information Database (AIDA). (2023). Not there yet: Family reunification for beneficiaries of international protection. https://asylumineurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Family-Reunification.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Alpes, M. J., & Spire, A. (2014). Dealing with law in migration control: The powers of street-level bureaucrats at French consulates. Social & Legal Studies, 23(2), 261–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/0964663913510927
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alpes, M. J. (2017). Brokering high-risk migration and illegality in West Africa: Abroad at any cost. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Belloni, M., & Cole, G. (2022). The right to exit as national and transnational governance: The case of Eritrea. International Migration.
   Google Scholar
• Block, L. (2015). Regulating membership: Explaining restriction and stratification of family migration in Europe. Journal of Family Issues, 36(11), 1433–1452. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X14557493
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonjour, S., & De Hart, B. (2013). A proper wife, a proper marriage: Constructions of “us” and “them” in Dutch family migration policy. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 20(1), 61–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350506812456459
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borrelli, M. L., Lindberg, A., & Wyss, A. (2022). States of suspicion: How institutionalised disbelief shapes migration control regimes. Geopolitics, 27(4), 1025–1041. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2021.2005862
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borrelli, L. M., & Lindberg, A. (2019). Paperwork performances: Legitimating state violence in the Swedish deportation regime. Journal of Legal Anthropology, 3(2), 50–69. https://doi.org/10.3167/jla.2019.030204
   Google Scholar
• Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Caplan, J., & Torpey, J. C. (Eds.). (2001). Documenting individual identity: The development of state practices in the modern world. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cleton, L. (2023). Assessing adequate homes and proper parenthood: How gendered and racialized family norms legitimize the deportation of unaccompanied minors in Belgium and The Netherlands. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 30(2), 323–346. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxac001
   Google Scholar
• D’Aoust, A. M. (2018). A moral economy of suspicion: Love and marriage migration management practices in the United Kingdom. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 36(1), 40–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263775817716674
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eggebø, H. (2013). A real marriage? Applying for marriage migration to Norway. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 39(5), 773–789. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2013.756678
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eldridge, E. R., & Reinke, A. J. (2018). Introduction: Ethnographic engagement with bureaucratic violence. Conflict and Society, 4(1), 94–98. https://doi.org/10.3167/arcs.2018.040108
   Google Scholar
• Eule, T. G., Loher, D., & Wyss, A. (2018). Contested control at the margins of the state. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 44(16), 2717–2729. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2017.1401511
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE). (2014). Disrupted flight: The realities of separated refugee families in the EU. Retrieved December 16, 2021, from www.refworld.org/docid/58514a054.html.
   Google Scholar
• European Migration Network. (2017). Family reunification with third country national sponsors in Belgium. Retrieved December 16, 2021, from www.emnbelgium.be/publication/family-reunification-tcns-belgium-and-eu-national-practices-emn
   Google Scholar
• Geoffrion, K., & Cretton, V. (2021). Bureaucratic routes to migration: Migrants’ lived experience of paperwork, clerks and other immigration intermediaries. Anthropologica, 63(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.18357/anthropologica6312021184
   Google Scholar
• Göpfert, M. (2013). Bureaucratic aesthetics: Report writing in the Nigérien gendarmerie. American Ethnologist, 40(2), 324–334. https://doi.org/10.1111/amet.12024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Griffiths, M. (2012). ‘Vile liars and truth distorters’; truth, trust and the asylum system (Respond to this article at http://www. therai. org. uk/at/debate). Anthropology Today, 28(5), 8–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8322.2012.00896.x
   Google Scholar
• Gupta, A. (2012). Red tape: Bureaucracy, structural violence, and poverty in India. Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gustafsson, H. (2022). Collectivity in waiting: Transnational experiences in Swedish family reunification. European Journal of Social Work, 25(6), 1069–1081. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2022.2064434
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helén, I., & Tapaninen, A.-M. (2013). Closer to the Truth: DNA profiling for family reunification and the rationales of immigration policy in Finland. Nordic Journal of Migration Research, 3(3), 153–161. https://doi.org/10.2478/njmr-2013-0006
   Google Scholar
• Herlihy, J., Scragg, P., & Turner, S. (2002). Discrepancies in autobiographical memories—implications for the assessment of asylum seekers: Repeated interviews study. BMJ (Clinical Research ed.), 324(7333), 324–327. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.324.7333.324
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Horton, S. B., & Heyman, J. (Eds.) (2020). Paper trails: Migrants, documents, and legal insecurity. Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hull, M. S. (2012). Government of paper: The materiality of bureaucracy in urban Pakistan. University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Infantino, F. (2023). The interdependency of border bureaucracies and mobility intermediaries: A street-level view of migration infrastructuring. Comparative Migration Studies, 11(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878-022-00324-x
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs, M., & Maryns, K. (2022). Managing narratives, managing identities: Language and credibility in legal consultations with asylum seekers. Language in Society, 51(3), 375–402. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404521000117
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janmyr, M. (2018). UNHCR and the Syrian refugee response: Negotiating status and registration in Lebanon. The International Journal of Human Rights, 22(3), 393–419. https://doi.org/10.1080/13642987.2017.1371140
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jubany, O. (2011). Constructing truths in a culture of disbelief: Understanding asylum screening from within. International Sociology, 26(1), 74–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580910380978
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jubany, O. (2017). Screening asylum in a culture of disbelief. Truths, Denials and Skeptical Borders. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Kafka, B. (2009). Paperwork: The state of the discipline. Book History, 12(1), 340–353. https://doi.org/10.1353/bh.0.0024
   Google Scholar
• Kim, J. (2011). Establishing identity: Documents, performance, and biometric information in immigration proceedings. Law & Social Inquiry, 36(03), 760–786. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4469.2011.01249.x
   Google Scholar
• Kraler, A., & Bonizzoni, P. (2010). Gender, civic stratification and the right to family life: Problematizing immigrants’ integration in the EU. International Review of Sociology, 20(1), 181–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/03906700903525792
   Google Scholar
• La Spina, E. (2019). “Good/bad” migrant families and their integration in the European Union. MigracionesInternacionales, 10(28), 1–29.
   Google Scholar
• Lego, J. (2018). Making refugees (dis)appear: Identifying refugees and asylum seekers in Thailand and Malaysia. Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Studies, 11(2), 183–198.
   Google Scholar
• Leinonen, J., & Pellander, S. (2020). Temporality and everyday (in) security in the lives of separated refugee families. In Family life in transition (pp. 118–128). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Löbel, L. M., & Jacobsen, J. (2021). Waiting for kin: A longitudinal study of family reunification and refugee mental health in Germany. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 47(13), 2916–2937. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2021.1884538
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mascia, C. (2021). How bureaucracies shape access to rights: The implementation of family reunification in Belgium. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 47(9), 2127–2143. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2020.1726734
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maskens, M. (2015). Bordering intimacy: The fight against marriages of convenience in Brussels. The Cambridge Journal of Anthropology, 33(2), 42–58. https://doi.org/10.3167/ca.2015.330205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mekonnen, D., & Arapiles, S. P. (2021). Access to official documents by eritrean refugees in the context of family reunification procedures: Legal framework, practical realities and obstacles. https://www.ecoi.net/en/file/local/2049549/report_access_to_official_documents_eritrea_equalrights_irap_may-2021.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Merlini, R. (2009). Seeking asylum and seeking identity in a mediated encounter: The projection of selves through discursive practices. Interpreting, 11(1), 57–93. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.11.1.05mer
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell, J., & Coutin, S. B. (2019). Living documents in transnational spaces of migration between El Salvador and the United States. Law & Social Inquiry, 44(04), 865–892. https://doi.org/10.1017/lsi.2018.27
   Google Scholar
• MYRIA. (2018). Migratie in cijfers en in rechten: 2018. Recht op gezinsleven in het gedrang. Retrieved December 16, 2021, from www.myria.be/files/MIGRA2018_NL_AS_1.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Näre, L. (2020). Family lives on hold: Bureaucratic bordering in male refugees’ struggle for transnational care. Journal of Family Research, 32(3), 435–454. https://doi.org/10.20377/jfr-353
   Google Scholar
• Navaro-Yashin, Y. (2007). Make-believe papers, legal forms and the counterfeit: Affective interactions between documents and people in Britain and Cyprus. Anthropological Theory, 7(1), 79–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/1463499607074294
   Google Scholar
• Odasso, L. (2021). Family rights-claiming as act of citizenship: An intersectional perspective on the performance of intimate citizenship. Identities, 28(1), 74–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/1070289X.2020.1723309
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olivier de Sardan, J. P. (2004). Etat, bureaucratie et gouvernanceen Afrique de l’Ouest francophone: Un diagnostic empirique, une perspective historique. Politique africaine, 96(4), 139–162. https://doi.org/10.3917/polaf.096.0139
   Google Scholar
• Olwig, K. F. (2022). The right to a family life and the biometric ‘truth’ of family reunification: Somali Refugees in Denmark. Ethnos, 87(2), 275–289. https://doi.org/10.1080/00141844.2019.1648533
   Google Scholar
• Pellander, S. (2015). An acceptable marriage, marriage migration and moral gatekeeping in Finland. Journal of Family Issues, 36(11), 1472–1489. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X14557492
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pigg, S. L., Erikson, S. L., & Inglis, K. (1969). Introduction: Document/ation: Power, interests, accountabilities. Anthropologica, 60(1), 167–177. https://doi.org/10.3138/anth.60.1.t16
   Google Scholar
• Pöllabauer, S. (2004). Interpreting in asylum hearings: Issues of role, responsibility and power. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting, 6(2), 143–180. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.6.2.03pol
   Google Scholar
• Riles, A (Ed.) (2006). Documents: Artifacts of modern knowledge. University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ruffer, G. B. (2011). Pushed beyond recognition? The liberality of family reunification policies in the EU. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 37(6), 935–951. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2011.576196
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadiq, K. (2011). A global documentary regime? Building state capacity in the developing world. In R. Koslowski (Ed.), Global mobility regimes (pp. 151–160). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137001948_8
   Google Scholar
• Schweitzer, R. (2015). A stratified right to family life? On the logic(s) and legitimacy of granting differential access to family reunification for third-country nationals living within the EU. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 41(13), 2130–2148. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2015.1037256
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shoham, H. (2021). It is about time: Birthdays as modern rites of temporality. Time & Society, 30(1), 78–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961463X20955094
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silverman, S. J. (2016). “Imposter-Children” in the UK Refugee status determination process. Refuge: Canada’s Journal on Refugees, 32(3), 30–39. https://doi.org/10.25071/1920-7336.40371
   Google Scholar
• Sorgoni, B. (2019). The location of truth: Bodies and voices in the Italian asylum procedure. PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review, 42(1), 161–176. https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12282
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Souter, J. (2011). A culture of disbelief or denial? Critiquing refugee status determination in the United Kingdom. Oxford Monitor of Forced Migration, 1(1), 48 –59. https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12282
   Google Scholar
• StojićMitrović, M. (2018). “Managing” the polyphony: The discourse of fraud and epistocracy in the context of migration. In M. I. Rajković, P. Kelemen, & D. Župarić-Iljić (Eds.), Contemporary migration trends and flows in the territory of Southeast Europe (pp. 181–193). FF Open Press.
   Google Scholar
• Taitz, J., Weekers, J. E. M., & Mosca, D. T. (2002). The last resort: Exploring the use of DNA testing for family reunification. Health and Human Rights, 6(1), 20–32. https://doi.org/10.2307/4065312
   Google Scholar
• United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees [UNHCR]. (2018). Legal and protection policy research series no.36: The “essential right” to family unity of refugees and others in need of international protection in the context of family reunification. Retrieved December 16, 2021, from www.unhcr.org/protection/globalconsult/5a8c413a7/36-essential-right-family-unity-refugees-others-need-international-protection.html
   Google Scholar
• Van Reisen, M., Berends, E., Delecolle, L., Hagenberg, J., Trivellato, M., & Stocker, N. (2019). Refugees’ right to family unity in Belgium and the Netherlands: ‘Life is nothing without family’. In M. Van Reisen, M. Mawere, & M. Stokmans (Eds.), Mobile Africa: Human trafficking and the digital divide (pp. 449–493). Langaa Research & Publishing CIG.
   Google Scholar
• Vandenbroucke, M. (2020). Legal-discursive constructions of genuine cross-border love in Belgian marriage fraud investigations. Critical Discourse Studies, 17(2), 175–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2020.1715233
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verhellen, J. (2018). Cross-border portability of refugees’ personal status. Journal of Refugee Studies, 31(4), 427–443. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/fex026
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zampagni, F. (2016). Unpacking the Schengen visa regime. A study on bureaucrats and discretion in an Italian consulate. Journal of Borderlands Studies, 31(2), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/08865655.2016.1174605
   Google Scholar
• Wray, H. (2006). An Ideal Husband? Marriages of Convenience, Moral Gate-keeping and Immigration to the UK. European Journal of Migration and Law, 8(3-4), 303–320. https://doi.org/10.1163/157181606778882582
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar