Résultat de la recherche
Detention Decisions: Implementation Rationales of the Bureaucratic Use of Immigration Detention in Swiss Cantons
This article analyzes the coexisting meanings, interpretations and functions underlying the varying uses of immigration detention in Swiss cantons. The authors argue that cantonal immigration bureaucracies decide on administrative detention according to different and intertwined implementation rationales, revealing varying functions and reasonings which shape its uses in practice. This highlights the significant variation in subnational policies and practices with regards to immigration detention within a single federal country, depending on these rationales and the cantonal contexts. The cantonal discretionary implementation of the same legal norms leads to various cantonal policies, resulting in different numbers and profiles of persons detained.
La détention administrative de personnes étrangères en chiffres
En vue d’assurer l’exécution du renvoi d’une personne étrangère, les cantons peuvent utiliser la détention administrative lorsqu’elle est jugée proportionnelle et qu’une autre mesure moins coercitive ne peut être appliquée. La détention des requérant·e·s d’asile débouté·e·s ou en procédure Dublin ainsi que des personnes en situation de séjour irrégulier devrait donc être utilisée en dernier ressort et être aussi brève que possible. Mais qu’en est-il en pratique ?
Bureaucracies Under Judicial Control? Relational Discretion in the Implementation of Immigration Detention in Swiss Cantons
Based on interviews with bureaucrats and judges in several Swiss cantons, this article analyzes how bureaucrats decide to order immigration detention and how the judicial review shapes their decisions. The authors argue that discretionary decision-making regarding immigration detention is structured by the web of relationships in which decision-makers are embedded and affected by the practices of other street-level actors. The varying cantonal configurations result in heterogenous bureaucratic practices that affect the profiles and numbers of persons being detained. In particular, differences in judges’ interpretation of legal principles, as well as in their expectations, strongly affect bureaucratic decisions.
Die ausländerrechtliche Administrativhaft in Zahlen
Zur Sicherstellung des Wegweisungsvollzugs einer ausländischen Person können die Kantone die Administrativhaft anordnen, sofern diese als verhältnismässig eingestuft wird und keine weniger einschneidende Massnahmen infrage kommen. Die Inhaftierung von abgewiesenen oder sich in einem Dublin-Verfahren befindenden Asylsuchenden sowie von Personen mit irregulärem Aufenthalt sollte somit nur als letztes Mittel und so kurz wie möglich erfolgen. Doch wie sieht die Praxis aus?
À propos de ‘La pratique de la Suisse en matière d’asile de 1979 à 2019’, étude publiée par le SEM
Administrative Detention of Foreign Nationals in Figures
For carrying out the removal of a foreign national, cantons may enforce administrative detention where this respects the principle of proportionality, and no other less coercive measure is available. The detention of asylum seekers whose application has been denied or under the Dublin procedure, and of persons residing irregularly in Switzerland, should therefore be applied as a last resort, and for the shortest possible time. But what is the situation in practice?