Immigration, citizenship and gender

1
Immigration, citizenship and gender
2
3 themes

• Can entrance to the liberal state be restricted?
• If so, on what grounds? To keep up the welfare
  state?
• Immigration and gender mixed marriage in Dutch
  nationality law and immigration law

3

• J.H.Carens (1987), Aliens and Citizens the
  Case for Open Borders, Review of Politics vol.
  49(2), pp. 251-273. Shortened version re-printed
  in W. Kymlicka (ed.)(1995), The Rights of
  Minority Cultures. Oxford/New York OUP, pp.
  331-349.

4

• Hui and his mother

5
Demonstration in Amsterdam 30 Sept. 2006 Hui
belongs here, not in prison!

6
What gives us the right to restrict immigration?

• It is our country, so we have a right to decide
  who we let in and who not.
• They take away our jobs, deprive us of our
  wealth. We have a right to economic self defence.
• Mass immigration will destroy our culture, so
  that we can no longer exist as a national
  cultural community. We have a right to cultural
  self defence.

7
Rawls 2 basic principles

• each person is to have an equal right to the most
  extensive total system of equal basic liberties
  compatible with a similar system of liberty for
  all.
• social and economic inequalities are to be
  arranged so that they are both a. to the
  greatest benefit of the least advantaged, and b.
  attached to offices and positions open to all
  under conditions of fair equality of opportunity

8
Rules of lexical priority

• 1. Liberty can be restricted only for the sake of
  liberty. Hence, freedom rights may only be
  restricted if you by exercising your freedom
  rights harm the freedom rights of someone else.
• 2. Equal liberties take precedence over equal
  opportunity which take precedence over equal
  resources.

9

• the social circumstances of my sex, class or race
  should not count, nor should country of origin gt
  the basic agreement among those in the original
  position to permit no restrictions on migration
• if unrestricted immigration would lead to chaos
  and the breakdown of order immigration
  restrictions would be allowed as this would be a
  case of restricting liberty for the sake of
  liberty. In the nonideal world also national
  security
• But warning these arguments may not be used too
  expansive

10

• We have a right to prevent being flooded by
  immigrants, but
• Against it is our country people may not be
  excluded from social benefits, only because they
  had the bad luck to be born in the wrong place.
• What if immigration reduces the economic
  well-being of current citizens? But current
  citizens not in worst off position liberty (to
  migrate) takes priority over economic concerns
• What about our culture? If immigration would
  undermine liberal democracy itself restrictions
  on immigration would be permitted, but
  restrictions for the sake of preserving a
  distinctive culture would be ruled out

11

• We are countries of immigration and welfare
  states at the same time an uneasy combination
• Closed borders
• Cut back welfare provisions for all
• A stairway of citizenship rights

12

• E. Engelen (2003), How to combine openness and
  protection? Citizenship, migration and welfare
  regimes, Politics Society 31(4), pp. 503-536.

13

• The idea of differentiated citizenship rights
  goes against 2 basic premises about citizenship
• A. Citizenship rights are indivisible
• B. They are tied up to the nation state
• Yet
• You can break up rights into different
  categories political, civil and social rights
  and within each category further differentiate.
• There is no logical link between citizenship
  rights and nationality

14
Engelens stairway of citizenship rights

• upon entrance, newcomers receive a modicum of
  citizenship rights, preferable the full set of
  civil rights, a bare minimum of political rights
  and only some social rights. Over time newcomers
  would gain access, in a step-by-step fashion, to
  the full set of political rights, while the
  acquisition of the full set of social rights is
  dependent on contribution and therefore always
  subject to time constraints
• Advantage no zero/sum open borders/welfare
  state, but combining openness and protection
• Cost increased unequal treatment citizens and
  denizens.

15
Mixed relationships in Dutch nationality law and
immigration law

• Betty de Hart (2003) Onbezonnen vrouwen
  (Foolhardy women) Amsterdam Aksant.

16

• Until 1964 a Dutch woman who married a foreigner
  automatically lost her Dutch nationality, while a
  foreign woman marrying a Dutch husband
  automatically obtained Dutch nationality.
• Q. What does this tell you about the moral logic
  underlying this rule?

17
1994 Bogus Marriage Prevention Act

• A bogus marriage is
• a marriage in which the intention of the
  partners (to be) or one of them is not to fulfil
  the duties that are by the law connected to
  marriage, but to obtain access to the Netherlands

18

• Marriages with foreign partners 2001
• Background partners Absolute number Percentage
• First generation 233.391 50
• partner from abroad
• Dutch 193.416 42
• partner from abroad
• 2nd Generation 33.638 8
• partner from abroad
• Total (12 of all marriages 460.245 100
• in the Netherlands)

19
Jan (38) and Clara (22)

• met each other on the beach last summer. The
  Dutch partner knows of the past of his partner,
  he is not happy with it, but that is now of the
  past. Communication between them is difficult,
  however. Not unfriendly lady, in big-softy
  situation.
• Big softy an older and socially weak man, not
  too smart, who cannot find a woman of his own
  group and who is tricked or sexually indulged by
  the foreign woman, who uses him in order to
  obtain a residence permit.

20
Lydia (35) and Clement (36)

• She claims that mr. x is the father, but we
  doubt that. Mr. X has declared that he never
  visited the Netherlands and for ms. Y this is her
  first visit to Nigeria. (..)

21
Which relationships or marriages are defined by
the foreign police as bogus and why?

• Dutch women are subjected to screening of their
  motives more often than men of 128 files 42
  cases raised doubts, 31 Dutch women, 11 Dutch
  men.
• Three characteristics determine whether a couple
  is seen as deviating from the romantic ideal of
  marriage
• the socio-economic background of the Dutch
  partner,
• differences between the partners
• the extent to which the Dutch partner has made an
  informed choice.

22

• Socio-economic background all the big softies
  were lower educated men. Class did not have the
  same effect on women.
• Differences age difference gt will this marriage
  work? Different religions, wanting to marry a
  Muslim is suspect
• Informed choice shows that you dont act as a
  foolhardy woman

23
Types of people who run the risk of entering a
bogus marriage

• Male type the big softy can transform into
  white knight
• Female type the foolhardy woman
• feminist inclinations gt unwillingness to conform
• overly romantic
• irrational
• emotional
• gt Overly female not capable of informed
  decision making

24
The immigrations service model family

• the partners have no past no former marriages,
  no children from previous marriages and of course
  no criminal antecedents
• family life is founded after the residence status
  of the foreign partner is secured otherwise this
  raises suspicion
• the model family has to be an economic unity with
  a full time working and a full time caring
  parent this because of the income requirement.
• the partners choose one another unconditionally
  show doubt about your relationship and it will
  endanger your partners chances to obtain a
  residence permit.

25
Consequences for the applicants

• The policy norms determine their choices
  concerning
• the form of the relationship(cohabitation or
  marriage)
• choices about their career
• the right of domicile in the Netherlands.
• Their privacy is deeply invaded

26

• Dutch immigration rules are not gender neutral.
  The bogus marriage is a construct based on
  specific values, norms and stereotypes about
  gender, religion, ethnicity and class. It is
  ascribed to Dutch men of lower social-economic
  class and to Dutch women of all socio-economic
  backgrounds.
• There is no objective indication of large scale
  misuse. Therefore, the Bogus Marriage Prevention
  Act has a controlling and warning function we do
  not want our borders transgressed, not by aliens,
  and not by Dutch men and particularly, we want to
  discourage Dutch women marrying aliens.