Articles for category: 9/11

Cities of God

Smart-city surveillance is not always used “for the good.” Instead, the faces of regime opponents or, in other contexts, underrepresented minorities, are often self-incriminating elements. It is clear that smart cities pose important problems to privacy and that technology-infused urban spaces bring as many benefits as challenges. I argue that we should be particularly critical of the employment of surveillance technologies in slums because they are by definition vulnerable places from different perspectives.

‚Don’t Snoop on Me‘

For the past twenty years, Brazil has been torn between the paths of public security and mass surveillance, and of reaffirming human rights, especially the right to privacy. An interesting duality has emerged: on the one hand, the creation of a robust regime in terms of data protection and, on the other, a wholehearted acceptance of facial recognition technology.

The ›Ketchup Effect‹

A closer look at the use of surveillance measures by public authorities in Sweden following 9/11 reveals that once it began, the development can perhaps best be described as displaying a ‘ketchup effect’; where you open the bottle and at first nothing comes out, and then it all comes out at once and you have effectively ruined your dish (which, depending on your view of ketchup, may have been doomed from the moment you picked up the bottle).

How Public Space Surveillance is Eroding Political Protests in Australia

As protest movements are gaining momentum across the world, with Extinction Rebellion, Black Lives Matter, and strong pro-democracy protests in Chile and Hong Kong are taking centre stage, governments around the world are increasing their surveillance capacities in the name of “protecting the public” and “addressing emergencies”. Australia is not an exception to this trend.

A Hollow Promise

Throughout the post-9/11 period, we’ve seen the courts fail to check the growth of the surveillance state, inviting and sanctioning new abuses. But we do see reason for hope. The expansion of the surveillance state is increasingly taking center stage in American political discourse. While it’s unclear if America’s political, legal, and constitutional systems will ever fully recover from the post-9/11 moment, it is clear that only mass political movement will be able to edge back us from the precipice of authoritarianism and reassert constitutional checks and the rule of law.

Securitizing asylum seeking in speech and practice in Finland

The presence of a strong security paradigm in Finnish migration law, policy and court practice is not a new phenomenon. What has become most prevalent is the securitization of asylum seeking. For a long time, this speech has not turned into practice, but this may soon change, in response to the migration influx after 2015 and in the Belarussian context.

The Long Shadow of 9/11

At the broadest level, 9/11 exacerbated the chronic precarity of non-citizens’ status as legal subjects governed under the rule of law. In principle, the rule of law is indifferent to citizenship: after all, the legal subject is constituted through subjection to law, not to the state as such. And yet, the rule of law has always been insipid in the sphere of migration, and securitization diluted it even further. This is true across all jurisdictions, including those bound by human rights entrenched in constitutional texts.

Security-vested Institutional Racism

With liminal legal spaces expanding on several domains of non-EU migrants’ lives in Europe, specific populations of third country nationals came to face greater discriminatory treatment. Rules and procedures were being adopted in the name of security and the protection of the public and/or social order against so-called “irregular migration”. We focus on non-EU migrants in Belgium, as they constitute an extremely relevant case to illustrate how institutions of a liberal, democratic European state have transformed and adapted the ways they operate discrimination along racist lines.

Irregularisierung der Staatsbürgerschaft in Indien

Indien hat komplexe rechtliche Mechanismen geschaffen, die den Status der Staatsbürgerschaft stark verunsichert haben. Diese Mechanismen erlauben es, Personen willkürlich als mutmaßliche Ausländer ins Visier zu nehmen, stellen unzumutbare Beweisanforderungen für den Nachweis der Staatsbürgerschaft und erleichtern den schleichenden Verlust materieller Rechte - und das alles ohne formellen Entzug des Staatsbürgerschaftsstatuses. Diese Prozesse lassen sich meiner Meinung nach am besten als das verstehen, was Peter Nyers als "Irregularisierung der Staatsbürgerschaft" bezeichnet.

Irregularizing Citizenship in India

India has created complex legal mechanisms that have introduced severe insecurity of citizenship status. These mechanisms permit arbitrary targeting of persons as suspected foreigners, place unreasonable evidentiary standards for proving citizenship, and facilitate creeping loss of substantive rights – all without a formal revocation of citizenship status. These processes, I suggest, are best understood as what Peter Nyers calls ‘irregularizing citizenship’.