WRITEN BY

DIMITRIOS POLYZOS

Department of Politics
University of York
MA in International Relations

Academic year: 2013/2014

{Word Count: 14.997 words}

Y1448721

Abstract
The theme of this thesis is sovereign power of European countries in matters of
migration contention and security preservation in their territorial space. Sovereign
power of the individual European state is put under the microscope of social theories
which explain the domination of rational choice by highlighting the characteristics of
human nature which explain exclusion and alienation of immigrants as a rational
choice of the hosting societies.
The aim of the present thesis and key argument is that the ability of the sovereign
nation (and the EU in extent as a sovereign union of nation states) to claim authority
and to be self-determined stems from its capability to rationalise its choices on the
basis of securitisation and self-preservation. It will be argued that immigration
policies are planned and enforced by states under the doctrine of self-preservation
and it will be assessed whether modern immigrant detention camps serve the common
social grater good by reviewing the case of detention camps in Greece.

ii

Acknowledgements
The present thesis has been the capstone of a year of hard work, a variety of lessons
learnt and a world of new experiences none of which would have been possible had I
not chosen the University of York to undertake my MA studies, therefore I would like
to thank the University for the incredible opportunity I received to be a part of one
exceptional academic society and which offered me a year that I will always
remember with the fondest memories.
I would also like to express my deepest appreciation to my supervisor Dr Tom OShe
to whom I owe my profound gratitude, for without his support and guidance the
present dissertation would not have been possible.
I would also like to thank my family for their love and moral support throughout the
whole academic year.

iii

Table of Contents
I.

INTRODUCTION...3

II.

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE7

1.1 The origins of reasoning in political philosophy; the Logos.7

1.2

Sovereign power and the European state .9

1.3 Theoretical frame work of the study...11

1.3.1

Foucault and the theory of biological racism.11

1.3.2 Agamben and the state of exception....16

1.3.3 Arendt and the process of dehumanisation..21
1.4

From Foucault to Arendt and beyond; of logos, rights and migration22

III. ON MIGRATION.25
2.1

Migration Policies...26

2.2

European Union on migration.33

2.3 Towards preventing illegal migration.34

2.4

Dimensions of immigration: Analysing the Greek case 35

2.4.1 Greece as a host country38

2.5

Structure and development of immigration policy in Greece.40

2.6

Consequences of immigration in Greece45

2.6.1

Economic45

2.6.2

Social & Cultural49

2.7

Securitising the Greek territorial space; FRONTEX, detention centres and

human rights violations52

IV.

DISCUSION OF FINDINGS..56
!1

3.1

Migration Policy failure..56

3.2

Effectiveness of the detention centres.57

V.

CONCLUSION.59

BIBLIOGRAPHY63

!2

I. INTRODUCTION

The theme of this thesis is sovereign power of European countries in matters of

migration contention and security preservation in their territorial space. Sovereign
power of the individual European state is put under the microscope of social theories
which explain the domination of rational choice by highlighting the characteristics of
human nature which explain exclusion and alienation of immigrants as a rational
choice of the hosting societies.
Briefly this dissertation will cover the theoretical frameworks of the Foucauldian
Tradition of biological racism; Agamben and the rational choice of law to create
homini sacri, which will be useful in understanding the role of contemporary
immigrant detention facilities; last but not least, Arendts explanatory of the process
of dehumanisation which will enforce the line of argumentation against detention
facilities specifically designed for immigrants.
The aim of the present thesis and key argument is that the ability of the sovereign
nation (and the EU in extent as a sovereign union of nation states) to claim authority
and to rationalise its choices on the basis of securitisation and self-preservation. It will
be argued that immigration policies are more strict and inhuman as we move upwards
in the global power relation hierarchy.
The thesis is divided in five parts out of which the first and present in the introduction
to the subject and the last contains the conclusions and lessons extracted from the
!3

process of carrying out the study. The two main chapters where the main analysis will
be taking place are divided to cover briefly the review of the literature (Chapter two)
and to investigate the topic over migration, illegal/irregular/illicit immigration,
offering an insight to the policies implemented by the European Union, a critique of
them and a close up examination of the case of Greece and the immigrant detention
camps used by the country in means of regulating and dealing with the problem of
illegal immigration (Chapter three). The final chapter aims to offer a discussion over
the findings of the study and focus in the failure of migration policies, the violations
of human rights of immigrants and also to discuss the future of EU securitisation.
Furthermore, the study will be carried out in accordance with ethical conduct
requirements. Ethical boundaries are described to be the self-regulatory guidelines
which govern decision-making. Ethical behaviour helps protect individuals,
communities, environment and offers potential to increase the sum of good in the
world (Israel & Hay, 2006:2).

As to the methodology implemented to collect resources in the process of carrying out

this study the I chose that of literature review analysis choosing to collect and discuss
data existing already in literature. A literature review is a systematic search of
published work to find out what is already known about the intended research
topic (Robinson & Reed, 1998:58). Bless (2000) argues that a literature review is a
formal and appropriate tool of analysis as it covers a vast portion of the theoretical
framework within which the research is being conducted, it allows debates to emerge
!4

and it provides the reader and the writer with all the necessary definitions governing
the field within which the research falls.

The data collected for this study are a product of the existing literature and where
extracted from the Universitys Library and electronic databases and also the Library
of the Kapodestrean University of Athens. The terms used in search engines and
databases to collect and retrieve literature relevant to my study were among others
immigrant, migration, refugee, detention, borders, securitisation, reason,, policies etc.
To begin with the term migration is used to define the movement of individual people
or a proportion of population of a country or a region towards another country or
region, regardless the causes of this movement. Territorial movement in particular
distinguishes migration to internal and external (Schnapper, 1991). Migration is
divided in two categories, emigration and immigration, where the first is indicative of
an outflow, whilst the second is used to describe the inflow of individuals and or
populations to a host country or region and both terms are usually identified in the
scientific literature with the word migration (Emke-Poulopoulou, 2007; 1986). With
regard to the destination migration is discerned in European or within European
borders and in transcontinental or overseas (Mousourou, 1991). Finally in relation to
its legal status migration is distinguished in legal and illegal (with or without the
possession of required travel documents).
Contemporarily, migration is conceptualised as a set of different processes being
triggered by the transition from traditional to modern societal contexts. The
!5

differences among cultural settings are justified on the basis of the existence of
multiple stages leading to a linear continuation, corresponding to that of biological
organisms, from simple to more complex ones being thus prioritised on the founds of
the notion of progress (Thomas & Znaniecki, 1984).
The following first chapter will attempt to cover the discussion around theories
explaining how immigration policies are planned and enforced by states and how
detention camps serve the common social grater good

!6

II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

1.1 The origins of reasoning in political philosophy; the Logos

Logos1, namely reason, determines the ends of action and identifies the means
required to realise these ends. Logos makes its first appearance as a term in the
writings of pre-Socratic philosophers whose scant excerpts are quoted in the works of
later writers as an attempt to make sense of cosmogony, the creation of the world.
Hence, divine reason Theios logos, is used to explain and resonate with every
aspect of human and non-human life and was conceived in order to feed the curiosity
of the human race in explaining the cause for their existence and the purpose of their
lives. In his work (About Nature) Heraclitus of Ephesus (535-475
BC) tells people that it is wise to agree (on things) not because of listening to me, but
(because of listening to) the reason, that everything is one the deeper meaning of
which is that reasoning processes are common for all even though the individual
person is often trapped in the illusion that as a unique unit he possesses a logic of his
own (Kahn, 1979). Thus, according to Heraclitus, the reason is a pure internal
capacity it is wisdom, intelligence and moderation.
Compliance with the common reason is an idea also found in the Stoic philosophers
writings, who consider logos to be eternal. However, they argue that human beings
are incapable of understanding reason before they hear it for the first time and that
1

In the Greek language (ancient and contemporary) logos means speech and from the later

derives the logical unfolding of the former in ancient Greek philosophy.

!7

when people are exposed to reason they still are too immature to implement it
(reasoning) as they might possess the words but when it comes to actions they
practice in accordance to their individual nature, their character and their experiential
knowledge (Manos, 2002).
Therefore, although divine reason is inherent in all humanity and reverberates in each
individual person, not everyone is capable of conceptualising the necessity of
implementing reasoning to their actions. Socrates argued that logos drives mankind in
the search of their true self and guides them when facing their inner
demons (Nechamas, 2001; Taylor, 2000; Sdrakas, 1996).
The concept of reason is also encountered in the works of Plato, but in this case it
denotes an internal logical power with which a person is endowed so as to be able to
make optimum decisions and avoid succumbing to detrimental desires and acts (Cary,
1959). Moreover, Plato considers reason to be a guide towards the truth of all things.
In other words, reasoning means to marshal logical arguments which advocate in
favour of our end (telos), explain our actions, and link them with our intellectual
capabilities (rather than our senses).
Nevertheless, apart from using logos with the meaning of words defining peoples
will and also perceptions of the world around them, Aristotle also retains Platos
interpretation of logos as the fundamental criterion for achieving the practice of a
reasonable and modest life (Kraut, 2002). In few words, to paraphrase Plato, when the
individual person reaches the point where he can conceptualise logos, he can then

!8

reach a point of excellent balance both internal and external in his life, he can live in
the Golden mean. Hence, the individual person can reach out to happiness and
fulfilment as his requests and minimum rudiments are shifted through the light that
reasoning brings in life apprehending thus sentiments of depression and impulsion.
The aforementioned findings of ancient Greek philosophy constitute a concrete basis
for understanding how reason is connected to the maintenance of a viable growth both
internal and external and the extent in which reason can become a shield of protection
of the individual persons best interests.

1.2 Sovereign power and the European States

When using the theory of international relations to explain the relations being built
between states, the tradition of speculation about the state as it emerges in Platos
work prevails. Wight exalts the aforementioned tradition as speculation about the
society of states, or the family of nations, or the international community (1966:36).
These speculations regarding the relationships between nation-states are deriving
from the fluidity of the power balance among the former which gives shape and
motion to their individual political decisions and to some extent to the collective
strategic decisions being made under the umbrella of alliances and unification. Hence,
political decision making relies heavily on the ability of the individual state to use its
power as a measure to position itself in the global status quo hierarchy and influence
other states to conform and follow their lead.

!9

Hence, theoretic concepts governing international relations should be conceptualised

as living organisms. As such they are reshaped, reformed and are in perpetual motion
and development as world politics are changing and evolving. As Heraclitus states
War is the father of all and king of all, who manifested some as gods and some as
men, who made some slaves and some freemen (DK22B53)2 suggesting that it is
necessary for aggressive implementation of will to exist among creatures and in
nature in general for progress and development to occur accordingly, political battles
taking place in all four corners of the globe amend the components of politics in
practice as relative power and supremacy are shifted from one decade to the next
(Keohane, 2002). However, acknowledging that political struggle not only exists
among nations, even when they appear to maintain sustainably peaceful relationships,
should not mislead into reflecting upon political societies as being components of a
cruel world.
Therefore, the crucial connection between the individual persons ability to reason
and the ability to claim sovereignty becomes apparent entailing that the ability to
reason and make decisions on the basis of logical and realistic perceptions of best
interest enables the individual to claim authority which subsequently becomes a
normative to then be evaluated and honoured or removed according to its actual
performance (Kahn, 2006). However this is not to say that there is a concept of
sovereign self rather that the individuals as a united whole, a society within which

This passage if a free translation of the original text which is in the Greek language made by

myself.
!10

each individual can use his reason to pursue progress and prosperity, to verbally and
practically demarcate the minimum standards of conduct which are considered
acceptable and which would not threaten or jeopardise his quest for happiness and
fulfilment.

1.3 Theoretical framework of the study

From the 18th century and onwards the notion of power is being transformed radically
and as a consequence the sovereignty on life and death is transferred from the lord
and the church to the state which undertakes the management and protection of the
life of its nationals throughout their existence. This new form of power-exercise
differs to the previous in terms of the positive and corrective quality and as to its
purpose which is the protection of the populations life, its growth and enrichment on
every level and in particular in the fields of economy, order and welfare. Authority is
embedded and exercised on the level of biological life, preservation of the species and
race and the mass population phenomena. The word race here is of great significance
as it stipulates a constant historical/political division of populations.

1.3.1 Foucault and the theory of biological racism

Enemies of the state are considered all these internal or exterior threats against the
populations viability thus, they are sent to their death achieving the latters survival.
The Aristotelian conceptualisation of man as an animal, whose only distinctive
capability among other is that of having a political status, is being reframed by
!11

Foucault in order to be adapted to the new version of biological sovereign right over
life and death. According to Foucault the new version of man is that of a political
animal whose life as a value is being under negotiation depending on its worth to the
rest of the population within which they are incorporated (1982:175).
This type of power which operates prompting, boosting, incrementally, exercising
control and surveillance on all vital phenomena based on the accumulated knowledge
about the latter, intervening collectively managerially, regulatory and organisationally
on the lives of the individual subjects aiming to protect them from illness,
maliciousness and death is what Foucault (1980) identified as biopower. Biopower
was mobilised to resolve efficiently the phenomenon of overpopulation of the 18th
century, being accompanied by all the socioeconomic parameters such as morbidity
issues, public healthcare issues, the management of climatic geographical and
environmental conditions which appertain to the life within the city and is diffused in
the social spectrum in two ways which ensure its bioregulatory purposes, that of
discipline and that of biopolitics. A concrete example of how biopower can be
exercised by sovereign states comes from the field of medical science. In the early
20th century, twenty nine countries maintained eugenics legislation under which those
who were recognised as 'genetically defective', ie criminals, the mentally retarded,
those condemned as being immoral, prostitutes, alcoholics, antisocial, vagrants,
indigent and beggars, were subjected in compulsory sterilisation (Barnes, 2006;
Muller-Hill, 2002; Sanderson, 2002; Garland, 1999, 2001; Katz & Abel, 1984; Paul,

!12

1967). Meanwhile, in the United States, immigration from Asia and Southeast Europe
towards the US was restricted (Garland, 1999, 2001).
Discipline, which precedes historically biopolitics, is oriented to the control and
management of the human body aiming to oppress and annihilate its resistance, while
biopolitics have as a unit of analysis the biological processes that characterise and the
conditions which favour the development of it. All functions of the natural life
(reproduction, vitality, morbidity and mortality) are the contents of biopolitics and are
subjected to the mechanisms and calculations being made by the states sovereign
power. Life is no longer taken but is rather being protected and preserved as being the
ultimate sovereign good. Enemies of the life and viability of a population are
generally considered to be a threat to the perpetuation of health, strength and stability
and therefore are destined to be exterminated for the general benefit of the society
which is made possible through what Foucault named state racism or biological
racism (Kelly, 2004).
According to Foucault the state biological racism is the basic mechanism of biopower
facilitating the overcoming of the contradiction that the state itself bears, which is
none other than the fallacy that while being in favour of life it however, distinguishes
lives in superior and inferior and decides to vanish those who endanger the lives of
worthy population. The indirect murder aims to preserve the latter from the infectious
existence and practises of the malicious rest of the population (Foucault, 1990).
Society needs to be protected against the biological hazards of other races of lower
and different ancestry.
!13

This racist theme that permeates the fabric of society, with a view to the lasting
clearance of foreign elements and adjusting all in the norm, the social average, the
social standardisation (normalisation), is indicated and thoroughly analysed in
Foucaults book il faut defender la societe. Biological racism fragments the
biological continuous to which biopower appertains to, establishing a biological
relationship between the extermination of biological risk and the enfeeblement of the
species as a whole and ethnic race as a unit. In other words and to use the example of
US and interracial marriage banning, biological racism devotees used reason to
explain rationally the biological risk that mingling of races would impose to the white
ethnic race, a scenario which became a feared reality within the specific social
culture.
To adjust Foucaults theoretical approach to biological racism and to apply it in the
present study it is very appropriate to reflect upon the discussion between Foucault
and Delez, where Delez comes to the conclusion that the sovereign state imposes its
vision to its subjects on the grounds of protection, preservation of the population and
the sovereign good (Foucault & Bouchard, 1980). As he explains the oppression of
immigrants among other contemporary forms of state violence becomes tolerated and
accepted by the general population through the process of visualisation of what the
state considers as greater good.
Hence, it is hard to argue that even nowadays, that globalisation has built bridges of
communication between the four corners of the earth, immigrants are not perceived as
a threat to the homogeny and clarity of an ethnic race as security risk is seen through
!14

the prism of ethnic polyphony and heterogeneity (Aradau & Van Munster, 2007).
Foucaults discussion of panopticism (the states ability to see everything and
impose its viewpoint to its subjects) illuminates the evolution of institutions into
disciplinary societies, through the extension of the mechanisms of discipline
throughout society in the formation of what might be called in general the
disciplinary society (1995:209). The disciplinary power of the state over immigrants
starts at the borders which are the primer frontier that the state needs to surveillance
as to avoid illegal immigrants to enter or invade the national ground and to facilitate
the movement of legal immigrants within the country (without even remotely
implying that they are welcomed in any of the two statuses).
As Eithne Luibhid (2002) argues, clearly, inspection at the border is not a one-time
experience but it is rather, as Foucaults image of the carceral archipelago suggests, a
process that situates migrants within lifelong networks of surveillance and
disciplinary relations. Surveillance of the lives of immigrants begins upon their
entrance to the foreign to them state and continues in the context of detailed
documentation of the reasons for them entering the country and establishment of the
timeframe within which they are expected to depart. Immigrants who do not possess
official documents face immediate deportation when possible or are automatically
apprehended by legal authorities until their origin and identity is being verified.
Immigrants are thus apprehended within a net of power relations governed by
documentation status, and as Foucault argues, it is the discourse lying in power
relations, within a society, where power itself derives from.
!15

The absolute control of immigration serves the state as a powerful symbol of a

nations sovereignty. Thus, the state demonstrates its disciplinary power over peoples
lives and distinguishes the population between subjects of the state and aliens
(Luibhid, 2002). It is this segregation that inflates the debate on the necessity of
detention camps which will be extensively discussed further in this paper.

1.3.2 Agamben and the state of exception

While Foucault draws upon the outset of the 18th century to define biopower and
biopolitics, Agamben claims that already from ancient times the biological life was a
subject targeted by and concerning sovereignty. Agamben (2005) argues that the
sovereign power determines the lawfulness of an action for example with regards to
the extent of his power over his subjects a King may decide whether taking someones
life should be considered as a punitive action or a sacrifice of one for the benefit of
the many. Again the authority of the claim stems from the Kings ability to reason
over his actions, legitimising them. Agamben uses the terms biopolitics and state of
exception arguing that unlike Foucault he sought to link issues stemming from
biopolitics and the fact that life is considered a matter of political sovereignty, to the
issues deriving from political sovereignty itself.
Nevertheless, the state of exception appears also in the works of the legal theorist
Schmitt (1985) as a form of power where political control of society by the state goes
beyond the limits of what is considered to be a normative conception of democracy
in the liberal state by invoking the emergency of its survival. It is the exception upon
!16

which the rule and procedures through which attempted legalisation and/or the
normalisation of cases presented as 'exceptional circumstances', or an exception to the
rule because of an emergency situation. Though this logic it is invoked the absolute,
the whole, the totalitarian using the term necessary which is often referred to as
imperative need - inhibiting, and essentially banishing the democratic and human
rights. The mechanism invoking this necessity is the sovereign state. The emergency
is interwoven with tine threat to sovereignty, but is also an expression of its power.
This is a contradiction where emergency is parallel term to posed threat against
sovereignty and thus indicates a potential opposite to the power which emerges as a
'threat' or at least as citing a threat, while simultaneously confirming that the state is
indeed a master holding the monopoly on its invocation. This is the limit where the
Weberian definition of the state as "the body has a monopoly of legitimate use of
violence" is inadequate as a tautology (Vandergeest & Peluso, 1995; Weber, 1993).
Schmitts and Agambens exeptionalism theories differ in the process of
understanding exception where the second draws heavily upon the work of the first
whilst declaring it as insufficient as the first worked largely on legal constitutionalist
interpretations of exception (Huysmans, 2008). Hence, in Agambens state of
exception we find the following contrasting pairs: legal/illegal, life/death. These are
bound to coexist in the succinct review of the notion of exception3. Agamben
identified the essence of the state of exception as the ultimate limit between politics
3

Legitimate includes illegal which is being defined through its contrast with the former.

Illegal arises from its exclusion by the definition of the statutory limits where from it also
begins (in Norris, 2000).
!17

and law between the juridical order and bare life, as the no man's land on the border
of constitutional / supra-constitutional provisions, practices and decisions beyond the
constitutional-legal explanation as defined by the Latin maxim necessitas legem non
habet (necessity is not subjected to the rule of law). Politicisation of life signals for
Agamben the emergence of biopolitics and the primary activity of the sovereign
power is the production of a biopolitical body. What he tried to demonstrate
throughout his research is that measures designed to meet extraordinary and in cases
extreme temporary events was twisted and shifted into becoming a norm, an adopted
practice which is acceptable by the government.
The stepping stone of this transition was the First World War when the state of
exception was deriving from the state of war. In the Nazi Germany of 1930s the state
of exception was established right after Hitler assumed control of the state and was
never revoked throughout the twelve years of the war. People, immigrants were then
being identified as having the characteristics of the figure of homo sacer4 (sacred
man) which Agamben (1998) borrows from the Roman Laws. Homo sacer is defined
in legal terms as someone who can be killed without the killer being regarded as a
murderer; and a person who cannot be sacrificed in a religious ritual (hence it also
translates in accursed man). This persona is expunged from society and is being
deprived of all his rights and functions in civil religion. Homo sacer is himself a state
4

He is holy and damned, killable without alerting any punitive system. He is located both

within (as entity contained in the legal order) and outside (as not being protected by the legal
order) the laws boundaries. He exists in the legal framework only so that he can be excluded
legitimately by the rule of law.
!18

of exception who is bound by the law yet is being denied his right to be included in
the law (in the sense that he cannot claim protection).
The establishment of a state of exception, namely, the indefinite suspension of the
regulatory and juridical order, when population can potentially be killed (murdered
without being murdered; in the sense that murder translates to sanctions for the
committing person) in the absence of legal and moral boundaries, enhances the power
of institutions and provisions located outside the law and that of life scientists on life
itself and as Agamben argues, the state of exception disperses in the Western political
bodies the absolutely killable corpses of their nationals.
Unsurprisingly, the term Homines sacri became a definition of those detained in
concentration camps of Nazis where biopower was unraveled and exposed to its
truthful intentions (Agamben, 2002). Those living in detention camps are somehow
unconsciously Homines sacri, assimilated to a life that can be taken without being
considered as a murder. This is due to the law considering that those detained in
camps do not own themselves anymore, life belongs to the law itself and these people
are somewhere between life and death (alive/dead), hence in the case of Nazis there
was no crime when lives were disposed in the context of experiments.
However, Agamben argues that nowadays the state of exception has been transformed
itself in the sense that it has been diffused in the whole world and not just a war zone.
Not to be misunderstood here, what Agamben implies is that contemporarily the term
(not the notion) state of exception is not applicable simply because when referring to

!19

changes in power relations these are seen under the prism of normal changes in
policies, the international law, and national laws and constitutions. The term state of
exception should be revised as a conceptualisation; exception itself is no longer
appertaining to events which bring a country or a society at turmoil, otherwise
extraordinary circumstances, but rather as inner convulsions which are necessary to
keep the political machine working. Consequently the homo sacer is replaced by the
homme sans papiers the man without papers, documentations, identity. This persona
has illegally entered the territory of a country foreign to him and his causes and plans
cannot be verified.
To deal with these types of immigrants most western states are implementing a system
of compulsory detention in prison-like camps where they are held as unlawful and
unwanted individuals until their origins are verified, then they are either extradited (if
they are found to be criminally charged), deported or left to circulate within the
country, yet being unable to move either forward or backwards and leave the hosting
country. For Agamben detention camps are the law of modernity, an attitude which
refers to the horrific Nazi concentration camps, but with a new, perhaps even more
terrifying way as the conditio inhumana (inhuman situation) in the camps expands
and applies beyond in the greater society5. The latter is the most common and

For the Italian philosopher, since the invention of the state of exception in the campos de

concentraciones created by the Spaniards in Cuba in 1896, and the British concentration
camps in S. Africa during the Boer War and until the contemporary Guantanamo, the bottom
line is that we are dealing with an extension to the entire population of citizens of a state of
exception.
!20

reoccurring situation in Greece and shall be discussed thoroughly in the next chapter
of the present study.

1.3.3 Arendt and the process of dehumanisation

As already been demonstrated both past and contemporary literature targets and
surfaces characteristics that govern human nature and exposes man as an animal given
the ability to reason and the choice to oppress his fellow human beings. Arendt (1998;
1981) argues that man has been so absorbed in self-destructive and harmful towards
others practices that he became inhuman. She notes that it is this process of
dehumanisation that deprives man from exhibiting these characteristic which identify
his existence and which allow his fellow human beings to reflect upon him as such
and treat him as such. In few words man has lost his right to be identified as human
because of his abusive and inappropriate conduct, depriving himself from becoming
something greater due to his unnatural behaviour.
Moreover, it appears that the establishment of human rights is not sufficient as
preventive action on the basis of reasoning; contrariwise, it is the acknowledgements
of mans political rights that would allow him to have the right to claim his rights as a
human being. To put it in Rortys words the 'liberal society asks its citizens (to have)
a moral identity for public purposes, and to have it irrespective of whatever other,
private identities they may also have (Hammer, 1997:321).

!21

Throughout the process of dehumanisation, man lays bare of his political status by
confining his existence in flesh and bones which merely exhibit some vitality. The gap
between natural and inhuman behaviour is filled by authoritarian and totalitarian
behaviours which prove the existence of a deep crevice between democracy and
dictatorship which cannot be bridged while the states employ hostile behaviour
towards one another. Thus, under the veil of looking out for the wellbeing and
prosperity of their population, states have legitimised through unreasonably reasoning
for the use of violence both at a national and an international level (Duarte, 2005).
Unsurprisingly, the racist and discriminatory effects of the process of dehumanisation
which appeared vividly in the onset of the 20th century with the rise of the
movement for eugenics and have been discussed earlier are again a reoccurring
theme.
What is found in Arendts reasoning process is that the political identity of mankind is
a prerequisite in the discourse of defining human rights as it allows public visibility of
the individuals existence (Hammer, 1997).

1.4 From Foucault to Arendt and beyond; of logos, rights and

migration
Unarguably the marriage between philosophy and political thought is bound to cause
interaction among these individual ideas and notions that have previously been
reviewed and explained in the present chapter. Philosophy reflects upon man as an
animal capable of reasoning to whom logos is inherent and who is thus, expected to
!22

be a herald of morality as his duty is to make the best and rational choices which will
lead him to beatitude. Why then would such a reasonable creature seek to harm and
divide? On the antipode, political science places man in the centre of attention by
attributing to him characteristics (such as solidarity and identity) which are pre
conditions for him to legitimise his claim of his rights.
A man striped of his rights is a homo sacer, a person without identity, an homme sans
papiers, an immigrant, an intruder of civilised, pure and dominant mankind. He is
greeted with hostility and treated with apathy and xenophobia and hate.
The right to migrate when the conditions which are the minimum prerequisites for an
individual to seek for and enjoy a fulfilling and prosperous life are violated is itself a
precondition for the enjoyment of the rest of the individuals human rights. Hence, as
it will be argued further in the present study, a foreigners right to migrate in the
hosting country of his choice, selected through the process of rational filtering of the
available optimum choices for his survival and/or his development, serves as a quasiright to rights.
In the contemporary Greek society the right to legal residence is paving the way for a
greater agenda of other rights of climaxing significance for the individuals life. From
the simple everyday matters such as the right to transact with public services, and the
right to public care in sickness to the more perplexed and ideal rights such as that of
being given a vote in elections as for his voice to be heard in the society where he
lives and produces work.

!23

The discrimination against and social isolation of immigrants (both legal and illegal)
is apparent throughout the entire Greek constitutional law. For instance, according to
the current legislation illegal immigrants and refugees are allowed to educate their
children only in public schools and to be hospitalised only in the emergency
departments in hospitals, all public services are constrained from providing their
services to illegal immigrants, otherwise the individuals found to provide any sort of
administrative support to them are liable to face criminal penalties; legislature
prohibits renting houses to illegal immigrants and criminalises versions of practical
solidarity, since he, who facilitates the staying of an illegal third-country national in
the Greek state shall be punished with substantial prison sentences and monetary
fines, echoing thus an important symbolic message to aspiring foreboders of
solidarity. Subsequently, the grey zones drawn around the human rights of illegal
immigrants and refugees in Greece have established a viral hostile environment of the
Greek society as a host of migration.
Consequently, in the following chapter the study focuses in the reality of paranoid and
semi-legal policies implemented by the Greek state and how this interlinks the
existing rights of immigrants to those of the rest of the Greek nationals.

!24

III: ON MIGRATION

As already being mentioned in the introductory stage of the present study the term
migration is used to define the movement of individual people or a proportion of
population of a country or a region towards another country or region, regardless the
causes of this movement. Eisenstadt (1955) described as the willingness of an
individual or a population to abandon the natural habitat and society in which they
were placed by birth and to settle in another societal environment. Depending on the
length of the chronic presence of a migrant in the host country, migration is also
demarcated in short-term, temporary migration (between no less than three and no
more than twelve months) and long-term, permanent migration (more than the
minimum of one year which may de facto be extended leading to de facto residence)
(OECD, 2001:296; Stamatakis, 2006).
The discussion around migration highlights this transitional process also as the
transfer of human resources and workforce from one region to another with evidence
showing that the usual destinations are developed countries which are found or
expected to offer more chances in employability and prosperity (Vendura, 1994;
Castles & Kosack, 1985) and vice versa competitiveness among countries is
stimulated by their favourability status as migrating destinations by triggering
innovativeness and know how expertise (Amin & Thrift, 2002; Florida, 2002;
Glaeser, 1998).

!25

Dirks (1998) noted that the onset of the era of modernisation and globalisation has
opened the back door to massive and unprecedented international migration pressure.
He argues that the emerging desire of individuals and larger groups of population to
migrate and leave behind the safety of the known residential environment cannot be
rationalised by mere constructive factors suggesting the quest for optimising life
conditions, but rather by acknowledging the factors of suppression, adjective poverty
and a massive desire for freedom of choice and self-determination.
Nevertheless, a question arising here is whether migration is a product of individual
free choice (individual action) or a result of broader geopolitical and transnational
dynamics (Sassen, 2003). In this assay it is argued that large-scale international
migration is part of the complex economic, social and national networks, which are
under close control and monitoring by the authorities so that it is not easily accessible.
Hence, it is plausible to argue that immigration is not limited to the massive invasion
of the poor and that this is more a problem than a crisis management (Sassen, 2003).

2.1 Migration Policies

For the notions of policies and practices appertaining to migration to be
conceptualised it is necessary and appropriate to distinguish immigration policies and
immigrant policy implemented by states. Immigration policy is that inflicted by the
establishment of immigrants in host countries and in particular they target the increase
of the levels of social participation and therefore are characterised as polymorphic
tactics of incorporation and absorption (Hammar, 1985).

Joppke and Morawska

!26

(2003) point out that the existence of a society in absence of alien ethnic groups is a
utopia. Integration in this case would rely on an internal consensus regulated by the
state mechanisms (in Freeman, 2004). As it is apparent the individuality and the
undependability of actors in contemporary societies call for a different approach to
integration which would take into account the fragmentation and decentralisation of
the latter (Freeman, 2004).
Immigration policies is the aftermath and for Favell (2010) a part of the long term
consequences of migration for the hosting countries and include among other the
basic legal and social protection; formal naturalisation and citizenship (or residencybased) rights; anti-discrimination laws; equal opportunities positive action; the
creation of corporatist and associational structures for immigrant or ethnic
organisations; the redistribution of targeted socioeconomic funds for minorities in
deprived areas; policy of law and order; multicultural education policy; language and
cultural courses in the host societys culture, and so on (for similar checklists of
policies, see Kymlicka, 1995; Soysal, 1994; Vertovec, 1997) (2010:372-3). Favell
continues that all the aforementioned are parts of the states responsibilities and fall in
the sphere of the governmental control.
To go back to the discussion of distinguishing among immigration policies and
immigration policy which, as exhibited, is the governmental response to the
phenomenon of immigration, and before elaborating on the above described issues, as
immigration policies are defined those action planning processed and decisions of
states as to control who is immigrating, why and for how long. Nevertheless, the
!27

distinguish between immigration policy and policies however analytically useful it

might be one cannot overlook the fact that they are so deeply interrelated and
unarguably correlated in the common sense of people (ILO report, 1998:6-8). This
can be acknowledged in the way that states control migration, namely the means that
they employ to their ends, reflected in the policies of incorporation and absorption
and in results they inflict (Mandralis & Andoniades, 2007).
At this point it is necessary to continue with an investigation of the policies
implemented by hosting countries and to the discussion arising from the reaction
(both positive and negative) of both hosting countries and to those countries of origin
of immigrants. On the positive side of the scale are found all these policies and
measures which appertain to the methods and practices which encourage, highlight
and implement the advisable administration and legislative initiatives with regards to
mobility and diversity of populations. On the antipode, correspondingly, are registered
all the shifts and alterations of public policy implementation which opt to control
closely or to impose complete abatement on migration and which are therefore
significantly related to social isolation of migrating populations (Penninx et al., 2008).
Historically the disposition of states towards migration is exalted to the selfperceptions of countries as to whether they are self-identified as hosting countries or
not (Canada and the US as being self-identified as hosting countries of immigration
whereas the broader European countries are not regardless the high rates of
immigration) (Penninx, 2005). This can be tracked back in the fifties when the labour
policies implemented in European states facilitated migration and the reunion of
!28

families of migrants and also the conditions of claiming and being granted asylum
were revisited and aborted and replaced by more strict ones. However, the tighter the
cluster of monitoring migration was becoming the more unorthodox and illicit
practices of smuggling and trafficking immigrants were invented allowing
uncontrollable procuration and illicit contraband. Additionally, the very recent
phenomena of terrorism heightened the brass tack of insecurity of states and became
inevitably correlated to border control and strict constraint of migrant entering.
Even though many European countries among which Germany, the Netherlands and
Sweden attempted to resolve the issue of migration by encouraging the
implementation of policies which allowed the influx of certain numbers of human
resources as temporary labour force, the latters permanent residence created
sustainably emerging and growing in numbers immigrant societies in their swaddle.
Hence, the necessity of developing integrating policies for some countries only
emerged in the mid-70s and became generally a normative in the 90s.
As argued previously immigration policies is the aggregate of measures and adopted
social practices dictated by two binding and accessorial pillars the first of which
appertains to the regulation of the influx, residency and employability of non-citizens
in a given society, including those measures dedicated to encourage reversion and
repatriation of immigrants and to fight back procuration; the second pillar appertains
to the policies dealing with the integration of immigrant population on sovereign
ground and in general to all those positive policies which ground juridical and
typologically the prerequisites for the convergence of immigrants and nationals of a
!29

given society. The second pillar will not be explicitly ad thoroughly investigated in
the present study as the objective here is to highlight the policies and their ability to
self-resonate as means of achieving self-security and preservation of a sovereign state.
Nevertheless the apportionment of the national policies of integration and
incorporation of immigrants regardless whether they refer to educational, welfare,
housing, health and security policies is a crucial topic of discussion for those legally
residing in a foreign country (Schnapper, 1992) and can be a proposed topic for
further investigation in extension to the present study.
Besides methods and social practices the planning and implementation of immigration
policies is also bound by the financial status of the hosting country, by the prevalent
situation in the labour market and by the existing social cohesion which was
previously mentioned in the study. All these are concrete facts which speak to the
relevancy if not chained interrelation between politics and the topic on immigration as
being argued by many scholars and researchers of the political science (see Simon,
2007; Pipper, 2006; Hollifield, 2000).
Consequently, there are three apparent concepts arising with regards to immigration
policy of a host country, border control by the sovereign nation enacting legislation
of admission and deportation, national securitisation, and the integration of
immigrants encompassing the administration of political rights (Hammar, 1985). To
the extent of issues that this study is shouting out to highlight and investigate it is the
problems concerning the tackling of illegal immigration by intensifying border guard,
the promotion of strict regularisation procedures, and the elimination of illicit human
!30

trafficking that are attempted to be rationalised as to the actions taken tom solve them
through the prism of human logic and reasoning. The fact that large numbers of
immigrants are involved in illegal activities (street crime) in combination with the
problems posed by the "illegal" status what this study earlier referred to as homini
sacri, is one of the main sources of concern for the safety of citizens (Ribas-Mateos,
2004).
Hence, as admitted by academics and policy makers, there is a tendency for the
movement of populations to be included in national security issues of high risk. The
perception that international migration is a threat to the security of countries is partly
related to the concern on international criminal activities which exploit the movement
of individuals by establishing networks of human trafficking and on that of the most
recent terrorist attacks. Unarguably, the events of 9/11 in 2001 and the subsequent
terrorist attacks in Madrid, London, Bali and elsewhere have led to the conclusion that
the issues of national security precede firmly on the agenda of debates on immigration
policy.

2.2 European Union on migration

European host countries being considered as preferable destinations of illicit human
movement (among which Greece which will be examined as a case study further)
have consequently developed mechanisms of migration control and have also moved
towards a certain level of unanimous conforming formulism for immigrants
permanently residing foreign ground. Although the European Union has no collective
!31

immigration policy, yet it has taken remarkable steps towards harmonising the
member states immigration and asylum granting policies.
The Treaty of Rome in 1957 was one of the first collective attempts to set out the
standards for free labour movement, condemning discrimination against workers of
nationalities different to a states nationals and in 1992 the Maastricht Treaty gave EU
the green light to act more intensively and methodically on immigration policy
frameworks (Zimmermann, 1995). Moreover, the Amsterdam treaty in 1997
spotlighted the topics around immigration policies, asylum and visa obtaining, which
had already been brought to attention in 1985 and 1990 by the Schengen Accords I
and II (Zimmermann, 1995), in the civic axis of the union and assigned the European
Commission with a five year mission of taking initiative in this domain. Member
states were forced to alternate their legislation on migration effectively which
translates to intensified boarder control system development and selective
immigration and asylum policies (Boswell, 2003).
In 1999 the Tampere Council authorised the development of a common framework
with regards to unanimous asylum policy and the European Commission and
pronounced the announcement over legal and illicit migration (European
Commission, 2000a, b; 2001a, b).

A number of special provisions which would

facilitate the elimination of illicit human trafficking, would lower the numbers of
asylum seekers in European Union ground and would constitute extradition of
individuals with illegal or unclear status to either their counties of origin or to other
countries within the Union which were considered as check points in the sense that
!32

once the immigrants had already passed through them they were automatically
nominated as secure places especially for asylum seekers to return to (Boswell, 2003).
Nonetheless, the Council has approved very few of the suggestions of the
Commission appertaining to immigration. This fact however does not indicate the
unwillingness of the Council to lay out a series of common committing ground rules
to resolve the migration issues but can be understood as reluctance to issue specific
guidelines in the form of one measure to fit all to avoid interference with each
individual members national sovereign and its right to be self-regulated in national
security matters. The imperfect relationship between historic experience on migration
and the policies established to regulate it can partially explain the aforementioned
slow transformation to a total policy alignment among European Union state members
(Castles & Miller, 2003).
Yet the EUs efforts managed to transform effectively the European map into a
stateless region by eliminating the boarders between nation state members and by
creating a framework of shared authority and responsibility major extent of which is
to tackle illegal migration.

2.3 Towards preventing illegal migration

As argued elsewhere in this study, ever since the 1990s the attempts to regulate and in
reality to discourage and prevent immigration and more importantly human
trafficking became more systematic (Boswell, 2003). The Schengen Accords made it
clear that the judicial and the policing system of member states would have to work
!33

hard towards reassuring that the individual member states would be safe and secure
after the abolishment of national borders among them. The externalisation of border
control instruments and the implementation of pre-frontier control aimed to create the
sense of security for host countries yet managed to link migration to a permanent
notion of threat to a states welfare. This lead subsequently to justify more vigorous
police measures to the extent of state responsibility. Thus, the sense of state
responsibility created solid base for the EU to claim intensive immigration policy
reformation from candidate countries to enter the Union with the most significant and
controversial one being the obligation to enter into agreements for readmitting
undocumented migrants constituting many EU candidates (among which Greece) as
waste banks for those undocumented and unwanted.
Following the notion of prevention the EU made grate efforts to pull the brakes on
migration and asylum granting by undertaking a crusade to offer assistance to
troubled regions where the majority of immigrants where emerging. The attempts to
offer financial and solidarity assistance were thought to be a panacea to uncontrollable
migration as the goal was to offer help and funds and diplomatic delegate resources
and to resolve domestic problems of troubled states before their collapse which would
signify new flows of immigrants toward EU states. As noble as this might appear to
be its interior motive is to lift some weight from migration control instruments of the
Union as their task was becoming more and more challenging to perform, thus the
alternative approach to hit the problem to its root causes appeared to be more feasible
as a project.
!34

Hence, in the 1990s a new era of peace building, post war recovery and military
intervention strategies was set in motion which opened the back door to post
imperialistic expanding control behaviour for both the EU and the rest of the powerful
International players6. Nevertheless it can be argued that migration management was
neither less necessary nor it ever became an issue of less engrossment for the Union.

2.4 Dimensions of immigration: Analysing the Greek case

It is rather interesting to investigate the approach of the term migration through the
dimension of hospitality, which is intertwined with the European but mainly the
Greek culture and has its roots in the ancient Greek culture. Hospitality in the ancient
Greek world is a synonym of hosting without preconditions, in fact without any
conditions, provided a priori to any individual entering a region or a home, whoever
he/she might be, regardless their identity, whether or not being an alien, an immigrant,
regardless being invited or an unexpected guest, and without requiring credentials of
nationality for citizens of another country. In particular this approach establishes a
positive relation between the host and the guest by establishing the existence of a
neutral and friendly environment for the later for which the term used is "state shelter" ( ) the concept of which has its origins in the Bible, when
Moses calls the Israelites to cross the Jordan to the land of Canaan a territory that God
promised to Abraham and his descendants (Derrida, 2003: 28-47).

see Report of the High Level Working Group on Asylum and Migration which prepared the

ground for the intervention and invasion in Iraq and Afghanistan

!35

Inevitably, at this point the most important questions and the core subject of this thesis
arise. How can the modern world and the contemporary Greek state in particular
resonate against the development of detention camps where immigrants are crammed
on a daily basis as if they are some sort of clutters, of unwanted, purposeless beings
deprived of their human thisness? And why has the term state-shelter been
degenerated and demoted into that of state-enemy, a state of ignorance which has
failed to live up to its promise for unconditional support of those in distress, of those
forced to become stateless and are being perpetually oppressed in their land of origin?
In order for these questions to be answered effectively it is necessary to dive in the
depths of human logic and morality prior to investigate the surfacing problematic
migration policies in effect in the European territorial space and in the Greek state in
particular.
To begin with, population movements towards the European continent could not have
left Greece uninfluenced. Since the establishment of the European Union (EU) and
throughout its gradual enlargement, with the accession of increasingly more European
countries, within the territorial limits of the continent, was another step for the radical
change in the content migration and its traditional status (Markou, 1998). The
introduction, for example, since 1988 of the right to freedom of movement and
establishment of workers in countries of the European Union, transformed
"immigrants" to "mobile workers" and "equal citizens" of every European country. In
essence they became mobile citizen-workers, another form of human capital within
the EU. Hence, since the late 1980s, Greece, Italy, Spain, and Portugal among other
!36

European countries were converted into immigration hosting countries. It was the
collapse of communist regimes, the worsening international financial situation and the
religious fanaticism that increased dramatically the currents of foreigners migrating
from eastern and central Europe and the Third World countries. These migrants who
crossed the national borders without always have the necessary legal documents came
mostly from Albania, Poland, the Philippines, Pakistan, Iraq and Egypt (Petronoti &
Triandafyllidou, 2003). To be more specific two-thirds of these immigrants came from
Albania, 6% from Bulgaria, and 4% in Romania and the rest from more than a
hundred countries of Eastern Europe and of the rest of other continents (Fakiolas,
2004: 36).
Challenging, for a researcher of the political science, is the task of dipping his tows in
the unknown waters of philosophy in an attempt to become the philosopher himself
and to conceptualise first, analyse subsequently and translate human behaviour into
established practices incurring consequences either these being positively related to
their context or these causing alteration to the human nature itself demoting the
person as an individual and as a member of a collectively acting community.
Hence, in order for the researcher to serve his purpose and carry out a thorough
investigation on the subject of migration policies and the use of detention camps as
immigrant storage facilities will be formatted, analysed and lastly filtered via the
notion of the theory of rational choice.

!37

2.4.1 Greece as a host country

Greece had never been considered as a traditional host country for immigrants, yet
ever since the 1970s the country slowly started to experience an increasing
immigration inflow. During the 90s and while Greece was still one of the least
developed countries in the European Union, the rates of incoming migrating workers
in relation to the proportion of the Greek population and workforce rose significantly
leading to increasing undeclared, illegal work. At first and until the early 1990s the
main volume of immigrants was comprised of repatriating Greeks and small numbers
of Egyptians and Filipinos and comprised only a low 2% of the populations grand
total (Cavounides et al., 2008; Naxakis & Hletsos, 2003). The largest wave of
immigration emerged right after the fall of the Communist regimes of the Central and
Eastern Europe. Further, fewer increase was noted in the numbers of immigrants
flowing in from Asia and Africa (Triantafillidou & Maroukis, 2010). Immigrants were
soon identified as the perpetuators of the underground and illegal economy which
then accounted for almost the 40% of all economic activities taking place in the
country. They usually performed tasks of unskilled or semi-skilled workers, their
wage was generally significantly lower (up to 1/3) than those of local workers and
they often fell victims to fraud and exploitation of the circuit of the underground
illegal economy (Kastoridas, 1991:34). Moreover, the accession of the country to the
EU, which assisted to the economic and social development in the country constituted
the country to be an attractive destination for those who could not enter already
developed countries of the West (Kassimis & Kassimi, 2004). Most recently

!38

Pakistani, Iraqi, Afghan and Bangladeshi immigrants arrive in Greece seeking

political asylum (especially ever since 9/11).
In many cases Greece was a mere transition point (transit country) for final
destinations such as other EU states the US, Australia and Canada (EmkePoulopoulou, 2007). It is worth mentioning here that the majority of immigrants
entering the country in the last two decades are economic immigrants (Kavounides et
al., 2008) and their number as being estimated by the Greek Ministry of Internal
Affairs in 2011 and the European Migration network in 2009 is more than 1.092.000
52% of which are Albanians. Stunningly it has been reported that the majority of
immigrants living on Greek ground until the early 21st century were illegally
smuggled in the country (Varvitsiotes &Kampouroglou, 2006).
The geographic positioning of the country had always played a significant role in
incoming migration as it is the crossroad of three continents (Xirouchakis &
Korliouros, 2011; Emke-Poulopoulou, 2007). As being the closest European
neighbour of Turkey, Greece is facing a severe influx of illegal immigrants being
smuggled in the country by human trafficking networks being coordinated via the
former (European Commission, 2012).
Moreover, the great extent of the Greek overland natural boarders makes it an easy
target as control is insufficient and inefficient (Emke-Poulopoulou, 2007). Naxakis &
Hletsos (2003) argue that the afore mentioned fact in combination with the high rates
of cheap and unreported labour which is a reoccurring issue in the country and

!39

appertains to Greek nationals as well as foreigners, constitute the country an emerging

preferable destination for undocumented immigrants as it is harder for them to be
tracked down and be deported back to their countries of origin. Also another yet
determining factor attracting illegal immigrants is the higher rates of minimum wage
for immigrants in relation to those of their descendance (Moyssidis et al., 2011).
Unarguably, Greece as being historically a traditional emigrating nation had neither
the experience nor the proper legislation to host immigrants, the flooding wave of
whom brought tremendous turbulences in the country which have not been effectively
dealt with ever since the 90s. Hence, the Greek immigration policy turned at large to
fight back illegal migration neglecting the importance of integration (Moyssidis et al.,
2011).
Nevertheless, the largest proportion of immigrants who entered the country in the 90s
are now legal after the legalisation provisions of 1998, 2000, 2004 and 2005 and due
to the reformations on the immigration Act of 2007. Hence a vigorous integration
policy was enabled and applied ever since (Bhning, 1991:451; Kontis,
2001:178-180).

2.5 Structure and development of immigration policy in Greece

As already being mentioned previously, despite the fact that Greece had not been
historically a host country for immigrants, it is its geographical positioning which
makes it a perfect passage towards the wealthy countries of the Western European
Union. Most illegal immigrants enter the country legally yet they break the law by
!40

extending their legally predetermined residence permit. The time consuming

bureaucratic procedures of the states governments and also the inability of the state to
guard the boarders effectively encourage immigrants to choose to enter the country
illegally and without the necessary documentation to confirm their identification and
their country of origin. This makes deportation almost impossible and that alongside
with the increasing levels of illicit trade of goods, services and human capital attracts
smugglers and immigrants themselves as they find it easier to work and move within
the country without legal documentation.
Nowadays the Greek immigration policy implemented has taken great steps to
overcompensate the un- promptness of the past. In this part it is considered highly
appropriate for past and present legislative acts to be reviewed briefly. To begin with
the legal framework in effect, appertaining to immigration, deportation and legal
presence and work in the country had remained unchanged since the mid-war era and
until the early 90s. Right after the fall of the Berlin wall in 1989 and due to the fact
that Greece was the only Balkan state being a member of the EU, the country was
converted into a land of unregulated immigration influx. Hence, in 1991 the country
adopted a new legal framework over migration, L.1975/1991 which was later
optimised by laws L.2452/1996 and L.2713/1999 both of which were dominated by
the logic of self-preservation and were practically implementing preventive, defensive
and repressive measures, lavishing uncertain purview to the judicial and executive
public bodies of law enforcement whilst implying the implementation of tactics of
suppressive policing practices against immigrants. The Presidential decrees number
!41

358/1997 and number 359/1997 shifted the hostile environment that the
aforementioned acts triggered by encouraging illegal immigrants to come forward and
be officially documented as to be legalised by obtaining the White Card of legal
presence in the country and thanks to these decrees approximately 200.000 illegal
immigrants were tracked and legally documented (Zavos, 2006).
Few years later in 2001 a new attempt to enrich the Greek constitution in long-term
and to set more rational and achievable goals towards eliminating illegal immigration,
law L.2910/2001 called for the political domestication of immigrants and relayed
regulations with regards to entering the country, residence and labour (Varvitsiotes &
Kampouroglou, 2006). This particular law has been alternated more than 60 times
since then (Kapsalis, 2007) being charged as being anachronistic and discriminative.
Moreover, in 2004 law L.3284/2004 introduced the notion of jus soli in matters of the
Greek citizenship and was considered as a leap of faith to the future towards a more
integrated immigration policy (Zavos, 2006). In 2005 however, law L.3386/2005 took
the initiative one step further as it emphasised in the field of social integration of
immigrants of third countries and EU non-Greek national citizens residing in Greece;
in its introductory draft the legislators clarified that their intention was to bridge the
gaps which had been created by the 2001 act and that with this law they aspired to
assume strategic initiative towards immigration management and to institutionalise
appropriate measures and assurances of close monitoring of the nations boarders and
to implement strict regulations for entering the country as to avoid uncontrollable
trespassing, as well as the possibility of granting permanent and legal documentation
!42

to all those homini sacri enabling them with the potential of being gradually and
formally integrated in the Greek society (Kapsalis, 2007). Unfortunately, regardless
the good intentions of the 2005 legal act, bureaucratic implications in practice
constituted it unfit to be actively implemented. To tackle these in 2007, law L.
3536/20077 entitled Special Adjustments of Issues of Immigration, Public
Governance and Decentralisation opted to set aside bureaucratic obstacles, to solve
all problems none related to culpable behaviour of immigrants and to facilitate their
social assimilation.
The most recent years have brought a quiet period of legislative inactivity which has
subsequently surrogated the continuity of irregular immigration. It should be however
noted at this point that the failure of the state mechanisms to impose some certain
level of regulation of irregular immigration has deepened the chasm of dissension
within the Greek society leading to anachronistic tendencies towards xenophobia and
hence alienation of immigrants especially those who entered the country within the
past decade, depriving them from the opportunity to establish strong social bonds
which would allow them to consider permanent residency in the country constituting
them modern homini sacri. To make things even harder, the rise of the Neo-Nazi
political party of Golden Dawn in the Greek parliament in 2013 which is openly
against immigration and has been accused of violent criminal acts against immigrants
7

L.3536/2007 is in effect to this date whilst there is an active political debate at the moment

with regards to the necessity of reformations to deal with racism and xenophobia which have
been brought in the main political stage by the heinous criminalistics actions of the Golden
Dawn political party.
!43

regardless their ethnic id, is bound to be a major hitch towards achieving the
covetable harmonisation of immigration policy at this side of the Union (Figgou et al.,
2013).
From this brief account of Greek legislation with regards to immigration two
important lessons can be extracted. First that Greece has historically been unable to
react effectively to the significant increase of immigration which on the onset of
1990s became uncontrollable in both legal and illegal level. Secondly that
bureaucracy and lack of thorough investigation prior to legal stipulations of acts has
made it impossible for the controlling authorities of the country to create a concrete
legal setting which would encourage immigrants to come forward and become legal
improving thus their employability and their mobility in the EU.
Regarding means of defending the state against illegal immigration these are confined
merely to intense yet not sufficiently effective security checks at the countrys
national borders. The unarguable failure to control illegal migration at the Greek
borders is however, not only a major problem for the Greek governments and society
in extent but also a headache for the rest of the Union as from Greece it is easy for
illegal immigrants to attempt moving towards Italy and then to more rich countries of
the North and the West. The failure of policy can be tracked back to three main
factors, that of the social dynamics of the migratory process, that of the wider
phenomenon of Globalisation, that of the pure failure of regional political systems to
exercise their sovereign powers (Castles, 2004). As already discussed earlier in this
study, the main strategy line that EU employs with regards to regulating and
!44

preventing irregular migration is to target the root causes of it and attempt to resolve
emerging problems in their focal points.

2.6 Consequences of migration in Greece

2.6.1 Economic
Although not officially substantiated, there is a strong view that the Greek economy
relies heavily on immigrants and without them the country would have been reeled
over by serious developmental problems. Contemporarily the high levels of
employment of foreigners in the country indicates that the interruption of economic
marginal limit activities some of which are export oriented and that employ mainly
Greek nationals has been avoided, there is also evident improvement of the age
composition of the workforce, and very importantly foreign workers and have
strengthened the service to households, in the field of domestic care for young
children and that of elderly people (Fakiolas, 2005).
Moreover, the national GDP in 2005 grew by 3.7% where about 2.6 percentage points
was the result of private consumption, of which one unit derived from the
consumption of migrants. Additionally the per capita in bank deposits belonging to
immigrants is estimated to be around 10,000, when the equivalent of Greek nationals
is around 8,000 (Eleftherotypia, 4/8/2006).

!45

Also according to a study carried out by the Institute of labour GSEE, proves
evidently that the entry of immigrants into the Greek market was not accompanied by
significant deregulation of the labour market and of the Greek society in extension.
This is mainly due to the fact that immigrants entering the country after the 1990,
faced a "friendlier" work environment as Greece had now previous experience of the
massive entry of immigrants into a gigantic illicit labour market offering thus easy
employment opportunities and fast income.
The contribution in the domain of agriculture has also been reported as by the middle
of 2000 the majority of immigrants were employed in the agricultural and
manufacturing domains. Indeed, the contribution of immigrants expanded in many
rural areas causing stimulation of local markets which expanded beyond the
agricultural sector (Kassimis and Papadopoulos, 2005).
According to the biennial report of the OECD for 2003-04 for Greece, the presence of
foreign workers has not prevented the creation of the same proportion of employment
opportunities for the local workforce and in most cases it has created additional
income for the economy, it has caused a significant increase in indirect taxation, and
also has improved employment opportunities for Greeks of similar level of labour
skills and their utilisation in agricultural production of very low productivity.
On the antipode, the influx of immigrants is closely related among other issues with
the extremely high levels of illegal labour and the broadening of the black market in
the country which involves mainly informal and illicit economic activities that are

!46

found to be characteristic features of "countries of new immigration," among which is

Greece. These undeclared illicit workers are mainly employed in agriculture, building
industry, constructions and small services for individuals and families and coincide
almost exactly with the demand of immigrants in Greece (Ribas-Mateos, 2004:1056;
Mingione, 1990: 5).
A rather contradictory fact is that the supply of unskilled immigrants and underpaid
work, and even in jobs that do not interest the local workforce in the country, have
brought in principle positive results. Because on the one hand the specific needs of the
labour market are being met and on the other hand immigrants not being effectively
utilised in these positions would bear the likelihood that production in these areas
would be quantitatively less. Also several businesses employing immigrants as cheap
labour force while not being able to afford higher labour costs, could not have
maintained their viability which would subsequently result in local workers to be
rendered jobless, plus there would effectively be a reduction in production (Petrinioti,
1993: 98). Yet unarguably, the absence of influx of foreign workers would inflict
conversion of working environment and a rise of local wages.
Cheap labour, however, gripped the wages down to a lower level than those which
Greek workers are willing accept. This has the effect of creating vacancies potentially
be covered by the new influx of illegal immigrants, thus creating a malicious circle,
with an increasing labour demand for those new entrants (Fakiolas, 2005:110).

!47

Nevertheless, the viewpoint that the utilisation of immigrants in labour market

increases the rates of unskilled or low skilled unemployment (as they subsidise the
local work force) is proven by research not to be cohering. Research carried out in
both Europe and the US indicated that the mobility of workforce stimulates the labour
market as immigrants constitute flexible redundancy in cases of low rates of mobility
of the local labour force (Zimmermann, 1995:51-53).
Fakiolas (1999) argues that if the governments restructure firstly and foremost their
national economic policies it would be increased the possibility for new and more
attractive employment opportunities to incur for native workforce. Moreover,
according to Diamandouros (2004) it is the delay of state mechanisms and public
administration to be remoulded efficiently as to accommodate effectively the rates of
migration begets unconscious resistance of the society into conceptualising the
positive effects of migration aforementioned, leading to serious social turbulences
which are mainly reinforced by the dominant image of the Greeks society as being
one of pure homogeny. This false concept has been found to result in xenophobia and
especially in the rise of nationalistic echoes of the past in the Greek society now more
than ever before. Hence, in this next few passages the social effects of immigration
will be discussed as an attempt to formulate an understanding of the greater cost of
immigration for the Greek society which in this study is argued to have nurtured
tolerance towards a new kind of mild racism which has evolved into further tolerance
of the implementation of the inhuman institution of detention centres for illegal

!48

immigrants.

2.6.2 Social & Cultural

The migrational movement towards Greece of the past two and a half decades has
shifted the imaginary scale of migration from the dominant side of emigration to that
of immigration. Until then Greeks conceptualised migration as a phenomenon of
exogenous reaction, as the outflow of the Greek population and mainly Greek
workforce towards the rest of the world and more importantly from a sociologic
perspective they understood migration as a step upwards in the social ranking as those
who migrated mostly in western countries managed to create wealth for them and
their families back in the country. In antithesis the change of the country as becoming
a host of immigrants raises simultaneously a number of challenges associated with the
established and entrenched ideological beliefs that underpinned the establishment and
further build the society of the Greek nation. The homogeny being alleged previously
was exposed into serious alteration with the wide inflow of foreigners and the term
immigrant became a synonym of poverty, delinquency, outlaws and intrusion.
Therefore in addition to the fear of raising unemployment and criminality which have
already been discussed previously in this study it is found that the colours of the
Greek society of the national identity intensified the distress the later was found in.
Due to the deep embedded religiosity of the Greeks society fear and insecurity
increased exaggerating the image of the Greek society to its own nationals
(Makridimitris, 2006). What is meant by this is that the general crisis of social and
!49

moral values, of political and cultural orientation of the country suddenly adopted the
migration problem as an expansion tank to diffuse internal disputes of the society over
its post-civil war revamped cultural identity.
As it is well understood identity is a key term defining modern multicultural societies
which aim in establishing of a cultural individualistic existence for both minority and
dominant groups coexisting in a common natural habitat. Hence, the cultural identity
of a person is established and founded upon the process of socialisation in which he is
expected to participate as being a member of a community. Indeed the social identity
of the member of a community has a strong reflection on the cultivation of the ego of
a person, the unique personal identity of the individual which affects significantly and
is also reflected in his ability to understand and explain the world and everything
happening around him, in other words the individuals ability to reason.
This very important process is taking place through the methods of enculturation and
acculturation which appertain to the way in which the individual is internally
conceptualising, understands and is accepting the new multicultural reality that he is
presented with as being a member of a hosting society, of a hosting state (Berry,
1988).
According to research conducted among fifteen EU countries it was found that 50%
of the respondents admitted that the presence of immigrants enriches the cultural life
of the host society. However, the concentration of positive answers varied among
countries, with the highest rates being found in the Swedish society 70%, while only

!50

26% of the Greek participants were identified as being in favour (Emke-Poulopoulou,

2007: 229).
Moreover, immigration is directly linked to the evolution of modern family
institutions. In particular it affects fertility, conclusion of marital relationships and
more specifically those of mixed nature nationality-wise. Immigrant marriages seam
not to be affected by the uncertainty of income and the instability of living in a
foreign society whist natives indulge to these pressures and the anxiety of building up
the proper foundations for developing a family in the future. This is undoubtedly
connected to the formers culture, which enables them to construct a different reality
in terms of fertility and connubial necessity in life than this embedded in the lives of
the national population. Especially in countries such as the UK and France or
Germany where the second and third generation immigrants is a reality the
phenomenon is more apparent. However, in Greece the ethnically homogeneous
formation of the state, and also the relatively recent entry of foreigners in the country
(even of those in conditions of illegal residence) contributed to a cultural conflict
lacking major events of contradiction, with the exception of some isolated incidents of
racist expressions of some nationalist zealots found evenly spread in the past decades
which did not affect significantly the social fabric of the country (Zografakis et al.
2009; Diamandouros, 2004).

!51

2.7 Securitising the Greek territorial space; FRONTEX,

detention centres and human rights violations
Up to this point of the study it becomes apparent that the integrity of the Schengen
agreements space within which the internal borderline controls are abolished is a
vital priority of the European Union. Prevention and reduction of illegal immigration
in all its dimensions, it is vital for the credibility of policies relating to legal
migration, as well as their acceptance by the general public.
For this purpose, the European Union tends to enhance the operational dimension of
the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External
Borders of the Member States of the European Union (FRONTEX- from frontires
extrieures), mainly by expanding its capacity in operational control and the powers
to take all necessary actions including border control in areas designated as areas of
"high risk" and exposed to exceptional migratory pressure.
Providing expertise and logistical infrastructure in third countries which are the high
risk flagged countries of origin and transit of migrants in order to create effective and
sustainable management capacities borders, has assigned FRONTEX with a
prominent role to implement functions in supporting the borders in these countries,
and towards the creation of a common database for sharing information which could,
in accordance with the findings for the future of immigration policy in Europe,
become an important step to control illegal migration and human trafficking.

!52

In reality the aspiring goal of the EU is the creation of an enclosed space, isolated
from its neighbours, not only those developing regions of the world; a Europe that
every notion and sentiment of humanity will stop at its external borders; a European
Fortress. FRONTEX assumed a role of missionary forces protecting the Union
imposing militarisation of border controls, the use of inhumane practices which
gradually leads to the creation of a modern Iron Curtain this time separating the EU
from the developing world.
Hence, it all seems plausible when it comes to allegations against FRONTEX with
regards to human rights violations. In Greece as in most European countries
nowadays, FRONTEX is assigned with the responsibility of managing immigrant
detention camps. Returning to Arendts explanatory of the process of dehumanisation
and its role in Nazi detention camps it makes it apparent that this certain form of
practice namely the indefinite detention of people against their will whose only crime
(until proven otherwise) was to enter a country of EU undocumented, is especially
heinous and anachronistic. Moreover as Duffield (2006) argues it is the migration
security nexus which filters state security through the containment of cultural and
ethnic identity so as to retain a sustainable homogenised society in host countries.
Since 2010 Greece has been implementing a new policy to manage its irregular
migrant population and reinforce the EU external borders, which relies heavily on the
use of detention facilities. Immigrants being detected for irregular entry or residence
in Greece, including asylum seekers, are being placed in detention facilities. The
Greek Legal Council has authorised FRONTEX and policing authorities to retain
!53

irregular immigrants in detention for a maximum 18-month time-limit set by the EU

Returns Directive. After this initial period detainees usually appear to agree on being
relished to their countries of origin.
This new policy has raised the rates of arrests significantly high therefore, Greece has
been investing in building infrastructure to meet the demand by currently offering five
pre-removal centres operating in Amygdaleza, Corinth, Komotini, Paranesti and
Xanthi, which can accommodate 5000 people, packed in disgracing for the country
conditions and by the end of 2014 four more establishments are expected to open so
as to subsidise the oldest ones offering better living conditions8.
Many scholars and political science analysts have argued the past few years that
FRONTEX is perpetually acting against immigrants welfare to the point that human
rights are being violated (Triandafyllidou & Ambrosini, 2011; Andrijasevic, 2010;
Hyndman & Mountz, 2008; Spijkerboer, 2007). Indeed the Human Rights Watch
(2010) reported that FRONTEX was involved in human rights violations. They state:
FRONTEX consistently and repeatedly took action during RABIT 2010 (Rapid
Border Intervention Teams) that exposed migrants and refugees to inhuman and
degrading treatment in the detention facilities in Evros. Most notably, this occurred
when border guards participating in FRONTEX patrols apprehended migrants that
they knew would be held in facilities where the conditions were inhuman and

For more information see Press Office Reply of Minister of Interior and Citizen Protection

concerning the events at Amygdaleza, 11 August 2013, available at http://www.yptp.gr/

index.php?option=ozo_content&lang=GR&perform=view&id=4736&Itemid=579
!54

degrading. The agency directly or indirectly had a hand in their apprehension and
transfer to detention centres and, thus, in their subsequent detention in inhuman and
degrading conditions. [] FRONTEXs activities that facilitated the detention of
migrants in Greek detention centres during the RABIT deployment violated the
prohibition on inhuman and degrading treatment. (HRW 2010:48-50)
Freilick (2011) Human Rights Watch's refugee programme director accused
FRONTEX that it has become a partner in exposing migrants to treatment that it
knows is absolutely prohibited under human rights law (The Guardian, Sep.2011).
The serious allegations of abuse of immigrants and refugees, the numerous allegations
of rapes of men, women and young children, the absence of medical help and the
physical detention of human beings being completely deprived of all their basic rights
paints a clear picture of how Europe is treating aliens in its disposition. Moreover
FRONTEX is denying all responsibility of what happens in the Greek detention
camps of Evros and accuses the Greek Governments of inability to control the events
taking place on Greek ground with regards to implementing the immigration policies
of the Union (The Guardian, Sep.2011).
FRONTEXs role as Neal (2009: 353) argues has been shifted from a mere border
guarding instrument to that of an intelligence-led risk management agency, and now
to an attempted reassertion of state exceptionalism, implementing unorthodox
practises and being accused of serious disrespect against human lives, yet managing
and regulating immigration aspiring to fulfil its role in defusing security within the
European Union family.
!55

IV. DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

3.1 Migration Policy failure

It is a fact that nowadays irregular migration and inflow of undocumented immigrants
and asylum seekers is a global phenomenon with political and social implications that
local governments seem to be unable to control and regulate. It is reported that EU
regulation policies have largely accomplished the opposite effects on immigration
constituting human trafficking as a gold mine for international smuggling networks
(Castles, 2004).
Having already mentioned previously in the study that states rely heavily on their
experience of migration either as being host countries of as being emerging points of
emigration, it makes it apparent that experience is a crucial factor determining failure
of policies. Structural and stipulating deficiencies of laws and enactments cause
imminent systemic failure and intercept policies from achieving their goals. Castles
(2004) argues that policy regimes are structured on the foundations of cost-benefit
calculations. This allegation is compatible with the theory presented in the literature
review part of the study as it explains policy planning and implementation of the basis
of realising internal goals of the states which accommodate their long term aspirations
of being self-determined, maintaining their viability and retaining their long term
positioning in the global status quo (if not stepping up in the global hierarchy). The
states best interests come first on the national security agenda and political
governmental systems which fail to preserve sovereignty are bound to face shock in
!56

their very own foundations. A very recent example appertaining to the case of Greece
is the raise of the Neo-Nazi political party of Golden Dawn (GD). The huge gap that
the right sided present governing party left by failing to resolve the reoccurring
problem of illegal migration, has been filled by the promises of ethnic clearance and
mass deportations which GD is promising to their voters who in their majority are
unemployed and of low educational and social level who become witnesses on a day
to day basis of criminality raising in urban areas due to the high levels of illegal
immigrant concentration.

3.2 Effectiveness of the detention system

The policy of detention camps as a solution of the immigration issue is based on the
hypothesis that by arresting illegal immigrants and refugees the government will
discourage potential newcomers. This argument assumes that until recently Greece
was paradise for immigrants. The truth is that since the early 1990s and the first
migration wave from the Balkans towards the country, the core of public policy was
identical to the present: the aim was to remove at any cost of those immigrants and
refugees already present and to discourage others from attempting to enter the
country.
Moreover, the cost of maintaining detention facilities in Greece is proven to be
unbearable for the state hence the camps are funded by the European Commission
(Malmstrom, 2012). The inability of the state to manage efficiently the centres is
reflected upon the unhygienic conditions which have a negative impact on the health
!57

of detainees and staff and also increases the grand total of the costs since many of
them are forced to be hospitalised. To add on the long list of problems and increasing
costs for the state caused by detention centres, the state is obligated to support the
families of those detained for any period and cover litigation costs for each single
case which reaches the Greek Court of Law (Medecins sans Frontieres, 2014).
As it becomes apparent the policy of detention of irregular immigrants being
implemented by the Greek governments is ineffective and insufficient. People are
being deprived of their basic freedoms and human rights by being retained for an
indefinite amount of time while there is no reported evidence that this practice has
lowered the rates of irregular migration in the country. Further in the last part of this
study, final conclusions will be arrayed and alternative options will be suggested as to
dealing with irregular migration.

!58

V. CONCLUSION

Recapping the lessons of the present study as illegal/illicit/irregular immigration is

defined as the systematic illegal/unlawful entry of a large number of immigrants. In
Greece the problem of irregular migration begun with the fall of the socialist regimes
in 1989, catalytic reasons seem to be the collapse of the Eastern bloc and the dynamic
promotion of globalisation as a strategic vehicle and a target international hegemony
based on a hyper neoliberal international financial system.
Illegal immigration is not only a crime, but major violation of human rights and is
thus considered as a modern form of slavery. It constitutes the third largest illegal
money laundering activity in the world after arms smuggling and drug trafficking, and
also it is a crime characterised as being of high profit and low risk.
All the aforementioned evidence of the study manage to prove the apparent claim that
EU is carrying out a crusade against irregular immigrants, living up to the standards
of the Foucauldian tradition and conceptualising security as the responsibility to make
the reasonable and rational choices to preserve their territorial and social status
regardless the unorthodox practices that they implement to achieve their aspirations.
Unarguably the cost of preserving the consistency of the EU and the freedom of all its
citizens is translated in human lives being lost, families being torn apart and unwanted
people fugitives from their countries being treated as empty shirts, undesirable
immigrants packed in detention camps until the day of their deportation.
!59

Illicit immigrants are therefore treated as unwanted flesh, homini sacri, sacrificed in
the altar of political games of securitisation, being treated as unworthy of basic human
rights and being apprehended against their will when all they are looking for in the
first place is to reach the land of freedom. The absence of complete alignment of
policies among member states of the Union explains in a great level the pathogenesis
of the collective attempts. This absence as being already discussed stems from the
different experiences of migration that each country of the union has met in its past
and also from the deep embedded fear and xenophobia of the European Union greater
society which creates a rationale for the Union to take securitisation issues high on
their policies agenda. And yet no matter the strictness of collective policies and the
stiffness of each countrys enactments the failure to deal with illicit migration and
human trafficking is a fact.
For Greece, a country with a long past tradition in emigration having individuals and
populations invading the state, taking over unwanted jobs and being involved in
illegal transactions of the black market in combination with the current situation of
the state which portraits a fragmented by the recession country which is gradually
losing its sovereign identity. Moreover numerous specific factors have shaped the
issue of migration inflow in Greece such as the geographical position of the country,
having both overland and sea borders makes it difficult for efficient and systematic
control to be imposed and creates easier access for entering populations from
neighbouring countries while, as being a crossroads between two continents Greece
serves as a pit stop for several immigrants aspiring to enter richer host countries of the
!60

west. Nevertheless, for those who decide to reside in Greece it is the existence of
extensive agriculture, a large number of short-staffed and underpaying small and
medium companies and the informal economy, also contribute to easier absorption
illegal immigrant labour, often seasonal or periodic, particularly in the fields of
construction, agriculture, services and crafts. In addition, the configuration of a
generally loose institutional framework is estimated to have favoured and encouraged
the immigration influx.
Illegal immigration in Greece, which in essence is systematic colonisation and
invasion-tolerance or dullness of both authorities and a large proportion of citizens, is
contemporarily with the underlying economic crisis, a bomb about to explode and
cause major internal destabilisation.
Destabilising factors within the Greek society such as the raise of the racist and NeoNazi political party of Golden Dawn are proposed by the author of the present study
to be further investigated systematically since their sudden assumption of political
power has afflicted tremendously the foundations of the Greek society having divided
the public opinion in two camps, those who are in favour of packing undocumented
immigrants who are considered as a threat to society in detention camps until their
deportation due to the high risk of their engaging themselves in criminal actions and
those who stand by the human rights enactments fighting for immigrants to be treated
as any other legitimate member of the society.
As to alternative suggestions for the Greek governments, it can be suggested the
enforcement of policing authorities and the judicial system with resources to assess
!61

thoroughly and investigate individual cases of immigrants avoiding unnecessary

detention, and also the investment in more appropriate infrastructure to accommodate
asylum-seekers and families and to allow smoother integration of those who will be
granted mobility in the country in the future.
Last but not least as Arendt (1973, 1970, 1965) suggests solidarity is an effective
antidote to dehumanisation as it appertains to the acknowledgement and acceptance of
variations among human beings and national populations in extent, reminding that we
should not forget that we are all simply human and we should treat others as we wish
to be treated.

!62

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Agamben, G. (1998). Homo sacer: Sovereign power and bare life (trans. D. HellerRoazen). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press
Agamben, G. (2002) LOuvert: De lHomme et de lAnimal, Paris: Rivages
Agamben, G. (2005). State of exception (trans. K. Attel). Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Amin, A. and Thrift, N. (2002) Cities: Reimagining the Urban. Polity: Cambridge
Andrijasevic, R. (2010). Deported: The Right to Asylum at EUs External Border of
Italy and Libya1. International Migration, 48(1), 148-174.
Aradau, C., & Van Munster, R. (2007). Governing terrorism through risk: Taking
precautions,(un) knowing the future. European journal of international relations,
13(1), 89-115.
Arendt, H. (1965). On revolution Penguin
Arendt, H. (1970). On violence Houghton Mifflin Harcourt
Arendt, H. (1981). The life of the mind Houghton Mifflin Harcourt
Arendt, H. (1998). The Human Condition 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago,
1998
Arendt, H. (2013). The human condition. University of Chicago Press
!63

Barnes P., (2006), All Life Matters: Be Born Perfect or Die, NSW Right to Life.
Berry, 1988 Berry J. (1984), Cultural Relations in PlurelSocieties: Alternatives to
Segregation and Their Sociopsychological Implifications in: N. Miller, M. Brewer,
Groups in contact, Academic Press, N. York
Bhning W. R. (1995), Labour market integration in Western and Northern Europe:
which way are heading? In: W. R. Bhning and R. Zegers de Bejil (eds) The
integration of migrant workers in the labour market: Policies and their impact.
Geneva: International Labour Office
Boswell, C. (2003) European Migration Policies in Flux. Changing Patterns of
Inclusion and Exclusion (Oxford: Blackwell with RIIA).
Boswell, C. (2007, forthcoming) Theorizing Migration Policy: Is There a Third
Way? International Migration Review, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp. 75100.
Castles, S. and Kosack, G. (1973, second edition 1985). Immigrant Workers and Class
Structure in. Western Europe. London: Oxford University Press.
Castles, S., Miller, M., 2003. The Age of Migration: International Population
Movements in the Modern World, 3rd ed. The Guilford Press, New York, London
Cavounidis J, Kontis A, Lianos T, Fakiolas R (eds) (2008) Immigration in Green:
experiences, policies and prospects, vol 1. IMEPO, Athens (in Greek)

!64

Council Of The European Union Brussels, 27 July 2011 Report of the High Level
Working Group on Asylum and Migration Available on: http://www.statewatch.org/
news/2011/aug/eu-council-hlwg-12589-11.pdf
Derrida J.(2003), Beyond Cosmopolitanism, ed. Criticism, Athens [Derrida J. (2003),
, . , ]
Derrida, J. (2003). Autoimmunity: Real and Symbolic Suicides: A Dialogue with
Jacques Derrida. Philosophy in a time of terror: Dialogues with Jrgen Habermas
and Jacques Derrida, 85-136.
Diamandouros N. (2004), in "The Greece of Migration", ed. M. Paul., D.
Christopoulos., Minority Groups Research Centre, ed. Criticism, Athens
[ . (2004), , .
., ., , . , ]
Dirks, G. E. (1998). Factors underlying migration and refugee issues: Responses and
cooperation among OECD member states. Citizenship Studies,2(3), 377-395.
Duarte A., 2005, Hanna Arendt. Biopolitics and the dissemination of violence: the
Arendtian critique of the present, www.hannaharendt.net Duffield (2006
Eisenstadt S.N. (1955), The Absorption of Immigrants, London, Routledge
Eleftherotypia newspaper, (2006) Resistance groups sprouted like mushrooms article
in the Eleftherotypia newspaper, 8.4.2006

!65

Elshtain, J. B. (2008). Sovereignty: God, state, and self. Basic Books.

Emke-Poulopoulou H. (1990), Migrants and Refugees in Greece, magazine Election
Affairs Social Welfare, p. 1-112, Athens [-

.(1990),

, . 1-112,
Emke- Poulopoulou. H. (1986), Problems of Immigration Repatriation, IMEO-EDIM,
Athens [-

. (1986),

, -, ]
Emke-Poulopoulou, H.(2007), Immigration Challenge, Ed. Papazisis, Athens [ ., , . , 2007]
European Commission (2012), Economic and budgetary projections for the 27 EU
Member States (2010-2060) available on: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/
publications/european_economy/2012/pdf/ee-2012-2_en.pdf

European Commission (2001a) A Sustainable Europe for a Better World: A European

Union Strategy for Sustainable Development, COM(2001)264 final, EC, Brussels,
available on: http://europa.eu.int/comm/employment_social/news/2001/jun/132_en.html
European Commission (2001b) Environment 2010: Our Future, Our Choice, Sixth
Environmental Action Programme, COM(2001)31 final, EC, Brussels, available on:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/newprg/

!66

Fakiolas R. (1999, 2000), Migration and Unregistered Labour in the Greek Economy,
in King, R.,Lazaridis, G. and Tsardanidis, C. (eds) Eldorado or Fortress? Migration in
Southern Europe.Basingstoke: Macmillan, 57/78.
Fakiolas, R. (2004). The economic effects of migration. Migration and Political
Intervention. Theories and Debates, 1.
Favell, A. (2010). Integration nations: the nation-state and research on immigrants in
Western Europe. Selected Studies in International Migration and Immigrant
Incorporation, 1, 371.
Figgou, L., Mylopoulou, I., & Birmbili-Karaleka, A. (2013). Construction of
ideological extremity and minoritization in the pre-electoral rhetoric of the far right
party Golden Dawn. Scientific Annals-School of Psychology, 10, 499-527.
Florida, R. (2002) The Rise of the Creative Class. New York: Basic Books
Foucault M., 1990, The History Of Sexuality: The Use of Pleasure(Volume II),
Vintage:3-13.
Foucault, M. (1982 Eds.2012). The history of sexuality: An introduction. Random
House LLC.
Foucault, M., & Bouchard, D. F. (Eds.) (1980) Language, counter-memory, practice:
Selected essays and interviews Cornell University Press
Foucault, M. (1975) Discipline & Punish: The Birth of the Prison.
Reprint. New York: Vintage, 1995
!67

F r e e m a n , G . P. ( 2 0 0 4 ) . I m m i g r a n t i n c o r p o r a t i o n i n w e s t e r n
democracies1.International migration review, 38(3), 945-969.
Freilich, J. D. (2012). Review. The Michigan Historical Review, 38(2), 145-146.
Garland A., 1999, Genetics, Eugenics and the Medicalization of Social Behavior:
Lessons from the past, Endeavour, Vol. 23 (1):10-19.
Garland A., 2001, Is a New Eugenics Afoot?, Science, Vol. 294(5): 59-60.
Glaeser, E. (1998) Are cities dying. Journal of Economic Perspective, 12: 139160
Glezos, M. (2006)The resistance groups sprouted like mushrooms in Eleftherotypia
newspaper (8/4/2006) [. ,
, , (8/4/2006)] Item of personal collection
Goodwin-Gill, G. S. (2011). The right to seek asylum: Interception at sea and the
principle of non-refoulement. International Journal of Refugee Law, 23(3), 443-457.
Hammar T. (1985), European Immigration Policy: a Comparative Study. Cambrige:
Cambrige University Press
Hollifield J. F. (2000), The Politics of International Migration, In Migration Theory
Talking Across Disciplines, Ed. C. B. Brettell and J.F. Hollifield. New York/London:
Routledge pp. 137186

!68

Human Rights Watch (2010) in Todeschini, V. (n/d) The Externalisation of Migration

Control: An Assessment of the European Unions Policy in the Light of the Charter of
Fundamental Rights. Migration, Human Rights and Security in Europe, 18.
Huntington, S. P. (1999). The lonely superpower. Foreign affairs, 35-49.
Huysmans, J. (2008). The Jargon of ExceptionOn Schmitt, Agamben and the
Absence of Political Society1. International Political Sociology, 2(2), 165-183.
Hyndman, J., & Mountz, A. (2008). Another Brick in the Wall? Neo-Refoulement
and the Externalization of Asylum by Australia and Europe1. Government and
Opposition, 43(2), 249-269.
International Labour Office Report (ILO) (1998) November, available on: http://
www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/relm/gb/docs/gb295/pdf/tmmflm-1.pdf

Joppke, C., & Morawska, E. (2003). Integrating immigrants in liberal nation-states:

Policies and practices. Toward assimilation and citizenship: Immigrants in liberal
nation-states, S, 1-36.
Kahn, P. W. (2006). Political Time: Sovereignty and the Transtemporal
Community. Cardozo L. Rev., 28, 259.
Kapsalis, A. (2007) ''.
[Undeclared employment and immigrants
legalization], ed. Apostolos Kapsalis (Athens: -, 2007).

!69

Kasimis C. & Kassimi C. (2004) Greece: A History of Migration. Migration

Information Source, June 2004
Kassimis, C. and Papadopoulos, A.G. (2005) The multifunctional role of migrants in
the Greek countryside: implications for the rural economy and society, Journal of
Ethnic and Migration Studies, 31(1): 99127.
Katsoridas D.. (1991) Foreign workers in Greece and their living conditions. Labour
Institute GSEE ADEDI, Athens. [, . (1991)
. ,
.]
Katz J., Abel C.F., (1984), The Medicalization of Repression: Eugenics and Crime,
Contemporary Crises, 8: 227-241.
Kelly M., 2004, Racism, Nationalism and Biopolitics: Foucaults Society Must Be
Defended, Contretemps, 4: 58-70.
Keohane, R. O. (2002). Ironies of sovereignty: the European Union and the United
States. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 40(4), 743-765.
Kontis. A., (2001), Economic Integration of Immigrants in the host country, in C.
Amitsis C.. Lazaridis (eds.) Socio Legal Dimensions of Migration in Greece, p.
177-220, ed. Papazisis, Athens [ . (2001),
, . , . (.)

!70

 , . 177-220, .
, ]
Kymlicka, W. (1995), Multicultural Citizenship, Oxford UP, Oxford.
Lazaridis G. and Tsardanidis Ch., Macmillan Press, UK, pp. 57-79
Luibhid, E. (2002). Entry denied: Controlling sexuality at the border. U of
Minnesota Press
Makridimitris. A., (2006), State of the Society, Problems and Reform of
Modernization, ed. Lebani, Athens [

. (2006),

, , . , ]
Malmstrom, C. Letter dated 12. December 2012, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/carol/?
fuseaction=download&documentId=090166e58e0a005b&title=letter.pdf

Mandralis. A., & C. Antoniades., (2007) Social Integration of Immigrants is a

Requirement for their Political Integration, Migration as a Challenge for the EU of
the 21 st century. Available online at: http://www.e-logos.gr/articles.asp?
subject_id=39&subject2_id=37&article=560&lang=GR

Manos, A. (2002), "The Bliss range as Life in Ancient Stoic Philosophy" Kardamitsas
publications, Athens. [ .,
, , 2002.]
Markou, P.G. (1998), The Multiculturalism of Greek society. The Process
Internationalization and the Need for Intercultural Education, YPEPTH-GGLE
!71

[ . . (1998), .
,
.-]
Medecins sans Frontieres, Invisible Suffering: Prolonged and systematic detention of
migrants and asylum seekers in substandard conditions in Greece, April 2014,
available at: http://www.msf.org/sites/msf.org/files/invisible_suffering.pdf
Mignione E. (1995), Labour Market Segmentation and Informal Work in Southern
Europe, European Urban and Regional Studies, 2 pp 121-143
Mousourou LM (1991), Migration and Immigration Policy in Greece and Europe, ed.
Gutenberg, Athens [ .. (1991),
, . Gutenberg, ]
Moyssidis, A., Papadopoulou, D.. (Eds.), (2011). The Social Integration of
Immigrants in Greece. Employment, Education, Identity, Athens: Review [,
.,, . (.), (2011).
. , , , : ]
Muller-Hill B., (2002), Review Article: Eugenics, a Good Idea?, Trends in Genetics,
Vol. 18 (3):162-163
Naxakis, Ch. Chletsos, M. (2003). (Et seq.) Immigrants and immigration. Economic,
political and social aspects, Athens: Patakis [, . , . (2003) (.)

!72

 . , , :
]
Neal, A. W. (2009). Securitization and risk at the EU border: the origins of
FRONTEX*. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 47(2), 333-356.
Nechamas A. (2001), The Art of Life. Socratic Reflections: from Plato to Foucault,
Translation by Spyropoulos, S. editing by Virvidakis, Nefeli publications, Athens
[ ., . :
, . , . , ,
2001]
OECD (2001) Regulatory Reform in Greece, Paris SG/RR (2001)2, 16 February
Available at: http://www.oecd.org/regreform/2756295.pdf
OECD (2003) Trends in International Migration. SOPEMI 2003 Edition Available at:
http://www.oecd.org/migration/mig/31853067.pdf

Paul J., 1967, Population Quality and Fitness for Parenthood in the Light of State
Eugenic Sterilization Experience, 1907-1966, Population Studies, Vol. 21(3):
295-299
Penninx R., Spencer D. and Van Hear N. (2008)Migration and Integration in Europe:
The State of Research, Report commissioned by the Economic and Social Research
Council (ESRC) for NORFACE (New Opportunities for Research Funding

!73

Cooperation in Europe), ESRC Centre on Migration, Policy and Society (COMPAS)

University of Oxford
Penninx, R. (2005), Integration of migrants: economic, social, cultural and political
dimensions, in: M. Macura, A.L. MacDonald and W. Haug (eds), The new
demographic regime. Population challenges and policy responses. New York/Geneva:
United Nations, 137-152
Petrinioti, X. (1993) Migration to Greece: a first recording, classification and
analysis. Athens: Odysseas. [, . (1993)
: , . : .]
Petronoti and Triantafyllidou A. (2003), Recent Immigration Flows to Greece,
National Centre for Social Research National Book Centre, Athens
Piper N, (Spring 2006) Gendering the Politics of Migration, International Migration
Review, Vol. 40, No 1, pp.133164
Press Office Reply of Minister of Interior and Citizen Protection concerning the
events at Amygdaleza, 11 August 2013, available at: http://www.yptp.gr/index.php?
option=ozo_content&lang=GR&perform=view&id=4736&Itemid=579
Ribas-Mateos, N. (2004). Una invitacin a la sociologa de las migraciones. http://
www.torrossa.it/resources/an/2465413
Rijpma, J. J. (2010). Frontex: successful blame shifting of the Member
States?.Anlisis del Real Instituto Elcano (ARI), (69), 1.
!74

Sanderson S.K., 2002, Review Article: Eugenics: A Reassessment, Population and

Environment, Vol. 24 (2):219-222
Sassen, S. (2003). Globalization or denationalization?. Review of International
Political Economy Vol10:1 pp 122
Schmitt, C. (1985). Political theology: Four chapters on the concept of sovereignty.
University of Chicago Press.
Schnapper D. (1991), La France de lintgration,Sociologie de la nation en 1990,
Paris, Gallimard
Schnapper, D. (1992) LEurope des Immigrs, Paris : Franois Bourin.
Sdrakas. E. (1996), The Stoic Philosophy in the Disaster of Bios,

Meander,

Thessaloniki [ . (1996), ,
, ]
Simon P. (2007) Ethnic Statistics and Data Protection, Strasbourg, ECRI, Council of
Europe
Soysal, Y. (1994), Limits of Citizenship: Migrants and Post-National Membership in
Europe, Chicago UP, Chicago
Spijkerboer, T. (2007). The human costs of border control. European Journal of
Migration and Law, 9(1), 127.

!75

Taylor C.C.W.( 2000), Socrates, A Very Short Introduction, Ed. Oxford University
Press,
The Guardian (Sep.2011) http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/sep/21/eu-borderpolice-bline-eye-migrant-abuse
Thomas W., I., and Znaniecki F. (1984), The Polish Peasant in Europe and America,
Urbana-Chicago, University of Illinois Press
Triandafyllidou A. & Maroukis, Th. (2010). Immigration in Greece in the 21st
century. Athens: Review. [, . & , . (2010).
21 . : .]
Triandafyllidou, A., & Ambrosini, M. (2011). Irregular immigration control in Italy
and Greece: Strong fencing and weak gate-keeping serving the labour
market.European Journal of Migration and Law, 13(3), 251-273.
Vandergeest, P., & Peluso, N. L. (1995). Territorialization and state power in
Thailand. Theory and society, 24(3), 385-426.
Varvitsiotis, J. M., Kambouroglou G. (2006): The long road to a single immigration
policy in the European Union: developments from 1999 to 2005. Brussels: EPP-ED,
2006, pp. 131[, ., , (2006):
:
1999-2005. : -, 2006. . 131]

!76

Ventura, L. (1994) Immigration and the Nation. Athens: Foundation [,

(1994) . : .]
Vertovec, S. (1997), Social Cohesion and Tolerance, in From Metropolis to
Cosmopolis, J. Hjarno (Ed.), Esbjerg: South Jutland University Press, pp. 94-134
Weber, M. (1993). Basic concepts in sociology. Citadel Press.
White, M. (2000). Why is there no International Theory? In International relations critical
concepts in political science. (Vol. 1). London: Routledge.

Xirouchakis, P., & Kourliouros, E. (2013). The Real Causes of Economic Migration
to Greece: The Case of Albanian Immigrants in Herakleion, Crete.Journal of Regional
Socio-Economic Issues, 3(2), pp 87-101. Zavos, 2006
Zimmermann K. F. (1995a),Tackling the European Migration Problems, Journal of
Economic Perspectives, Vol. 9,No 2, pp 45-62
Zimmermann K. F. (1995b), European Migration:Push and Pull, International
Regional Science Review, Vol. 19,No 1, pp. 95-128
Zografakis, S.., Kontis, A.., Mitrakos, Th. (2009), Steps of immigrants in the Greek
economy, IMEPO [, ., , ., , ., (2009),
, ...]

!77