Abstract
Discretionary practices have often been put forward to explain the racially disproportionate patterns we see in policing. The focus on discretion rather than racism neatly shifts attention away from race and instead towards discretionary practices, which are notoriously amorphous and inscrutable. The attention towards discretion (rather than race) further allows race to operate without being explicitly named and, therefore, to operate as an absent present. In this article, I discuss how race and discretion work together when ordinary police officers are tasked with migration control duties to identify foreign national offenders. Drawing on empirical research conducted in England, I propose the concept of racialised discretion and argue that it holds merit because it recognises that certain discretionary practices and decisions are animated because of race, through race and with the effect (intentional or not) of racially disproportionate outcomes. The article argues for the need for racialised discretion to be seen as distinct from other forms of discretion both in policing and the criminal justice process more widely.
Highlights
Bordering RaceThe filtering function of the border has been discussed by scholars (Aas 2011, Aas and Bosworth 2013; Mezzadra and Neilson 2013; Weber 2013) as a process by which those who belong or do not belong are identified, selected for further checks, subjected to delays and refused entry by border agents and immigration officers when crossing borders
This paper explores the relationship between discretion and race by discussing the findings from an empirical research project that examined day-to-day police involvement in migration control in Britain
Operation Nexus is a policy aiming to swiftly remove foreign national offenders in England and Wales by identifying foreign national offenders who have an uncertain immigration status as soon as they are brought into police custody suspected of a crime
Summary
Bordering RaceThe filtering function of the border has been discussed by scholars (Aas 2011, Aas and Bosworth 2013; Mezzadra and Neilson 2013; Weber 2013) as a process by which those who belong or do not belong are identified, selected for further checks, subjected to delays and refused entry by border agents and immigration officers when crossing borders. Deciding whether to check someone on the immigration database, whether to pass a case on to the criminal cases team and whether to assess someone as ‘high harm’ or dangerous enough to warrant a case being made for deportation all, to some degree, involve a mix of discretionary and obligatory procedures. This example of ‘crimmigration’ (Stumpf 2006) in practice in Britain has found that discretionary practices are employed towards visible racial minorities. Despite the policy’s prescription that every suspect who is booked into police custody should have an immigration check performed, the reality was that the policy was selectively applied at the officer’s (police or immigration) discretion and towards visible racial minorities who, according to the officers’ perceptions, did not sound or look British (Parmar 2018a)
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have