Paper Short Abstract:

The paper enquires into how “street-level bureaucrats” engage in the process of refugee reception in Portugal, understand citizenship rights and put them into practice based on assimilationist assumptions regarding the conditions and requisites for integration.

Paper Abstract:

The granting of refugee status and the consequent provision of international protection occurs within international and national legal frameworks. However, much of what happens in the daily lives of refugee destination contexts depends on the work of professionals (such as social workers) responsible for safeguarding the legal rights associated with granting asylum.

The aim of this paper is twofold. Firstly, to enquire into how “street-level bureaucrats” engage in the process of refugee reception in Portugal, understand citizenship rights and put them into practice. Secondly, we aim to critique the assumptions that influence their work regarding the necessary conditions and requisites for integration. To this end, we approach professionals working in this field from two perspectives: as extension officers, reproducing and implementing the state bureaucracy of the institutionalization of refugee rights; and as change agents: complementary to state services, (possible) agents of resistance, and even of state rectification, assuming responsibilities and improvising responses in situations of state dismissal. These professionals mediate between refugees and the state. As such, they do much more than deliver policies and operationalize rights: they take on a gatekeeping role, oscillating between law-on-paper and law-in-practice, between the reproduction of institutional bureaucratic regulations and the exercise of discretion. Their gatekeeping practices not only elucidate the complex and ambiguous relationship between legal status and citizenship rights, but they also shed light on how some of them are informed by assimilationist interpretations of integration.

Paper Short Abstract:

Based on the "morality check" as a postcolonial legacy in Niger, this presentation argues that moral taxonomies by lay people may occupy a formal place in naturalization procedures.

Paper Abstract:

Conventional theories of citizenship have long focused on legal rights and obligations and the formal criteria to acquire them. To undo such narrow and Eurocentric definitions of citizenship, political anthropology has highlighted the constitutive role that brokers, social affiliations, and social norms play in shaping citizenship (Lazar 2008, Berenschot/van Klinken 2018). While this research has often considered norms as informally shaping citizenship, this presentation argues that morality may occupy a formal place in naturalization procedures. In Niger and in other French ex-colonies, accessing citizenship requires passing a “morality check” (enquête administrative de moralité). In Niger, an intelligence unit from the national police draws on several state and societal sources to determine whether an applicant has “good” or “bad” morals. Apart from interviewing the applicant and file research, police officers interview neighbors about an applicant’s social behavior. Thereby, lay taxonomies on applicants’ everyday lives, shaped by its routines and little escapes (Das 2020), enter the naturalization procedure as formal, but confidential file knowledge, which remains beyond an applicant’s control. This has especially affected migrants who do not conform to hegemonic gender and sexuality norms, which have become increasingly restrictive with the rise of political Islam (Sounaye 2018). The morality check points to the formal role of morality in regulating citizenship and the expertise ascribed to ordinary citizens in assessing and policing migrants’ private lives. This presentation is based on longterm ethnographic research in Niger’s asylum and migration bureaucracy in 2018-2019 and update interviews in 2020-2021.

Paper Short Abstract:

In the context of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Russian men – especially naturalized citizens – became a target for large scale drafting campaigns. Based on ethnographic research, this paper investigates how dual Russian-Tajikistani citizens navigate the emergent militarised citizenship regime.

Paper Abstract:

In the context of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Russian men – especially naturalized citizens – became a target for large scale drafting campaigns. Called by the state to fulfil their military obligations to their (new) motherland, they are left to navigate their (im)mobilities and mitigate the risks of having become Russian. We argue that Russia weaponises strategic citizenship in an attempt to attract more manpower to its war with Ukraine. Such weaponisation functions through a few distinct institutional and legal mechanisms: granting citizenship as a reward for contracted military service and revoking acquired citizenship in case citizens fail to stand up to the expectations of military duty. Rhetorically this is framed as affective claims of debt and duty testifying to ‘genuine link’ between the state and new citizens. Racialised migrant workers and new Russian citizens from Central Asia whose economies are heavily dependent on migrants’ remittances, are especially vulnerable to this move. Bound by familial obligations of care and material provision that tied them to the Russian labour market for the past three decades, they now have to assess and hedge the new existential risks of being/becoming Russian. They do so by utilising their intimate knowledge of Russia’s institutional mechanisms and the bureaucracy. Long exposure to Russia’s fickle migration policy and the distinct political economy of document production allows them to engage with the instability of documents in their material form and use the contradictory logics of legality and citizenship to their advantage.

Paper Short Abstract:

This paper looks at how citizenship is negotiated through volunteering at a community centre in East London and explores how newcomers in precarious migration situations (with precarious access to citizen's rights) engage with volunteering that is promoted as 'civic participation' by the state.

Paper Abstract:

Volunteering emerges as a domain where notions of citizenship are negotiated and contested. Western nation-states promote volunteering as ‘civic participation’; however; people in precarious migration situations (either undocumented or in the asylum process) are encouraged to volunteer in Civil Society Organisations, despite their limited access to citizen’s rights. What happens when people engage in activities of ‘civic participation’ whose claim to citizenship is massively curtailed or right out rejected by the nation-state? This paper explores the paradoxical engagement of undocumented or asylum-seeking newcomers with volunteering activities in a community centre in East London. Based on ongoing fieldwork, the paper will analyse novel forms of negotiated citizenship that emerge through volunteering and explore how newcomers in precarious migration situations engage with volunteering roles as part of their bricolage of survival strategies. Volunteering emerges as a space of experimentation where roles of provisioning and citizenship are tried out and where power dynamics can be momentarily subverted. The paper takes a critical look at the implicit and explicit ideas of ‘empowerment’ that are being projected onto volunteering activities by Civil Society Organisations, and focuses on how newcomers are engaged in acts of ‘infrastructuring’ through volunteering.

Paper Short Abstract:

This paper draws upon fieldwork in citizenship preparation classes in Greece and discusses the strenuous labour of citizenship: the learning processes and the navigation of bureaucracies within an arbitrary and shifting legal framework that, often, deems eligible applicants non-eligible.

Paper Abstract:

This paper draws upon fieldwork in citizenship test preparation classes in Greece and discusses the crafting of citizens-to-be. The citizenship test has been introduced in the last years as a standardized, transparent, rapid, and objective method of evaluation of noncitizens’ integration in the country. However, critiques have scrutinized the difficulty of the test and its horizontal character – the fact that it is addressed to applicants with advanced literacy skills and that it requires extraordinary memorizing skills. Eligibility to citizenship must be proven and citizenship is, in fact, earned through a laborious process. Citizenship applicants as well as various brokers who mediate in the process of citizenship acquisition engage in the strenuous labour of citizenship that includes specific learning processes, navigating bureaucracies and dealing with an arbitrary and shifting legal framework that, often, deems eligible applicants non-eligible. Moreover, citizenship classes include a learning process that aims to craft moral, Greek and European citizens. However, as my research has shown, many times, the best students in these classes are the ones who are excluded from legal citizenship as they do not fulfil the income criteria, a recently introduced essential element and prerequisite of naturalization.

Paper Short Abstract:

We draw on two case studies, bureaucratic practices within residency procedures in Brussels and the Amsterdam “digital city ID” proposal, in order to examine how local bureaucracies and municipal efforts advocating for alternative understandings of citizenship fortify categories of (non-)citizens.

Paper Abstract:

Existing scholarship exploring the role of state bureaucracy in producing il/legalization within a particular migration regime, has predominantly focused on the national level, such as within migration offices (Eule, Borelli, Lindberg & Wyss, 2019) and deportation case workers (Cleton & Chauvin, 2019; Kalir, 2019), amongst others. Yet, a large portion of legal and bureaucratic encounters between illegalized residents and the state happen at the local, municipal level. In our article, we examine local bureaucracies or municipalities that play a crucial role in fortifying categories of (non-)citizens, even when proposing alternative understandings of citizenship. As a way to foster “anthropological comparative perspectives,” we draw on two case studies: bureaucratic practices within residency procedures in Brussels and a proposal for an Amsterdam “digital city ID.” In the case of Brussels, we examine how malpractices of local administration and authorities within specific residency procedures and temporary precarious residence permits obstruct or revoke a potential legal status, thereby pointing at its liminality and contingency. These local bureaucratic practices include, official removal from the population register, and inadequate or slow paperwork. In the case of Amsterdam, we examine how grassroots activists and street-level bureaucrats jointly reconfigure regimes of trust production and identity verification by proposing a decentralized, locally-issued identity document for the illegalized.

Paper Short Abstract:

Drawing on ethnographic PhD fieldwork on "refugee" settlement in Turkey, this paper argues that naturalisation of Syrians produced "cruel promises" (Berlant, 2011, p. 22) for autonomy, relationships and future belonging in a context of generalised legal, political and economic precarity.

Paper Abstract:

This paper considers the bureaucratic process and experiences of naturalisation of displaced Syrians living in Istanbul, Turkey who are naturalising or have naturalised as Turkish citizens. Turkey does not provide a regular pathway to permanent residence or citizenship, for the over 4 million refugees from Syria, Afghanistan and elsewhere on its territory. Still, since 2016, the Turkish government under Recep Tayyip Erdogan has granted citizenship on a discretionary basis to just over 230,000 of forcibly displaced Syrians. Drawing on ethnographic PhD fieldwork on the politics of time in refugee settlement in Germany and Turkey, this paper argues that naturalisation poses a “cluster of promises” (Berlant, 2011, p. 16) for autonomy, relationships and future belonging for Syrians with precarious legal status; “cruel promises” that fail to materialise upon actual naturalisation. The bureaucratic process of naturalisation produces expectations for betterment of status amongst Syrians, promising freedom and equality to “citizens”, a life in fulfilled relationships, and future belonging (what Eva von Redecker (2023) terms “Bleibefreiheit” – the freedom to stay put). The fulfilment of those expectations, however, is unequally distributed; fulfilling autonomy, relationships and belonging for some relies on the denial for others. In failing to live up to the promises naturalisation itself created, naturalisation was a “cruel promise” in which existing injustices in legal, political and economic precarity were heightened and new forms of exclusion emerged.

Paper Short Abstract:

This paper will analyse how indigenous men can get trapped by bureaucratic procedures. The manipulation of the set of practices this establishes, along with the precarious social situation and the necessity of the Army for soldiers, enables a specific militarised citizenship regime.

Paper Abstract:

In this exploration of military imaginaries in Brazil, the distinctions between citizen and civilian become blurred within the context of mandatory military service and conscription. While citizens traditionally obtain official documents to exercise their social and political rights, this paper delves into the unique scenario where the military provides a crucial document for male subjects. Military conscription documents are, in many circumstances, definitive for male access to what the State has to offer. Focusing on a Northwestern Amazonian city through 12 months of participant observation, I examine how the Brazilian army strategically exploits bureaucratic intricacies, ensnaring male indigenous individuals in a systematic sinkhole to mould them into (possible) recruits.

The paper seeks to explore the social life of these government documents in the lives of indigenous men. These documents/ papers that are, on the one hand, mandated by the military create barriers rather than facilitating indigenous individuals' lives. Drawing on encounters and narratives, I shed light on the circumstances leading indigenous men to fulfil military service obligations, even when not expected to. I argue that within the broader framework of military service and, more specifically, among indigenous men in Amazonian contexts, citizenship is validated only through a ritualistic process of becoming lost, found, drafted, or released from military obligations. This paper thus illuminates the intricate interplay between bureaucratic processes, military structures, and indigenous identities, contributing to a nuanced understanding of citizenship within the Brazilian military landscape.