Oceania’s ‘crimmigration creep’: Are deportation and reintegration norms being diffused?
| Author | Henrietta McNeill |
| Published date | 01 September 2021 |
| Date | 01 September 2021 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/00048658211008952 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
Oceania’s ‘crimmigration
creep’: Are deportation
and reintegration norms
being diffused?
Henrietta McNeill
Coral Bell School of Asia Pacific Affairs, Australian National
University, Canberra, ACT, Australia
Abstract
The trend of deportation of convicted non-citizens to the Pacific has grown over the last
decade, due to increasingly harsh deportation punitive measures placed on non-citizens,
known as crimmigration. When further parole-like policies and legislation are placed upon
the returnee once they have completed their sentence and have been returned to their
country of origin, it is known as ‘crimmigration creep’. ‘Crimmigration creep’ has been seen
in the New Zealand Returning Offenders (Management and Information) Act (2015), and
appears to be proposed in the similar Samoan Returning Offenders Bill (2019). This article
tests the diffusion of ‘crimmigration creep’ to understand how international relations norm
diffusion theory can be applied to border criminology concepts. This is done within a norm
circulation model, and by testing the normative strength of ‘crimmigration creep’ in Samoa.
Keywords
Crimmigration, crimmigration creep, deportation, norm circulation, norm diffusion, Pacific,
Samoa, New Zealand
Date received: 3 November 2020; accepted: 22 March 2021
Corresponding author:
Henrietta McNeill, Coral Bell School of Asia Pacific Affairs, Australian National University, Baldessin Building
(Building 105a), Acton, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia.
Email: henrietta.mcneill@anu.edu.au
Journal of Criminology
!The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/00048658211008952
journals.sagepub.com/home/anj
2021, Vol. 54(3) 305–322
Introduction
Ioane (not his real name), a Samoan national, moved to Australia when he was five years old.
His life, education and ties were in Australia – he married, split from his wife, and had a child
with his new partner. Ioane also got in trouble in Australia, he committed a series of offences
including repeatedly driving while disqualified, and crimes of violence such as robbery, assault
with a weapon, and assault of police officers. When Ioane was sentenced for his involvement in
the armed robbery of a vehicle, Australian police and immigration officials decided that this
crossed a line and he was no longer welcome in Australia: Ioane was to be deported to Samoa
at age 31. He had spent 26 years in Australia, the majority of his life. He knew very little of
Samoa, did not understand its culture and language, and would have to leave his family and all
he knew behind in Australia. Samoan officials now had to decide how to deal with Ioane, a man
they know little about, other than the extensive criminal record Australian officials provided.
How might he reintegrate to a new and unfamiliar home? Would he pose a threat to the
Samoan community?
The deportation and return of criminal offenders to the Pacific Islands has increased
over the past decade and receiving states have sought to manage the reintegration of the
influx. However, Pacific receiving states often face challenges in managing the reinte-
gration of returnees. Chief amongst these challenges is the length of time the returnee
has spent away from their country of origin: often they are lacking in language skills and
cultural experience, making it hard to gain employment and develop social support
networks on their return (Pereira, 2011; Weber & Powell, 2018).
Domestic social services for reintegration are often expensive for developing states; at
times traditional policing interventions are used in their place, where resourcing already
exists. When an increased burden on policing services exists, such as if reintegration
support is not sufficient, regulation through legislation can be a perceived solution. The
receiving state’s legislative response can emulate a court-mandated sentence: including
surveillance, regular reporting to government agencies, and strict conditions on activity
and movement. In this case, returnees are subject to new legislation on arrival that
focusses on their prior criminality and risk to public safety, rather than social reinte-
gration. Returnees are made to feel like criminals on their return: treated as they were
prior to their deportation, but this time in their country of citizenship. This is termed
‘crimmigration creep’.
I argue that diffusion of ‘crimmigration creep’ is evident within legislation in
Oceania: elements of crimmigration and ‘crimmigration creep’ are seen in Australia,
New Zealand and now proposed in the Independent State of Samoa (hereafter, Samoa).
I test this notion to understand how international relations diffusion theory can be
applied to border criminology concepts. Firstly, I compare crimmigration-based legis-
lative approaches towards returnees in New Zealand and Samoa. The similarities
between the New Zealand Returning Offenders (Management and Information) Act
(2015) and the Samoa Returning Offenders Bill (2019) codify shared crimmigration-
based approaches. Secondly, I present evidence of diffusion of this legislation from New
Zealand to Samoa, applying a norm circulation model. Thirdly, I examine media reports
relating to criminal deportations and the Samoa Returning Offenders Bill to understand
306 Journal of Criminology 54(3)
To continue reading
Request your trial