@techreport{SherwoodCostelloMcDonnell, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Sherwood, Angela and Costello, Cathryn and McDonnell, Emilie}, title = {The Displacement Regime Complex: Reform for Protection}, edition = {No. 09}, doi = {10.48462/opus4-5320}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-53209}, pages = {32}, abstract = {This working paper aims to examine the 'displacement regime complex', displacement referring to both internally and externally displaced persons, taking into account the competing roles of UNHCR and IOM in both spheres of activity. The title of the paper 'Reform for protection', aims to outline institutional reforms that aim to increase protection for the displaced, informed by binding universal human rights standards, and institutional principles relating to accountability and participation of most affected populations.}, language = {en} } @incollection{SherwoodLemayCostello, author = {Sherwood, Angela and Lemay, Isabelle and Costello, Cathryn}, title = {IOM's Immigration Detention Practices and Policies: Human Rights, Positive Obligations and Humanitarian Duties}, series = {IOM Unbound?: Obligations and Accountability of the International Organization for Migration in an Era of Expansion}, booktitle = {IOM Unbound?: Obligations and Accountability of the International Organization for Migration in an Era of Expansion}, editor = {Bradley, Megan and Costello, Cathryn and Sherwood, Angela}, publisher = {Cambridge University Press}, isbn = {9781009184175}, doi = {10.1017/9781009184175.016}, publisher = {Hertie School}, pages = {360 -- 396}, abstract = {This chapter analyses IOM's practices and policies on immigration detention from the 1990s to date, spanning a period of significant change in its approaches to detention. The chapter first distills pertinent international human rights law (IHRL) on migration-related detention, and then examines IOM's normative statements concerning detention. It shows that while IOM generally emphasises international legal standards, it also tends to stress states' 'prerogative' to detain, frame alternatives to detention (ATDs) as a desirable option rather than a legal obligation, and weave an operational role for itself, notably through assisted voluntary returns (AVRs). The chapter then interrogates IOM's involvement in detention through four case studies. These reveal not only IOM's changing role regarding detention, but its enduring part in a global system whereby powerful states and regions seek to contain protection seekers 'elsewhere.' The chapter concludes that, without constitutional and institutional change to ensure it meets its positive human rights obligations, and deeper critical reflection on its humanitarian duties, IOM's practice risks expanding and legitimating detention.}, language = {en} }