FMR 44 Immigration detention: looking at the alternatives

Although legally justifiable, increasing restrictions on movement and work for refugees in Iran have detrimental effects for the refugees.

The integration of Central African refugees into existing Cameroonian communities has had far-reaching development impacts on the region and the state as a whole.

Mistrust and fear abound among Rwandan refugees in Uganda. The dearth of information available about cessation urgently needs to be addressed by UNHCR.

The monitoring of refused asylum seekers post-deportation is critical to effective protection.

Israel's aggressive campaign of arrest and deportation of South Sudanese asylum seekers contravenes the principle of non-refoulement and international standards for voluntary, dignified return.

While AVR is clearly preferable to deportation, NGOs and academics alike have criticised these schemes for being misleadingly labelled and lacking genuine voluntariness.

Programmes to assist deported Afghan youth to reintegrate on their return are failing miserably. There needs to be much greater awareness of what it is like for them when they return, and of good practice in implementing such programmes.

Young Afghans forced to return to Kabul having spent formative years in the UK encounter particular risks and lack any tailored support on their return.

States continue to show a marked reluctance to implement alternatives to immigration detention. The reason for this may well be because such alternatives ignore the disciplinary function of detention by which states coerce people into cooperation.

Alternative to detention programmes may be less restrictive and less expensive than formal detention but they may still have drawbacks. The provision of competent legal advice appears to be key to low rates of absconding.