Analyzing the Multiscalar Production of Borders through the Various Degrees of State Membership in Canada Farah Zaman A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Post Graduate Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Masters of Arts (MA) in Criminology Department of Criminology Faculty of Social Science University of Ottawa © Farah Zaman, Ottawa, Canada, 2017 ii Acknowledgements I would like to take a moment to sincerely thank everyone who has enriched my graduate experience and has been a part of this journey. Your unwavering support and words of encouragement have helped me greatly in achieving my full potential. To my thesis supervisor, Martin Dufresne, I truly appreciate your guidance and thoughtful insights. In addition, thank you to my two evaluators, Professor David Moffette and Professor Maritza Felices-Luna. I’d like to especially thank Professor Moffette for working closely with me each step of the way to produce a unique thesis. Thank you all for pushing me to deliver a unique project and prompting me to think outside the box about the subject matter. Your constructive criticism has allowed me to become a better writer and a researcher. It was truly a privilege to be able to work with you both. To my family, thank you for being my pillar of support over the last two years. I’d like to express my utmost gratitude for your unconditional love and support over the years. Without you, I would not have been able to reach this point. To my friends and colleagues, thank you for keeping me grounded when writing an entire thesis seemed like an impossibly daunting task. You helped me overcome moments of panic and worry by providing me with positive words of encouragement when the light at the end of the tunnel seemed bleak. iii Abstract There has been great scholarly interest in examining the management, proliferation, and dynamic articulations of borders through an actor-network lens in recent years. In tracing the networks of Mohamed Harkat, the irregular arrival of a particular group of Tamil migrants, and Deepan Budlakoti, I demonstrate how the border is a fluid entity composed of socio-technical actors dispersed across time and space capable of producing varying degrees of membership statuses. In exploring the cases of these non-citizens, this thesis aims to understand what each of these multi-level networks tells us about the notion of borders and bordering practices alike. This study contributes to the expanding literature that situates the border as a fluid and malleable entity that is made up of interwoven socio-technical practices, discourses, symbols, institutions, and networks through which power is dispersed and the binary distinctions between membership and non-membership increasingly become layered concepts. iv Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................ II ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................. III TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................... IV INTRODUCTION: BEYOND THE “LINE IN THE SAND” .................................................. 1 CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW.................................................................................... 5 1.1 CONTEXT ................................................................................................................................ 5 1.2 CRIMMIGRATION: THE OVERLAPPING MANDATES OF IMMIGRATION LAW AND CRIMINAL LAW ............................................................................................................................................. 8 1.3 SURVEILLANCE: SOCIAL SORTING, DIGITIZED DISSECTION, SURVEILLANT ASSEMBLAGES, AND THE IBORDER ...................................................................................................................... 14 1.4 “THE JURISDICTIONAL GAME”: THE FLUID, UNFIXED, AND HETEROGENEOUS FORMULATIONS OF MEMBERSHIP ............................................................................................... 17 1.5 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: ACTOR-NETWORK THEORY .................................................... 22 1.5.1 History and Background of Actor-Network Theory ..................................................... 24 1.5.2 Theoretical Concepts and Component Parts of Actor-Network Theory....................... 26 1.5.3 Actor-Network Theory and the Present Study .............................................................. 29 CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY AND RESEARCH DESIGN ........................................... 32 2.1 WHAT IS A CASE STUDY? ...................................................................................................... 32 2.2 ANT AND CASE STUDIES: HOW IS IT USEFUL? ..................................................................... 33 2.3 RESEARCH QUESTION ........................................................................................................... 35 2.4 RESEARCH DESIGN AND DATA COLLECTION ........................................................................ 36 2.5 CASE STUDY SUMMARIES..................................................................................................... 38 2.5.1 Mohamed Harkat (2002) .............................................................................................. 38 2.5.2 MV Ocean Lady (2009) and MV Sun Sea (2010) ......................................................... 40 2.5.3 Deepan Budlakoti (2014).............................................................................................. 41 CHAPTER 3: GOVERNING THROUGH LEGAL TECHNICALITIES ............................ 44 3.1 STATELESSNESS .................................................................................................................... 45 3.2 SECURITY CERTIFICATES ...................................................................................................... 51 3.3 HUMAN SMUGGLING ............................................................................................................ 61 CHAPTER 4: LOCATING BORDERING PRACTICES ...................................................... 68 4.1 SPATIAL BORDERING ............................................................................................................ 68 4.2 SURVEILLANT BORDERING ................................................................................................... 74 4.3 CORPOREAL BORDERING ...................................................................................................... 85 CHAPTER 5: TOWARDS MULTISCALAR BORDERWORK AND FLUID MEMBERSHIP ........................................................................................................................... 90 v CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................... 95 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 96 APPENDIX A ............................................................................................................................ 108 APPENDIX B ............................................................................................................................ 109 1 Introduction: Beyond the “Line in the Sand” Traditional geographic discourses on borders are synonymous with the physical and highly visible line that distinguishes the limits between different social, political, and economic spaces (Newman, 2006: 144). Among traditional border scholars, abstract theorizations that extended beyond the border as a rigid spatial marker often seemed like foreign and incomprehensible concepts (Newman, 2006: 172). Geographers often portrayed the border as a passive line on a map that was used to demarcate spaces of territorial sovereignty and described the dynamic physical feature of a landscape (Newman, 2006: 174; Newman, 2006: 144). This field of study was primarily concerned with descriptive analyses of borders, their location, and the political and historical processes that led to their demarcation (Newman, 2006: 145). A series of historical developments and modern innovations have indeed contributed to the actual spaces borders now occupy and how they work to regulate the movement of people and things in unique ways. The codification of laws contributed to defining the types of persons allowed to move within, enter, or cross borders (Torpey, 1998: 241). The border as a physical line also enabled the collection of information and represented the earliest forms of centralized knowledge production (Ford, 1999: 870). This was followed by the development of formalized systems of registration, conducting censuses, distributing passports, identity cards and the like in the state’s attempt to store knowledge on its subjects (Torpey, 2000: 12; Ford, 1999). This enabled state officials to closely regulate and manage cross-border mobility at physically established ports of entry where passers were required to prove their status via state-issued documentation (Torpey, 2000: 9; Torpey, 1998: 241). A lack of official documents served as legitimate grounds for excluding certain groups of people from entering into a state. In addition, a body of legal norms was also created to “adjudicate claims by individuals to enter into particular spaces and territories” (Torpey, 1998: 241). Recently, the field of border