The removal of international protection as a process of administrative rebordering

Abstract In this article I argue that the removal of international protection should be regarded as administrative rebordering. Many countries and the European Union (EU) are introducing measures to make international protection more temporary through using temporary permits and the more routine investigation of the removal of international protection. The system of removing international protection is an administrative process. Therefore, I refer to it as administrative rebordering, meaning administratively drawing new borders around people who have already crossed them by being granted international protection. I examine this through the analysis of 200 cases of removal of international protection involving individuals and families, processed by the Finnish Immigration Service between 2015 and 2022. Most research on the topic has focused on group-based decisions, and to the best of my knowledge, this is the first large-scale academic study to examine it at the level of individual decision making. The analysis shows how the process often begins as a by-product of routine administrative actions, and how the refugee’s possibility to be heard in the process—and therefore to impact it—varies greatly. It further examines the most common arguments on which the removal is based, as well as the liminal effects of the appeal procedure as a remedy. The article demonstrates how a great deal of resources is used to investigate the removal in cases that simply do not meet requirements for removal. This raises serious questions about the aims of many countries to make international protection more temporary through administrative rebordering.