Migration, Culture Conflict and Crime

Joshua D. Freilich, Moshe Addad, Graeme Newman

• Publisher: Taylor & Francis
• Year: 2017
• Print ISBN: 9781138705166
• eBook ISBN: 9781351784801
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Derecho
• Subtopic: Derecho penal

This title was first published in 2002: The issue of immigration and crime in all of its many contexts and forms, is a problem which affects numerous countries throughout the world. In many countries, immigrants have been accused of disproportionate involvement in crime while, in others, immigrants are often claimed to be the victims of criminal offenders, as well as indifferent criminal justice systems. The subjects covered within this informative collection include the offending and victimization rates of immigrants and their dependants, institutional racism, human trafficking/smuggling and ethnic conflicts. In particular, the problems faced by female immigrants are addressed in detail. Whilst some papers look at the issues facing particular countries, such as Germany, the United Kingdom, Australia, Israel and Turkey, others adopt a more comparative approach. Migration, Culture Conflict and Crime is an essential and compelling read for all those with a strong interest in this important area. Not only does it significantly advance our scientific knowledge concerning the relationship between immigration, crime and justice, but it also sets forth a number of proposals which, if implemented, could address many of the problems found in these areas.

IV. COUNTRY STUDIES

12 Crime and Victimisation of Migrants in Australia: A Socio-demographic View

Satyanshu Mukheijee, Australian Institute of Criminology

Introduction

Unravelling the relationship between migration and crime requires the examination of the incidence of crime in all its forms, the processes of the criminal justice system, and the causes and conditions affecting the migrant communities adversely. Unfortunately, the facts necessary for a conclusive statement are, in many instances, unobtainable. It is important, however, to point out that even though statistical information essential for a rational debate on the subject is in many cases lacking, public opinion appears to have built up assumptions. It is often easier to develop adverse assumptions with regard to migrant groups, particularly some nationality groups. Because members of some migrant groups can be easily differentiated on the basis of appearance, religion, language, and habits, such differentiation is impulsively extended when some of their members are found guilty of criminality. Indeed, the majority population may assume that criminality is a weakness that is characteristic of those migrant groups. Yet, scholars have asserted for decades that no one migrant, race, minority group is innately more criminal than any other.

The purpose of this paper is to provide:

• A brief summary of research and statistics on migrants and crime, with particular reference to Australia.

• A description and analysis of currently available statistical information

• Methods to advance our knowledge on the subject.

Prior research

Research literature on the relationship between migration and crime often tends to treat all migrants as a homogeneous group. It overlooks the fact that migrants differ not only in terms of cultures, language, and appearance, but also in terms of circumstances under which they migrate, their experiences (often victims of torture and persecution), and the stage of life at which they migrate. Sometimes, these differences can separate groups emigrating from the same country in different time periods under different circumstances. Even individuals arriving at the same time and under the same circumstances may differ. A case in point is the arrival of refugees from Kosovo in Australia. Almost 4,000 refugees accepted the temporary accommodation arranged by the Australian Government but one family of seven found the accommodation unsuitable and chose to return to Kosovo.

Scholarly writings and theoretical approaches seeking to explain criminal involvement by members of migrant groups have a history of over a century. What differentiates recent research from earlier research on the subject are its findings. Up until the 1950s research results showed that migrants living in disorganized communities displayed higher criminal involvement than their more fortunate counterparts, but their crime rate was lower than that of the native-born population. Research in the 1990s, however, appears to show that migrants participate in crime at a higher rate than the native-born population. It is possible that this shift along with statements made by some politicians have led to increasing levels of concern among segments of the population and the media. This is not unique to Australia. Throughout Europe and North America debates on race relations and the criminal involvement of members of migrant groups have been widespread. A number of major publications including original research from over 30 countries of Europe, North America and Australia have appeared on the subject of immigration/ethnicity/race and crime in the late 1990s (see for e.g., Baumgartl and Favel 1995; Hawkins 1995; Marshall 1997; Tonry 1997; Chirico, Das, and Smith 1997; Waters 1998; Mann and Zatz 1998). A number of scholars have observed increasing arrest rates of immigrants vis-à-vis the native-born.

Some of the major findings of recent research are:

1. Migrants, ethnic groups, and minority groups are not defined uniformly in all research studies, and there is, therefore, no uniformity in counting foreigners.

2. The ethnic differences among migrant groups in Europe are considerable. Germany, Sweden and Switzerland receive migrants generally from other European countries. France, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom have received, apart from European migrants, a large number of migrants from their ex-colonies.

3. Race, ethnicity, or country of origin has less to do with crime than the environment and the disorganized communities they live in.

4. Particularly in Europe, lack of knowledge of the local language is considered to be a major disadvantage faced by migrant groups.

5. Migrants generally have lower levels of education and a very low rate of participation in higher education, which limits their life chances.

6. Migrants generally concentrate around poorer and disadvantaged city neighbourhoods.

7. The migrant unemployment rate is significantly higher than that of the native-born population.

8. There is evidence of some bias against migrant groups in their contacts with the criminal justice system. For example, in decisions such as arrest, caution or prosecution, social background factors, including family stability, play an important role. Suspects from migrant/ minority groups often come from ‘unstable’ families, making such decisions difficult. This situation can influence decisions at subsequent stages of the criminal justice system.

Marginalisation of migrant groups is a common theme that emerges from research literature. In a detailed expose on Spanish Immigration Law and marginalisation of migrant groups Calavita (1998) writes that public policy on immigrants in Spain:

is almost without exception rhetorically framed in terms of the need for integration and cultural tolerance. In marked contrast with this rhetoric, Spanish law systematically reproduces illegality, marginality, and precariousness. The social and economic exclusion and marginalisation of Spain’s immigrants is neither unpredictable nor incidental; rather, it is the most significant achievement of Spanish immigration (p. 557).

The Australian scene

The first major investigation into the involvement of migrants in crime in Australia commenced in the 1950s when the Minister for Immigration established the Committee to investigate Conduct of Migrants. The Committee collected a large amount of data on migrant types, the nature of the problems they encountered, their involvement in crime (based on court statistics), and issued three reports. The major conclusion of all three reports was that the incidence of serious crime was lower amongst migrants than in the Australian population generally. The Committee also indicated that, while crime by migrants received undue publicity, little publicity was given to offences against migrants (Commonwealth Immigration Advisory Council 1952). One of the many observations the Committee made concerned the attitude of many Australians and the media. The Committee observed:

If an Australian commits a misdemeanour, responsibility for it is attributed to him individually. If a migrant commits a similar misdemeanour it is usually reported in such a way that the fact that he is a migrant, rather than the crime itself, is featured and responsibility for the offence is thus shared by the whole migrant population (Commonwealth Immigration Advisory Council 1952 p. 14).

Similar observations have been made by investigations elsewhere and at different times. The Committee noted that although the migrants suffered disadvantages such as the lack of proper balance of the sexes, considerable psychological strain like loneliness and unfamiliar environment, lack of the knowledge of the local language, and lack of support of one’s family, their lower involvement in crime was commendable.

Since the Committee’s report, two major works have addressed the issue of migrant crime in Australia (see Francis 1981; Hazelhurst 1987).

The present research

Scope

There has been increasing interest in researching the links between migrants and crime in recent years. A major impediment to studying this issue has been the lack of reliable statistics. Recent research in North America and Europe cited earlier, presented valuable insights into the relationship between migrants and crime but these studies could not be compared in any meaningful way. Some researchers used police statistics, others used court data, and still others relied upon prison statistics. Most North American researches since the 1960s have dealt with race and not migrants. A large number of European researchers study foreigners, resident foreigners, legal immigrants, etc., and definitions of these terms are not always comparable. It is, therefore, difficult to say exactly which group is involved in what type of crime and which group suffers victimisation more than others do. Difficulties are also encountered in Australian statistics.

For the present study we have tried to limit the study to first generation migrants and their involvement in crime. The reason for selecting these groups was dictated by the availability of census as well as arrest and imprisonment statistics. While we confine our research to overseas-born groups it should be recognized that a substantial part of the Australian population includes children of persons born overseas. In many cases they have strong ethnic and cultural attachments to their heritage. They will not be part of the analysis in this paper as available crime data only specified country of birth and not heritage. Every five years the Australian Census of Population and Housing provides valuable details on socioeconomic background, including country of birth, and structure of the Australian population. The National Prison Census since 1983 provides a count of prisoners on 30 June each year; among other details this Census also includes information on the place of birth of prisoners. And the State of Victoria Police since 1993–1994 has been publishing details of persons processed for offences, which again includes the place of birth of those processed. In this paper 25 overseas-born and the Australian-born groups have been included, arrest data were available only for these groups.

Social and demographic characteristics of the Australian population

The 1996 Census of Population and Housing lists nationals of over 200 countries and territories who have made Australia their home. According to the Census people bom overseas constitute about a quarter of the Australian population. In the period 1981 to 1996, covering four censuses, the composition of the overseas-born population has changed considerably. Although those bom in the United Kingdom still remain the largest overseas-born community, as a proportion of all overseas bom their number has declined from over 45 percent in 1981 to under 36 percent in 1996. During the same period the proportion of Asian-bom population has increased from over seven per cent to over 19 per cent of the overseas-born population.

People migrate for different reasons and under various circumstances. Usually the receiving country determines the number of migrants it wants and sets priorities and procedures. These may change over time to suit the country’s needs. Occasionally, countries like Australia accept a substantial number of migrants on humanitarian grounds, mainly refugees; in such instances it is often difficult to use strict selection criteria. Thus, migrants bring different life experiences, varied levels of knowledge, education, language proficiency, and work experiences. Together with their religions and customs, these attributes play an important role in becoming a responsible resident of the new country. In Australia’s case until the Second World War migrants from the United Kingdom and Ireland constituted the overwhelming majority of new settlers in Australia. After the War and until the early 1970s a large number of migrants came from the rest of Europe. Since the late 1970s a substantial number of migrants arrived from Asia, particularly refugees from Indochina and the Middle East. The arrival of migrant groups at different times, under different immigration programs, and from different source countries has led to the display of identifiable age-gender profiles of their respective population. This is highly relevant for an examination of a link between immigrants and crime.

Consider the data in Table 12.1. Fourteen percent of total Australian population and 16 per cent of the Australian-born population in 1996 were in the high risk or 15–24 age group. First generation migrants from Italy, Greece, the Netherlands, Hungary, Germany, the United Kingdom, Former Yugoslavia have very low proportion of population in high crime age groups and over three quarters of their populations are 45 years old or over. Among the recent arrivals, immigrants from Cambodia, Vietnam, Malaysia, and Fiji have a higher proportion than the national average of people in high crime age group and a little over one-fifth of their population is 45 and over.

A high proportion of some migrant groups lack both formal qualifications and the knowledge of English. Their unemployment rate, particularly those who arrived in the 1990s, is very high (see Table 12.2). For some migrant groups, especially with a non-English speaking background, more than half of those in the labour force were unemployed. This situation prevails in various age groups. Among some migrant groups the unemployment rate of youth in the 15–24 age group is the highest. The effect of a low level of qualifications and poor proficiency in English is visible when employment, occupation and industry data are reviewed. As expected these groups of migrants are employed ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• List of Figures
• List of Tables
• List of Contributors
• Acknowledgments
• I. GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES
• II. PREVENTION AND POLICY
• III. GENDER ISSUES
• IV. COUNTRY STUDIES
• Index