Contradictions in Immigration Policies in Times of Crisis: The Case of Greece

In April 2010, as Greece was undergoing the deepest economic and political crisis since the restoration of democracy, the PASOK government passed the Ragoussis Law, one of the country’s most open citizenship laws, granting citizenship and voting rights for municipal elections to second-generation migrants. Less than two years later, the same government was opening a string of detention centres for ‘illegal’ migrants in response to a rise in criminality of ‘epidemic proportions’ due to the effects of the economic crisis. Shortly thereafter, and as the country was experiencing a severe outburst of racism and xenophobia, the Council of State, Greece’s highest administrative court, questioned whether this legislation was in accordance with the country’s constitution and the new conservative-led coalition government eagerly repealed the law. Immigration policies in contemporary liberal democracies reflect the economic and normative contradictions that are at the heart of the ‘liberal paradox’ (Hollifield 1992). Liberal democracies have to manage anti-immigrant and nationalist sentiments, economic demands, liberal norms and legal standards. This paper will explore the conflicting dynamics of openness and closure for immigration. It will pay particular attention to the role that domestic and external non-state actors have played in framing the issues, setting the agenda and pushing in favour of more restrictive or liberal options with regards to migration issues. Overall, this paper will reveal the extent to which the wider crisis-ridden context has influenced Greece’s migration-related policies.