Content area
Public cooperation is crucial for the police to successfully perform their duties. Yet marginalised and vulnerable groups facing uncertainty about their societal status often significantly mistrust the police. Migrant populations experiencing forced labour are marginalised and uncertain groups that face significant challenges for police in gaining trust and cooperation, especially since many have escaped conflict or authoritarian regimes, or experienced trauma and exploitation prior to encountering police in democratic contexts. This paper examines the potential role of policing agencies in Anglophone countries in addressing forced labour in migrant communities. Whilst recognising that police are not ideal first responders to this issue, the paper acknowledges that they often represent the first visible state response with the legal authority to support or detain individuals. This paper reviews the literature on forced labour and migration and presents a conceptual argument, applying procedural justice as a theoretical framework to assess its potential for improving the policing of forced labour, particularly among newly arrived migrants still establishing social relationships, bonds, and capital. The paper concludes by arguing that procedural justice may help police earn the trust and confidence of migrant populations experiencing forced labour and help address labour exploitation, although this trust-building remains hampered by the concomitant harms caused by crimmigration systems.
Details
Exploitation;
Literature reviews;
Anglophones;
Marginality;
Mental disorders;
Migrants;
Forced migration;
Violence;
Citizenship;
Rescue workers;
Police;
Social justice;
Cooperation;
Right to work;
Noncitizens;
Policing;
Police community relations;
Boundaries;
Political asylum;
Labor migration;
Population;
Procedural justice;
Displaced persons;
Social relations;
Police-Citizen interactions;
Forced labor;
Social exclusion;
International cooperation;
Trauma;
Immigration policy;
Trust;
Uncertainty;
Migration;
Justice
; Morgan, Matthew 2
1 Institute of Law and Justice, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield S1 1WB, UK
2 Thomas More Law School, Australian Catholic University, Brisbane 4014, Australia; [email protected]