Illicitness and Illegality in Europe
Political and Social Constructs Determine Limits of Illicit Activity
Illicit trade is generally considered to be one of the major challenges of globalization, the dark side of it, as it is categorized by many analysts of the phenomenon. As a result, the fight against it has also become global, in the form of international organizations, supranational structures and joint efforts on the part of developed countries to combat criminal acts and proliferation of illegal trade. The rise of terrorism has also determined a more careful approach towards illicitness and illegality, because they are seen as interconnected.
Illicitness as a Social and Political Construct
There is an essential thing that has to be understood when talking about illicitness: it is a social and political construct. States define what is illicit and what is not and as a result the national responses to illicitness can be different, according to national and political interests of those in power. This is illustrated by the fact that some states proved to be more interventionist and imposed higher controls in illicit markets than others. In some cases, certain activities that were once considered normal were redefined as criminal activities. It is important to ask ourselves why states promote universal values and then hurry to define exceptions from those values in order to understand the bigger picture.
Theories of Illicitness and State Sovereignty
Peter Andreas puts forward several theories that could explain why and how states define illicitness according to their interest.
- The social constructivist view that regards the criminalization of certain practices as having a symbolic function, not necessarily related to the enforcement of the regulation.
- The realist-statist perspective, which explains the approach to illicitness by means of power relations between states
- The radical view, which points to the economical inequalities as being responsible for the “division of labor” in the informal markets.
In order to understand how states define illicitness and how they respond to it, it is sometimes necessary to combine these theories. In the case of the immigration policies and border control, all these theories find their place in the actions undertaken at the level of the European Union. While the constructivist perspective explains the importance of ideas and the formation of a certain cultural framework for the EU, the realist one stresses the fact that these ideas are shaped by the most important actors in the system (old member states). The radical view explains how the poor countries become dependant on the illicit networks because they have cheap labor that can be used in richer states. Not only immigration restrictions depend on the states’ perception on illicitness, but also laws against drugs trading and money laundering.
We live in a increasingly globalized world, extremely focused on security, safety and legality. However, one has to always look at the source of legality and to understand that the definition of what is illicit originates with the notion of sovereignty and national interest.
What do you think about this article?
More in Politics & Society
Latest Articles