AUTONOMY DESPITE RESTRICTIONS: ASYLUM SEEKERS IN ISPARTA, ISTANBUL, AND YALOVA

Year 2013, Volume: 1 Issue: 1, 135 - 151, 25.10.2013

Deniz Sert , Uğur Yıldız

Abstract

5683 numaralı Yabancıların Türkiye’de İkamet ve Seyahatleri Hakkında kanunun 17.
maddesi uyarınca, Türkiye’deki sığınmacıların İstanbul ve Ankara gibi metropol alanlar dı-
şında kalan Anadolu’nun uzak bölgelerindeki uydu kentlerde yaşamaları öngörülmüştür. Bu
düzenleme sığınmacıların özgürlüğünü kısıtlayan sıradışı ve başka bir ülkede görülmemiş bir
uygulamadır. Bu bağlamda, bu makale Giorgio Agamben’in ‘kutsal insan’ kavramını kullanarak
uydu kentlere yerleşen sığınmacılar ve mültecilerin hangi ölçüde ‘çıplak hayat’ koşullarına
maruz kaldıklarına dair teorik bir tartışma ile başlar. İstanbul, Yalova ve Isparta’da yapılan ampirik bir araştırmaya dayanan makale sığınmacıların deneyimlerini iç içe geçmiş üç boyutta
inceler: devlet ile ilgili olan makro düzeyde, Türkiye’nin sığınmacılar ve mültecileri ‘çıplak
hayat’ koşullarına iten iltica prosedürleri ve yönetmelik özelliklerini irdeler. Orta düzeyde
Henri Lefebvre tarafından geliştirilen ‘kent hakkı’ kavramı kullanılarak şehir hayatı içinde
göçmenlerin etkileşimlerinin rolü analiz edilir. Mikro düzeyde ise Michel de Certeau’nun
‘zayıfların sanatı’ olarak ortaya koyduğu ‘taktik’ kavramına odaklanarak göçmenlerin bakış
açıları sunulur. Bu düzeyde makale, Türkiye’deki düzenlemeler ve prosedürlerin doğrudan ve
dolaylı etkilerini incelerken, sığınmacılar ve mültecilerin çıplak yaşam koşullarını aşmak için
geliştirdikleri karşı stratejileri özetlemektedir.

AUTONOMY DESPITE RESTRICTIONS: ASYLUM SEEKERS IN ISPARTA, ISTANBUL, AND YALOVA

Abstract

In accordance with Article 17 of the Law 5683 on Residence and Travel of Foreigners, asylum seekers in Turkey are settled in assigned satellite cities in remote areas of Anatolia rather than staying in metropolitan areas such as Istanbul or Ankara. This is an unusual and unique regulation that is restricting the right of asylum seekers’ freedom of movement. In this context, utilizing Giorgio Agamben’s concept of the homo sacer, the article begins with a theoretical discussion of the extent to which asylum seekers and refugees settling in satellite cities are exposed to ‘bare life’ conditions. Based on an empirical research in Istanbul, Yalova and Isparta, the article examines the experiences of asylum seekers according to three dimensions, which are rather intertwined: The macro level, which is state-related, looks at the characteristics of asylum procedures and regulations in Turkey that put asylum seekers and refugees into bare and naked life conditions. The meso level utilizes the concept of ‘the right to the city’ developed by Henri Lefebvre. At this level, the role of migrants’ interactions within city life is analyzed. The micro level presents the perspectives of the migrants through a focus on Michel de Certeau’s conceptualization of ‘tactics’ as the ‘art of the weak.’ At this level, the article examines the direct and indirect impact of regulations and procedures in Turkey on the daily lives of asylum seekers and refugees, as well as their counter-strategies to overcome their bare life conditions

Keywords

AUTONOMY, DESPITE, RESTRICTIONS

References

• AGAMBEN, G. (1998). Homo Sacer: Sovereign power and bare life. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
• AGAMBEN, G. (2000). Means without End. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
• AGAMBEN, G. (2005). State of Exception. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• BIEHL, K. (2008). Governing Through Uncertainty: ‘Refugees’ in Turkey. MA Thesis submitted to Boğaziçi University, Istanbul.
• De CERTEAU, M. (1988). The Practice of Everyday Life. Translated by Steven Rendall. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
• FITZPATRICK, P. (2001). ‘Bare Sovereignty: Homo Sacer and the Insistence of Law.’ Theory and Event, 5(2).
• FOUCAULT, M. (1978). History of Sexuality: Volume 1: An Introduction. Translated by Robert Hurley. New York: Pantheon Books.
• FOUCAULT, M. (1995). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Translated by Alan Sheridan. New York: Vintage Books.
• FOUCAULT, M. (2003). Society must be defended: Lectures at the College de France, 1975-1976, M. BER- TANI and A. FONTANA (der), New York: Picador.
• LEFEBVRE, H. (1996). ‘The Right to the City’, in E. KOFMAN and E. LEBAS (der). Writings on Cities. London: Blackwell.
• OWENS, P. (2009). ‘Reclaiming ‘Bare Life’?: Against Agamben on Refugees,’ International Relations, 23(4): 567-582.
• SCHMITT, C. (2005). Political Theology: Four Chapters on the Concept of Sovereignty. Translated by George Schwab. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
• WALTERS, W. (2008). ‘Acts of Demonstration: Mapping the Territory of (Non-) Citizenship’, in E. F. IŞIN and G. M. NIELSEN (der), Acts of Citizenship. London: Zed Books.
• YIFTACHEL, O. (2009). ‘Critical theory and ‘gray space’: Mobilization of the colonized.’ City: analysis of urban trends, theory, policy, action, 13(2-3): 246-263.
• ZEMBYLAS, M. (2010). ‘Agamben’s Theory of Biopower and Immigrants/Refugees/Asylum Seekers: Discourses of Citizenship and the Implications for Curriculum Theorizing.’ Journal of Curric- ulum Theorizing, 26(2): 31-45.