Chaque année, des centaines de milliers de ressortissants de pays tiers en séjour irrégulier ne peuvent être éloignés de l'Union européenne (UE). L'inéloignabilité de certains étrangers n'est pas toujours transitoire, et nombreuses sont les personnes qui y demeurent pendant des années. Et pourtant, l'inéloignabilité de longue durée ne mène pas forcément à la régularisation du séjour. Je suis intéressé par la manière dont l'UE gère l'inéloignabilité, ainsi que par les raisons pour lesquelles autant de personnes inéloignables se retrouvent dans des limbes juridiques d'exclusion du séjour régulier. Dans une première partie, je conceptualise la nature et les conséquences des divers statuts d'étrangers inéloignables, tels que réglementés par le droit de l'UE. Je propose ainsi une typologie des limbes juridiques entre le séjour irrégulier et régulier. Il existe des limbes de tolérance, d'un côté, et des limbes de séjour régulier non-Reconnu, de l'autre. Je me consacre principalement aux limbes de tolérance. Dans une deuxième partie, j'examine la manière dont l'UE a gouverné ces limbes juridiques, notamment son impact sur le lien dans ses États membres entre divers types d'obstacles à l'éloignement, d'un côté, et les statuts de tolérance, de l'autre. Dans une troisième partie, j'analyse les fonctions attribuées aux limbes de tolérance par des acteurs institutionnels de l’UE. Je soutiens que les statuts de tolérance peuvent se voir attribuer des fonctions de rétribution, de dissuasion, d'éloignabilité, de spectacle étatique, de sélection, et de réduction des dépenses publiques. / Hundreds of thousands of illegally staying third country nationals (TCN) cannot be removed from EU Member States despite the issue of return measures against them. Illegally staying TCNs may not be removable as a result of legal, policy, or practical obstacles to removal. Non-Removability is not always temporary and can in many cases last a very long time. And yet protracted non-Removability does not necessarily lead to regularisation of status. I am interested in how the EU has managed non-Removability and why so many non-Removable persons have been left in a limbo of exclusion from legal residence. In Part I, I provide a conceptual framework for understanding the nature and consequences of a variety of positions that non-Removable TCNs may find themselves in. I do so by providing a typology of what I call limbo spaces between illegal and legal stay. There are limbo spaces of toleration, on the one hand, and limbo spaces of unrecognised legal residence, on the other. I mainly focus on toleration. In Part II, I examine how the EU has governed limbo spaces of toleration, namely its important impact on the nexus in Member States between various forms of non-Removability, on the one hand, and limbo spaces of toleration, on the other. In Part III, I analyse the functions of limbo spaces of toleration. I argue that toleration positions can be viewed as sanctions of membership exclusion, and may be perceived by certain EU institutional actors as performing a range of functions akin to administrative detention and imprisonment: retribution, deterrence, enhanced removability, the expressive power of the State, and selection/rehabilitation.

The securitisation and externalisation of Europe's borders have had devastating consequences for people trying to cross them. As Greece is on the periphery of the European Union, its role in this process and in the journey of people on the move is crucial. This thesis focuses on the situation in the city of Patras (Northern Peloponnese) and the informal camp set up by people on the move there. Drawing from interviews with volunteers working in Patras and previous research related to Patras or other Greek refugee camps, this thesis applies the concept of borderscapes in order to understand the situation in Patras. The aspect of resistance that people on the move create against borders is central to the thesis, as it lies at the heart of the relationship that people on the move have with the borders they face. Furthermore, analysis through the conceptual lens of borderscapes explains how the border, like Patras itself, is a violent place in many different ways. Finally, I will highlight the paradoxical role that volunteers play in this system of bordering and how the mobility and visibility of people on the move are linked to European policies and strategies to selectively restrict certain types of migration.

Some expulsion decisions cannot be executed due to the existence of deportation impediments, which in this case means that foreigners are in a legal limbo in such a way that they have neither the right to stay nor the opportunity to leave Sweden. The regulation of deportation impediments is found in Aliens Act (2005:716), but it is the application of these regulations that determine how specific cases are assessed, why it is highly relevant to study said cases.  The essay deals with political, practical and medical impediments, found in Chapter 12 of the Aliens Act, in order to establish the applicable law, and by analyzing ten court cases from the Migration Court of Appeal, study how the court assesses the Swedish Migration Agency's application of these legal barriers. The provisions being studied are chapter 12 1-3 §§ Aliens Act, concerning political impediments, chapter 12 18 § Aliens Act, concerning practical and medical impediments, and also chapter 12 19 § Aliens act which establishes the possibility of a new trial in a case. The applicable law is established through a legal dogmatic method, and the legal cases from the Migration Court of Appeal are analyzed using a legal sociological method.  The study concludes that political impediments are weighed heaviest in comparison to medical and practical impediments, due to the latter two not being derived from international conventions or instruments as opposed to political impediments. Furthermore, it is easier to present evidence when invoking political impediments, as evidentiary requirements are set lower than those for practical and medical impediments. At the same time the individual has an opportunity to be granted a new trial if he or she invokes a new condition that concerns political impediments, while a new trial cannot be granted if the individual invokes medical or practical impediments. The provisions concerning practical and medical impediments should therefore be developed or amended in such a way that they are adapted to the circumstances that may arise in these cases. It is also concluded that the Swedish Migration Agency's investigation and interpretation of these impediments must be more comprehensive. It must be adapted to the conditions referred to in the case, due to the application of these provisions being complex and requiring the Swedish Migration Agency's staff to be well trained and accurate in each individual case.