Corrigendum to “A Patchwork of Intra-Schengen Policing: Border Games over National Identity and National Sovereignty”

In his 2020 article, Moffette – building upon the work of Valverde (2009, 2010) and De Sousa Santos (1987) – introduces the multi-scalared nature of governance structure as a lens to analyse how government actors responsible for migration and border control can, and are, using this structure to their advantage by shifting from one jurisdictional scale to the other – depending on what is most beneficial for them. In this approach, which acknowledges the pluralist nature of legal norms and systems, the notion of jurisdiction is to be understood in a dynamic way and as a power that sits with anyone – whether they are a formal state actor or not – who, “(...) wants to summon or enforce the law, make claims about the “where”, the “who”, the “what”, the “when”, and the “how” of law (Valverde, 2009) and provide rationales for why an act or a person, in a particular place, falls under the authority of a particular body and should be treated according to this or that kind of procedures.” (Moffette & Pratt 2020: 16). Looking at jurisdiction this way, addresses the performative aspect of jurisdictions. A similar performative quality has also been attributed to borders through the act(s) of bordering (also see Ford 1999 and Wonders 2006). The performance of jurisdictions is, or can be, at the same time, part of this performative act of bordering as the allocation of jurisdiction Corrigendum