Urban approaches to human rights: tracking networks of engagement in Amsterdam’s debate on irregular migration

IF 0.6 Q2 Social Sciences

Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law Pub Date : 2019-05-03 DOI:10.1080/07329113.2019.1601826

L. Roodenburg

{"title":"Urban approaches to human rights: tracking networks of engagement in Amsterdam’s debate on irregular migration","authors":"L. Roodenburg","doi":"10.1080/07329113.2019.1601826","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper discusses local engagements with human rights norms in Amsterdam, in the context of responses to irregular migration. Specifically, the article studies the local government’s development of a human rights agenda and reflects how this aligns with or contradicts (1) the local government’s program for irregular migrants and (2) NGO initiatives in the realm of human rights and irregular migrants. In 2016 the municipality of Amsterdam launched an “Amsterdam Human Rights Agenda” and (irregular) migration is not mentioned, while the local government does have a progressive program for irregular migrants. Simultaneously, several NGOs contest the municipality for their approach towards irregular migrants, at times using human rights language. Analysis of stakeholder interviews, city council meetings and policy documents reveal the conflicting approaches that urban actors have towards human rights. The language of rights gives weight to claims of NGOs, precisely because of its legal dimension. Contrastingly, in the human rights agenda the municipality mainly refers to rights in their moral sense and refrains from legal language. Concrete issues that are already on the political agenda become labelled as human rights problems. Therefore, this article deliberates whether this undermines the possible strength of human rights as an urban governance framework.","PeriodicalId":44432,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2019.1601826","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 6

Abstract

Abstract This paper discusses local engagements with human rights norms in Amsterdam, in the context of responses to irregular migration. Specifically, the article studies the local government’s development of a human rights agenda and reflects how this aligns with or contradicts (1) the local government’s program for irregular migrants and (2) NGO initiatives in the realm of human rights and irregular migrants. In 2016 the municipality of Amsterdam launched an “Amsterdam Human Rights Agenda” and (irregular) migration is not mentioned, while the local government does have a progressive program for irregular migrants. Simultaneously, several NGOs contest the municipality for their approach towards irregular migrants, at times using human rights language. Analysis of stakeholder interviews, city council meetings and policy documents reveal the conflicting approaches that urban actors have towards human rights. The language of rights gives weight to claims of NGOs, precisely because of its legal dimension. Contrastingly, in the human rights agenda the municipality mainly refers to rights in their moral sense and refrains from legal language. Concrete issues that are already on the political agenda become labelled as human rights problems. Therefore, this article deliberates whether this undermines the possible strength of human rights as an urban governance framework.

查看原文本刊更多论文

城市处理人权问题的方法:追踪参与阿姆斯特丹非正规移民辩论的网络

摘要本文讨论了在应对非正常移民的背景下，当地与阿姆斯特丹人权规范的接触。具体而言，本文研究了当地政府制定的人权议程，并反映了这与(1)当地政府的非正规移民计划和(2)非政府组织在人权和非正规移民领域的倡议是如何一致或矛盾的。2016年，阿姆斯特丹市推出了一项“阿姆斯特丹人权议程”，其中没有提到(非正规)移民，而当地政府确实有一个针对非正规移民的渐进方案。同时，一些非政府组织对市政当局对待非正规移民的方式提出质疑，有时使用人权语言。对利益攸关方访谈、市议会会议和政策文件的分析揭示了城市行为者对待人权的相互矛盾的态度。权利的语言赋予非政府组织的主张以分量，正是因为它的法律层面。相比之下，在人权议程中，市政当局主要是指道德意义上的权利，而没有使用法律语言。已经在政治议程上的具体问题被贴上了人权问题的标签。因此，本文将探讨这是否会削弱人权作为城市治理框架的可能力量。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law LAW-

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： As the pioneering journal in this field The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law (JLP) has a long history of publishing leading scholarship in the area of legal anthropology and legal pluralism and is the only international journal dedicated to the analysis of legal pluralism. It is a refereed scholarly journal with a genuinely global reach, publishing both empirical and theoretical contributions from a variety of disciplines, including (but not restricted to) Anthropology, Legal Studies, Development Studies and interdisciplinary studies. The JLP is devoted to scholarly writing and works that further current debates in the field of legal pluralism and to disseminating new and emerging findings from fieldwork. The Journal welcomes papers that make original contributions to understanding any aspect of legal pluralism and unofficial law, anywhere in the world, both in historic and contemporary contexts. We invite high-quality, original submissions that engage with this purpose.