Human rights and the political: Assessing the allegation of human rights overreach in migration matters

IF 1.7 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Anuscheh Farahat
{"title":"Human rights and the political: Assessing the allegation of human rights overreach in migration matters","authors":"Anuscheh Farahat","doi":"10.1177/09240519221092631","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Europe's external borders have been the site of intense human rights struggles over the last decade. While States are inventing ever new practices to circumvent their human rights responsibility by not responding to rescue calls or using private actors as proxies for refoulement, human rights activists seek to expand State jurisdiction to effectively hold European governments responsible for human rights violations at their borders and on the high seas. At the same time, the rise of populist movements and increasing xenophobia have made expansive human rights interpretation to the benefit of migrants increasingly suspicious in public discourse. The question therefore arises: Does the expansion of migrants’ human rights and State responsibility bear features of ‘human rights overreach’ in the sense that human rights encroach too much on State sovereignty, which may ultimately decrease the acceptance of human rights themselves? Or is it a necessary ‘outreach’ of human rights, that is, an adaptation of human rights to new practices of border protection in order to ensure human rights’ effectiveness? This paper addresses these questions in three steps. It first briefly presents current struggles about migrants’ human rights in the Mediterranean. It then deals with the increasing critique of human rights overreach in migration matters and assesses judicial practice in reaction to increasing State pressure. The core argument finally developed in this paper is that we should respond to the allegation of overreach by advancing a more political understanding of human rights, which acknowledges the methodological limits of regressive human rights interpretation and defends the idea of human rights as a concrete utopia. The paper develops this argument with a view to the concrete case law on migration issues and suggests how courts and migration law scholars should deal with the challenges of human rights struggles regarding migration.","PeriodicalId":44610,"journal":{"name":"Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights","volume":"35 1","pages":"180 - 201"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09240519221092631","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Europe's external borders have been the site of intense human rights struggles over the last decade. While States are inventing ever new practices to circumvent their human rights responsibility by not responding to rescue calls or using private actors as proxies for refoulement, human rights activists seek to expand State jurisdiction to effectively hold European governments responsible for human rights violations at their borders and on the high seas. At the same time, the rise of populist movements and increasing xenophobia have made expansive human rights interpretation to the benefit of migrants increasingly suspicious in public discourse. The question therefore arises: Does the expansion of migrants’ human rights and State responsibility bear features of ‘human rights overreach’ in the sense that human rights encroach too much on State sovereignty, which may ultimately decrease the acceptance of human rights themselves? Or is it a necessary ‘outreach’ of human rights, that is, an adaptation of human rights to new practices of border protection in order to ensure human rights’ effectiveness? This paper addresses these questions in three steps. It first briefly presents current struggles about migrants’ human rights in the Mediterranean. It then deals with the increasing critique of human rights overreach in migration matters and assesses judicial practice in reaction to increasing State pressure. The core argument finally developed in this paper is that we should respond to the allegation of overreach by advancing a more political understanding of human rights, which acknowledges the methodological limits of regressive human rights interpretation and defends the idea of human rights as a concrete utopia. The paper develops this argument with a view to the concrete case law on migration issues and suggests how courts and migration law scholars should deal with the challenges of human rights struggles regarding migration.
人权与政治:对移徙事务中人权越权指控的评估
过去十年来,欧洲的外部边界一直是激烈的人权斗争场所。虽然各国正在创造新的做法,不响应救援呼吁或利用私人行为者作为驱回的代理人,以规避其人权责任,但人权活动人士寻求扩大国家管辖权,以便有效地让欧洲各国政府对其边界和公海上侵犯人权的行为负责。与此同时,民粹主义运动的兴起和仇外心理的加剧,使得有利于移民的广泛人权解释在公共话语中日益受到质疑。由此产生的问题是:移民人权和国家责任的扩大是否具有“人权越界”的特征,即人权过分侵犯国家主权,最终可能降低对人权本身的接受程度?还是人权的必要“外延”,即为了确保人权的有效性,使人权适应新的边境保护做法?本文分三步来解决这些问题。它首先简要介绍了目前地中海移民的人权斗争。然后,它处理对移徙事务中人权越界的日益增多的批评,并评估司法实践对日益增加的国家压力的反应。本文最后提出的核心论点是,我们应该通过推进对人权的更政治的理解来回应越界的指控,这种理解承认倒退的人权解释的方法局限性,并捍卫人权作为具体乌托邦的想法。本文从移民问题的具体判例法的角度展开了这一论点,并建议法院和移民法学者应如何应对有关移民的人权斗争的挑战。
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
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
6.20%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: Human rights are universal and indivisible. Their fundamental importance makes it essential for anyone with an interest in the field to keep abreast of the latest developments. The Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights (NQHR) is an academic peer-reviewed journal that publishes the latest evolutions in the promotion and protection of human rights from around the world. The NQHR includes multidisciplinary articles addressing human rights issues from an international perspective. In addition, the Quarterly also publishes recent speeches and lectures delivered on the topic of human rights, as well as a section on new books and articles in the field of human rights. The Quarterly employs a double-blind peer review process, and the international editorial board of leading human rights scholars guarantees the maintenance of the highest standard of articles published.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信