Cultures, Citizenship and Human Rights最新文献

{"title":"Deepening and widening of the protection of fundamental rights of European citizens vis-à-vis non-state, private actors","authors":"S. Vries, H. V. Eijken","doi":"10.4324/9780429198588-9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429198588-9","url":null,"abstract":"Ever since the concept of EU citizenship was formally introduced in the Treaty of Maastricht, a lively debate followed as to how European citizenship, in particular in relation to the ‘traditional’ concept of national citizenship, should be viewed. It has, for instance, been described as a form of composite citizenship, in a sense that citizenship is composed of various statuses, rights and duties depending on the legal order to which the citizen is subject (Van Eijken 2015). The idea of composite citizenship is still very much linked to the definition of EU citizenship in the Treaty, which stipulates that EU citizens are nationals of the Member States, which has an additional value to national citizenship. The question is how the formal, legal conception of EU citizenship as can be found in the Treaty relates to a number of developments in the EU, like the upcoming Brexit, the Rule of Law crisis in a number of Member States and the case law of the European Court of Justice, attaching a fundamental status to EU citizenship. Considering these developments the question arises, whether EU citizenship should not be perceived as, or develop into, a more open, fluid concept, which has gained an independent and not merely additional status to national citizenship? In this paper the (legal) possibilities (clues) and constraints will be explored, which can already be found in old case law of the European Court of Justice and in the literature, with a view to develop a more open and inclusive concept of citizenship.","PeriodicalId":158864,"journal":{"name":"Cultures, Citizenship and Human Rights","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132033386","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Contested cultural citizenship of a virtual transnational community","authors":"D. Miert","doi":"10.4324/9780429198588-12","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429198588-12","url":null,"abstract":"From the 15th century onwards, up until at least the end of the 18th century, scholars and scientists in Europe often referred to the concept of a Respublica literaria (‘Republic of Letters’ or ‘Commonwealth of learning’) to denote the world they inhabited: an intellectual world in which scholars, printers, teachers and often patrons were tied together into huge correspondence networks, constituting a pan-European social network. The Republic of Letters is often characterized as an imagined community, but it may also be seen as civil society or even a knowledge commons. As a community that transgressed geographical boundaries and stimulated the sharing of knowledge, its members were forced to accept many differences in religion and politics. The Republic of Letters has therefore often been seen as fostering ‘tolerance’. Yet, the Republic of Letters was also exclusive: only highly educated people could participate, and these were usually white, male and heterosexual. Citizenship of this imagined community was defined by culture: by practices, and increasingly by codes of conduct. In this article, we will examine to what extent theories of citizenship help to gain a clearer picture of the structural impediments for women to be accepted as participants in this community.","PeriodicalId":158864,"journal":{"name":"Cultures, Citizenship and Human Rights","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122132406","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Looking back, looking forward","authors":"J. Bhabha","doi":"10.4324/9780429198588-10","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429198588-10","url":null,"abstract":"approximation to it’. Others are less sanguine in their assessment of the Trafficking Protocol’s impact and legacy. Marjan Wijers, an expert who participated in the negotiations leading up to the Protocol, is critical of its focus and argues that it prioritises attention to the coercion involved in the recruitment and transportation aspects of trafficking instead of unconditionally addressing the central human rights violation caused by human trafficking, namely the abusive working conditions of trafficked persons—be they labouror sex-sector related (a distinction Wijers is critical of)—irrespective of the initial induction circumstances. Torture, brutalisation, rape, coercion in the daily life of sex workers or undocumented migrants who chose to cross borders to improve their life prospects, she argues, are thus ignored or marginalised. This approach, she notes, diverts the primary preoccupation of anti-trafficking intervention from the protection of vulnerable workers to the policing of State borders. From a single country perspective, Grupo Davida, a conglomerate of academic researchers associated with the Davida prostitutes’ rights association in Rio de Janeiro, articulate a similar opinion based on their experience of the Trafficking Protocol’s impact on Brazil’s antitrafficking policies. Like Wijers, they note its impact on strengthening migration control policy and its concomitant neglect of some of the most vulnerable and exploited groups, including sex workers, coerced migrant labourers and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals. Kathryn Baer at The Trafficking Research Project too from her vantage point in Singapore—a non-signatory country influenced by global anti-trafficking discourse—criticises the impact that growing government emphasis on sanctioning trafficking has had on victim protection. She argues that policies justified as anti-trafficking measures in fact generate and justify raids on irregular migrants and sex worker groups, increasing criminal convictions of vulnerable workers but ignoring issues of victim protection or trafficking prevention. She also notes that a key rights issue confronting vulnerable migrant workers—deceptive recruitment practices that trick them into accepting exploitative labour contracts on false premises—is ignored. Yet another group of contributors strike a middle ground between these two contrasting perspectives, setting out both gains and detriments that the Protocol seems to have produced. Anne T Gallagher, a leading international expert on antitrafficking law and policy, carefully sets out the conclusions of her balance sheet. Like Ezeilo, she commends the agenda-setting achievements of the Protocol, the fact that it has generated a road map for dealing with trafficking where none existed. She also ANTI-TRAFFICKING REVIEW 4 (2015) notes the beneficial impact of the Protocol’s unitary (albeit unwieldy) definition of trafficking as a consensus-building breakthrough that provides a ba","PeriodicalId":158864,"journal":{"name":"Cultures, Citizenship and Human Rights","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133810663","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Cities of refuge","authors":"Moritz Baumgärtel, B. Oomen, E. Durmuş, S. Miellet","doi":"10.4324/9780429198588-8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429198588-8","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":158864,"journal":{"name":"Cultures, Citizenship and Human Rights","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122209122","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}