第3部分保护,13国籍,无国籍和保护

S. Goodwin-GillGuy, McAdam Jane, Dunlop Emma
{"title":"第3部分保护,13国籍,无国籍和保护","authors":"S. Goodwin-GillGuy, McAdam Jane, Dunlop Emma","doi":"10.1093/law/9780198808565.003.0013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter studies nationality, statelessness, and protection. Domestic law determines the content of nationality, and historically only those elements of nationality bearing on the relations between States were considered of relevance to international law. Questions of nationality, therefore, are in principle within the reserved domain of domestic jurisdiction, even if that leaves many questions open. At one time, it was easier to envisage that the realm of the domestic might not be co-extensive with the realm of the international—that a State’s nationals for the purposes of international law, might yet be divided ‘back home’ into those who did, and those who did not, enjoy the full benefits of civil status. In a post-modern age sensible of human rights, such distinctions, though not unknown, are difficult to justify. If the domestic conception of citizenship did not encompass a sense of protection by the State, including admission or re-admission, then it failed as an instance of nationality in the sense of international law. The chapter then reflects on statelessness in international law and practice. It looks at the elimination and prevention of statelessness and the protection of stateless refugees.","PeriodicalId":204360,"journal":{"name":"The Refugee in International Law","volume":"1680 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Part 3 Protection, 13 Nationality, Statelessness, and Protection\",\"authors\":\"S. Goodwin-GillGuy, McAdam Jane, Dunlop Emma\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/law/9780198808565.003.0013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This chapter studies nationality, statelessness, and protection. Domestic law determines the content of nationality, and historically only those elements of nationality bearing on the relations between States were considered of relevance to international law. Questions of nationality, therefore, are in principle within the reserved domain of domestic jurisdiction, even if that leaves many questions open. At one time, it was easier to envisage that the realm of the domestic might not be co-extensive with the realm of the international—that a State’s nationals for the purposes of international law, might yet be divided ‘back home’ into those who did, and those who did not, enjoy the full benefits of civil status. In a post-modern age sensible of human rights, such distinctions, though not unknown, are difficult to justify. If the domestic conception of citizenship did not encompass a sense of protection by the State, including admission or re-admission, then it failed as an instance of nationality in the sense of international law. The chapter then reflects on statelessness in international law and practice. It looks at the elimination and prevention of statelessness and the protection of stateless refugees.\",\"PeriodicalId\":204360,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Refugee in International Law\",\"volume\":\"1680 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Refugee in International Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/law/9780198808565.003.0013\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Refugee in International Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/law/9780198808565.003.0013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本章研究国籍、无国籍和保护。国内法决定国籍的内容,历史上只有对国家间关系有影响的国籍因素才被认为与国际法有关。因此,国籍问题原则上属于国内管辖的保留范围,即使这留下了许多悬而未决的问题。曾经,比较容易设想的是,国内领域可能不会与国际领域共同广泛- -就国际法而言,一个国家的国民仍可能被“在国内”划分为享有公民地位的人和不享有公民地位的人的全部利益。在后现代的人权意识时代,这样的区别,虽然不是未知的,但很难证明是正确的。如果国内的公民概念不包括国家的保护意识,包括接纳或重新接纳,那么它就不能作为国际法意义上的国籍实例。本章接着对国际法和实践中的无国籍状态进行了反思。它着眼于消除和预防无国籍状态以及保护无国籍难民。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Part 3 Protection, 13 Nationality, Statelessness, and Protection
This chapter studies nationality, statelessness, and protection. Domestic law determines the content of nationality, and historically only those elements of nationality bearing on the relations between States were considered of relevance to international law. Questions of nationality, therefore, are in principle within the reserved domain of domestic jurisdiction, even if that leaves many questions open. At one time, it was easier to envisage that the realm of the domestic might not be co-extensive with the realm of the international—that a State’s nationals for the purposes of international law, might yet be divided ‘back home’ into those who did, and those who did not, enjoy the full benefits of civil status. In a post-modern age sensible of human rights, such distinctions, though not unknown, are difficult to justify. If the domestic conception of citizenship did not encompass a sense of protection by the State, including admission or re-admission, then it failed as an instance of nationality in the sense of international law. The chapter then reflects on statelessness in international law and practice. It looks at the elimination and prevention of statelessness and the protection of stateless refugees.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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