《藩篱》、《小说》和《魔山

Dana Schmalz
{"title":"《藩篱》、《小说》和《魔山","authors":"Dana Schmalz","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780192846501.003.0016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"How to allocate responsibility for refugee protection between states forms a salient question in international refugee law. Explicit principles are lacking, yet there is a growing consensus that the issue of responsibility-sharing relates to the system’s most salient deficiencies. Within Europe, the sharing of responsibility for refugees is equally contested. Explicit legal rules exist within the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) of the EU on the one hand, and the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) on the other. The chapter explores the schemes of responsibility-sharing that underlie these two frameworks, the scheme of layered responsibility under the ECHR, and the scheme of alternative responsibility under the Dublin legislation of the CEAS. It discusses the respective implications for the regulation of borders and safeguarding of rights. It points to the role of individual procedural rights arguing that lessons can be learned from the European case which can also apply to the international level.","PeriodicalId":268388,"journal":{"name":"The Protection of General Interests in Contemporary International Law","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fences, Fiction, and the Magic Mountain\",\"authors\":\"Dana Schmalz\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780192846501.003.0016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"How to allocate responsibility for refugee protection between states forms a salient question in international refugee law. Explicit principles are lacking, yet there is a growing consensus that the issue of responsibility-sharing relates to the system’s most salient deficiencies. Within Europe, the sharing of responsibility for refugees is equally contested. Explicit legal rules exist within the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) of the EU on the one hand, and the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) on the other. The chapter explores the schemes of responsibility-sharing that underlie these two frameworks, the scheme of layered responsibility under the ECHR, and the scheme of alternative responsibility under the Dublin legislation of the CEAS. It discusses the respective implications for the regulation of borders and safeguarding of rights. It points to the role of individual procedural rights arguing that lessons can be learned from the European case which can also apply to the international level.\",\"PeriodicalId\":268388,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Protection of General Interests in Contemporary International Law\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Protection of General Interests in Contemporary International Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192846501.003.0016\",\"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 Protection of General Interests in Contemporary International Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192846501.003.0016","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

如何在各国之间分配难民保护责任是国际难民法中的一个突出问题。虽然缺乏明确的原则,但越来越多的人一致认为,责任分担问题与联合国系统最突出的缺陷有关。在欧洲内部,分担难民责任同样存在争议。欧盟的欧洲共同庇护制度(CEAS)和欧洲人权公约(ECHR)都有明确的法律规定。本章探讨了作为这两个框架基础的责任分担机制,即欧洲人权公约下的分层责任机制,以及CEAS都柏林立法下的替代责任机制。它讨论了各自对边界管制和权利保障的影响。它指出了个人程序性权利的作用,认为可以从欧洲的案例中吸取教训,这些教训也适用于国际一级。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Fences, Fiction, and the Magic Mountain
How to allocate responsibility for refugee protection between states forms a salient question in international refugee law. Explicit principles are lacking, yet there is a growing consensus that the issue of responsibility-sharing relates to the system’s most salient deficiencies. Within Europe, the sharing of responsibility for refugees is equally contested. Explicit legal rules exist within the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) of the EU on the one hand, and the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) on the other. The chapter explores the schemes of responsibility-sharing that underlie these two frameworks, the scheme of layered responsibility under the ECHR, and the scheme of alternative responsibility under the Dublin legislation of the CEAS. It discusses the respective implications for the regulation of borders and safeguarding of rights. It points to the role of individual procedural rights arguing that lessons can be learned from the European case which can also apply to the international level.
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