在南非、英国和欧洲人权法院,外籍父母的公民子女的权利主张:“非法”和应得的等级

IF 0.9 4区 社会学 Q3 FAMILY STUDIES
J. Sloth-Nielsen, J. Collinson, A. Spalding
{"title":"在南非、英国和欧洲人权法院,外籍父母的公民子女的权利主张:“非法”和应得的等级","authors":"J. Sloth-Nielsen, J. Collinson, A. Spalding","doi":"10.1093/lawfam/ebad019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article examines the South African High Court judgement in TR & others v Minister of Home Affairs & others, which is the first time that a South African court has addressed the constitutional rights of children in the immigration context. In this case, constitutional rights claims were made by South African citizen children because South African immigration law deemed a foreign national parent to be an ‘illegal alien’, subject to expulsion, as soon their spousal relationship with a South African citizen had broken down. The law allowed no other outcome, other than expulsion, regardless of the impact on the affected children. We argue, therefore, that although the High Court deployed the language of children’s dignity and best interests, TR is not really a decision about children at all. Instead, it is a judgement about whether the parents’ deserved the status of ‘illegality’, and its consequences, which had been imposed by South African immigration law. This focus on the deservingness of the parents, rather than the best interests of the children, can be found in other jurisdictions and this article explores how the law deals with similar circumstances in the UK and the European Court of Human Rights. This article concludes by arguing that Article 3 CRC requires that ‘the sins and traumas of fathers and mothers should not be visited on their children’ and that this should be foundational to the best interests of the child provision in the South African constitution in the immigration context.","PeriodicalId":51869,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law Policy and the Family","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rights claims of citizen children of foreign national parents in South Africa, the UK, and the European Court of Human Rights: hierarchies of ‘illegality’ and deservingness\",\"authors\":\"J. Sloth-Nielsen, J. Collinson, A. Spalding\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/lawfam/ebad019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This article examines the South African High Court judgement in TR & others v Minister of Home Affairs & others, which is the first time that a South African court has addressed the constitutional rights of children in the immigration context. In this case, constitutional rights claims were made by South African citizen children because South African immigration law deemed a foreign national parent to be an ‘illegal alien’, subject to expulsion, as soon their spousal relationship with a South African citizen had broken down. The law allowed no other outcome, other than expulsion, regardless of the impact on the affected children. We argue, therefore, that although the High Court deployed the language of children’s dignity and best interests, TR is not really a decision about children at all. Instead, it is a judgement about whether the parents’ deserved the status of ‘illegality’, and its consequences, which had been imposed by South African immigration law. This focus on the deservingness of the parents, rather than the best interests of the children, can be found in other jurisdictions and this article explores how the law deals with similar circumstances in the UK and the European Court of Human Rights. This article concludes by arguing that Article 3 CRC requires that ‘the sins and traumas of fathers and mothers should not be visited on their children’ and that this should be foundational to the best interests of the child provision in the South African constitution in the immigration context.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51869,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Law Policy and the Family\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Law Policy and the Family\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/lawfam/ebad019\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"FAMILY STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Law Policy and the Family","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/lawfam/ebad019","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文检视南非高等法院在TR & others v Minister of Home Affairs & others一案中的判决,这是南非法院首次处理移民背景下儿童的宪法权利。在这种情况下,南非公民儿童提出宪法权利要求,因为南非移民法认为外籍父母是“非法外国人”,一旦他们与南非公民的配偶关系破裂,就会被驱逐出境。法律不允许其他结果,除了驱逐,不管对受影响的儿童有什么影响。因此,我们认为,尽管高等法院使用了儿童尊严和最大利益的语言,但TR实际上根本不是一个关于儿童的决定。相反,这是一个关于父母是否应该得到南非移民法规定的“非法移民”地位及其后果的判断。这种对父母的应得性的关注,而不是孩子的最大利益,可以在其他司法管辖区找到,本文探讨了法律如何处理英国和欧洲人权法院的类似情况。本文的结论是,《儿童权利公约》第3条要求“父亲和母亲的罪恶和创伤不应被转嫁到他们的孩子身上”,这应该是南非宪法中移民背景下儿童最大利益条款的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Rights claims of citizen children of foreign national parents in South Africa, the UK, and the European Court of Human Rights: hierarchies of ‘illegality’ and deservingness
This article examines the South African High Court judgement in TR & others v Minister of Home Affairs & others, which is the first time that a South African court has addressed the constitutional rights of children in the immigration context. In this case, constitutional rights claims were made by South African citizen children because South African immigration law deemed a foreign national parent to be an ‘illegal alien’, subject to expulsion, as soon their spousal relationship with a South African citizen had broken down. The law allowed no other outcome, other than expulsion, regardless of the impact on the affected children. We argue, therefore, that although the High Court deployed the language of children’s dignity and best interests, TR is not really a decision about children at all. Instead, it is a judgement about whether the parents’ deserved the status of ‘illegality’, and its consequences, which had been imposed by South African immigration law. This focus on the deservingness of the parents, rather than the best interests of the children, can be found in other jurisdictions and this article explores how the law deals with similar circumstances in the UK and the European Court of Human Rights. This article concludes by arguing that Article 3 CRC requires that ‘the sins and traumas of fathers and mothers should not be visited on their children’ and that this should be foundational to the best interests of the child provision in the South African constitution in the immigration context.
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
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
25.00%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: The subject matter of the International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family comprises the following: - Analyses of the law relating to the family which carry an interest beyond the jurisdiction dealt with, or which are of a comparative nature - Theoretical analyses of family law - Sociological literature concerning the family which is of special interest to law and legal policy - Social policy literature of special interest to law and the family - Literature in related disciplines (such as medicine, psychology, demography) which is of special relevance to law and the family - Research findings in the above areas, reviews of books and relevant reports The journal has a flexible policy as to length of contributions, so that substantial research reports can be included.
×
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