The EU's Hospitality and Welcome Culture: Conceiving the "No Human Being Is Illegal" Principle in the EU Fundamental Freedoms and Migration Governance.

IF 1.2 Q1 LAW Human Rights Review Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1007/s12142-022-00662-4
Armando Aliu, Dorian Aliu
{"title":"The EU's Hospitality and Welcome Culture: Conceiving the \"No Human Being Is Illegal\" Principle in the EU Fundamental Freedoms and Migration Governance.","authors":"Armando Aliu,&nbsp;Dorian Aliu","doi":"10.1007/s12142-022-00662-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article aims to highlight the theoretical and philosophical debate on hospitality underlining the normative elements of framing migrants and refugees as individual agents in the light of hospitality theory and migration governance. It argued the critiques of the neo-Kantian hospitality approach and the EU welcome culture with regard to refugees in the EU from a philosophical perspective. The \"No human being is illegal\" motto is proposed to be conceived as a principle of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. The cosmopolitan right to visit and the universal right to reside were discussed in the context of human rights and co-responsibility. Linking the hospitality approach with migration governance enables the reconstruction of reception policies and practices, diversification of non-state actors that engage in migration governance mechanism, and polarization of political initiatives (e.g., politics of allocation and dispersal, readmission negotiations, convergence/divergence of priorities and strategic interests). The research findings highlight that the EU adopted a neo-Kantian hospitality approach that combines both \"co-responsibility\" and \"vertical/heterarchical relations.\" The EU's \"New Pact on Migration and Asylum\" was considered proof of how the EU follows neo-Kantian hospitality that is manifested in dualism and contradictory approach. The study presents a typology that splits co-responsibility into individual/institutional actions and human rights/migration governance.</p>","PeriodicalId":45171,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights Review","volume":"23 3","pages":"413-435"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8934602/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Rights Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-022-00662-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This article aims to highlight the theoretical and philosophical debate on hospitality underlining the normative elements of framing migrants and refugees as individual agents in the light of hospitality theory and migration governance. It argued the critiques of the neo-Kantian hospitality approach and the EU welcome culture with regard to refugees in the EU from a philosophical perspective. The "No human being is illegal" motto is proposed to be conceived as a principle of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. The cosmopolitan right to visit and the universal right to reside were discussed in the context of human rights and co-responsibility. Linking the hospitality approach with migration governance enables the reconstruction of reception policies and practices, diversification of non-state actors that engage in migration governance mechanism, and polarization of political initiatives (e.g., politics of allocation and dispersal, readmission negotiations, convergence/divergence of priorities and strategic interests). The research findings highlight that the EU adopted a neo-Kantian hospitality approach that combines both "co-responsibility" and "vertical/heterarchical relations." The EU's "New Pact on Migration and Asylum" was considered proof of how the EU follows neo-Kantian hospitality that is manifested in dualism and contradictory approach. The study presents a typology that splits co-responsibility into individual/institutional actions and human rights/migration governance.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
欧盟的好客和欢迎文化:在欧盟基本自由和移民治理中设想“没有人是非法的”原则。
本文旨在强调关于款待的理论和哲学辩论,强调在款待理论和移民治理的基础上将移民和难民作为个体代理人的规范要素。它从哲学的角度论证了对欧盟难民的新康德式好客方式和欧盟欢迎文化的批评。“没有人是非法的”的座右铭被提议作为欧盟基本权利宪章的一项原则。在人权和共同责任的背景下讨论了世界性的访问权和普遍的居住权。将接待办法与移民治理联系起来,有助于重建接待政策和做法,使参与移民治理机制的非国家行为体多样化,以及政治举措的两极分化(例如,分配和分散政治、重新接纳谈判、优先事项和战略利益的趋同/分歧)。研究结果强调,欧盟采用了一种新康德式的款待方式,结合了“共同责任”和“垂直/层次关系”。欧盟的“移民与庇护新公约”被认为是欧盟如何遵循新康德主义的待客之道的证明,这种待客之道表现为二元论和矛盾的方法。该研究提出了一种类型学,将共同责任分为个人/机构行动和人权/移民治理。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
14.30%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: Human Rights Review is an interdisciplinary journal which provides a scholarly forum in which human rights issues and their underlying empirical, theoretical and philosophical foundations are explored. The journal seeks to place human rights practices and policies within a theoretical perspective in order to link empirical research to broader human rights issues. Human Rights Review welcomes submissions from all academic areas in order to foster a wide-ranging dialogue on issues of concern to both the academic and the policy-making communities. The journal is receptive to submissions drawing from diverse methodologies and approaches including case studies, quantitative analysis, legal scholarship and philosophical discourse in order to provide a comprehensive discussion concerning human rights issues.
期刊最新文献
Manifestation of Women’s Rights in School Textbooks? Evidence from Social Science Textbooks in India Making Tangible the Long-Term Harm Linked to the Chilling Effects of AI-enabled Surveillance: Can Human Flourishing Inform Human Rights? Freedom of Religion and Non-discrimination Based on Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation in Ukraine: Corporate Policy Commitments in Situations of Conflicting Social Expectations The Venezuelan Migrant Population’s Right to Health in the Bucaramanga Metropolitan Area A step in the right direction, or more of the same? A systematic review of the impact of human rights due diligence legislation
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1