From migration crisis to migrants’ rights crisis: The centrality of sovereignty in the EU approach to the protection of migrants’ rights

IF 1.3 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Leiden Journal of International Law Pub Date : 2023-02-06 DOI:10.1017/S0922156522000759
Alan Desmond
{"title":"From migration crisis to migrants’ rights crisis: The centrality of sovereignty in the EU approach to the protection of migrants’ rights","authors":"Alan Desmond","doi":"10.1017/S0922156522000759","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The long-simmering process of sidelining and side-stepping migrants’ rights protection while attempting to regulate cross-border movement of people was heated up by the 2015 migration crisis and has recently been brought to the boil with the crisis-fuelled adoption of the UN Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM) in 2018. The GCM represents an endorsement at the international level of soft-law, goal-setting frameworks for international co-operation on migration as it pertains to migrants’ rights, and a corresponding disavowal of any role for binding legal obligations in this field. Focusing on the EU, I argue in this article that states’ sovereign powers in the realm of control of non-EU migration have been largely undiluted by the development of the international system of human rights protection. I show how the 2015 migration crisis galvanized multilateral international co-operation on the part of the EU and its member states in the field of non-EU migration in a way that entrenched EU states’ sovereign self-interest by institutionalizing a soft-law approach, thereby producing a crisis from the perspective of migrants’ rights protection. I also argue, however, that the migration crisis facilitated a resurgence of state sovereignty in the EU to the detriment not only of migrants’ rights, but also of internal EU co-operation and co-ordination. Finally, I suggest that in times of crisis supranational courts are particularly susceptible to being recruited to EU states’ rights-restrictive approach to international migration.","PeriodicalId":46816,"journal":{"name":"Leiden Journal of International Law","volume":"36 1","pages":"313 - 334"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Leiden Journal of International Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156522000759","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The long-simmering process of sidelining and side-stepping migrants’ rights protection while attempting to regulate cross-border movement of people was heated up by the 2015 migration crisis and has recently been brought to the boil with the crisis-fuelled adoption of the UN Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM) in 2018. The GCM represents an endorsement at the international level of soft-law, goal-setting frameworks for international co-operation on migration as it pertains to migrants’ rights, and a corresponding disavowal of any role for binding legal obligations in this field. Focusing on the EU, I argue in this article that states’ sovereign powers in the realm of control of non-EU migration have been largely undiluted by the development of the international system of human rights protection. I show how the 2015 migration crisis galvanized multilateral international co-operation on the part of the EU and its member states in the field of non-EU migration in a way that entrenched EU states’ sovereign self-interest by institutionalizing a soft-law approach, thereby producing a crisis from the perspective of migrants’ rights protection. I also argue, however, that the migration crisis facilitated a resurgence of state sovereignty in the EU to the detriment not only of migrants’ rights, but also of internal EU co-operation and co-ordination. Finally, I suggest that in times of crisis supranational courts are particularly susceptible to being recruited to EU states’ rights-restrictive approach to international migration.
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
从移民危机到移民权利危机:主权在欧盟保护移民权利方法中的中心地位
在试图监管人员跨境流动的同时,搁置和回避移民权利保护的长期酝酿过程因2015年的移民危机而升温,最近又因2018年《联合国安全、有序和正常移民全球契约》(GCM)的通过而沸腾。GCM代表着国际层面对软法律的认可,对涉及移民权利的移民问题国际合作的目标设定框架,以及对该领域具有约束力的法律义务的任何作用的相应否认。以欧盟为中心,我在这篇文章中认为,国际人权保护体系的发展在很大程度上削弱了各国在控制非欧盟移民领域的主权权力。我展示了2015年的移民危机如何激发欧盟及其成员国在非欧盟移民领域的多边国际合作,通过将软法律方法制度化来巩固欧盟国家的主权私利,从而从移民权利保护的角度产生危机。然而,我也认为,移民危机促进了欧盟国家主权的复兴,不仅损害了移民的权利,也损害了欧盟内部的合作与协调。最后,我认为,在危机时期,超国家法院特别容易被欧盟国家招募到对国际移民采取权利限制的做法中。
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
2.30
自引率
6.70%
发文量
67
期刊最新文献
International law in the minds: On the ideational basis of the making, the changing, and the unmaking of international law BinaryTech in motion: The sexgender in the European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence Rewriting the law of international organizations: Whither the Asia Pacific? Beyond the machinery metaphors: Towards a theory of international organizations as machines The Committee on the Rights of the Child and Article 12: Applying the Lundy model to treaty body recommendations
×
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