When Humans Become Migrants

Study of the European Court of Human Rights with an Inter-American Counterpoint

Nonfiction, Reference & Language, Law, International, Social & Cultural Studies, Social Science
Cover of the book When Humans Become Migrants by Marie-Bénédicte Dembour, OUP Oxford
View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart
Author: Marie-Bénédicte Dembour ISBN: 9780191644771
Publisher: OUP Oxford Publication: March 26, 2015
Imprint: OUP Oxford Language: English
Author: Marie-Bénédicte Dembour
ISBN: 9780191644771
Publisher: OUP Oxford
Publication: March 26, 2015
Imprint: OUP Oxford
Language: English

The treatment of migrants is one of the most challenging issues that human rights, as a political philosophy, faces today. It has increasingly become a contentious issue for many governments and international organizations around the world. The controversies surrounding immigration can lead to practices at odds with the ethical message embodied in the concept of human rights, and the notion of 'migrants' as a group which should be treated in a distinct manner. This book examines the way in which two institutions tasked with ensuring the protection of human rights, the European Court of Human Rights and Inter-American Court of Human Rights, treat claims lodged by migrants. It combines legal, sociological, and historical analysis to show that the two courts were the product of different backgrounds, which led to differing attitudes towards migrants in their founding texts, and that these differences were reinforced in their developing case law. The book assesses the case law of both courts in detail to argue that they approach migrant cases from fundamentally different perspectives. It asserts that the European Court of Human Rights treats migrants first as aliens, and then, but only as a second step in its reasoning, as human beings. By contrast, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights approaches migrants first as human beings, and secondly as foreigners (if they are). Dembour argues therefore that the Inter-American Court of Human Rights takes a fundamentally more human rights-driven approach to this issue. The book shows how these trends formed at the courts, and assesses whether their approaches have changed over time. It also assesses in detail the issue of the detention of irregular migrants. Ultimately it analyses whether the divergence in the case law of the two courts is likely to continue, or whether they could potentially adopt a more unified practice.

View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart

The treatment of migrants is one of the most challenging issues that human rights, as a political philosophy, faces today. It has increasingly become a contentious issue for many governments and international organizations around the world. The controversies surrounding immigration can lead to practices at odds with the ethical message embodied in the concept of human rights, and the notion of 'migrants' as a group which should be treated in a distinct manner. This book examines the way in which two institutions tasked with ensuring the protection of human rights, the European Court of Human Rights and Inter-American Court of Human Rights, treat claims lodged by migrants. It combines legal, sociological, and historical analysis to show that the two courts were the product of different backgrounds, which led to differing attitudes towards migrants in their founding texts, and that these differences were reinforced in their developing case law. The book assesses the case law of both courts in detail to argue that they approach migrant cases from fundamentally different perspectives. It asserts that the European Court of Human Rights treats migrants first as aliens, and then, but only as a second step in its reasoning, as human beings. By contrast, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights approaches migrants first as human beings, and secondly as foreigners (if they are). Dembour argues therefore that the Inter-American Court of Human Rights takes a fundamentally more human rights-driven approach to this issue. The book shows how these trends formed at the courts, and assesses whether their approaches have changed over time. It also assesses in detail the issue of the detention of irregular migrants. Ultimately it analyses whether the divergence in the case law of the two courts is likely to continue, or whether they could potentially adopt a more unified practice.

More books from OUP Oxford

Cover of the book Absolutism in Renaissance Milan by Marie-Bénédicte Dembour
Cover of the book Scotland : A History by Marie-Bénédicte Dembour
Cover of the book Evil by Marie-Bénédicte Dembour
Cover of the book Law in Modern Society by Marie-Bénédicte Dembour
Cover of the book Qur'an of the Oppressed by Marie-Bénédicte Dembour
Cover of the book The Subject Matter of Intellectual Property by Marie-Bénédicte Dembour
Cover of the book The Ethics of Embryonic Stem Cell Research by Marie-Bénédicte Dembour
Cover of the book Oxford Textbook of Fundamentals of Surgery by Marie-Bénédicte Dembour
Cover of the book Energetic Food Webs by Marie-Bénédicte Dembour
Cover of the book Manifest Reality by Marie-Bénédicte Dembour
Cover of the book Anarchism: A Very Short Introduction by Marie-Bénédicte Dembour
Cover of the book Scotland's Populations from the 1850s to Today by Marie-Bénédicte Dembour
Cover of the book The Law of Reinsurance by Marie-Bénédicte Dembour
Cover of the book Ultrasound Guidance in Regional Anaesthesia by Marie-Bénédicte Dembour
Cover of the book The Rome We Have Lost by Marie-Bénédicte Dembour
We use our own "cookies" and third party cookies to improve services and to see statistical information. By using this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy