Cookies on this website
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Continue' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.
  • Did 9/11 matter? Securitisation of asylum and migration in the European Union from 1992 to 2008

    12 December 2013

    This paper analyses the effect of 9/11 on securitization of asylum and immigration in the EU from 1992 to 2008 at the supranational level. It explores the assumption that 9/11 did in fact change asylum and immigration policies. Additionally, it offers an interpretation of how asylum and migration in the EU have been securitized, thereby contributing to a better understanding of the process of securitization. Briefly, this paper finds that the escalated securitization manifested both qualitative and quantitative change. For instance, quantitative change is found in political discourse and qualitative change is identified in the establishment of a permanent state of emergency. Finally, given its regional focus, this paper aids the understanding of the integration and supranationalization of asylum and immigration policies within the EU.

  • Prima facie determination of refugee legal status: an overview of its legal foundation

    12 December 2013

    The objective of this paper is to clarify the use of PFRSD in practice and explore its legal foundation. It argues that the term ‘prima facie’ should be understood in refugee law as a shorthand reference to the general law relating to injunctions. That is, ‘prima facie’ is shorthand for a lower standard of proof, rather than a shifted burden of proof. PFRS can therefore be conceived as a quia timet injunction granted, in haste and ex parte, at the discretion of the host State with both prohibitory and mandatory elements. The injunction persists until, but is without prejudice to, RSD that considers exclusion and non-inclusion from Convention protection. The paper finds that this injunctive conception is founded in the Convention, accords with State and UNHCR practice, and clarifies the rights attached to PFRS. The paper ends by suggesting that PFRSD practice beclarified by way of an Executive Committee conclusion.

  • Understanding and addressing the phenomenon of 'child soldiers'

    12 December 2013

    This paper investigates how the well-intentioned global humanitarian discourse on child soldiers may be disregarding the complex local understandings and experiences of military recruitment. It seeks to present a compelling case for a wholesale re-conceptualisation of the phenomenon of ‘child soldiers’ so as to devise aid programmes that can better reflect and respond to local understandings, priorities, and needs. This paper takes on both global and local levels of analysis and draw from a wide array of literature, including those from the fields of human rights, child development, political economy, anthropology, and various policy documents and reports of humanitarian and human rights organisations.

  • Family reunification: a right for forced migrants?

    12 December 2013

    This paper attempts to shed light on some of the core issues surrounding family reunification. In doing so, it examines the family in a forced migration context and engages in a discussion of the nature of the family to identify who is being reunified. Additionally, it looks at family reunification from an international law perspective and asks: Is there an international legal right to family reunification? On what basis does such a right rely? How expansive is it? To explain the reluctance of states to acknowledge reunification rights, this paper also discusses the political aspects of reunification and situates in within the wider context of immigration. Finally, this paper examines alternative approaches to family reunification, to re-centre it within a rights optic.

  • UNHCR as an autonomous organisation: Complex operations and the case of Kosovo

    12 December 2013

    This study takes an analytical and empirical approach to assess how the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) demonstrated organizational autonomy in the face of realpolitik and member state interests. It uses as its case study the one year period (June 1999-June 2000) the organization was part of the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo. UNHCR’s role in Kosovo is central to a discussion of international organizational autonomy because it raises questions about the nature and role of humanitarian organisations in state building operations. This paper argues that UNHCR exercised autonomy using three strategies: first, through its utilisation of authority (delegated, moral and expert); second, through exploitation of information asymmetries; and finally, through manipulation of stakeholder incentives and the ability to play stakeholder interests off one another.

  • Salah Sheekh is a refugee: new insights into primary and subsidiary forms of protection

    12 December 2013

    This paper explores the limits of 'subsidiary' or 'complementary' protection, with particular emphasis on how the concept is applied within the European Communities [EC] legal order. Seeking light in obscure places, it argues that recent developments in EC law, as well as the evolving jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, can be construed positively as dispelling confusion between differently motivated claims to international protection. Should ambiguity prevail, however, these developments may well signal the emergence of a regional 'asylum law', calling into question the continuing relevance of the universal legal framework enshrined in the 1951 Convention and its 1967 Protocol.

  • State, nation, citizen: rethinking repatriation

    12 December 2013

    This paper offers a historical contextualisation of the political concepts underpinning repatriation. It demonstrates that the difficulty in understanding repatriation as a “solution” to displacement results from attempting to reconcile a political philosophy of universal human rights with the principle of nation-state sovereignty. The paper argues that post-1985 attempts to reconceptualise repatriation were flawed largely because repatriation was depoliticised into “return”, reducing the likelihood of durable solutions based on citizenship and the remaking of state-citizen bonds. Using empirical evidence from the case of Guatemalan return from January 1993, this paper argues that recognition of more direct and politicised refugee engagement in displacement resolution offers an opportunity to strengthen concepts of refugee dignity and the durability of return. Moreover, it suggests a community-based approach that recognises the collective political identities of refugee groups may offer greater possibility for state transformation through repatriation than individually-based return, as well as greater possibility for the expression of “dignity” than that of “voluntariness”.

  • Conflict-induced migration and remittances: exploring conceptual frameworks

    12 December 2013

    Remittances – the money that migrants send home – are a key element in the socioeconomic reality of many conflict-affected and post-conflict countries. However, conceptual frameworks for explaining the dynamics of remittances in conflict-affected settings are lagging behind emerging empirical evidence. This paper first explores relevant conceptual models from the literature on labour migration, and outlines some of their limitations. Second, it focuses on aspects of conflict-induced migration – specifically, the causation of migration, the situation of family left behind and the post-migration situation of refugees – that may have implications for the remittance behaviour of those affected.

  • Unprotected among brothers: Palestinians in the Arab world

    12 December 2013

    This paper aims to trace the political and legal ripple effects of the Nakbah – the mass displacement of Palestinians from historic Palestine beginning in 1948 – for those refugees who found refuge in Arab states outside the bounds of international attempts at their assistance and protection. It will present a legal and political analysis of ‘protection gaps’ – in short, the lack of international and national protection that should, in principle, be guaranteed to all refugees. In doing so, this paper explores the relation between the foreign policy agendas of autocratic Arab states and their domestic policies, which are aimed at controlling and, often, marginalizing Palestinian refugees. It argues for a layered and intertwined political and legal analysis, with particular emphasis on the impact of autocratic governance on human rights and the role of foreign policy in host state treatment of Palestinians.

  • Repatriation and reconciliation in divided societies: the case of Rwanda’s ‘Ingando’

    12 December 2013

    This study shows that the nationalist script of de-ethnicization is based on a simplistic binary opposition and remains weak for the same reason why it is intriguing: De-ethnicization is a ‘minority’ project, forbidding and prescribing certain forms of expression and association, while not creating a concomitant attractor in the form of equal participation in state-building and ‘state-sharing’. This paper delineates the ‘repatriation-reconciliation nexus’ and explores the notion of reconciliation-cum-nation building. Moreover, it analyses de-ethnicization as a political project with roots, agents and scripts; assess the major factors that undermine de-ethnicization; and propose an alternative that might avoid its costs. Finally, this paper calls for a more nuanced understanding of ‘post-genocide plurality’, which accommodates yet supersedes difference as an ordering principle in political interaction.