Discrimination and Immigration Control

2021 ◽  
pp. 131-144
Author(s):  
Luara Ferracioli
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Immigration Control

This chapter focuses on the ethics of the institutional apparatus that goes along with immigration control. It takes seriously the fact that immigration control sometimes lead to human rights violations, and that liberal states sometimes engage in problematic forms of discrimination when they engage in the business of policing their internal borders. It argues that liberal states must endorse a number of key strategies to ensure that unauthorized immigrants are neither placed in a position where their human rights are violated or left unprotected nor discriminated against on the basis of arbitrary criteria. The discussion therefore aims to minimize the vulnerability of those immigrants who have not received authorization to reside in the territory of the liberal states.

The Law, Immigration and Human Rights: Changing the Australian Immigration Control System

1985 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 535-554 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sev A. Ozdowski
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Control System ◽  
Immigration Policy ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Social Conflict ◽  
Comprehensive System ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Present System ◽  
Immigration Control ◽  
Discretionary Powers

The structure of the present system of immigration control in Australia is examined here in the context of its origin, evolution and responses to current human rights and anti-discrimination standards. This article argues that the system has serious shortcomings because it confers broad discretionary powers on immigration officials and provides no comprehensive system of judicial review. Since the 1970s the system has been gradually losing its legitimacy and has become a subject of challenges by various groups. Its efficiency has been undermined and it breeds social conflict and systematic human rights violations. The suggestion is made for development of a new immigration control system, based upon legislation that incorporates all objectives and principles pertaining to immigration policy, procedure, and review.

Social representations of human rights violations: Further evidence

2001 ◽  
Vol 60 (2) ◽  
pp. 89-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alain Clémence ◽  
Thierry Devos ◽  
Willem Doise
Keyword(s):  
Cluster Analysis ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Costa Rica ◽  
Young People ◽  
Social Representations ◽  
Social Reality ◽  
Questionnaire Study ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
High Tolerance ◽  
Individual Actions

Social representations of human rights violations were investigated in a questionnaire study conducted in five countries (Costa Rica, France, Italy, Romania, and Switzerland) (N = 1239 young people). We were able to show that respondents organize their understanding of human rights violations in similar ways across nations. At the same time, systematic variations characterized opinions about human rights violations, and the structure of these variations was similar across national contexts. Differences in definitions of human rights violations were identified by a cluster analysis. A broader definition was related to critical attitudes toward governmental and institutional abuses of power, whereas a more restricted definition was rooted in a fatalistic conception of social reality, approval of social regulations, and greater tolerance for institutional infringements of privacy. An atypical definition was anchored either in a strong rejection of social regulations or in a strong condemnation of immoral individual actions linked with a high tolerance for governmental interference. These findings support the idea that contrasting definitions of human rights coexist and that these definitions are underpinned by a set of beliefs regarding the relationships between individuals and institutions.

American and Canadian Civil Actions Alleging Human Rights Violations Abroad by Oil and Gas Companies

2008 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 653 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Horlick ◽  
Joe Cyr ◽  
Scott Reynolds ◽  
Andrew Behrman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
The United States ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Law Of Nations ◽  
Forum Non Conveniens ◽  
The Government ◽  
Oil And Gas Companies ◽  
Political Question ◽  
The U.S

Under the United States Alien Tort Statute, which permits non-U.S. citizens to bring lawsuits in U.S. courts for human rights violations that are violations of the law of nations, plaintiffs have filed claims against multinational oil and gas corporations for the direct or complicit commission of such violations carried out by the government of the country in which the corporation operated. In addition to exercising jurisdiction over U.S. corporations, U.S. courts have exercised jurisdiction in cases involving non-U.S. defendants for alleged wrongful conduct against non-U.S. plaintiffs committed outside the U.S.The exercise of jurisdiction by U.S. courts over non-U.S. defendants for alleged wrongful conduct against non-U.S. plaintiffs committed outside of the U.S. raises serious questions as to the jurisdictional foundation on which the power of U.S. courts to adjudicate them rests. Defences that foreign defendants can raise against the exercise of jurisdiction by the U.S. courts are an objection to the extraterritorial assertion of jurisdiction, the act of state doctrine, the political question doctrine, forum non conveniens, and the principle of comity. These defences are bolstered by the support of the defendant’s home government and other governments.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document