Treatment of Aliens and Nationality: Alleged War Criminals Seeking Asylum: How Serious do the Reasons for Exclusion from International Protection Need to Be?

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 468-473
Author(s):  
Mariangela La Manna
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
August Reinisch ◽  
Christoph Schreuer

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-61
Author(s):  
Pelin Sönmez ◽  
Abulfaz Süleymanov

Türkiye, Cumhuriyet tarihinin en yoğun zorunlu göç dalgasını 2011 yılından bu yana süren Suriye Savaşı ile yaşamaktadır. Suriye vatandaşlarının geçici koruma statüsü altında Türkiye toplumuna her açıdan entegrasyonları günümüzün ve geleceğin politika öncelikleri arasında düşünülmelidir. Öte yandan ülkeye kabul edilen sığınmacıların kendi kültürel kimliğini kaybetmeden içinde yaşadığı ev sahibi topluma uyumu, ortak yaşam kültürünün gelişmesi açısından önem arz etmektedir. Bu makalede, "misafir" olarak kabul edilen Suriyeli vatandaşların Türk toplumunca kabul edilmeleri ve dışlanma risklerinin azaltılmasına yönelik devlet politikaları ortaya konularak, üye ve aday ülkelere göçmenlerin dışlanmasını önlemek için Avrupa Birliği (AB) tarafından sunulan hukuki yapı ve kamu hizmeti inisiyatifleri incelenmekte, birlikte yaşam kültürü çerçevesinde Suriyeli vatandaşlara yönelik  toplumsal kabul düzeyleri ele alınmaktadır. Çalışma iki ana bölümden oluşmaktadır: göçmen ve sığınmacılara karşı toplumsal dışlanmayı engellemek için benimsenen yasa ve uygulamaların etkisi ve İstanbul-Sultanbeyli bölgesinde Suriyeli sığınmacılarla ilgili toplumsal algı çalışmasının sonuçları. Bölgede ikamet eden Suriyelilere yönelik toplumsal kabul düzeyinin yüksek olduğu görülürken, halkın Suriyelileri kendilerine  kültürel ve dini olarak yakın hissetmesi toplumsal kabul düzeyini olumlu etkilemektedir. ABSTRACT IN ENGLISHAn evaluation of the European Union and Turkish policies regarding the culture of living togetherThis article aims to determine the level of social acceptance towards Syrians within the context of cohabitation culture by evaluating EU’s legal structure and public service initiatives in order to prevent Syrian refugees from being excluded in member and candidate countries and by revealing government policies on acceptance of Syrians as “guest” by Turkish society and minimizing the exclusion risks of them. This article consists of two main parts, one of which is based on the effects of law and practices preventing refugees and asylum seekers from social exclusion, and the other is on the results of social perception on Syrians in Sultanbeyli district of Istanbul. At the end of 5-years taking in Syrian War, it is obvious that most of more than 3 million Syrian with unregistered ones in Turkey are “here to stay”. From this point of view, the primary scope of policies should be specified in order to remove side effects of refugee phenomenon seen as weighty matter by bottoming out the exclusion towards those people. To avoid possible large-scale conflicts or civil wars in the future, the struggle with exclusion phenomenon plays a crucial role regarding Turkey’s sociological situation and developing policies. In the meaning of forming a model for Turkey, a subtitle in this article is about public services for European-wide legal acquis and practices carried out since 1970s in order to prevent any exclusion from the society. On the other hand, other subtitles are about legal infrastructure and practices like Common European Asylum and Immigration Policies presented in 2005, and Law on Foreigners and International Protection introduced in 2013. In the last part of the article, the results of a field survey carried out in a district of Istanbul were used to analyze the exclusion towards refugees in Turkey. A face-to-face survey was randomly conducted with 200 settled refugees in Sultanbeyli district of Istanbul, and their perceptions towards Syrian people under temporary protection were evaluated. According to the results, the level of acceptance for Syrians living in this district seems relatively high. The fact that Turkish people living in the same district feel close to Syrian refugees culturally and religiously affect their perception in a positive way: however, it is strikingly seen and understood that local residents cop an attitude on the refugees’ becoming Turkish citizens.


Author(s):  
Danil Sergeev

The article evaluates current conditions of international criminalization of offences relating to cultural property and makes a brief historical review of developing international protection of cultural property and elaborating a corresponding notion. Having analyzed the international instruments, the author concludes that offences relating to cultural property may include deliberate seizure, appropriation, demolition as well as any other forms of destruction or damage to objects and items protected under the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict committed during international and non-international armed conflicts. These offences do not include such possible acts toward universal cultural values committed either beyond any armed conflict or without direct connection with it. Taking the examples of destruction of Buddhas of Bamiyan, Nimrud, Palmyra, and mausoleums of Timbuktu, the author states that international criminalization of offences relating to cultural property is insufficient, because it does not encompass such cases when objects or items of cultural value are damaged or destroyed under the control of national administrations or with their knowledge.


2013 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 233-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dallal Stevens

Protection is arguably the raison-d’être of refugee policy. Yet, surprisingly, the meaning of protection is not without ambiguity. ‘Domestic protection’ can be distinguished from ‘international protection’; the sense attributed to protection within the 1951 Refugee Convention contrasts with that of the 1950 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) Statute. Equally, how the state interprets its protective obligations departs frequently from the practice of humanitarian organisations. Alongside such differences, there has been a proliferation of protection concepts in recent years which, far from improving understanding, have added unnecessary confusion and undermined the fundamental purpose of protection. This article considers the language of ‘protection’ within the refugee field and argues that protection proliferation must now be addressed and reversed.


2021 ◽  
pp. 239965442198970
Author(s):  
Maissaa Almustafa

The end of 2015 witnessed a global record in the number of forcibly displaced people fleeing because of wars and persecution. The unprecedented total of 65.3 million displaced individuals, out of which 21.3 million were refugees, was the highest number that the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has recorded since its establishment in 1950. During the same year and in the face of this large-scale crisis, only 107,100 refugees were admitted for resettlement through official resettlement programs, whereas 3.2 million people applied for asylum globally. And in spite of the fact that the majority of the world refugees are hosted in ten developing regions, the dominant narrative in the global media was about the “unauthorized” arrival of more than one million asylum seekers in Europe by sea during 2015. This paper argues that the unexpected nature of refugees’ arrivals has proven that refugees were supposed to be contained in their camps in the Global South, deterred from reaching the territories of the Global North, represented here by Europe. Thus, the paper proposes that these arrivals are rather reflections of a crisis of protection that developed in the Global South where containment and deterrence strategies against refugees from the Global South exacerbate their inhumane displacement conditions in home regions. In the same context, the paper discusses how international protection structures have been reconstructed to serve the same goals of containment and deterrence, with the ultimate aim of putting people ‘back in place’ with minimal access to protection and rights.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document