The Myth of International Protection

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia Seymour
Keyword(s):  
International Protection

International Protection of Investments

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
August Reinisch ◽  
Christoph Schreuer
Keyword(s):  
International Protection

Birlikte Yaşama Kültürü Çerçevesinde Avrupa Birliği ve Türkiye Politikaları: Suriyelilere Yönelik Tutumun Sultanbeyli Örneği Üzerinden Değerlendirilmesi

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-61
Author(s):  
Pelin Sönmez ◽  
Abulfaz Süleymanov
Keyword(s):  
Civil Wars ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Social Acceptance ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The Other ◽  
Syrian Refugees ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Legal Structure ◽  
Turkish People

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.

International Criminalization of Offences Relating to Cultural Property

2019 ◽  
pp. 18-24
Author(s):  
Danil Sergeev
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Values ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Historical Review ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Cultural Property ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Cultural Value ◽  
Direct Connection ◽  
International Protection ◽  
International Instruments

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.

What Do We Mean by Protection?

2013 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 233-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dallal Stevens
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
The State ◽  
Refugee Policy ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Refugee Convention ◽  
United Nations High Commissioner ◽  
High Commissioner

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.

scholarly journals Reframing refugee crisis: A “European crisis of migration” or a “crisis of protection”?

2021 ◽  
pp. 239965442198970
Author(s):  
Maissaa Almustafa
Keyword(s):  
Large Scale ◽  
Global South ◽  
Global Media ◽  
Developing Regions ◽  
International Protection ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
The Face ◽  
Global North ◽  
Displaced People ◽  
Resettlement Programs

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.

scholarly journals The Right to Dignity of Refugees: A Response to Fleur Johns

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 111 ◽  
pp. 193-195
Author(s):  
Elspeth Guild
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Mass Migration ◽  
International Refugee Law ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Right

Fleur Johns' thesis about the increasing role of data in the verification of the condition of the world and how this impacts on international law is stimulating and bears reflection. This is an extremely interesting and innovative approach to the issue of data and its role in state engagement with mass migration. From the perspective of a scholar on international refugee law, a number of issues arise as a result of the analysis. One of the contested aspects of mass migration and refugee protection is the inherent inconsistency between two ways of thinking about human rights—the first is the duty of (some) international organizations to protect human rights in a manner which elides human rights and humanitarian law, and the second is the right of the individual to dignity, the basis of all human rights according to the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1949. The first enhances the claims of states to sovereign right to control their borders (mediated through some international organizations), while the second recognizes the international human rights duties of states and international organizations to respect the dignity of people as individuals (including refugees). Fleur is completely correct that human rights abuses are at the core of refugee movements. While there are always many people in a country who will stay and fight human rights abuses even when this results in their sacrifice, others will flee danger trying to get themselves and their families to places of safety; we are not all heroes. Yet, when people flee in more than very small numbers, state authorities have a tendency to begin the language of mass migration. The right to be a refugee becomes buried under the threat of mass migration to the detriment of international obligations. Insofar as mass migration is a matter for management, the right of a refugee is an individual right to international protection which states have bound themselves to offer.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document