scholarly journals Securitized and criminalized: an analysis of Mexico’s addition to the list of designated countries of origin

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meredith Baker
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Refugee Policy ◽  
Access To Information ◽  
Immigration Legislation ◽  
Government Corruption ◽  
Government Data ◽  
Refugee Claimant

Mexico’s addition to the list of Designated Countries of Origin (DCO) i.e. safe countries in light of extreme human rights violations and government corruption raises many questions. Using government data obtained through the Access to Information Act, this qualitative study examines the DCO policy and safe country designation process and applies the country designation criteria to the case of Mexico. Through government discourse, the securitization of migration and the construct of the ‘criminal’ refugee claimant have become normalized, leading to exclusionary immigration legislation. While questioning whether or not Mexico belongs on the DCO list, this study reveals the unjustifiable discrimination contained in Canadian refugee policy, specifically the Protecting Canada’s Immigration System Act (Bill C-31).

scholarly journals Securitized and criminalized: an analysis of Mexico’s addition to the list of designated countries of origin

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meredith Baker
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Refugee Policy ◽  
Access To Information ◽  
Immigration Legislation ◽  
Government Corruption ◽  
Government Data ◽  
Refugee Claimant

Mexico’s addition to the list of Designated Countries of Origin (DCO) i.e. safe countries in light of extreme human rights violations and government corruption raises many questions. Using government data obtained through the Access to Information Act, this qualitative study examines the DCO policy and safe country designation process and applies the country designation criteria to the case of Mexico. Through government discourse, the securitization of migration and the construct of the ‘criminal’ refugee claimant have become normalized, leading to exclusionary immigration legislation. While questioning whether or not Mexico belongs on the DCO list, this study reveals the unjustifiable discrimination contained in Canadian refugee policy, specifically the Protecting Canada’s Immigration System Act (Bill C-31).

scholarly journals Open data, crowdsourcing and citizen evidence for human rights investigations

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela Ambrose ◽  
Ryan Burns
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Digital Technologies ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Access To Information ◽  
Ethical Research ◽  
Working Paper ◽  
The Social ◽  
Small Collection

New digital technologies allow unprecedented access to information about crises and disasters. A small collection of organizations and individuals are taking advantage of these new flows and forms of information to seek out human rights violations. In this working paper, Angela Ambrose situates these organizations within the umbrella of human rights investigations labs. She explores some of the social and political shifts within which these new practices should be understood, arguing that the practices raise important new ethical, research, and technical questions.

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.

A Qualitative study on human rights and labor conditions of rehabilitation specialists

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 69-85
Author(s):  
Sung Youl Cho ◽  
Yong Chan Byun ◽  
Geun Chang Song ◽  
Ye Sook Youn
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Labor Conditions

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