Przejdź do głównego menu Przejdź do sekcji głównej Przejdź do stopki
SM baner

Tom 73 Nr 3 (2020): Westlessness czyli zmierzch Zachodu 2.0?

Westlessness czyli zmierzch Zachodu 2.0?

Komercjalizacja odpowiedzialności w polityce migracyjnej Unii Europejskiej

DOI: https://doi.org/10.35757/SM.2020.73.3.08
Przesłane: 4 czerwca 2021
Opublikowane: 30 marca 2021

Abstrakt

Kontekst. Eksterytorializacja polityki Unii Europejskiej od  lat uznawana jest za  skuteczne narzędzie do zwalczania nielegalnej migracji. Kryzys migracyjny otworzył krytyczną dyskusję nad zgodnością działań zewnętrznych UE z  prawem międzynarodowym. Praktyka eksterytorializacji redefiniuje wartości świata Zachodu.
Cel. Identyfikujemy działania eksterytorialne UE w zakresie polityki azylowej i kontroli nielegalnej migracji. Analizie krytycznej poddaliśmy porozumienia z Libią i Turcją. Na gruncie teoretycznym zauważyliśmy potrzebę rozszerzenia koncepcji komercjalizacji suwerenności Gammeltofta-Hansena. Zaproponowaliśmy termin komercjalizacji odpowiedzialności. Nasza propozycja stanowi połączenie pojęć z zakresu eksterytorializacji, szkodliwych praktyk państw i towarzyszących temu konsekwencji dla praw człowieka.
Metodologia. Posłużyliśmy się metodologią jakościową nauk społecznych i  nauk o polityce. Utrzymując podejście krytyczne, dokonaliśmy przeglądu literatury narracyjnej. Ponadto przeprowadziliśmy pogłębioną analizę aktów normatywnych.
Wyniki. Praktyki eksterytorialne od  dekad są nieodłącznym elementem polityki migracyjnej UE. Potwierdziły to przykłady porozumień z Libią i Turcją. Celowe działania polityczne i komercjalizacja odpowiedzialności ukazały, że respektowanie praw człowieka stało się opcjonalne. W naszym przekonaniu oddelegowywanie odpowiedzialności do państw trzecich jest nie tylko widocznym przejawem zachodniej hipokryzji, ale też upadkiem aksjologicznych fundamentów Unii Europejskiej.

Bibliografia

  1. Alkhateeb A., Libyan Detention Centers: Libya’s Legal and Regulatory Framework on Migration, UMEA Universtiy, Umeå 2019.
  2. Andersson R., A Game of Risk: Boat Migration and the Business of Bordering Europe, „Anthropology Today” 2012, vol. 28, issue 6.
  3. Baker D., Challenges and Proposed Alternatives for EU Policy in Managing Migration from its Southern Borders, available on the internet: <https://www.ce.uw.edu.pl/pliki/pw/1-2016_baker.pdf>.
  4. Betts A., Towards a Mediterranean Solution? Implications for the Region of Origin, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2006.
  5. Bovens M., Hart P., Understanding Policy Fiascoes, Transaction, New Brunswick 1996.
  6. Bradley M., Refugee repatriation: justice, responsibility and redress, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2013.
  7. Casas-Cortes M., Cobarrubias S., Pickles J., Good neighbours make good fences’: Seahorse operations, border externalization and extra-territoriality, “European Urban and Regional Studies” 2016, vol. 23, issue 3.
  8. Collet E., The Paradox of the eu–Turkey Refugee Deal, Migration Policy Institute, Washington 2016.
  9. Crépeau F., Report of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants. Regional study: management of the external borders of the European Union and its impact on the human rights of migrants, UN Human Rights Council, Geneva 2013.
  10. Da Costa K., The Extraterritorial Application of Selected Human Rights Treaties, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden 2013.
  11. De Boer T., Closing Legal Black Holes: The Role of Extraterritorial Jurisdiction in Refugee Rights Protection, “Journal of Refugee Studies” 2013, vol. 28, no. 1.
  12. De Guttry A., Capone F., Sommario E., Dealing with migrants in the central Mediterranean route: A legal analysis of recent bilateral agreements between Italy and Libya, “International Migration” 2018, vol. 56, issue 3.
  13. Deleixhe M., La Grèce, bouclier de l’Europe?, „Esprit” 2020, vol. 7–8.
  14. Den Heijer M., Europe and Extraterritorial Asylum, Hart Publishing, Oxford and Portland, Oregon 2012.
  15. Enria N., Gerwens S., Greek-Turkish border crisis: Refugees are paying the price for the EU’s failure to reform its asylum system 2020, London School of Economics and Political Science, London 2020, available on the internet [accessed: 20 VII 2020]: <https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2020/03/25/greek-turkish-border-crisis-refugees-are-paying-the-price-for-the-eus-failure-to-reform-its-asylum-system/>.
  16. Faist T., Contested externalisation: responses to global inequalities, “Comparative Migration Studies” 2020, vol. 7, issue 45.
  17. Fekte L., Europe: Crimes of Solidarity, “Race & Class” 2009, vol. 50, issue 4.
  18. Fernández Arribas G., The EU–Turkey Statement, the Treaty-Making Process and Competent Organs. Is the Statement an International Agreement?, “European Papers” 2017, vol. 2, issue 1.
  19. Fitzgerald D. S., Remote control of migration: theorising territoriality, shared coercion, and deterrence, “Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies” 2020, vol. 46, issue 1.
  20. Foret F., Calligaro O., European values: Challenges and opportunities for EU governance, Routledge, New York 2018.
  21. Frelick B., Kysel I. M., Podkul J., The Impact of Externalization of Migration Controls on the Rights of Asylum Seekers and Other Migrants, “Journal on Migration and Human Security” 2016, vol. 4 issue 4.
  22. Gammeltoft-Hansen T., Access to Asylum: International Refugee Law and the Globalisation of Migration Control, Cambridge Studies in International and Comparative Law, Cambridge 2011.
  23. Gammeltoft-Hansen T., Nyberg N., The migration industry and the commercialization of international migration, Routledge, New York 2013.
  24. Gammeltoft-Hansen T., The refugee, the sovereign and the sea: EU interdiction policies in the Mediterranean, “DIIS Working Paper” 2008, vol. 6.
  25. Generale A., When migrants do not arrive in Europe: The Memorandum of Understanding, EU-Logos Athena, 4 III 2020 [accessed: 14 V 2020], available on the internet: <https://www.eu-logos.org/2020/03/04/when-migrants-do-not-arrive-in-europe-the-memorandum-of-understanding/>.
  26. Goodwin-Gill G., The Right to Seek Asylum: Interception at Sea and the Principle of Non-Refoulement, “International Journal of Refugee Law” 2011, vol. 23.
  27. Goran I., Gjurovski M., The axiological foundations of the European Union foreign policy, “Horizons” 2014, vol. 16.
  28. Gozdziak E. M., Main I., European Norms and Values and the Refugee Crisis: Issues and Challenges, [in:] eds. E. M. Gozdziak, I. Main, B. Suter, Europe and the Refugee Response: A Crisis of Values, Routledge, New York 2020.
  29. Grange M., Flynn M., Immigration Detention in Libya, Global Detention Project, Geneva 2015, available on the internet [accessed: 20 V 2020]: <https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/5567387e4.pdf>.
  30. Hamood S., EU–Libya cooperation on migration: a raw deal for refugees and migrants?, “Journal of Refugee Studies” 2008, vol. 21, issue 1.
  31. Hart H. L. A., Honoré T., Causation in the Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford 1985.
  32. Hathaway J., Gammeltoft-Hansen T., Non-Refoulement in a World of Cooperative Deterrence, University of Michigan Law School, Law and Economics, Michigan 2014.
  33. Hecke G., Hess S., Tracing the Effects of the EU–Turkey Deal The Momentum of the Multi-layered Turkish Border Regime, “Border Regime Studies” 2017, vol. 3, issue 2.
  34. Hintjens H., Bilgic A., The EU’s Proxy War on Refugees, “State Crime Journal” 2019, vol. 8, issue 1.
  35. Hodal K., Humanity is on path to self-destruction, warns UN special rapporteur, “The Guardian” [online], 10 XII 2018 [accessed: 23 VI 2020]: <https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2018/dec/10/humanity-is-on-path-to-self-destruction-warns-un-special-rapporteur-nils-melzer>.
  36. Isik E., The EU–Turkey Refugee Deal and the Kurdish Issue, Al Jazeera Opinions War & Conflict, 5 iii 2016 [accessed: 19 v 2020]: <https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2016/03/eu-turkey-refugee-deal-kurdish-issue-160302113254551.html>.
  37. İşleyen, B., Turkey’s governance of irregular migration at European Union borders: Emerging geographies of care and control, “Environment and Planning D: Society and Space” 2018, vol. 36, issue 5.
  38. Kafkoutsou N. R., Oikonomou S. V., Dimmished, Derogated, Denied. How the right to asylum in Greece is undermined by the lack of EU responsibility sharing, Oxfam and Greek Council for Refugees, Cowley, Oxford 2020, available on the internet [accessed: 12 V 2020]: <https://oxfamilibrary.openrepository.com/bitstream/handle/10546/621011/bp-diminished-derogated-denied-greece-refugees-020720-en.pdf>.
  39. Karadağ S., Extraterritoriality of European borders to Turkey. An implementation perspective of counteractive strategies, “Comparative Migration Studies” 2019, vol. 7, issue 12.
  40. Kaya A., Rottmann S., Gökalp Aras E., Mencütek Z. S., Border Management and protection policies for Syrian refugees in Turkey, Respond, Policy Brief, 1 VI 2020 [accessed: 15 I 2021], available on the internet: <https://respondmigration.com/policy-briefs/border-management-protection-policies-for-syrian-refugees-in-turkey>.
  41. Klaus W., Lévay M., Rzeplińska I., Scheinost M., Refugees and asylum seekers in Central European Countries: Reality, politics and the creation of fear in societies, [in:] Refugees and Migrants in Law and Policy, Springer, Cham 2018.
  42. Klepp S., Italy and its Libyan Cooperation Program: Pioneer of the European Union’s Refugee Policy?, Middle East Institute, Washington D.C. 2010.
  43. Korkut U., Pragmatism, moral responsibility or policy change: The Syrian refugee crisis and selective humanitarianism in the Turkish refugee regime, “Comparative Migration Studies” 2016, vol. 4, issue 2.
  44. Lemberg-Pedersen M., Manufacturing displacement. Externalization and postcoloniality in European migration control, “Global Affairs” 2019, vol. 5, issue 3.
  45. Levy C., Refugees, Europe, Camps/State of Exception: “Into The Zone”, the European Union and Extraterritorial Processing of Migrants, Refugees, and Asylum-seekers (Theories and Practice), “Refugee Survey Quarterly” 2010, vol. 29, issue 1.
  46. Malakooti A., The Political Economy of Migrant Detention in Libya: Understanding the players and the business models, Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime, Geneva 2019.
  47. Mandıracı B., Sharing the Burden. Revisiting the EU–Turkey Migration Deal, „Crisis Group” [online], 13 iii 2020.
  48. Milanovic M., Extraterritorial Application of Human Rights Treaties: Law, Principle, and Policy, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2011.
  49. Miller D., National Responsibility and Global Justice, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2007.
  50. Mitzen J., Anxious Community: EU as (in)Security Community, “European Security” 2018, vol. 27, issue 3.
  51. Moreno-Lax V., EU External Migration Policy and the Protection of Human Rights, European Parliament, Brussels 2020, available on the internet [accessed: II 2021]: <http://www.epgencms.europarl.europa.eu.cmsdata/upload 5c6d5a01040ceu_External_Migration_Policy_and_the_Protection_of_Human_Rights.pdf>, <https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2020/603512/EXPO_IDA(2020)603512_EN.pdf>.
  52. Morgese G., Italia,Libia e Questione Migratoria. Sfide storiche, politiche della memoria ed integrazione europea mezzogiorno e area mediterranea, Universita degli studi di Bari Aldo Moro, Bari 2020, available on the internet [accessed: 12 VI 2020]: <http://jmc.uniba.it/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Feb2020_Morgese.pdf>.
  53. Palan R., Tax Havens and the Commercialization of State Sovereignty, „International Organization” 1957, vol. 56, issue 1.
  54. Pascale G., Is Italy internationally responsible for the gross human rights violations against migrants in Libya? „QIL” 2019, vol. 56.
  55. Piscitelli G., Trading in suffering: detention, exploitation and abuse in Libya, „Medici Senza Frontiere”, Geneva 2019, available on the internet: <https://www.msf.org/libya’s-cycle-detention-exploitation-and-abuse-against-migrants-and-refugees>.
  56. Poon M., EU–Turkey Deal: Violation of, or consistency with, international law?, “European Papers” 2016, vol. 1, issue 3.
  57. Rijpma J., Cremona M., The extra-territorialisation of EU migration policies and the rule of law, “EUI LAW Working Paper” 2007, vol. 2007, issue 7.
  58. Ronzitti N., Il trattato Italia-Libia di amicizia, partenariato e cooperazione, Istituto Affari Internazionali, Roma 2009, available on the internet [accessed: 26 V 2020]: <http://www.iai.it/sites/default/files/pi_a_c_108.pdf>.
  59. Ryan B., Mitsilegas V., Extraterritorial Immigration Control: Legal Challenges, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden 2010.
  60. Sylla A., Schultz S. U., Commemorating the Deadly Other Side of Externalized Borders.“Migrant-Martyrs”, Sacrifices and Politizations of (Irregular) Migration on the International Migrants Day in Mali, “Comparative Migration Studies” 2019, vol. 8, issue 4.
  61. Ulusoy O., Battjes H., Situation of readmitted migrants and refugees from Greece to Turkey under the eu–Turkey statement, “vu Migration Law Series” 2017, vol. 15.
  62. Üstübici A., EU–Turkey cooperation on migration. Survey of Experts and Actors on the Euro-Mediterranean Region, “Euromed Survey” 2017, vol. 7.
  63. Üstübici A., İçduygu A., Border closures and the externalization of immigration controls in the Mediterranean: A comparative analysis of Morocco and Turkey, “New Perspectives on Turkey” 2018, vol. 59.
  64. Üstübici A., The impact of externalized migration governance on Turkey: technocratic migration governance and the production of differentiated legal status, „Comparative Migration Studies” 2019, vol. 7, issue 46.
  65. Van Aelst H., The Humanitarian Consequences of European Union Immigration Policy’s Externalisation in Libya: The Case of Detention and its Impact on Migrants’ Health, “BSIS Journal of International Studies” 2011, vol. 8.
  66. Völkel J. C., Money for Nothing, the Cricks for Free, “Comparative Migration Studies” 2014, vol. 2.
  67. Wilde R. G., The extraterritorial application of international human rights law on civil and political rights, Routledge, New York 2013.
  68. Woollard C., Has the Mediterranean Refugee Crisis Undermined European Values?, European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE), Brussels 2018, available on the internet [accessed: 01 II 2021]: <https://www.iemed.org/recursos-compartits/pdfs/Europe_Crisis_Wollard_2_Medyearbook2018.pdf>.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Podobne artykuły

1 2 3 > >> 

Możesz również Rozpocznij zaawansowane wyszukiwanie podobieństw dla tego artykułu.