Does a state's right to control borders justify harming refugees?
| Autor: | Bradley Hillier-Smith |
|---|---|
| Přispěvatelé: | University of St Andrews. Philosophy |
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Rok vydání: | 2023 |
| Předmět: |
Refugees
Permissible harm Sociology and Political Science T-NDAS SDG 16 - Peace Justice and Strong Institutions BJ Ethics Immigration SDG 10 - Reduced Inequalities AC JV Colonies and colonization. Emigration and immigration. International migration JV Philosophy Borders History and Philosophy of Science Freedom of association BJ MCP |
| Popis: | Certain states in the Global North have responded to refugees seeking safety on their territories through harmful practices of border violence, detention, encampment and containment that serve to prevent and deter refugee arrivals. These practices are ostensibly justified through an appeal to a right to control borders. This paper therefore assesses whether these harmful practices can indeed be morally justified by a state’s right to control borders. It analyses whether Christopher Heath Wellman’s account of a state’s right to freedom of association, which represents the most restrictive account of a state’s right to control borders available in the literature, can extend to justify current harmful practices against refugees. If not, then no available justification will be able to do so, and thus contemporary harmful practices used against refugees cannot be justified by a state’s right to control borders. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|