Law and Philosophy 32 (5):645-671 (2013)
AbstractHundreds of millions of people around the world are unable to meet their needs on their own, and do not receive adequate protection or support from their home states. These people, if they are to be provided for, need assistance from the international community. If we are to meet our duties to these people, we must have ways of knowing who should be eligible for different forms of relief. One prominent proposal from scholars and activists has been to classify all who are unable to meet their basic needs on their own as ‘refugees’, and to extend to them the sorts of protections established under the United Nations Refugee Convention. Such an approach would expand the traditional refugee definition significantly. Unlike most academic commentators discussing this issue, I reject calls for an expanded refugee definition, and instead defend the core elements of the definition set out in the 1967 Protocol to the United Nations Refugee Convention. Using the tools of moral and political philosophy, I explain in this article how the group picked out by this definition has particular characteristics that make refugee protection distinctly appropriate for it. While many people in need of assistance can be helped ‘in place’, in their home countries, or by providing a form of temporary protected status to them, this is not so, I show, of convention refugees. The group picked out by the UN refugee definition is a normatively distinct group to whom we owe particular duties, duties we can only meet by granting them refuge in a safe country. Additionally, there are further practical reasons why a broader refugee definition may lead to problems. Finally, I argue that rejecting the call for a broader definition of refugees will better help us meet our duties to those in need than would an expanded definition
Similar books and articles
Unacknowledged and unwanted? 'Environmental refugees' in search of legal status.Nina Höing & Jona Razzaque - 2012 - Journal of Global Ethics 8 (1):19-40.
The path to protection: The rationale for refugee law in pakistan and the appropriate direction of reform.Omar N. Chaudhary - unknown
Environmental refugees: What rights? Which duties?Derek R. Bell - 2004 - Res Publica 10 (2):135-152.
Ecological Refugees, States Borders, and the Lockean Proviso.Cara Nine - 2010 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 27 (4):359-375.
What (If Anything) Is Wrong with Trading Refugee Quotas?Jaakko Kuosmanen - 2013 - Res Publica 19 (2):103-119.
Gang-related asylum claims: An overview and prescription.Matthew J. Lister - 2008 - University of Memphis Law Review 38 (4).
Toward a reformulation of international refugee law.Jack I. Garvey - 1985 - Harvard International Law Journal 26 (2):483-500.
Global justice: an anti-collectivist and pro-causal ethic.James Franklin - 2012 - Solidarity 2 (1).
Sexual and reproductive health of asylum-seeking and refugee women in europe: Entitlements and access to health services.Kristin Janssens, Marleen Bosmans, Els Leye & Marleen Temmerman - 2006 - Journal of Global Ethics 2 (2):183 – 196.
Does ordinary injustice make extraordinary injustice possible? Gender, structural injustice, and the ethics of refugee determination.Serena Parekh - 2012 - Journal of Global Ethics 8 (2-3):269-281.
Closed Borders, Human Rights, and Democratic Legitimation.Arash Abizadeh - 2010 - In David Hollenbach (ed.), Driven From Home: Human Rights and the New Realities of Forced Migration. Georgetown University Press.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Refugee Rights: Against Expanding the Definition of a “Refugee” and Unilateral Protection Elsewhere.Max Cherem - 2016 - Journal of Political Philosophy 24 (2):183-205.
Methodological Nationalism, Migration and Political Theory.Alex Sager - 2016 - Political Studies 64 (1):xx-yy.
Climate Change Refugees.Matthew Lister - 2014 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 17 (5):618-634.
Immigration Rights and the Justification of Immigration Restrictions.Caleb Yong - 2017 - Journal of Social Philosophy 48 (4):461-480.
References found in this work
Migration and Morality: A Liberal Egalitarian Perspective.Joseph H. Carens - 1992 - In Brian Barry & Robert E. Goodin (eds.), Free Movement: Ethical Issues in the Transnational Migration of People and of Money. University of Pennsylvania Press. pp. 25-47.