EconStor >
Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS), Copenhagen >
DIIS Working Papers, Danish Institute for International Studies >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10419/44650
  

Full metadata record

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorGammeltoft-Hansen, Thomasen_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-03-30en_US
dc.date.accessioned2011-04-08T09:06:08Z-
dc.date.available2011-04-08T09:06:08Z-
dc.date.issued2008en_US
dc.identifier.isbn978-87-7605-254-6en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10419/44650-
dc.description.abstractThis paper starts from the encounter between a European navy vessel and a dinghy carrying boat refugees and other desperate migrants across the Mediterranean or West African Sea towards Europe. It explores the growing trend in the EU of enacting migration control at the high seas or international waters - so-called interdiction. It is argued that these forms of extraterritorial migra-tion control aim at reconquering the efficiency of the sovereign function to control migration, by trying to either deconstruct or shift correlate obligations vis-à-vis refugees and other persecuted persons to third States. In both instances, European States are entering into a sovereignty game, in which creative strategies are developed in order to reassert sovereign power unconstrained by national and international obligations. Starting from an analysis of the refugee regime itself, the paper looks at the possibilities for as-serting human rights extraterritorially, on the high seas, in foreign territorial waters and in relation to situations defined as search and rescue missions. On the basis of this, two interrelated dynamics emerge. The first concerns the legal debate surrounding the criteria for establishing extra-territorial jurisdiction. The so far restrictive interpretations applied provide a context for States to deconstruct protection responsibilities towards refugees by moving migration control outside their sovereign territory and into that of a foreign State. The second dynamic is what could be termed a growing commercialisation of sovereignty for the purpose of migration control. By negotiating access to foreign territorial waters or simply outsource the function of migration control to e.g. North and West African countries, European States are exploiting territorial principles of international law to shift and reduce refugee responsibilities.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherDanish Institute for International Studies (DIIS) Copenhagenen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesDIIS working paper 2008:6en_US
dc.subject.ddc330en_US
dc.subject.stwFlüchtlingeen_US
dc.subject.stwSeerechten_US
dc.subject.stwAsylrechten_US
dc.subject.stwMittelmeeren_US
dc.subject.stwEU-Staatenen_US
dc.titleThe refugee, the sovereign and the sea: EU interdiction policies in the Mediterraneanen_US
dc.typeWorking Paperen_US
dc.identifier.ppn560120990en_US
dc.rightshttp://www.econstor.eu/dspace/Nutzungsbedingungenen_US
Appears in Collections:DIIS Working Papers, Danish Institute for International Studies

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
560120990.pdf338 kBAdobe PDF
No. of Downloads: Counter Stats
Show simple item record
Download bibliographical data as: BibTeX

Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.