Jürgen Bast
Jürgen Bast is Professor of Public Law and European Law at Justus Liebig University Giessen, spokesperson of the interdisciplinary Research Group “Human Rights Discourse in Migration Societies” (MeDiMi) funded by the German Research Foundation (FOR 5321), and Academic Director of the Refugee Law Clinic, a clinical education program at Giessen law school. His main research interests are in migration law, human rights, and European constitutional law.
less
Related Authors
InterestsView All (6)
Uploads
Papers by Jürgen Bast
The parallel emergence of the Global Compact on Refugees (GCR) may suggest otherwise – namely, that the GCM is not relevant for refugees and other protection-seeking migrants. However, the legal construction that best serves the object and purpose of both documents is the assumption that the two Compacts have an overlapping scope of application. The GCM addresses specific protection needs of protection-seeking migrants who are not covered by the 1951 Refugee Convention, and it serves as an umbrella, strengthening the core human rights of migrants regardless of their status, including protection-seeking migrants. Hence, the GCM improves the international protection system as a whole and should be acknowledged as such.
achieve progress in implementing the Compacts’ commitments. Yet, the current top-down and State-led review process does not offer an efficient platform for identifying cases of non-adherence to Compact standards. This article uses a case study approach to highlight instances of non-compliance with Compact standards in Canada, South Africa, and the European Union. We analyze State practice in these three regions in relation to (i) use of immigration detention and (ii) access to the asylum procedure, with access
to healthcare as a cross-cutting issue. The article discusses how the Compacts’ review mechanisms could be improved and their added value in terms of their impact on domestic migration policies. It argues that both Compact review and implementation can be improved through increased civil society participation.
MeDiMi traces the humanrightization of discourse in migration societies in three contexts. These contexts include the legal system, areas of political action, as well as other professional and everyday socio-cultural contexts in which perceptions of self and the attitudes of actors within migration societies are expressed and formed. Legal analysis, social-science research and cultural studies of ten selected fields will provide the empirical basis for a theory of discursive practices in migration societies. This will enable us to achieve a new understanding of the role of human rights in contemporary societies, especially European ones.
ihren Niederschlag im Recht der Migrationssteuerung gefunden haben. Das Recht wird dabei als Teil des kulturellen Gedächtnisses verstanden, als ein Archiv sedimentierter Ideen, Erfahrungen und sozialer Beziehungen. Der Beitrag zeigt, wie Konstruktionsabhängigkeit und Bedeutungsvielfalt die hoheitlichen Versuche kennzeichnen, mit den Mitteln des Rechts lenkend in das Migrationsgeschehen einzugreifen. Unter Rückgriff auf rechtsgeschichtliche und soziologische Erkenntnisse identifiziert er fünf konkurrierende Perspektiven, denen jeweils charakteristische Rechtsinstitute und Steuerungsanliegen entsprechen: die Gefahrenabwehr-Perspektive, die zwischenstaatliche, die ökonomische, die kulturelle und die individualrechtliche Perspektive.
The parallel emergence of the Global Compact on Refugees (GCR) may suggest otherwise – namely, that the GCM is not relevant for refugees and other protection-seeking migrants. However, the legal construction that best serves the object and purpose of both documents is the assumption that the two Compacts have an overlapping scope of application. The GCM addresses specific protection needs of protection-seeking migrants who are not covered by the 1951 Refugee Convention, and it serves as an umbrella, strengthening the core human rights of migrants regardless of their status, including protection-seeking migrants. Hence, the GCM improves the international protection system as a whole and should be acknowledged as such.
achieve progress in implementing the Compacts’ commitments. Yet, the current top-down and State-led review process does not offer an efficient platform for identifying cases of non-adherence to Compact standards. This article uses a case study approach to highlight instances of non-compliance with Compact standards in Canada, South Africa, and the European Union. We analyze State practice in these three regions in relation to (i) use of immigration detention and (ii) access to the asylum procedure, with access
to healthcare as a cross-cutting issue. The article discusses how the Compacts’ review mechanisms could be improved and their added value in terms of their impact on domestic migration policies. It argues that both Compact review and implementation can be improved through increased civil society participation.
MeDiMi traces the humanrightization of discourse in migration societies in three contexts. These contexts include the legal system, areas of political action, as well as other professional and everyday socio-cultural contexts in which perceptions of self and the attitudes of actors within migration societies are expressed and formed. Legal analysis, social-science research and cultural studies of ten selected fields will provide the empirical basis for a theory of discursive practices in migration societies. This will enable us to achieve a new understanding of the role of human rights in contemporary societies, especially European ones.
ihren Niederschlag im Recht der Migrationssteuerung gefunden haben. Das Recht wird dabei als Teil des kulturellen Gedächtnisses verstanden, als ein Archiv sedimentierter Ideen, Erfahrungen und sozialer Beziehungen. Der Beitrag zeigt, wie Konstruktionsabhängigkeit und Bedeutungsvielfalt die hoheitlichen Versuche kennzeichnen, mit den Mitteln des Rechts lenkend in das Migrationsgeschehen einzugreifen. Unter Rückgriff auf rechtsgeschichtliche und soziologische Erkenntnisse identifiziert er fünf konkurrierende Perspektiven, denen jeweils charakteristische Rechtsinstitute und Steuerungsanliegen entsprechen: die Gefahrenabwehr-Perspektive, die zwischenstaatliche, die ökonomische, die kulturelle und die individualrechtliche Perspektive.
Seit 2/2024 open acdess verfügbar unter DOI 10.1628/978-3-16-151288-9.
The MeDiMi conference 2024 explored the intersection of human rights and migration in law, politics, and everyday life. The participants discussed a wide variety of legal struggles, issues of in-/exclusion, and (self-)representations of actors. This present book contains the abstracts and short bios of the speakers. It documents the contributions to an exciting and enriching conference that brought together people from various disciplines and countries.