The purpose of my thesis Position of war refugees in international law is to analyze particular types of protection of war refugees, to construe unclear legal provisions and to evaluate suitability of possible solutions. The thesis focuses on specifics of the position of war refugees and on options of their protection. The research question relates to the determination who a war refugee is and how his situation is solved in international law. The reason for this research is my great interest in refugee law and the current instability of the position of war refugees. The methodology used during writing the thesis was the analysis, comparison and description. The thesis is composed of three chapters, each of them dealing with different aspects of the position and the protection of war refugees. Chapter One defines characteristics of war refugees and addresses the issue of armed conflicts. Chapter Two concerns individual options of protection of war refugees in international law. This part concentrates primarily on issues related to the broader refugee definition, asylum and subsidiary protection. Within this chapter subsidiary protection is examined from a general point of view, as well as in relation to provisions of particular legal instruments. Furthermore, it pays close attention to the law of...

The German government’s decision in 2016 to reduce the number of incoming immigrants by suspending family reunification for beneficiaries of subsidiary protection for two years, sparked a controversial debate, with some critics arguing that family reunification represents a human right. Contributing to the very scarce literature about this development, the aim pursued in this thesis is to better understand the differing discourses and (de-)legitimation strategies regarding the suspension by comparatively analysing written statements handed in to German parliament by the government and civil society organisations in March of 2017. The theoretical framework underlying this thesis are the discursive understanding of human rights by Seyla Benhabib and Michel Foucault’s theorisation of power and knowledge. The methodological framework consists of a three-dimensional critical discourse analysis by Norman Fairclough complemented with an analysis of the four categories of (de-)legitimation by Theo van Leeuwen. The results of the analysis show that two types of discourse are pursued in the material: a legal, technical discourse by the government supported by (de-)legitimation strategies relying on national laws, administrative court decisions and the value of qualities like leadership and a discourse focused on the value of family life by the civil society organisations. Despite the diverse backgrounds of the civil society organisations analysed, coinciding (de-)legitimation strategies based on the importance of family life for integration and based on the case law of federal and European courts were identified.

No description available.

Définie comme droit national puis comme droit communautaire depuis l’adoption de la Convention de Dublin en 1990 par les États membres, la politique d’asile de l’Union européenne est devenue indissociable de sa politique migratoire. Le contexte des arrivées massives d’exilés dans l’Union européenne au cours des années 2010 a permis à l’UE de renforcer l’intégration de la demande d’asile dans une politique sécuritaire en la hiérarchisant, la catégorisant et en renforçant l’externalisation de son traitement. Cependant, en confirmant le mécanisme « Dublin » qui appelle à la solidarité des États membres dans la prise en charge des demandeurs d’asile, l’Union européenne, qui formait jusque-là un bloc unifié institutionnellement autour des valeurs des droits de l’Homme et de la démocratie, est désormais traversée par des conflits qui laissent ouverte la question de l’intégration et du rejet des demandeurs d’asile et qui révèlent une crise plus large. / Defined as national law and then as Community law since the adoption of the Dublin Convention in 1990 by the Member States, the asylum policy of the European Union has become inseparable from its migration policy. The context of the mass influx of exiles into the European Union in the course of 2010 has allowed the EU to strengthen the integration of asylum demand into a security policy by prioritizing, categorizing and strengthening the outsourcing of its treatment. However, by confirming the « Dublin » mechanism which calls for the solidarity of the Member States in the care of asylum seekers, the European Union, which until then formed an institutionally unified blocaround the values of the human rights and democracy, is now crossed by conflicts that leave open the question of integration and rejection of asylum seekers and reveal a wider crisis.