Regime Entanglement in the Emergence of Interstitial Legal Fields: Denmark and the Uneasy Marriage of Human Rights and Migration Law

Abstract

Cet article examine les processus politiques et juridiques par lesquels les droits de l'homme et le droit de la migration ont été confondus – nous l’appellerons plus généralement ici « l'enchevêtrement des régimes ». L'enchevêtrement des régimes implique que les différents domaines du droit non seulement interagissent, mais soient plus étroitement liés et s'influencent mutuellement. Les droits de l'homme et le droit de la migration ont historiquement eu des trajectoires distinctes dans le droit et la politique européenne, mais le récent couplage des deux a transformé l’un et l’autre. Le droit de la migration a acquis un élan juridique et une autonomisation judiciaire grâce à l'engagement croissant du droit et des institutions des droits de l’homme ; les droits de l'homme ont acquis une légitimité dans leurs aspirations universalistes en développant, quoique lentement, une jurisprudence sur les droits des non-ressortissants. Le couplage des deux droits a cependant été politiquement controversé – parfois même explosif – ce qui a remis en cause les deux domaines du droit. Bien que cet enchevêtrement participe d’une dynamique européenne globale, l'article applique une approche plus localisée, utilisant le Danemark comme un cas d’étude pour comprendre comment ces deux régimes juridiques ont été mis en œuvre et ont interagi dans le droit et la politique à l’échelle nationale.

Network analysis and comparative migration law: examples from the European Court of Human Rights

“…This was hardly a fait acommpli, as the time of its founding 'migrants were hardly a consideration in the newly created human rights scheme (Dembour, 2015) but the ECHR has always had had a cosmopolitan ethos to ensure the jurisdiction ratione personae of the Convention extends to everyone within the member states (Article 1). The first migration cases began to enter the ECtHR case law in the 1980s, by which point the Court had established itself as a de facto supreme court of human rights in Europe through legal development in other areas (Madsen and Gammeltoft-Hansen, 2021). The ECtHR has since built a sophisticated jurisprudence that extends from rights on expulsion or extradition against nonrefoulement both within and outside member states' territory, and has had broad impact for a range of migrant rights, such as non-discrimination, detention, privacy, and family unity.…”

“…In this context, it is often neglected that the expansion of the rights of migrants at the ECtHR has equally been a catalyst for the normative development of international human rights law (Madsen and Gammeltoft-Hansen, 2021). Understanding the rights of migrants in the ECtHR legal space now seems to implicate human rights law itself as issues touching on the lives of migrants are replete in Strasbourg case law.…”

“…In sum, this brief analysis has attempted to show how network analysis can be used to gauge European human rights law (Madsen and Gammeltoft-Hansen, 2021). What is clear even from our exemplary analysis is the centrality of migration cases within different parts of the ECtHR's general jurisprudence.…”

Network analysis and comparative migration law: examples from the European Court of Human Rights

“…This was hardly a fait acommpli, as the time of its founding migrants ere hardl a consideration in the newly created human rights scheme (Dembour, 2015) but the ECHR has always had had a cosmopolitan ethos to ensure the jurisdiction ratione personae of the Convention extends to everyone within the member states (Article 1). The first migration cases began to enter the ECtHR case law in the 1980s, by which point the Court had established itself as a de facto supreme court of human rights in Europe through legal development in other areas (Madsen and Gammeltoft-Hansen, 2021). The ECtHR has since built a sophisticated jurisprudence that extends from rights on expulsion or extradition against nonrefoulement both within and outside member states territor , and has had broad impact for a range of migrant rights, such as non-discrimination, detention, privacy, and family unity.…”

Mobility and legal infrastructure for Ukrainian refugees

“…Visa rules, aviation law, maritime rescue rules and EU trade and development agreements have each been recalibrated to serve this overarching purpose. This type of “legal entanglement” is well‐known in other areas of transnational law and over time they can significantly reshape the constituent legal regimes or give rise to new hybrid legal norms (Gammeltoft‐Hansen & Madsen, 2021; Krisch, 2021). In refugee and migration law, a growing body of scholarship have documented these effects in terms of how these adjacent legal areas have gradually developed in a highly discriminatory manner, systematically excluding refugees and irregular migrants from access to what Spijkerboer has aptly termed the “global mobility infrastructure” (Spijkerboer, 2018).…”