The first major study to compare changes made to Canadian and US refugee law after and because of 9/11, Refugee Law after 9/11 uncovers crucial connections among refugee law, security relativism, and national self-image.
Über den Autor
Obiora Chinedu Okafor is York Research Chair in International and Transnational Legal Studies and professor of law at Osgoode Hall Law School at York University. He is the United Nations Independent Expert on Human Rights and International Solidarity and a former chair of the UN Human Rights Council Advisory Committee. He is also the author of The African Human Rights System, Activist Forces and International Institutions; Legitimizing Human Rights NGOs: Lessons from Nigeria; Re-defining Legitimate Statehood: International Law and State Fragmentation in Africa; and dozens of other books.
Inhaltsverzeichnis
Introduction: Refugee Law after 9/11: A Canada-US Comparison
1 Deportations to Torture
2 The Detention of Asylum Seekers and Refugees
3 Terrorism-Related Inadmissibility
4 The Canada-US Safe Third Country Measure
Conclusion: Refugee Law, Security Relativism, and National Self-Image in Canada and the US after 9/11
Notes; Index
Klappentext
"Common wisdom suggests that 9/11 changed everything about refugee law in the United States and in Canada. But did it? "Refugee Law after 9/11" systematically examines the evidence to reveal that refugee rights were already so whittled down in both countries before 9/11 that there was relatively little room for negative change after the attacks. It also shows that the Canadian refugee law regime reacted to 9/11 in much the same way as its US counterpart, and these similar reactions raise significant questions about security relativism and national self-image in the two countries."--
