Annonce de la soutenance

24 February, 2021

Veuillez consulter la soutenance de thèse ci-jointe qui vous intéresserait.

Faten Kikano Hostipitalité, pouvoir et appropriation de l’espace dans l’habitat des réfugiés : le cas des réfugiés syriens au Liban 

Dans sa thèse, Faten propose une nouvelle lecture des espaces de refuge à travers les lentilles du pouvoir, de la culture et de l’espace. Elle étudie l’appropriation de ces espaces selon une approche transdisciplinaire et révèle les enjeux politiques, socioéconomiques, légaux et humanitaires qui influencent les milieux de vie des réfugiés. Faten explore le rôle des différents acteurs impliqués dans la gestion des espaces de refuge et met en évidence l’influence des politiques d’exclusion sur leur évolution. Elle questionne l’importance de la typologie de l’habitat (encampement ou non-encampement) par rapport aux conditions de vie des réfugiés. Son étude adopte la méthode des études de cas multiples au Liban. Ses résultats montrent que, sous prétexte de raccourcir la durée du séjour des réfugiés, les politiques d’accueil sont en réalité adoptées dans l’intérêt politique et économique d’acteurs étatiques et privés influents. Faten démontre que l’exclusion des réfugiés des systèmes institutionnels et formels les vulnérabilise afin de faciliter leur exploitation. Dans le but d’atteindre une meilleure justice spatiale, elle recommande aux gouvernements d’accueil et aux décideurs l’adoption de stratégies plus inclusives à l’égard des réfugiés permettant le renforcement de leurs capacités et la réalisation de leur autonomie, et des approches adaptées à l’usage et à la durée de leurs espaces. 

Mots-clés : espaces de refuge, appropriation de l’espace, géométries de pouvoir, hostipitalité, exclusion, camps, non-lieux, lieux socio identitaires, réfugiés syriens, Liban 

Mardi 9 mars 2021, 9h00 heures 

Zoom Meeting – Faculté de l’aménagement 

 ————————————————–

 PhD Thesis Defence 

 Faten KikanoHostipitality, place identity and appropriation of refuge spaces : the case of Syrian refugees in Lebanon 

 In her thesis, Faten proposes a new reading of refugee spaces through the lenses of power, culture, and space. She studies the appropriation of these spaces based on a transdisciplinary approach, revealing the political, socioeconomic, legal, and humanitarian issues that influence refugees’ living environments. Faten explores the roles of different actors involved in the management of refugee spaces and highlights the influence of policies of exclusion on the development of these spaces. She examines the relevance of space typologies (camps or non-camps) in relation to refugees’ well-being. Her study adopts the multiple case study method. Her research findings show that while hosting policies allegedly aim at shortening the length of refugees’ stay, they are in fact in favor of the interests of influential state and private actors. Faten demonstrates that refugees’ exclusion from formal systems increases their vulnerability and facilitates their exploitation. To achieve better spatial justice, she recommends that host governments and decision-makers adopt more inclusive strategies towards refugees, supporting their empowerment and autonomy, and housing approaches adapted to the use and the duration of their spaces. 

Keywords : refuge spaces, space appropriation, power geometries, hostipitality, exclusion, camps, non-places, place identity, Syrian refugees, Lebanon. 

Tuesday 9 March 2021, 9 : 00 am

Webinaire ACNU-Québec 10 décembre

9 December, 2020

ACNU-Québec - Invitation webinaire 10 décembre 2020

https://www.eventbrite.ca/e/billets-webinaire-en-direct-lonu-et-la-protection-des-droits-de-lhomme-125369432347?aff=affiliate3

Bordering the Pandemic: COVID-19, Immigration, and Emergency

UBC Migration Speakers Series by Asha Kaushal & Bethany Hastie

December 1, 2020

Bordering the Pandemic: COVID-19, Immigration, and Emergency

An online talk by:
Dr. Asha Kaushal
Assistant Professor, UBC Allard School of Law

&
Dr. Bethany Hastie
Assistant Professor, UBC Allard School of Law

with
Devin Eeg
Graduate, UBC Allard School of Law Graduate Program

Tuesday, December 1, 2020
12:30 – 2:00 p.m. (PST)

[ Abstract ]
In March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic led to the closure of Canada’s international borders. This closure was not absolute; it was marked by several exceptions. Those exceptions were contained in a series of Orders-in-Council (OiCs) which became the Canadian government’s mechanism of choice for governing the border. OiCs are swift, efficient, and flexible legal instruments, which makes them well-suited to a public health emergency. In this talk, we explore the nature, function and impact of regulating Canada’s borders through OiCs. Focusing on both the procedural and substantive dimensions of OiCs, we interrogate their potential political, legal, and social consequences. We draw on the theory of the emergency to unpack and illustrate how this unfolds, and to explain why it creates serious challenges for longer-term immigration regulation. We demonstrate how the use and content of the pandemic OiCs with respect to the border has reignited reliance on status-based distinctions in immigration regulation, and we consider the ways in which this may produce discriminatory effects at and within Canada’s borders.

Please RSVP for this event here

Beyond the 2018 Global Compact for Migration

The Future of International Cooperation on Migration Governance - February 5th, 2020

 

 

The Oppenheimer Chair in Public International Law and the Centre for Human Rights and Legal Pluralism at McGill university Faculty of Law, hosted a panel discussion on the future of the Global Compact for Migration, featuring:

  • His Excellency Ambassador Juan José Gómez Camacho, Ambassador of Mexico to Canada, former Permanent Representative of Mexico to the United Nations between 2016 and 2019 and
  • Hon. Luise Arbour, recently the UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General on International Migration, a former Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, and a former Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.

The panel discussion was hosted and moderated by:

  • Pr François Crépeau is the Hans & Tamar Oppenheimer Chair in Public International Lawand the Director of the McGill Center for Human Rights and Legal Pluralism. Pr Crépeau was the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrants from 2011 to 2017.

According to the United Nations, the global number of international migrants reached 272 million in 2019. This figure will increase due to population growth, enhanced connectivity, trade, rising inequality, demographic imbalances and climate change. Migration provides immense opportunity and benefits for home and host communities. At the same time, due to poor regulation and exploitation, migration can also create significant challenges for states and individuals alike. The 2018 Global Compact for Migration is the first-ever United Nations instrument on a common approach to the governance of international migration in all its dimensions. Our distinguished panelists were both instrumental to the crafting and adoption of the Global Compact. Although non-binding, the Compact is grounded in the values of state sovereignty, responsibility sharing, non-discrimination and human rights. It recognizes that a cooperative approach is needed to optimize the overall benefits of migration, while addressing its challenges for individuals and communities in countries of origin, transit and destination.

 

A Month, a Year, a Decade?

The Temporal Capacity of Protection for Refugees and Other Forced Migrants - Nov 11, 2019
11 November, 2019

 

5a20121a4

The Oppenheimer Chair in Public International Law and the Centre for Human Rights and Legal Pluralism, with the support of the McGill Refugee Research Group, welcome Professor Jane McAdam, University of New South Wales Law, Sydney, Australia; Director of the Andrew & Renata Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law; and Editor-in-Chief of the International Journal of Refugee Law journal.

In refugee law, the meaning of ‘well-founded fear of being persecuted’ has been extensively examined by courts and scholars alike. Yet, there has been very little consideration of how far into the future a risk of persecution may extend for protection to be warranted.

This lack of guidance on the question of timing has allowed an inappropriate notion of ‘imminence’ to infiltrate refugee decision-making across a range of jurisdictions – at times resulting in people being denied protection. It is especially pertinent to human rights-based claims involving harms that may manifest more gradually over time, such as those relating to the slow-onset impacts of climate change.

Professor McAdam’s talk examines how certain courts have grappled with ‘time’ in a relatively nuanced way, highlighting principles that may be instructive for other contexts.