Suchergebnisse

© 2017, The Journal of Global Affairs is the official student research publication of the Department of International and Area Studies in the College of International Studies at the University of Oklahoma. Correspondence may be sent to: Journal of Global Affairs, C/O CIS/DIAS, 729 Elm Avenue, Hester Hall 150, Norman, Oklahoma 73019, United States of America. Email: jga@ou.edu. ; This paper explores the intersection of European and international refugee and human rights law. While numerous treaties incorporate the rights of forced migrants, the Refugee Convention with the 1967 Protocol represents the most important instrument in regards to refugee protection. The European Union (EU) has established its own regional refugee and human rights regime with the European Convention of Human Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union as centerpieces. Although the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights have applied more progressive interpretations of refugee and asylum law, they have at times defaulted to conservative rulings, thereby compromising refugee protection. EU legislation, specifically the CEAS with the Dublin Regulation, has qualified the access to asylum and the principle of non- refoulement. The restrictive European visa regime and the various control mechanisms limit the right to seek asylum, the right to leave one's country, and access to an asylum procedure. The "safe country" concept further compromises refugee protection as it homogenizes asylum seekers and decreases the quality of asylum procedures. The EU is likely to continue and expand its conservative asylum system, which will come at the expense of overall refugee security and protection. ; About Stefanie Neumeier ; Stefanie Neumeier received a bachelor's degree in International Studies with a focus on International Relations from the University of Idaho. She is currently enrolled in the International Studies Master's program at the University of Oklahoma. Stefanie's research interests include Theory of International Relations, International Law, Human Rights, Forced Migration/Refugees, and the European Union. She is interested in further exploring regional and international migration and refugee regimes and the development of security institutions and international law. Previously, Stefanie worked as an intern in the US House of Representatives and in the Bundestag in Berlin, as well as volunteering in refugee camps and serving as a mentor to a Bosnian refugee family. After graduation in May, Stefanie will continue her graduate studies as a Ph.D. student in Political Science and International Relations at the University of Southern California. ; The Journal of Global Affairs is published in conjunction with the College of International Studies at the University of Oklahoma. ; undergraduate

A transnational legal order (TLO) authoritatively shapes "the understanding and practice of law" in a specific area of social activity, involving both state and civil society actors, and linking national, regional, and international levels. We argue that a TLO has emerged and settled since 1945 around capital punishment. Our analysis of the death penalty TLO treats "bottom-up" and "top-down" effects as interconnected, addresses the creation of legal order at both national and international levels, and emphasizes the recursivity linking developments at both levels. We trace the development of death penalty abolition from its origins in the immediate aftermath of World War II. Because the practical effects of abolition—in shaping legal and penal practice—necessarily occur at the national level, the analysis focuses on the international, transnational, and domestic factors that lead states to end capital punishment. After describing the emergence of a TLO abolishing the death penalty, we offer a new way of measuring the global and country-specific activities of transnational advocacy groups (Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International). We incorporate that measure in an analysis of data from about 150 countries. The central hypothesis is that making the TLO on capital punishment effective through abolition in national law requires modes of political action that overcome majoritarian public support for retention. We suggest two domestic institutional features that make abolition more likely despite retentionist popular opinion: proportional representation in the legislature and independent courts. We also suggest that transnational non-governmental organizations (NGO) and some regional organizations can support the move to abolish. The data analysis is largely consistent with these propositions and brief case studies illustrate the principal mechanisms.