Suchergebnisse

Who is a refugee? -- Who decides who is a refugee? -- Citizenship and the claiming of rights -- Democracy between the need for institutions and demands of inclusion -- Institutions of refugees' political participation -- The role of associative rights for refugees' political voice -- Humanitarian government and the political membership of refugees -- Representation of refugees in international forums.

Abstract
Stories shape our thinking about legal relationships and the challenges of law. This paper is interested in the ways, in which spatial constellations are imagined in connection with the law. It analyzes selected stories by Franz Kafka and Rachel Shihor alongside each other. Legal themes permeate these stories. Their fictive dialogue brings forth contrasting imaginations of community, universalism, and human limitations. Starting with their variations on the Tower of Babel story, the paper then discusses Kafka's "The Great Wall of China", "Before the Law", and "The Burrow", as well as Shihor's "The Bridge", "The Bus", "The Door", and "Questions". These stories illuminate Kafka's and Shihor's rich, narrative vocabulary of spatial imaginations of the law, and the fruitful contrast of their perspectives.

Abstract
Language rights have traditionally been codified and discussed in the context of minority protection. The identification of language rights with questions of national minorities can, however, confound the analysis. This article explores the freedom of using a language and argues that the individual dimension of language rights must not be ignored beside the group dimension. The argument proceeds along a reading of three recent cases from the European Court of Human Rights, which concerned the use of Kurdish in Turkey. The Court's reasoning illustrates the risk of an 'anxiety logic', which sees any language rights in connection with political claims of groups, thereby introducing additional conditions for the right and disregarding the significance a specific language can have for an individual, being more than a medium of conveying and receiving information. Conceptualising language use as an individual freedom is necessary also to account for situations other than national minorities, most importantly for the language rights of immigrants.

Neben der Geschichte der Dublin-Verordnung als äußerst zähem System einer ungerechten Zuständigkeitsverteilung zwischen Staaten gibt es eine zweite Geschichte der Dublin-Verordnung: Die langsame Stärkung der subjektiven Rechte von Asylbewerbern. Diese Geschichte erhält ein weiteres Kapitel mit dem diese Woche verkündeten Urteil Mengesteab des Europäischen Gerichtshofs. Die Entscheidung ist hochrelevant für die Praxis, weil sie die Fristenberechnung betrifft, bis wann ein Asylsuchender in einen anderen Mitgliedstaat gemäß Dublin-Zuständigkeit zurückgewiesen werden kann. Und die Entscheidung markiert zugleich, dass angesichts politischer Lethargie die größte Hoffnung für eine Veränderung des festgefahrenen Dublin-Systems in den Klagemöglichkeiten liegt.

Mit einem Hungerstreik protestierten vor ein paar Wochen rund hundert Asylsuchende am Münchener Rindermarkt. Sie forderten die sofortige Anerkennung ihrer Asylanträge und beklagten die unwürdigen Lebensbedingungen, denen Asylsuchende in Deutschland ausgesetzt sind. Nach mehreren Tagen wurde die gesundheitliche Situation der Hungerstreikenden immer kritischer, Vermittlungsversuche scheiterten und die Politik brachte schließlich ihre Hilflosigkeit zum Ausdruck, indem sie das Protestlager durch die Polizei räumen ließ.

Legal grammar is understood as the conceptual and linguistic foundation on which legal decisions rest – law's meta-structure, its argumentative techniques and its systematicity. The essay distinguishes between two ways of thinking about this grammar. The first way of thinking appeals to a grammar as a stabilizing factor, maintaining the coherence of the law. The second way of thinking highlights the asymmetries of power within this structure and perceives legal grammar as the medium carrying the ideological commitments of the law. As the essay ultimately argues, both perspectives react differently to the challenges of globalization that the law is confronted with. While the debate on the grammar(s) of global law is one place where future political order is negotiated, the outcome of the debate is largely open.