Littérature scientifique sur le sujet « Human smuggling – European Union countries »

This study focuses on the protection and promotion of human rights in the context of the external relations of the European Union (EU). It sets out to examine, in particular, the position of human rights within the framework of EU foreign policy. While questions of human rights sparked a wide-ranging academic debate and resulted in enhanced levels of public scrutiny over the last decade, the research presented in this dissertation attempts to fill a significant gap in scholarly attention. It does so by offering a critique of the theoretical approaches towards, and the practical manifestations of human rights promotion initiatives in the context of EU policy interaction with countries in Asia. Evidence from previous work, included as part of this dissertation, suggests that the incremental growth of human rights competencies and agendas within the EU's legal and political systems was reflected in a number of areas of concrete EU external activity, such as the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), Development Policy, relations with the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) group of countries and the EU's New Asia Strategy. This dissertation attempts to demonstrate how, in the context of a Constructivist perspective within International Relations Theory in general, and EU-Asia relations in particular, the EU can be conceptualised as a value-guided, 'ethical' polity, grounded in a constitutional framework of Treaties. As a result of this, the Union introdued a more pronounced human rights dimension to its dialogue with Asia. The evidence indicates that, in respect of its Asian partners, the EU implemented human rights strategies in a number or formats and with varying degrees of success. The study scrutinises, in particular, the Commission's 'strategy papers' on Asia and the Asia-Europe Meetings (ASEM). In addition to findings analysed in previous work, this study demonstrates that the resulting debates about 'rights' and 'values' can be related to wider discourses derived from normative theory and surrounding issues of culture and identity. In the Asia-EU dialogue, arguments over human rights contain the potential to be both an enabling dynamic for, and an inhibiting agent of, a more intensive EU-Asia political and cultural dialogue. The study places a particular emphasis on EU human rights promotion policies towards the People's Republic of China, the Republic of Indonesia and Burma (The Union of Myanmar). It identifies and appraises three distinct EU policy approaches ranging from incentives based and coordinated measures to a more coercive and punitive diplomatic arsenal.

Defence date: 18 June 2007<br>Examining Board: Prof. Francesco Francioni, (EUI) ; Prof. Marise Cremona, (EUI) ; Prof. Enzo Cannizzaro, (University of Macerata) ; Prof. Olivier De Schutter, (Catholic University of Louvain)<br>PDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digital archive of EUI PhD theses<br>This thesis addresses the question as to how the European Union can ensure that EU based MNEs respect human rights when operating in third countries. Firstly, it identifies primary obligations on MNEs as developed by international law in order to tackle the above question. Secondly, on the basis of this theoretical framework it investigates how the European Union has acted to promote respect of human rights obligations by MNEs which are based on the territory of one of its Member States. Thirdly, the gap between the EU’s commitment to the respect and promotion of human rights, the potential to regulate the conduct of MNEs and the EU’s reluctance to impose human rights obligations on MNEs is explored. It is suggested that current human rights law should develop in the sense of considering companies as duty holders, together with States and other non-state actors, for the realisation of human rights. Moreover, a principle of graduation of responsibility is applied to MNEs, according to the specific human right involved, the proximity to the victim and the element of State authority exercised by the company in a particular situation. The above depicted graduation of responsibility (from the obligation to respect, to the obligation to promote human rights) should be matched by a graduation of corresponding implementing mechanisms. Applying this theoretical framework to the EU, three main recommendations have been formulated. Firstly, the EU should more firmly link the promotion of MNEs’ human rights obligations to international human rights law and support the constitution of an international law framework within the UN. Secondly, the EU should promote MNEs’ human rights obligations within the limits of its competence, both at the international and at an external level. It has been argued that a proactive attitude in this respect would not require the acquisition of new powers, but simply the recognition of a functional competence on the basis of Article 6 TEU in taking positive (and not merely negative) steps for the promotion of human rights in the areas of its competence occurring in international law and the international framework for MNEs’ responsibility. Finally, the EU should not abandon the option of exploring non-binding and incentive measures, both at the international and external levels, to be encouraged as a viable complement to binding measures.