his human rights such as the right to family life and the right not to be subjected to inhuman treatment. On 30 January 2015, the rscsl dismissed this motion and held that he should continue to serve his sentence in the United Kingdom. The rscsl ’s decision was released to the public on 25 March
Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi
Betty de Hart
Sociology of Law Radboud University Nijmegen, Th e Netherlands Abstract Th is article looks at the extent and way in which the European Court of Human Rights takes the interests of insider spouses (citizens or permanent residents) into account in Article 8 ECHR cases (right to family life). It uses Caren
reunificationpp. 536-542Section 6. The right to family life and the expulsion of non-nationals : a human right to remain ?pp. 542-558Section 7. Concluding remarkspp. 558-559 This chapter is part of: Centre for Studies and Research in International Law and International Relations > Protection des migrants et des
, certain problematics as regards their relevance to the nature of the right to family life. The present article is structured on the basis of the order that the Court usually follows in order to find if there has been a violation of Article 8 of the ECHR . This unofficial ‘Article 8 test’ applied by the
Anette Faye Jacobsen
Barbara Ann Hocking and Michele Harvey-Blankenship
Christof Roos and Natascha Zaun
enjoy family life legitimizes the immigration of family members. However, no such right that would allow to work or to search for opportunities abroad can be claimed by labour migrants. The following paragraph discusses the robustness of the international norm ‘right to family life’. The norm’s vague
Mary Bosworth and Marion Vannier
In this article, we explore the human rights implications of immigration detention in Britain and France by focusing on duration. In so doing, we show how practices in both systems fail to meet basic human rights protections, raising urgent questions about the legitimacy and justification of these sites of confinement. Whereas in the uk problems arise from the absence of a statutory upper time limit to detention, in France it is the brevity for which foreign nationals may be held that raises humanitarian concerns. In the uk, the uncertain duration of detention makes it difficult for detainees to obtain or retain legal advice. Those who are held for long periods of time struggle to maintain their right to family life, while most find the lack of clarity about the period of their confinement hard to endure. In France, where most detainees are released or deported within a matter of days, it is often difficult to access due process and legal protections in time. This brief period of confinement before expulsion contrasts with its enduring effect on their family ties and future. Drawing on policy documents, law, and the limited body of empirical material available on these carceral sites, we map the similarities and differences between them in order to identify the limits as well as some prospects of human rights in immigration detention.
How to Implement Their Right to Family Life
Edited by Jaap Doek, Hans van Loon and Paul Vlaardingerbroek
Children on the Move contains the texts and speeches given and the papers presented at the international conference of the same title, which took place at the Hague, the Netherlands, 23-26 October 1994. The conference was one of the major contributions of the Netherlands to the UN International Year of the Family and was convened by the Netherlands Committee for the International Year of the Family in collaboration with the Hague Conference on Private International Law.
Children on the Move provides the reader with an in-depth analysis of the various legal aspects (problems and remedies) of inter-country adoption, international child abduction, and children as international refugees.