Refugee Law and Its Corruptions
Loading...
Authors
Grey, Colin
Date
2017-08-01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Keyword
Alternative Title
Abstract
This paper asks whether refugee law is morally trustworthy. Trustworthiness here denotes that those who make refugee law—in particular those who decide refugee claims—are competent in this domain and are moved by the fact that refugee claimants and citizens of countries of refuge count on them to make morally sound decisions. Drawing on Adam Smith’s sentimentalist theory of law, the paper argues that refugee law is presumptively subject to various corruptions of the moral sentiments, namely national prejudice, contempt for the lowly, love of domination, and self-deceit. Combined, these corruptions may explain the apparent arbitrariness of refugee claim outcomes. They also suggest that we should be skeptical of any claims regarding the moral trustworthiness of refugee law. What they do not suggest, contrary to more cynical theories, is that refugee law is free of normative constraint.
Description
This article is also available at the publisher, Cambridge University Press, site via https://doi.org/10.1017/cjlj.2017.16.
Citation
Grey Colin, Refugee Law and Its Corruptions (2017). 30 Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence 2. 339-62.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press
Faculty of Law, Western University
Faculty of Law, Western University