Who are Refugees?

Hundreds of millions of people around the world are unable to meet their needs on their own, and do not receive adequate protection or support from their home states. These people, if they are to be provided for, need assistance from the international community. If we are to meet our duties to these people, we must have ways of knowing who should be eligible for different forms of relief. One prominent proposal from scholars and activists has been to classify all who are unable to meet their basic needs on their own as ‘refugees’, and to extend to them the sorts of protections established under the United Nations Refugee Convention. Such an approach would expand the traditional refugee definition significantly. Unlike most academic commentators discussing this issue, I reject calls for an expanded refugee definition, and instead defend the core elements of the definition set out in the 1967 Protocol to the United Nations Refugee Convention. Using the tools of moral and political philosophy, I explain in this article how the group picked out by this definition has particular characteristics that make refugee protection distinctly appropriate for it. While many people in need of assistance can be helped ‘in place’, in their home countries, or by providing a form of temporary protected status to them, this is not so, I show, of convention refugees. The group picked out by the UN refugee definition is a normatively distinct group to whom we owe particular duties, duties we can only meet by granting them refuge in a safe country. Additionally, there are further practical reasons why a broader refugee definition may lead to problems. Finally, I argue that rejecting the call for a broader definition of refugees will better help us meet our duties to those in need than would an expanded definition.     

Who are the Unclaimed Dead?

Unclaimed dead are deceased persons with no known next of kin (NoK) or NoK was located but did not claim the deceased. Unclaimed dead in Marion County, Indiana, 2004–2011, are examined. Comparisons are provided of the unclaimed to the claimed dead population and county death patterns. Race, gender, marital status, age, location, manner and cause of death, NoK, and days to disposition are analyzed. The unclaimed dead were disproportionately male, slightly more likely to be Black, younger at death, died from natural causes, had unknown marital status, were equally likely as not to have NoK, did not die in a hospital, and were subject to autopsy. Nearly half the unclaimed had NoK who did not claim the body; the other half had no identifiable NoK. Unclaimed were more likely to have an autopsy and to die from external causes. Most unclaimed were identified by means outside fingerprints or DNA.     

Why are occupational safety crimes increasing?

The objective of this article is to analyse the structure of, and trends in, reported occupational safety crimes. The central focus is directed at analysing how we might understand the substantial increase in the number of reported offences witnessed during the first decade of the 21st century. In order to analyse trends in occupational safety crimes we proceed from both official crime statistics and data that have been compiled specifically for the purposes of this study, including a nationally representative sample of offence reports relating to the occupational safety crimes reported to the police. The results show that the increase in reported offenses is primarily due to a shift in definitions and in the reactions of the authorities rather than to a powerful increase in the number of actual crimes committed. This leads to the conclusion that registered occupational safety offences should first and foremost be viewed as a measure of the work of the authorities, rather than as an indicator of real crime trends.     

When scientists are adversaries,do participants lose?

In considering questions of the confidentiality of data, courts have focused their inquiry on the interests of litigants and the public, but they have neglected the fundamental privacy interests of participants. Because participants divulge their most private thoughts and experiences in research, involuntary breaches of their confidentiality should be barred. Congress has recongnized this principle in the provision of certificates of confidentiality for mental health research, but ambiguity in the relevant section of the Public Health Service Act renders such protection less strict than Congress intended. Protection of confidentiality should extend beyond litigation to secondary data analysis, when there is a significant risk that participants' identity will be divulged.     

Who are Chinese Citizens? A Legislative Language Inquiry

By exploring the meaning construction of Chinese citizenship stipulated in Chinese legislation and its interaction with social identities and human nature in the Chinese society, the present study investigates the nature and evolution of the conception of Chinese citizens through three selected cases from Chinese legislations, which illuminate that Chinese citizens are essentially persons with independent personalities defined by the rights and obligations stipulated in legislation. This conception is further strengthened by the entitlement to private properties and equality before law. This conception of Chinese citizenship is concrete and meaningful in the sense that it is underpinned with reference to social identities as person, people and personality in Chinese legislations. The reference of the conception to human being constitutes the essence of Chinese legislation. The meaning construction of Chinese citizenship is indeed a dynamic process engineered in the social and cultural process. The findings on the evolution of the construction of Chinese citizenship in Chinese legislation suggest that the formation of legal identity through legislation varies greatly in different countries. Nevertheless, the realization of the conception of citizenship will necessarily be backed up by social identities as person, people and personality, which will be further strengthened and expanded by the legitimating of private properties and equality before law. Citizenship is achieved by social participants through mediation engineered within the social and cultural process.     

How are Argentina and Chile facing shared biodiversity loss?

Biodiversity loss remains one of the most pressing issues for global governance. This situation can be seen in Argentina and Chile through the effects of biodiversity loss caused by the introduction and expansion of beavers in Southern Patagonia. This case is interesting because, despite the Beagle conflict (i.e., the border dispute) between these countries some decades ago, nowadays Argentina and Chile are facing shared environmental problems and both are actively seeking solutions. The main question in this paper is, how did Argentina and Chile search for a solution to shared environmental problems caused by the expansion of beavers in Southern Patagonia? This paper tackles this question and presents the results of the conducted qualitative research. The results indicate that, in order to understand what Argentina and Chile are doing to achieve a solution to their shared environmental problems, research cannot be exclusively focus on domestic affairs. Instead, this issue requires taking into account how international dimensions influenced domestic policies. As this paper argues, in Argentina and Chile, international cooperation is a method of influencing biodiversity governance through funds granted by international organizations and international expert recommendations.     

Human and fundamental rights: What are they about?

Conclusion Human rights, distrusted by Bentham, through emergence ofGesellshaft, have sometimes been identified with rights of market men and gradually on an ad hoc basis and so have been given a relational or relativist character for that reason. Such a view ignores the test of humanness or the tele of human rights surviving any political association and the need for full development of human personality as an autonomous being inherent in full respect for all as moral persons. This disposes of the view of human rights in terms of rules of a game, or of connection between human rights and human action, or of the standard of the prudent man or, finally, of the ideology of the rising bourgeoisie. Equally, that very test of humanness disposes of criticisms of the human rights theory based on a concern for implementation of rights, on concentric circles based on the specific and concrete, on the impossibility of liking the billions, on the distinction between negative, positive and administrative rights, on the condition of being able to make valid claims and thereby denying human rights to the deprived millions in poor countries, on the social justice model, on the potential for violence and conflict and, finally, on the vagueness or subjectivity of human rights. An eclectic synthesis not between good and evil nor between right and wrong but between the extremes of the views presented in such critical explanations e.g. between the New Right and the New Left and between Hobbes and Rousseau) is what is needed in order to present a workable theory of human rights in the modern-day world.