ICON S Conference 17 – 19 June 2016 Humboldt University Berlin

the non-performance of a positive duty (eg how to
test the proportionality of not providing social and
basic services?). Understanding asylum as a negative
duty allows for legal checks on refugee policy without
the need to establish the infringement of individual
human rights.
Sylvie Da Lomba: Developing A Vulnerability
Analysis In Immigration Cases: A Challenge
To The European Court Of Human Rights’ Immigration
Control Paradigm
This paper investigates the immigration control
paradigm in the case law of the European Court of
Human Rights. I posit that the significance that the
Court affords to the state’s right to control immigration
in migrant cases frustrates inquiries into the exercise
of the government immigration power and produces
narratives that are shaped by state migration policy
discourse and detached from the realities and complexities
of global migration.
As a challenge to this paradigm, I explore the deployment
of a vulnerability analysis in the Court’s case
law. I posit that a vulnerability analysis can prompt an
inquiry into migrants’ social, economic and institutional
relationships as well as greater scrutiny into the exercise
of the Government immigration power in the light
of ECHR obligations.
Corina Heri: The Utility of Equality and Vulnerability
Reasoning for Migrants under the ECHR
The contribution will examine whether and how
reasoning based on the vulnerability and equality
of migrants – a term understood here in a broad
sense – in the case-law of the European Court of
Human Rights affects the status of these individuals
within the host polity. More concretely, it will examine
whether the vulnerability heuristic can revolutionize
traditional accounts of citizenship and provide
non-nationals with access to rights – if not the right
to remain in the host country, then the right to be
treated in a certain manner or have access to certain
benefits while there. This question will be assessed
in particular under Art. 3 ECHR, the prohibition of
torture and inhuman and degrading treatment, which
is absolute and provides protection of human dignity.
For all migrants, including those not considered
vulnerable, access to rights may further be possible
in reliance on the principle of equality under Art. 14
ECHR, which enshrines an accessory prohibition of
discrimination.
75 THE NEW BORDERS OF INTERNA-
TIONAL (PUBLIC) LAW
Panel formed with individual proposals.
Participants Biancamaria Raganelli
Ilenia Mauro
Helga Hafliðadóttir
Philipp Kastner
Elisabeth Roy Trudel
Niamh Kinchin
Name of Chair Niamh Kinchin
Room UL6 2093
Biancamaria Raganelli and Ilenia Mauro: New
borders and boundaries in International Public
Law: Corruption, Human Rights and Extraterritorial
legislation on public procurement
The lack of integrity and corruption affects human
rights and erodes the pillars of democracy. This allows
the creation of a kind of barriers that builds new
borders and constrains within the economy. That is a
particular evident issue in public procurement. One
increasingly popular way for States to prevent some
violations of human rights committed overseas is
adopting measures with extraterritorial implications
or to assert direct extraterritorial jurisdiction in specific
instances. How to ensure integrity, accountability
and transparency of public authorities and economic
operators across Countries? Do we need a European
model supporting integrity in public procurement? The
paper investigates two different profiles linked to the
same phenomena: the legal boundaries of lobbying as
joint to conflicts of interest and corruption, on one side,
the effects of some extraterritorial legislation, such as
the US and the UK anti-bribery models, on the other.
Helga Hafliðadóttir: International Enforcement
and the progressive development of International
Law
With the adoption of the International Law’s Articles
on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful
Acts the issue of countermeasures of general interest
became subject to controversy. This controversy centered
around the general development of international
law and differences regarding collective countermeasures.
In particular, there are questions regarding the
entitlement of third states to take countermeasures in
response to breaches of obligations owned to the international
community as a whole. The purpose of this article
is to examine the progressive development of international
law within the context of international enforcement.
The analysis proceeds on the assumption that the notions
of obligations erga omnes and peremptory norms
have influenced the development of unilateral action to
enforce community interests. This article places emphasis
on the content of third states’ duties to take countermeasures
which includes the position of the victim state.
Concurring panels 116