Developing human dignity's potential to protect migrants' human rights

拟议的研究审查了人的尊严对移民人权保护的价值。这项研究的目的是雄心勃勃和新颖的，通过结合批判性比较方法来研究与移民有关的国际人权法的范围，欧洲人权法院(ECtHR)、欧洲联盟法院(CJEU)和联合国人权事务委员会(CCPR)的判例法，以及定性的实证研究方法。为解决这一问题，将采用比较的方法分析《欧洲人权公约》、《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》、《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》和《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》的判例法。这就引出了一些次要问题。首先，与《欧洲人权公约》和《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》相比，在《欧洲人权公约》和《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》中，《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》中的人的尊严权是否会导致CJEU更好地保护移徙者的权利？若有，保障程度如何？第二，如何确定人的尊严的实质内容，以及这与禁止不人道和有辱人格的待遇等其他人权条款有何不同？在现有的文献中提出了解决这个问题的必要性。最后，通过以人的尊严的视角审视这一判例法，我们可以从这些法院之间的对话中学到什么？具体地说，在没有编纂的情况下，这一对话是否有助于始终如一地建设人的尊严和始终如一地保护移徙者？适用领域：为了超越目前对寻求庇护者和难民的关注，这项研究将确定适用人类尊严的其他领域。人的尊严有可能在现有人权措施没有提供充分保护的两个关键领域为移徙者提供更具包容性的保护。第一，针对以医疗为由拒绝驱逐的非正常移民。考虑到医疗退还案件所需的高门槛，这一点尤其相关。其次，针对那些因气候变化影响而拒绝驱逐出境的人。目前，在保护方面存在差距，因为难民的定义不包括因气候变化而流离失所的人，而且不驱回原则的适用性有限。实用观点：从业者缺乏对人的尊严的理解。因此，一个研究子问题是，从业者需要什么样的信息或基于尊严的法律论点，才能更经常和成功地利用人的尊严？这项研究在方法上是新颖的，因为它结合了比较方法和实证研究方法，这是迄今为止关于移民人格尊严的现有学术所缺乏的一种方法。比较方法：这种方法是适当的，因为研究涉及与英国移民有关的国际和区域人权保护：《欧洲人权公约》、《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》和《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》。《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》和《欧洲人权公约》直接适用于英国，因为英国是这些条约的缔约国。这一分析不仅是因为CJEU和ECTHR在判例法中的对话，而且还因为CFREU对人的尊严的编纂形成了鲜明的对比，而ECHR和ICCPR缺乏编纂，这就是突出的研究问题。经验性研究方法：将进行少量访谈，以收集定性数据。这为所提出的研究问题提供了一个新的视角，并将为本研究中发展的人类尊严的构建提供参考。

The proposed research examines the value that human dignity contributes to migrants' human rights protection. This research is designed to be ambitious and novel by combining a critical comparative approach to study the range of international human rights law relevant to migrants, the case law of the European Court of Human Rights ('ECtHR'), the Court of Justice of the European Union ('CJEU') and the United Nations Human Rights Committee ('CCPR'), and qualitative empirical research methods.The central research question is how far can the protection offered by human dignity benefit migrants' rights protection? To tackle this, a comparative approach will be adopted to analyse the case law of the ECtHR, CJEU and CCPR. This raises a number of sub-questions. Firstly, has a codified right to human dignity in the CFREU resulted in better protection of migrants' rights by the CJEU compared to the ECtHR and CCPR? If so, what is the level of protection provided? Secondly, what can be determined about the substance of human dignity and how this is distinct from other human rights provisions such as the prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment? The need to address this question has been raised in existing literature.Finally, by examining this case law through a human dignity lens, what can be learnt about the dialogue between these courts? Specifically, in the absence of codification, does this dialogue promote a consistent construction of human dignity and a consistent standard of protection for migrants? Areas of application: To go beyond the current focus on asylum seekers and refugees, this research will identify other areas of human dignity application. Human dignity has the potential to offer more inclusive protection for migrants in two key areas in which existing human rights measures do not provide sufficient protection. Firstly, for irregular migrants resisting expulsion on medical grounds. This is particularly relevant considering the high threshold required in medical return cases. Secondly, for those resisting expulsion due to climate change impacts. Presently there is a gap in protection as the definition of a refugee does not encompass those displaced due to climate change and the applicability of the principle of non-refoulement is limited. Practical perspectives: There is a lack of understanding of human dignity by practitioners. A research sub-question is therefore what information or dignity-based legal arguments do practitioners need in order to be able to utilise human dignity more regularly and successfully? This research is methodologically novel because it combines a comparative approach with empirical research methods, an approach that has thus far been lacking in existing scholarship on migrants' human dignity. Comparative approach: This approach is appropriate because the research is concerned with international and regional human rights protections relevant to migrants in the UK: the ECHR, CFREU and ICCPR. The ICCPR and ECHR are directly applicable to the UK, as the UK is a state party to these treaties. The CFREU is included in this analysis not only because of the dialogue between the CJEU and ECtHR in their case law but also due to the contrasting codification of human dignity in the CFREU and lack of codification in the ECHR and ICCPR, which informs the research questions highlighted.Empirical research methods: A small number of interviews will be conducted to gather qualitative data. This provides a novel perspective on the research questions raised and will inform the construction of human dignity developed in this research.