The treatment of migrants is one of the most challenging issues that human rights, as a political philosophy, faces today. It has increasingly become a contentious issue for many governments and international organizations around the world. The controversies surrounding immigration can lead to practices at odds with the ethical message embodied in the concept of human rights, and the notion of 'migrants' as a group which should be treated in a distinct manner. This book examines the way in which two institutions tasked with ensuring the protection of human rights, the European Court of Human Rights and Inter-American Court of Human Rights, treat claims lodged by migrants. It combines legal, sociological, and historical analysis to show that the two courts were the product of different backgrounds, which led to differing attitudes towards migrants in their founding texts, and that these differences were reinforced in their developing case law. The book assesses the case law of both courts in detail to argue that they approach migrant cases from fundamentally different perspectives. It asserts that the European Court of Human Rights treats migrants first as aliens, and then, but only as a second step in its reasoning, as human beings. By contrast, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights approaches migrants first as human beings, and secondly as foreigners (if they are). Dembour argues therefore that the Inter-American Court of Human Rights takes a fundamentally more human rights-driven approach to this issue. The book shows how these trends formed at the courts, and assesses whether their approaches have changed over time. It also assesses in detail the issue of the detention of irregular migrants. Ultimately it analyses whether the divergence in the case law of the two courts is likely to continue, or whether they could potentially adopt a more unified practice.

About the Author
Marie-Benedicte Dembour is Professor of Law and Anthropology at the University of Brighton. She was previously at the University of Sussex. She has been a visiting scholar/tutor/Professor at various European institutions, including the Free University of Amsterdam, the Free University of Brussels and the University of Oxford. When Humans Become Migrants was written with the support of a Leverhulme Major Research Fellowship.

Reviews
When Humans Become Migrants is a magisterial endeavour which will become a standard work of reference for those working in the fields of migrants rights and the case law of the ECtHR. Despite being a lengthy, detailed work within narrowly drawn parameters, the clear, intuitive way in which the book, and each individual chapter, is structured, and the verve and clarity with which it is written lend it a discipline-transcending accessibility, which should ensure it the wide readership it merits. * Alan Desmond, Human Rights Law Review *
With a title as hard hitting as When Humans Become Migrants one would hope the content of the book would be equally as striking, and thankfully it is. Through it, legal anthropologist Marie-Benedicte Dembour challenges our thinking about the position and humanity of migrants, even before opening the book ... Dembours conceptual approach - contrasting the treatment of migrants in the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) with that of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) - provides a unique, highly relevant, and timely contribution to the field of human rights law and migration studies. * Rachael Owhin, Border Criminologies *
This book is highly recommendable for students, academics, and practitioners working on migration and human rights. It is an excellent and crucial addition to the literature and the first book where both regional courts are carefully examined on the issue of migrant protection. This makes the publication a lasting contribution for years to come and a central landmark in the scholarly research on the subject. * Diego Acosta Arcarazo, Senior Lecturer in European and Migration Law, University of Bristol, Nordic Journal of Human Rights *
Dembour's analysis is wide-ranging, covering historical and current developments in a range of areas of concern to migrants and their representatives. It is a work of sympathetic imagination which holds fast to its ideals even when writing against the mainstream. * Dr Helena Wray, The Journal of Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Law *
Dembour offers not only a perspicacious analysis and prudent suggestions, but also raises significant questions such as how the interests of migrants on one hand and of states on the other could be balanced without a bias for either or another, or how to regard the other as one of our own, create an open and inclusive attitude and set it as an institutional imperative. * Tea Skrinjaric, Allegra Lab: Anthropology, Law, Art & World *
In her characteristically original, distinctive and insightful way, Dembour invites us to abandon preconceived ideas and to think differently. This is the role judges need legal scholars to perform if academic commentaries are to nourish judicial decision-making. An intelligent, lucid and courageous book that takes the debate into new territory. * Francoise Tulkens, Former Judge and Vice President - European Court of Human Rights *


Awards
Winner of Joint winner of the 2016 Odysseus Network Best Publication Prize.



Book Information
ISBN 9780199667840
Author Marie-Benedicte Dembour
Format Paperback
Page Count 578
Imprint Oxford University Press
Publisher Oxford University Press
Weight(grams) 1g
Dimensions(mm) 234mm * 178mm * 31mm