Tesi sul tema "Cosmopolitan Right"

Adopting a Foucauldian critical methodology, this thesis reflects upon the inherent ambiguities of cosmopolitan government in/of EU(rope), which, it is suggested, are borne out in the ambiguous relationship between the particular liberal subjects – a ‘subject of interest’ and ‘subject of right’ - that such government seeks to identify, produce and foster. Developing Foucault’s own recently published genealogy of liberal government, it is argued that cosmopolitan government can be conceived as the promotion of (neo)liberal deregulatory market agendas within and beyond EU(rope): a EU(rope) of free competitive ‘subjects of interest’, increasingly conceived as entrepreneurs. This, it is argued, is the constitutive basis of contemporary post-national government in EU(rope) (Part I). Taking seriously the nuances in Foucault’s analysis, cosmopolitan government can, however, also be understood in terms of the evocation of EU(rope) as socially just nation-state rooted in constitution and social-contract: a EU(rope) of ‘subjects of right’ or citizens. Such a conceptualisation is often evident in scholarly and practical opposition to the perceived extremes of a ‘market’ Europe, as illustrated via an analysis of Habermas’s scholarship and French discourses on EU(rope) (Part II). Finally, taking the deliberative impulse in Habermas much further than he does in his own work on EU(rope), a range of scholarly interventions and associated institutional innovations have thought/ practiced cosmopolitan government as a multi-levelled, multi-scalar, open-ended deliberative endeavour ostensibly respectful of Europe’s extant plurality in theory and practice, but this is not without its own foundational ontology of the autonomous, rational, reasonable European subject. Indeed, via an analysis of deliberative forms of governance in contemporary EU(rope), it is argued that such a conception of rationality or reason is - in both theory and practice - closely associated with the aforementioned (neo)liberal rationality of cosmopolitan government to the extent that such rationalities are EU(rope)’s very condition of possibility (Part III). The thesis demonstrates, then, that the ambiguous relationship between a ‘subject of interest’ and ‘subject of right’ is not overcome in either the theory or practice of cosmopolitan government. It concludes by postulating that there may be good ethico-political reasons for giving up the attempt to overcome such ambiguity.

This paper is a project based on a theoretical approach, where my aim is to search for the core elements of a viable feminist cosmopolitan ethics.  To further that purpose I identify, discuss, and compare some of the main components of such an ethics as proposed by political theorists Seyla Benhabib and Iris Marion Young.  In doing so I hope to contribute to the ongoing project of cosmopolitan feminism.  My task in this project is to answer the following questions; what are the main components of Seyla Benhabib and Iris Marion Young´s feminist cosmopolitan ethics? Second; where do Benhabib and Young stand with regards to the relationship between the principle of state sovereignity and the human right to membership? Finally, based on a comparative reading of Benhabib and Young´s theories I ask; what should be some of the core elements of a viable feminist cosmopolitan ethics? I argue that for a feminist cosmopolitan ethics to be considered viable, it must carry within itself an impetus towards increased respect for the basic human rights of the 64.9 million persons that are currently displaced due to conflicts, war, persecutions and human rights violations.  Following a comparative reading of some of the main components of Seyla Benhabib and Iris Marion Young´s cosmopolitan ethics, I promote a vision of feminist cosmopolitan ethics that carries within itself the hope that is inherent in the promise of human rights, while at the same time offering the tools that are necessary to identify and rectify the structural injustices exprssed in the status and real-life situations of the 64.9 million persons that are currently displaced due to conflicts, war, persecutions, and human rights violations.

Esta tese visa a responder à indagação sobre a existência do Direito Cosmopolita não apenas como categoria filosófica, mas também como regime jurídico propriamente dito. Para tal, investiga seus pressupostos teóricos e seus pressupostos materiais, concluindo pela sua existência, tanto abstrata quanto concreta, enquanto regime jurídico stricto sensu. Com base nas premissas encontradas, o Direito Cosmopolita é traduzido da linguagem filosófica para a jurídica, sendo: (a) definido; (b) diferenciado do Direito Natural, do Direito Internacional, do Direito Comunitário e do Direito Internacional dos Direitos Humanos; e (c) sistematizado em torno de algumas categorias relevantes para o estudo jurídico (fontes, objeto, sujeitos, sanções e limites). Finalmente, a esquematização do Direito Cosmopolita abstratamente elaborada é testada no caso concreto do direito de visita a território estrangeiro, resultando em conclusões mais favoráveis à efetivação dos direitos humanos em âmbito mundial.
This thesis aims at questioning the existence of the Cosmopolitan Law not only as a philosophical category, but also as a legal regime itself. To achieve so, this study investigates the Cosmopolitan Laws theoretical and material assumptions, agreeing with both its abstract and empiric existence as a proper legal regime. Under these assumptions, the Cosmopolitan Law is translated from a philosophical discourse to a legal one, being: (a) defined; (b) distinguished from the Natural Law, International Law, Community Law, and the International Law of Human Rights; and (c) systematized in accordance with certain categories which are relevant to the Law studies such as sources, object, subjects, sanctions and limits. Finally, a conceptually-elaborated outlining of the Cosmopolitan Law is verified in the concrete case of the right of visit to a foreign territory. This experiment leads to conclusions that favour the human rights effectiveness worldwide.

The liberal conception of the state is marked by an insistence upon the equal civil and political rights of each inhabitant. Recently, though, a number of writers have argued that this emphasis on uniform rights ignores the fact that the populations of most states are culturally diverse, and that their inhabitants have significant interests qua members of particular cultures. They argue that liberals should recognize special, group-based cultural rights as a necessary part of a theory of justice in multicultural societies. In this thesis I examine the idea of special cultural rights. In the first part (Chapters 1 to 4), I begin by setting out some of the different conceptions of culture and multiculturalism that are involved in the debate over cultural rights. I then discuss three claims made by supporters of special cultural rights: (1) that having culture is an essential part of individual autonomy; (2) that people have morally significant interests qua members of particular cultures; and (3) that these interests are inadequately protected by existing liberal conceptions of human rights. Although I conclude that (1) is correct, I argue that both (2) and (3) are mistaken. Among other things, I suggest that the version of culture relied upon by supporters of special cultural rights is an implausible one and I outline what I take to be a more plausible, cosmopolitan conception of culture. In the second part (Chapters 5 to 9), I begin by looking at specific instances of cultural rights-claims, and analyzing the concept of cultural rights qua rights. I consider the practical and conceptual difficulties with special cultural rights at great length. But the core of my thesis is that our interest in culture lies in its contribution of worthwhile goals and options, and that this interest lies in culture generally rather than in particular cultures. Hence, adopting a special or group-based distribution of any right to culture would seem to be inconsistent with liberal egalitarian principles. If there are such things as cultural rights, I argue, they are general rather than special rights. I conclude by offering a very preliminary account of what a cosmopolitan conception of cultural rights might involve in the case of the right to free association and language rights.

Genetics is one sector in which there has been tremendous evolution and progress over the last few decades. While it is believed that genetics could offer tremendous opportunities for global health improvement, there is also a fear that existing global health inequalities will be amplified by the evolution of genetics.
It thus appears necessary to analyse the way current assumptions define what is just and acceptable with regard to global access and distribution of resources in this field. Indeed, given the importance of genetics to human health globally, this thesis will evaluate two principal legal regimes---intellectual property and international human rights---to determine to which extent they further the goal of distributing the benefits of these technologies equitably and globally. This evaluation is vital to ensure that legal regimes assist in ensuring that this promising field develops in a way that improves global health without leaving the most vulnerable outside of the process. This dissertation will undertake this complex task by employing and building upon cosmopolitan liberal theories developed over the few last decades as an extension of the work of Rawls and Daniels.
A theoretical framework to justify engaging in a global and more equitable redistribution of benefits produced by genetics is required. Ultimately, our analysis will produce strong normative benchmarks based on justice considerations for engaging in a global and more equitable redistribution of the benefits likely to emerge from genetic science. Universal consideration of all human beings, importance of health needs, normal functioning and equality of opportunities are some of the notions that will be analysed to construct this framework. We will then attempt to determine how and if this theory of distribution translates into positive law and to identify and analyse the main obstacles to legal compliance with global distributive justice. We will assess two main international normative systems: intellectual property law and human rights law to determine if their underlying philosophy, structure, and functioning take account of the principles highlighted in our theoretical framework and how underlying politics and economics matter.
This will set out a basis for further discussion on how we could work around some of the major obstacles identified throughout our analysis. It will also help us move from the vague and often symbolic ideal of benefit sharing actually prevailing toward the establishment of a real, enforceable concept of global benefit sharing in health that would position genetics at the rank of essential tool for achieving global health.

Thesis (MA)--Stellenbosch University, 2014.
ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The aim of this thesis is to determine what responsibilities democratic states have toward refugees. This problem is stated within the broader framework of the tension inherent in all democratic states: on the one hand, the sovereign right of a state over its territory and, on the other hand, the cosmopolitan or universal human rights norms upon which the state‟s constitution is founded. I argue that this tension is brought to the fore when refugees cross borders and enter into democratic territories, asking for protection and claiming their human rights. The sheer magnitude of the refugee crisis makes this an issue every state should address. My answer to the question of state responsibility is worked out in four phases. Firstly, I give a conceptual clarification of refugeehood, sovereignty, and cosmopolitanism. I show that neither absolute sovereignty (which implies closed borders) nor extreme cosmopolitanism (which implies no borders) is desirable. Secondly, I draw on Immanuel Kant‟s cosmopolitan theory as a possible solution. Kant proposes a world-federation of states in which right is realised on the civic, international, and cosmopolitan level. Kant also insists that every individual has the right to hospitality – a right which foreign states should recognise. Thirdly, I examine three prominent theories which could offer us a way to address the refugee crisis. I argue that the first two – multiculturalism and John Rawls‟ „law of peoples‟ – are not adequate responses to the refugee crisis, but that the third – Seyla Benhabib‟s cosmopolitan federalism – is more promising. Hospitality is the first responsibility states have toward refugees, and Benhabib proposes that it be institutionalised by (i) forming a federation of states founded on cosmopolitan principles, (ii) revising membership norms through the political process of democratic iterations, and (iii) extending some form of political membership to the state to refugees. Lastly, I justify the claim that political membership should be extended by referring to Hannah Arendt‟s argument that the ability to speak and act publicly is part of what it means to be human. If we deny refugees this ability, or if we deny them access to political processes, we deny their humanity. Benhabib proposes institutional measures to ensure that this does not happen, including allowing for political membership on sub-national, national, and supranational levels. Ultimately, I argue that democratic states have the responsibility to (i) allow entry to refugees, (ii) give refugees legal status and offer protection, and (ii) extend political membership to them on some level.
AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die doel van hierdie tesis is om te bepaal wat die verantwoordelikhede van demokratiese state teenoor vlugtelinge is. Ek plaas hierdie probleem binne die breër raamwerk van die onderliggende spanning in demokratiese state: die soewereine reg van ‟n staat oor sy grondgebied, aan die een kant, en die kosmopolitiese of universele menseregte-norme waarop die staat se grondwet berus, aan die ander kant. Ek argumenteer dat hierdie spanning na vore gebring word wanneer vlugtelinge, op soek na beskerming, grense oorsteek, demokratiese state binnetree en aanspraak maak op hulle regte. Ek bespreek die vraagstuk in vier stappe. Eerstens verduidelik ek die begrippe van vlugtelingskap, soewereiniteit en kosmopolitisme. Ek toon aan dat nóg absolute soewereiniteit (wat geslote grense impliseer), nóg ekstreme kosmopolitisme (wat geen grense impliseer) ‟n wenslike ideaal is. Tweedens kyk ek na Immanuel Kant se kosmopolitiese teorie vir ‟n moontlike oplossing. Kant stel voor dat state saamkom in ‟n wêreld-federasie, om sodoende reg te laat geskied op die plaaslike, internasionale, en kosmopolitiese vlak. Kant dring ook aan daarop dat elke individu die reg tot gasvryheid besit, ‟n reg wat ook deur ander state buiten die individu se staat van herkoms erken behoort te word. Derdens ondersoek ek drie prominente teorieë wat moontlike oplossings bied vir die vlugteling-krisis. Ek argumenteer dat die eerste twee – multikulturalisme en John Rawls se „law of peoples‟ – nie voldoende is om die vlugteling-krisis die hoof te bied nie. Die derde teorie, Seyla Benhabib se kosmopolitiese federalisme, blyk meer belowend te wees. Benhabib stel voor dat die staat se verantwoordelikheid om gasvryheid te toon geïnstitusionaliseer kan word deur (i)‟n federasie van state gegrond op kosmopolitiese beginsels te vorm, (ii) lidmaatskap-norme te hersien deur ‟n politieke proses genaamd demokratiese iterasie, en (iii) politieke lidmaatskap van een of ander aard aan vlugtelinge toe te ken. Laastens regverdig ek die aanspraak op lidmaatskap. Ek verwys na Hannah Arendt se argument dat die vermoë om in die publieke sfeer te praat en dade te kan uitvoer, deel uitmaak van wat dit beteken om ‟n mens te wees. As ons verhoed dat vlugtelinge hierdie twee vermoëns kan uitleef, ontken ons hulle menslikheid. Benhabib stel sekere institutionele maatreëls voor om dit te voorkom. Dit sluit politieke lidmaatskap op ‟n sub-nasionale, nasionale, en supra-nasionale vlak in. Uiteindelik argumenteer ek dat demokratiese state se verantwoordelikhede teenoor vlugtelinge uit die volgende bestaan: (i) toegang tot hierdie state se grondgebied, (ii) wetlike status en beskerming, en (iii) politieke lidmaatskap op een of ander vlak.

Esta tese investiga as possibilidades de uma proposta normativa feminista e cosmopolita para lidar com o problema das desigualdades de gênero e das violações das liberdades básicas das mulheres dentro da perspectiva liberal igualitária. Tendo como ponto de partida o axioma da igualdade moral humana e buscando alcançar um projeto de internacionalismo feminista liberal alternativo ao de Martha Nussbaum em Women and Human Development The capabilities approach. Para tanto, esta pesquisa discute o modo como as relações de gênero e coerções de gênero devem estar sob o escopo da justiça e busca construir uma interpretação da noção rawlsiana de estrutura básica como objeto da justiça que seja simultaneamente adequada do ponto de vista feminista e cosmopolita, a fim de que, em nome do próprio axioma da igualdade moral fundamental, seja possível dar conta da articulação entre os diversos horizontes da justiça: justiça local, justiça social e justiça cosmopolita. E argumenta que esta articulação, dentro de uma concepção de justiça institucional compatível com a tolerância e justiça liberais, exige um equalisandum cosmopolita nos moldes dos bem primários rawlsianos como um modo moralmente defensável de se criar uma esfera de inviolabilidade individual que proteja as mulheres de violações advindas das desigualdades de gênero e lhes possibilite direito de saída, sem com isso ignorar a legitimidade do pluralismo moral razoável. Assim, defende-se que apenas uma lista de bens primários cosmopolita articula devidamente as possibilidades de saída nos planos local, social e cosmopolita, na constituição de um ideal de direito de saída pleno para as mulheres que seja conforme o ideal de tolerância liberal e com um liberalismo político, tendo como objeto da justiça uma estrutura básica que inclui as coerções de gênero e cujo meio para a justiça é institucional.
The thesis explores a normative proposal of solving some of the well-known genders problems of inequality and infringement of womans basic liberties from a feminist and cosmopolitan point of view. It assumes the axiom of human moral equality as its normative grounds although it attempts to achieve a feminist liberal approach quite different from Martha Nussbaums Woman and Human Development The Capabilities Approach. To that end the research tries to conceive how gender tensions could be entailed by a theory of justice. Notwithstand the crucial distinctions between local, social and cosmopolitan justice, the work proposes a reinterpretation of the Rawlsian concept of basic structure, as the main subject of justice, in which both feminism and cosmopolitanism aims can be fit into the axiom of moral human equality. One of thesis main objectives is to sustain the requirements of a cosmopolitan equalisandum as a feasible and morally relevant way to set up inviolable areas of individuality concerning protection against gender violence. A rank of cosmopolitan primary goods also promotes the effectiveness of a series of exit rights: from the local context to the global one. It aims an ideal of full exit right to women that is entirely compatible with the liberal ideal of toleration.

Made available in DSpace on 2015-03-05T17:20:07Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 1
Nenhuma
As presentes reflexões tiveram por objetivo descrever o cenário de um tempo efêmero, redimensionado espacialmente e de ampla interconectividade econômica e cultural, bem como definir os fenômenos contemporâneos que determinaram a narrada efemeridade, a qual foi identificada por um tempo descrito como pós-moderno; a transformação dos espaços e interconexão transfronteiriça, foi identificada por um fenômeno conhecido como globalização. Em seguida, se buscou problematizar as questões da pós-modernidade e da globalização confrontando-as com as atuais conformações do Estado e do Direito, no sentido de demonstrar suas deficiências para responder as questões deste novo tempo e as possibilidades de transformação para o atendimento das novas demandas sociais, jurídicas e políticas da sociedade pós-moderna e do mundo globalizado. A partir disso, com as algumas idéias de Höffe e Kant, empreendeu-se na democracia, como aspecto fundamental para o enfrentamento deste novo cenário de uma sociedade marcada pelas incertezas,

Esta dissertação pretende abordar o artigo Idéia de uma história universal de um ponto de vista cosmopolita a partir de sua inserção no interior do sistema da filosofia kantiana. Tentaremos mostrar que a Idéia de uma história universal pode ser interpretada à luz do sistema da filosofia crítica. No \"Apêndice à dialética transcendental\" da Crítica da razão pura, o princípio racional da unidade sistemática dos conhecimentos do entendimento abre a perspectiva de ordenação da natureza de acordo com leis teleológicas. Segundo entendemos, é de acordo com esta representação teleológica da natureza que a Idéia de uma história universal de um ponto de vista cosmopolita é redigida. Adotando como fio condutor o direito cosmopolita, Kant expõe o conjunto das ações humanas como um progresso contínuo da humanidade em direção à realização de todas as suas disposições naturais racionais, como se a espécie seguisse a um propósito da natureza.
This dissertation intends to examine the article Idea for an universal history with a cosmopolitan purpose considering its insertion into Kant´s philosophical system. The claim is to show that this article can be interpreted according to the system of critical philosophy In the Transcendental Dialectic of Pure Reason´s Appendix, the rational principle of systematic unity of cognitions of the understanding allows the organization of nature by teleological laws. We think that the Idea for an universal history with a cosmopolitan purpose was written according to this teleological representation of nature. Adopting cosmopolitan right as a guide principle, Kant establishes the human actions as a continuous progress of humanity towards the realization of all rational natural dispositions, as if the species followed a principle of nature.

Made available in DSpace on 2015-05-14T12:11:46Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Arquivototal.pdf: 985011 bytes, checksum: e8f30bd0db73b890410e6eee96b1c719 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011-08-01
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - CAPES
Objective, in this research work, discuss the proposal cosmopolitan Kantian perpetual peace and its current two hundred years after it was written. During the course of the study identified at least three major models of cosmopolitanism: the Imperial, the messianic, Republican, to which Kant joins. Cosmopolitanism is his first formulations in antiquity, at the time of the Hellenistic and Roman empires, which will be taken up by medieval Christianity, the messianic version. It is however in modern times that the cosmopolitan ideal reappear with strength, especially in the Enlightenment period in the work of thinkers such as Abbé de Saint‐Pierre, Rousseau, and Immanuel Kant, who gave the most complete formulation philosophically. It fell to associate the theme cosmopolitan Kant to the problem of peace and the constitutionalization of international law by proposing a World Federation of Free States, which promoted legal equality between the different peoples who inhabit the earth, under the aegis of a new international law cosmopolitical. The update of this discussion occurred in the twentieth century, as a possible solution to the immense problems of a world traumatized by two world wars and the atomic terror. The proposal is part of the cosmopolitan globalization process of recent decades in the international legal sphere, as an effective mechanism for building a global civil society of peace, and to prepare the way for a World Federation of States, provided by Kant. Philosophers of law and politics as Kelsen, Habermas and Bobbio, seeking to update and reinterpret the Kantian proposal in the light of the new phenomena of war and peace in the era of globalization, they oppose the realist thinkers such as Danilo Zolo, who question the theoretical validity and practical feasibility of this project. The thesis I defend is that cosmopolitanism is not an impossible utopia, but a realizable possibility, at least in a philosophical and legal approach, when faced with political and legal challenges of contemporary international relations, since some conditions are created for its implementation.
Objetiva-se, neste trabalho de pesquisa, discutir a proposta cosmopolita kantiana de paz perpétua e a sua atualidade, duzentos anos depois de ter sido escrita. Durante o percurso da pesquisa identificamos pelo menos três grandes modelos de cosmopolitismo: o imperial, o messiânico, o republicano, ao qual Kant se filia. O cosmopolitismo encontra suas primeiras formulações na Antiguidade, na época dos Impérios helenísticos e romanos, que serão retomadas pelo cristianismo medieval, na versão messiânica. É, porém na época moderna que o ideal cosmopolita reaparece com força, sobretudo no período iluminista, na obra de pensadores como o Abbè de Saint-Pierre, Rousseau, e Immanuel Kant, que lhe deu a formulação filosoficamente mais completa. Coube a Kant associar a temática cosmopolita ao problema da paz e à constitucionalização da legislação internacional através da proposta de uma Federação Mundial de Estados Livres, que promovesse a igualdade jurídica entre os diferentes povos que habitam a Terra, sob a égide de um novo direito internacional cosmopolítico. A atualização dessa discussão ocorreu no século XX, como uma possível solução para os imensos problemas de um mundo traumatizado por duas guerras mundiais e pelo terror atômico. A proposta cosmopolita se insere no processo de globalização das últimas décadas na esfera jurídica internacional, como um mecanismo eficaz para a construção de uma sociedade civil global de paz, bem como para preparar o caminho para uma Federação Mundial de Estados, prevista por Kant. Filósofos do direito e da política como Kelsen, Habermas e Bobbio, procuram atualizar e reinterpretar a proposta kantiana á luz dos novos fenômenos da guerra e da paz na época da globalização; a eles se contrapõem os pensadores realistas, como Danilo Zolo, que questionam a validade teórica e a viabilidade prática deste projeto. A tese que defendemos é que o cosmopolitismo não é uma utopia irrealizável, mas uma possibilidade realizável, pelo menos em uma abordagem filosófico-jurídica, ao nos depararmos com os desafios político-jurídicos da contemporaneidade das relações internacionais, uma vez que sejam criadas alguma condições para a sua implementação.

In den letzten Jahrzehnten hat sich in Lateinamerika ein neuer Kontext für die Durchsetzung von Menschenrechten herausgebildet. Die organisatorische Entwicklung des Interamerikanischen Menschenrechtsschutzsystems (IAS), die Verabschiedung neuer Verfassungen durch die nationalen Gesetzgeber und die Anwendung innovativer Verfassungsauslegungen durch die maßgeblichen Gerichte in der Region haben zur Entstehung eines kosmopolitischen lateinamerikanischen Konstitutionalismus geführt. In diesem neuen Kontext hat der Interamerikanische Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (IACtHR) damit begonnen, die gerichtliche Überprüfung innerstaatlicher Gesetze zu praktizieren, d.h. er hat bei mehreren Gelegenheiten nationale Behörden angewiesen, innerstaatliche Gesetze wegen ihrer Unvereinbarkeit mit der Amerikanischen Menschenrechtskonvention (ACHR) für ungültig zu erklären. Angesichts der zunehmenden Konflikte zwischen nationalen und internationalen Menschenrechtsautoritäten zielt diese Studie darauf ab, den legitimsten und effektivsten Ansatz für die Praxis der interamerikanischen Konventionskontrolle zu finden. Ausgehend von der Debatte über die innerstaatliche richterliche Normenkontrolle werden zunächst die Gründe für die Praxis einer starken internationalen Normenkontrolle untersucht. Anschließend adressiert diese Studie Theorien, die versucht haben, die interamerikanische Konventionskontrolle zu schwächen. Diese Theorien haben sich häufig für die Übernahme des nationalen Ermessensspielraums auf der Grundlage der Rechtsprechung des Europäischen Gerichtshofes für Menschenrechte ausgesprochen. Schließlich plädiert die vorliegende Studie für eine kontextbasierte Theorie der interamerikanischen gerichtlichen Überprüfung und versucht, den nationalen Ermessensspielraum mit dem kosmopolitischen Konstitutionalismus Lateinamerikas in Einklang zu bringen.
In recent decades, a new human rights enforcement context has emerged in Latin America. The organizational evolution of the Inter-American System for Human Rights Protection (IAS), the adoption of new constitutions by national legislatures, and the adoption of innovative constitutional interpretations by the most authoritative courts in the region have led to the emergence of Latin American cosmopolitan constitutionalism. Within this new context, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) has started practicing the judicial review of domestic laws, i.e., on several occasions, it has ordered national authorities to invalidate domestic laws due to their incompatibility with the American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR). By reviewing domestic laws, the IACtHR has placed itself in the middle of a dialogue between legislatures and courts that was long seen as an exclusively domestic conversation within Latin American constitutionalism. This strong form of international jurisprudence has made the normative questions relating to judicial review much more complex to address. Given the increasing conflicts between domestic and inter-American human rights authorities, this study aims to find the most legitimate and effective approach to the practice of inter-American judicial review. In line with this, and drawing on the debate about domestic judicial review, it first assesses the reasons behind the practice of strong international judicial review. In order to offer a better form of inter-institutional interaction within the IAS, this study later addresses theories that have sought to weaken the practice of inter-American judicial review based on the principle of subsidiarity. These theories have often advocated for the adoption of the national margin of appreciation based on the European experience with this concept of deference to national authorities. Finally, this study advocates for a context-based theory of inter-American judicial review and tries to reconcile the national margin of appreciation with Latin American cosmopolitan constitutionalism.

A tese parte da hipótese central de que existe uma antinomia fundamental no pensamento político ocidental contemporâneo entre os Direitos Humanos e a Soberania. Observamos tal antinomia em dois campos distintos, porém interconectados: no campo propriamente teórico, no qual chegamos à antinomia do projeto universal-cosmopolita dos Direitos Humanos em relação ao Estadoemuralhado- nacional, e no campo do direito internacional, no qual a antinomia se faz presente em alguns instrumentos jurídicos internacionais do pós-Segunda Guerra Mundial. Ao final da pesquisa, a hipótese central se confirmou, o que mostrou, portanto, a vigência de uma dupla matriz teórico-prática no pensamento político (duas filosofias) presentes no mundo contemporâneo. De um lado, os Direitos Humanos levados às últimas consequências (em sua extremidade lógica), remetem a um mundo sem fronteiras e o defendem: o do kosmopolites (cidadão do mundo). Por outro lado, a Soberania, de igual forma, em sua extremidade lógica, remete às fronteiras territoriais, aos territórios fechados e de jurisdição exclusiva. Vista por esse viés, a Soberania atém-se à lógica da muralha, da distinção e polaridade do eu e do outro enquanto o cidadão-nacional versus o estrangeiro.
This thesis argues from the central hypothesis that there is an essential antinomy in the contemporary Western political thought between human rights and Sovereignty. This antagonism can be observed in two fields (although interconnected): in the theorethical field itself, in which we arrive at a universal-cosmopolitan project antagonistic to the State-enclosed-national terrritory; and in the field of international law, where we encounter this paradox in some of the international post-Second World War legal instruments. At the end of the research, the hypothesis was confirmed, thus revealing the existence of a double theoretical-practical matrix in the political thought (two philosophies) of the contemporary world. On the one hand, human rights are taken to the very end (in its logical extreme), correlate and defend a world without borders, of the kosmopolites (world citizen). On the other hand, Sovereignty, equally taken in this logical extreme, refers back to territories frontiers, to the closed territories, and its exclusive jurisdiction. Seen from this point of view, Sovereignty ties itself to the logic of the wall, the distinction and polarity of I and the other, as the national-citizen versus the foreigner.

La justice cosmopolite présuppose la justice dans l’ordre interne d’un État ainsi que la justice internationale, en se différenciant aussi bien de l’une que de l’autre pour s’interroger sur le juste et l’injuste qui porte sur l’être humain en tant que tel et en tant qu’individu singulier, au-delà de son statut en tant que habitant, ressortissant ou citoyen d’un État, prenant ainsi aussi en compte les générations futures et l’environnement. Être cosmopolite est une condition à dimension individuelle et collective, liée à la construction de soi (un soi cosmopolite), à la manière de penser et de vivre dans sa dimension quotidienne (l’action sous un angle cosmopolite), ainsi qu’à une réflexion sur ce qu’est le juste et l’injuste cosmopolite, sur l’émergence des groupes sociaux qui exigent le cosmopolitisme et sur la normativité des institutions nationales, internationales et supranationales qui veulent le réaliser. Ainsi, la notion de justice cosmopolite se révèle être un objet commun au champ de la philosophie, des sciences politiques, de la sociologie, des sciences de la culture, de la psychologie sociale ainsi que du droit. Nous analysons d’abord les enjeux de la justice cosmopolite tels qu’ils ont été formulés aux XVIII et XIX siècles chez Hobbes, Kant, Hegel et Alexander von Humboldt, en confrontant ses idées avec les débats contemporains; ensuite, les nouveaux problématiques de la justice cosmopolite qui se dessinent au XX siècle avec Freud, Kelsen, la Théorie Critique et Bourdieu; et enfin, quelques enjeux fondamentaux contemporains de la justice cosmopolite : les droits humains, le droit humanitaire, le droit des minorités et l’espace public mondial
Cosmopolitan justice presupposes justice in the order of a State as well as international justice, but differs from these two forms in that it questions the just and unjust concerning human beings as such and as a unique individual, beyond one’s status as a resident, national or citizen of a State, and also takes into account future generations and the environment. Being cosmopolitan has an individual and collective dimension related to the construction of the self (a cosmopolitan self), to one’s way of thinking and living in its everyday dimension (action from a cosmopolitan standpoint) and a reflection on what is just and unjust cosmopolitanism, the emergence of social groups that require cosmopolitanism and the normativity of national, international and supranational institutions that want to achieve it. Thus, the notion of cosmopolitan justice proves to be a common object in the field of philosophy, political science, sociology, cultural studies, social psychology and law. This thesis first analyzes the challenges of cosmopolitan justice as they were formulated in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries by Hobbes, Kant, Hegel and Alexander von Humboldt, comparing their ideas with contemporary debates (Part I). It then analyzes new issues regarding cosmopolitan justice that emerged in the twentieth century with Freud, Kelsen, Critical Theory and Bourdieu (Part II). Finally, an analysis is offered on fundamental contemporary issues of cosmopolitan justice, such as human rights, humanitarian law, the rights of minorities and global public space (Part III)

The process of internationalization of human rights was one of those responsible for making individuals subject to international law and for motivating the development of the principle of humanity. In this context, cosmopolitan ideals, inspired by the philosophical reflections of Immanuel Kant, from the middle of the last century, began to emerge with the intention of providing bases for the interpretation of certain phenomena. In the legal field, observation based on precepts of cosmopolitanism provides important elements for understanding human rights and the need to combat impunity for those who commit global violations of such rights through genocide, war crimes and crimes Against humanity. In relation to these criminal types, internationalization fostered the so-called principle of universal jurisdiction. According to this principle, any State is capable of prosecuting crimes against human rights, even if there is no territorial connection of the facts to its territory or nationality link between victims and / or defendants and the state of judgment. We are faced with the so-called judicial relocation, in which elements such as territoriality and nationality are put in check because of the need to protect human rights. The use of this principle, by generating ruptures with elements of modern understanding of law, jurisdiction and process, raises practical questions in the field of the so-called cosmopolitanization of justice. In view of this scenario, the research problems that guide this work are: To what extent does the process of internationalization of human rights establish a duty of States to exercise universal jurisdiction? When looking at the limits of the real, what are the obstacles to an effective exercise of universal jurisdiction in its absolute form? The general objective of the research was to observe the principle of universal jurisdiction over the dichotomous view of being cosmopolitan, of inspiration in Kantian philosophical reflections and of authors who use Kant as their theoretical basis and of the being of cosmopolitanization, a concept developed in the plane of Sociology by Ulrich Beck and which demonstrates that reality departs from the perceptions of a philosophical cosmopolitanism and approaches the idea that society has become cosmopolitan because of the transnationalization of global risks. The method of dialectical approach and the methods of comparative and typological procedure were used. It has been concluded that philosophically anchored on the premises of cosmopolitanism and, legally in the norms of jus cogens, universal jurisdiction, in its absolute form, is seen as a duty to be able to break with impunity and repair human rights violations. However, the reality of being shies away from universalist pretensions and approaches the particularism of practices, so that the presence of legal and political obstacles to the exercise of universal jurisdiction drastically reduces its spectrum of application. From the duty of punishment, through the application of absolute universal jurisdiction, States have only been able to punish if there are certain conditions, generally stipulated by their respective domestic laws.
O processo de internacionalização dos direitos humanos foi um dos responsáveis por tornar os indivíduos em sujeitos de direito internacional e por motivar o desenvolvimento do princípio da humanidade. Nesse contexto, ideais cosmopolitas, inspirados nas reflexões filosóficas de Immanuel Kant, a partir de meados do século passado, passaram a despontar com o intuito de fornecer bases para a interpretação de determinados fenômenos. No campo jurídico, a observação a partir de preceitos do cosmopolitismo acaba por fornecer importantes elementos para a compreensão dos direitos humanos e da necessidade de combate à impunidade em relação àqueles que cometem violações globais a tais direitos por meio de genocídios, crimes de guerra e crimes contra a humanidade. Em relação a esses tipos penais, a internacionalização fomentou o chamado princípio da jurisdição universal. Segundo tal princípio, qualquer Estado é capaz de julgar crimes ocorridos contra os direitos humanos, mesmo que não haja vinculação territorial dos fatos ao seu território ou vínculo de nacionalidade entre vítimas e/ou réus e o Estado julgador. Está-se diante da denominada deslocalização judiciária, em que elementos como territorialidade e nacionalidade são colocados em xeque por força da necessidade de proteção aos direitos humanos. A utilização desse princípio, por gerar rupturas com elementos da compreensão moderna de direito, de jurisdição e de processo, gera questionamentos de ordem prática, no campo da chamada cosmopolitização da justiça. Diante desse cenário, os problemas de pesquisa que norteiam este trabalho são: Em que medida o processo de internacionalização dos direitos humanos estabelece um dever de exercício de jurisdição universal por parte dos Estados? Ao observar os limites do real, quais são os entraves para um efetivo exercício da jurisdição universal em sua forma absoluta? O objetivo geral da pesquisa foi o de observar o princípio da jurisdição universal sobre a ótica dicotômica do dever ser cosmopolita, de inspiração nas reflexões filosóficas kantianas e de autores que utilizam Kant como sua base teórica e do ser da cosmopolitização, conceito desenvolvido no plano da sociologia por Ulrich Beck e que demonstra que a realidade se afasta das percepções de um cosmopolitismo filosófico e se aproxima da ideia de que a sociedade se tornou cosmopolita em razão da transnacionalização de riscos globais. Utilizou-se o método de abordagem dialético e os métodos de procedimento comparativo e tipológico. Concluiu-se que ancorada filosoficamente em premissas do cosmopolitismo e, juridicamente nas normas do jus cogens, a jurisdição universal, em sua forma absoluta, é vista como um dever ser capaz de romper com a impunidade e reparar violações de direitos humanos. No entanto, a realidade do ser afasta-se das pretensões universalistas e se aproxima do particularismo das práticas, de modo que a presença de entraves jurídicos e políticos ao exercício da jurisdição universal reduzem de modo drástico o seu espectro de aplicação. De dever de punir, por meio da aplicação da jurisdição universal absoluta, os Estados passaram a somente poder punir se houver a assunção de algumas condições, em geral estipuladas pelas respectivas legislações internas.

Direitos humanos e justiça internacional são temas que abrangem várias categorias de discussão. Ambos são igualmente importantes e sem um somos incapazes de alcançar o outro. Esse trabalho tem como objetivo apresentar as principais teorias políticas contemporâneas que tratam desse tema, em busca da que melhor responde a seguinte questão-problema: qual proposta de filosofia política se adapta uniformemente a valoração dos direitos individuais e argumenta como fatores internacionais afetam a sociedade doméstica? Fazemos uma revisão bibliográfica a partir da obra Uma teoria da justiça de John Rawls, apontamos como o debate se expandiu para o âmbito internacional e quais as críticas que foram feitas ao longo desse processo. Demonstramos como as relações internacionais afetam a política interna de sociedades em desenvolvimento e, assim, não somente devem ser consideradas quando pensamos em direitos individuais, mas também devem se tornar parte essencial e imprescindível de uma teoria de justiça. Por fim, concluímos como a proposta cosmopolita, coerente e precisamente se apresenta como a melhor alternativa a favor dos direitos individuais e, o Imposto Global de Recursos, assegura uma regularidade necessária para a discussão de justiça internacional.
Human rights and international justice are issues that span multiple categories of discussion. Both are equally important and none of them are unable to reach the other by itself. This study aims to present the main contemporary political theories that address this topic, in search of the best answer to the question-problem: which proposed political philosophy evenly fits the valuation of individual rights and argues as international factors affect the domestic society? We review the literature from the work A Theory of Justice by John Rawls, point out how the debate has expanded to the international level and what the criticisms that have been made throughout this process. We demonstrate how international relations affect the domestic policy of developing societies and, thus, should not only be considered when we think about individual rights, but also should become essential and an indispensable part of a theory of justice. At last, we conclude that the consistent and accurately cosmopolitan proposal presents itself as the best alternative in favor of individual rights, and the Global Resources Tax ensures the needed regularity for the discussion of international justice.

Confronted with the high toll of human lives that global poverty takes today, and the widening gap between the rich and the poor, a growing number of contemporary moral theorists and political philosophers have posed the question of what moral duties wealthy countries and individuals owe to the poor. Their answers could be divided in two main camps. Justice cosmopolitans, on one hand, emphasize the importance of building just institutions at the global level that stop harming the worse-off. On the other hand, assistance cosmopolitans emphasize the importance of aiding the needy, regardless of any past or present responsibilities that the wealthy may have toward them. In this thesis I focus on what the needy may do for themselves in order to get out of their plight. I believe this is a necessary complement to the perspective where the materially privileged seem also to be the morally anointed to address the plight of the needy. My claim is that, given certain conditions - i.e. the agent is morally innocent, the resources are accessible, the owner is not equally (or nearly as) needy in the same relevant respect, and it is a last resort - an agent in need has a right to take and use any resources needed to survive. This right has the form of a claim over those resources; that is, a right which is correlated with a duty on their owner to give them away or to let them be taken and used by the needy - if the owner is present and aware of the relevant circumstances. If he is absent, meanwhile, the agent may take and use those resources, assuming that - had the owner been present - he would have recognized her right. Moreover, this right is morally enforceable, by which I mean that the agent may take and use the resources needed by actual force if the owner fails to comply with his correlative duty, even if this goes against the established laws and social mores. I develop the normative framework of this cosmopolitan right of necessity and its correlative duty of humanity (as I call them in continuity with a long-standing philosophical tradition), based on the accounts of Samuel Pufendorf and Francis Hutcheson. Because they give different justifications for this moral relation (the former, contractarian-based; the latter, utilitarian), my aim is to persuade readers of both leanings that it is not contradictory, but follows from the very principles of these theories to accept the existence of such a duty and right. I then refer to the implications of accepting this principle as part of a cosmopolitan morality, and present some contemporary scenarios where it may be applied. -- provided by Candidate.

Despite the importance to and influence of Kant’s work on contemporary moral and political philosophy, little has been written concerning the possible application of Kant’s moral and political principles to the issue of refugee right. Such lack of exploration seems even more surprising in light of recent refugee crises making headlines across the globe. This thesis constructs a Kantian account of refugee right by examining and applying the Kantian principles of the law of hospitality and the original right to a place on Earth, while balancing these rights against the right of nations to self-determination. As such, this thesis starts with a thorough analysis of Kant’s moral and political framework, drawing from both the Doctrine of Right and Perpetual Peace. The law of hospitality and original right to a place on Earth are explicated and drawn upon to construct a concept of refugee right in accordance with Kant’s Principle of Right and wider principles of freedom. Then the scope of the thesis is broadened to examine how such a refugee right could realistically be implemented across the globe at the level of international relations and law. After careful examination of Kant’s views on sovereignty and self-determination, it is found that nations cannot be coerced to follow laws as individuals can. As a result, Kant’s admittedly vaguer concept of moral progress will be found to be an essential factor with regard to the realisation of - a refugee right.
Thesis (MPhil) -- University of Adelaide, School of Humanities, 2021

The central purpose of this research is to investigate the main progresses in promoting European integration strategies, social cohesion and sense of belonging (both global and European citizenship) within and by the European Union, taking into account the new multicultural realities of our globalized world; promoting a new model of integration which does involve neither homogenization nor hegemonization, allowing for both protection of human rights and the preservation of cultural values. Integration is in fact considered as a key element of the European Union’s migration policy, as well as a crucial element for the future development of European societies, besides the very identity of Europe itself. To this end a comparison is made between the classic and contemporary cosmopolitan theories and the human rights theory, in order to discover if and in which way they may or should complement each other. The idea of cosmopolitanism is questioned and criticized in parallel with the classical Westphalian sovereignty model, which represented and still represents the dominant governance model of international law and relations, notwithstanding the recent rise and development of international global institutions and non-governmental actors, proposing an alternative and new model of “global governance”. I therefore analyze the relationship between two famously conflicting ideologies of human rights: universalism and cultural relativism, in their philosophical and metaethical meaning of the liberal-communitarian debate; in the historical perspective of the post cold-war scenario, which saw the rise and establishment of an international community based on a “common view and scope” and on allegedly “shared values and principles”. The main purpose here is the one of investigating whether or not those values and principles, certified and promoted by the UDHR and other important treaties and declarations since 1948, can be really considered universal and universally shared, besides all cultural differences and relativism. I consider these issues as historically and ideologically related to the actual structure of the international and European system of protection of minorities and cultural diversity, which developed on a parallel although different line. The main intention here is the one of investigating merits and faults of this system, analyzing the new concept and definition of minorities in the European Union context, the European Union competences in this field and the possible mutual cooperation between the EU and other international actors acting for the protection of minority rights. Following OHCHR indications, there is still “no internationally agreed definition as to which groups constitute a minority”, while it is always stressed the fact that the existence of a minority should be recognized as a matter of fact and that any definition must include both objective and subjective aspects (race, ethnicity, language or religion but also identity and sense of belonging). I eventually evaluate different models of integration and European mechanisms of protection of cultural diversity, suggesting a path for a new model of European integration and human rights protection. The role of both states and supranational institutions like the European Union in protecting those rights is considered as essential in this respect.

This dissertation explores a family of theoretical models of humanitarian military intervention. A number of recent theorists, including Tesón, Caney, Buchanan, Orend, Moellendorf, and Wheeler, build their models from a perspective called ‘cosmopolitanism.’ They offer arguments based on the moral supremacy of human rights, the arbitrary character of territorial boundaries, and the duty to protect individual human beings exposed to serious and systematic violence by their own governments. I develop a model of intervention that recognizes the moral significance of political self-government. To the extent that international society should countenance a ‘duty to protect’ human rights, the duty ought to be constrained by a commitment to the values of self-government. The model developed in this dissertation also recognizes the significance of international law enforcement. Insofar as we should permit a role of enforcement for international human rights, that role should be constrained by formally accepted global principles and in particular by positive obligations to prevent and punish actions regarded as international crimes. These other global values are viewed with suspicion by cosmopolitan theorists, who tend to construe them in stark contrast to the vision of global responsibility for human rights protection. But I will show how these other values emerged simultaneously with cosmopolitanism and share many of its underlying intuitions. Because self-government and law enforcement are linked politically to the cosmopolitan vision, these two distinctive global values can be utilized as tools to fortify or expand cosmopolitanism by enlarging the global sense of responsibility for human rights. The aim of this project is to explain how these other values came to be neglected by cosmopolitan theorists, and why they should not be forgotten.
Thesis (Ph.D, Philosophy) -- Queen's University, 2013-09-25 12:11:55.056

By asking the question “who is the subject of humanity upon whom human rights are attached?” this thesis poses to cosmopolitan ethics an ontological question of how the being of the human of human rights is formulated. It inquires into the conditions of possibility of the anomaly of the cosmopolitan appeal to a universal right to humanity. This is an anomaly exposed by the aporias of war fought in the name of humanitarianism, dispossession of land as the consequence of an entitlement to hospitality and detention for an “unauthorized” assertion of the right to asylum. The thesis argues that the anomaly of universal human rights can be explained by the diagram of (in)humanity that has, like an abstract machine, circulated alongside the history of cosmopolitanism, constituting humanity as a human-inhuman complex that makes possible its denial. Rather than extending outwards, the boundary that divides inside from outside (human from inhuman) so as to make humanity a more encompassing and inclusive category for its legal-political mobilization, this thesis seeks to make sense of the boundary as a liminal space-time where human and inhuman come into conflict as the (in)human condition underlying the human rights conundrum. I describe this diagram as the “Anthropocentric Waiting Room” in order to designate how it is that humanity can be a condition for which some must wait. My central aim is to advance, in four phases, its theoretical importance to cosmopolitan studies. The first involves rupturing cosmopolitan ethics to highlight the space the (in)human occupies within contemporary discourses of cosmopolitan ethics. The second concerns recovering the archive to give the (in)human a history alongside cosmopolitanism’s humanity. The third engages in revisiting Kantian cosmopolitanism to establish its contribution to the intellectual history of the (in)human via a racist anthropology concerned with the production of the subject “Man” as “citizen of the world.” The fourth returns to the question of human rights through the problem of the anomaly by way of refracting this (in)human presence onto our contemporary dilemma.

This dissertation looks at how teachers, unionists, and cultural workers used black history to offer new ways of thinking about racial knowledge from a local level. Numerous efforts to promote and teach this history demonstrated how dissident cosmopolitan political currents from previous decades remained relevant to a vibrant and ideologically diffuse African American public sphere despite widespread Cold War dispersions, white supremacist reactions, and anticommunist repressions. My argument proceeds by demonstrating how these public history projects coalesced around a series of connected pedagogical endeavors. These endeavors included the work of school teachers on Chicago's South side who tried to advance curriculum reforms through World War II and afterwards, the work of packinghouse workers and other union-focused educators who used anti-discrimination campaigns to teach about the history of African Americans and Mexican Americans in the labor movement and to advance innovative models for worker education, and the activities of important cultural workers like Margaret and Charles Burroughs who politicized urban space and fought for greater recognition of black history in the public sphere through the advancement of their vision for a museum. Collectively, these projects expressed important ideas about race, citizenship, education and intellectual labors that engaged closely with the rapidly shifting terrains of mid-20th Century civil rights and international anti-colonialisms. Ultimately, this dissertation offers a social history about how cosmopolitan cultural work in public history and similar forms of knowledge production were at the intersections of political realities and lived experience in U.S. urban life.

Dissertação de Mestrado em Direito apresentada à Faculdade de Direito
O deslocamento forçado de pessoas e os infortúnios que o envolvem são um dos mais graves problemas da contemporaneidade com o qual a Comunidade Internacional precisa lidar. O Direito Internacional dos Refugiados, cujas ferramentas de proteção se caracterizam como as mais desenvolvidas normativamente e mais aceitas pelos integrantes daquela Comunidade, se restringe a salvaguardar os direitos de apenas uma das categorias de deslocados forçados, qual seja, dos Refugiados, tal como definidos pela Convenção Relativa ao Estatuto dos Refugiados de 1951 e pelo seu Protocolo de 1967. Assim, deixa de fora do seu âmbito protetivo todas as demais categorias, tais como, os deslocados internos, os deslocados por deterioração das condições ambientais e os deslocados por violações negativas de Direitos Humanos, uma vez que aqueles documentos, por um lado, privilegiam a tutela dos direitos civis e políticos em detrimento dos direitos econômicos, sociais e culturais e dos direitos transindividuais e difusos e, por outro, estabelecem a extraterritorialidade como requisito indispensável à concessão do seu respectivo Estatuto. Questiona-se, pois, se, em tempos de Internacionalização do Direito Internacional e de Constitucionalização do Direito Internacional, e diante do compromisso ético da Comunidade Internacional pela garantia universal dos Direitos Humanos e pela concretização da dignidade humana, bem como ante a urgência de se resolver a problemática do deslocamento forçado, deve a lógica de proteção dos refugiados permanecer demasiadamente restritiva ou se deve ser reformada, a fim de abranger com o seu manto protetivo as demais pessoas forçadamente deslocadas, a contribuir, dessa forma, com a solução, ou, ao menos, com o abrandamento, dessa problemática. Cuida-se, ademais, de buscar um remédio, pautado na concepção de que a Comunidade Internacional possui uma responsabilidade compartilhada para com a problemática do deslocamento forçado, para um dos infortúnios mais nocivos à efetiva proteção das pessoas forçadamente deslocadas que é a sua injusta distribuição e, consequentemente, dos ônus inerentes ao seu acolhimento, entre os países do mundo.
The forced displacement of people and the misfortunes surrounding it are one of the most serious contemporary problems that the International Community needs to deal with. International Refugee Law, which protection tools are the most normatively developed and most accepted by members of that Community, is restricted to safeguarding the rights of only one of the categories of forced displaced persons, namely, Refugees, as defined by Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 1951 and its 1967 Protocol. This leaves out of their protective scope all other categories, such as internally displaced persons, displaced by deteriorating environmental conditions and displaced by negative violations of Human Rights, once those documents, by one perspective, privilege the protection of civil and political rights in detriment of economic, social, cultural rights and transindividual and diffuse rights and, on the other hand, establish extraterritoriality as an indispensable requirement for the concession of its respective Statute. It is therefore questioned whether, in times of Internationalization of International Law and Constitutionalization of International Law, and in view of the ethical commitment of the International Community for the universal guarantee of Human Rights and for the realization of human dignity, also, moved by the urgency to resolve the problematic of forced displacement, should the logic of refugee protection remain too restrictive or should it be reformed in order to cover with its protective scope the other forcibly displaced persons, thus contributing to the solution, or at least , with the slowdown, of this problem. Furthermore, care is taken to seek a remedy based on the conception that the International Community has a shared responsibility for the problem of forced displacement, for one of the most harmful misfortunes to the effective protection of forced displaced persons, which is their unjust distribution and, consequently, of the inherent burden of receiving it, between the countries of the world.