Rights statement: The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Journal of Human Rights, 14 (1), 2015, © Informa Plc
Accepted author manuscript, 198 KB, PDF document
Final published version
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Responsibility, emergency, blame
T2 - reporting on migrant deaths on the Mediterranean in the Council of Europe
AU - Follis, Karolina
N1 - The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Journal of Human Rights, 14 (1), 2015, © Informa Plc
PY - 2015/1/23
Y1 - 2015/1/23
N2 - In 2011 at least 1500 migrants perished in the Mediterranean en route to Europe. In one notable case 63 of 72 passengers of a refugee dinghy died in the course of a two-week drift. Despite communicating distress, they were left to die by passing military vessels and maritime authorities. This article analyzes the inquiry into this case conducted within the Council of Europe as a revealing instance of international human rights supervision. Through a focus on the practice of human rights reporting in instances of multiple institutional and moral failures, it shows how the rapporteur arrived at a politically acceptable account of who was responsible for the boat’s tragedy. Distinguishing between the concepts of responsibility as duty and responsibility as guilt, the article considers the implications of privileging the former over the latter. It argues for a human rights practice that embraces a robust notion of responsibility which combines both.
AB - In 2011 at least 1500 migrants perished in the Mediterranean en route to Europe. In one notable case 63 of 72 passengers of a refugee dinghy died in the course of a two-week drift. Despite communicating distress, they were left to die by passing military vessels and maritime authorities. This article analyzes the inquiry into this case conducted within the Council of Europe as a revealing instance of international human rights supervision. Through a focus on the practice of human rights reporting in instances of multiple institutional and moral failures, it shows how the rapporteur arrived at a politically acceptable account of who was responsible for the boat’s tragedy. Distinguishing between the concepts of responsibility as duty and responsibility as guilt, the article considers the implications of privileging the former over the latter. It argues for a human rights practice that embraces a robust notion of responsibility which combines both.
U2 - 10.1080/14754835.2014.987737
DO - 10.1080/14754835.2014.987737
M3 - Journal article
VL - 14
SP - 41
EP - 62
JO - Journal of Human Rights
JF - Journal of Human Rights
SN - 1475-4835
IS - 1
ER -