نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
استادیار، گروه حقوق، واحد مشهد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، مشهد، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Blocking borders in times of emergency has been associated with conflicting interpretations and approaches, so that its interpretation as a governance-oriented issue is intertwined with criteria such as national security. However, it is necessary to adapt the issue of border movement restrictions to the special situations of immigrants, refugees and asylum seekers in the realm of international law and to answer the question: Can these restrictions be synonymous with violating human fundamental rights? be considered Therefore, in this research, which is based on a descriptive-analytical method, it was firstly determined that preventing the access of refugees by blocking the borders is a clear violation of Articles 9 and 33 of the Geneva Convention and governments cannot impose restrictions on their movement. especially that the situation of refugees or asylum seekers is different from ordinary people. Based on the method of analogical reasoning, it was determined: national security cannot act as an element to justify the blocking of borders in widespread epidemics, because the needs of national security must be interpreted based on an objective and potential threat and in practical terms, the threat against national security has also been raised. from a collective reaction.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)