On the Refugee Crisis Discourse: A Critical Analysis Sitting in the Junction of International Criminal Law and International Refugee Law

Abstract

This Article critically explores the close relationship between the discourse of the refugee crisis phenomenon and inattentive state policies against refugees. Various reproduced political approaches of states appearing as a result of `how to deal with refugee crisis' concern across the world are exemplified to this end. In this light, it is asked whether certain forms of abuse occur due to the states' way of regulating refugees' asylum, and whether the process can be elevated to the level of crimes against humanity under the Rome Statute. The goal is to understand this issue by involving international criminal law and in connecting it to the International Criminal Court to determine whether states can be precluded from creating an environment that possibly leaves refugees vulnerable to both physical and sexual abuse, e.g., in detention centers or refugee camps. In relation to that, it is also expounded in what ways the refugee crisis as a produced concept by the conservative propaganda configures the attitude of both individuals and policy makers towards refugees. The adverse image, that is portrayed for refugees, effects negatively not only on the public view but also normalizes states' othering attitude when it comes to responding and regulating the movements of outsiders. In this direction, the 1951 Refugee Convention, the Rome Statue, and some other relevant international legal instruments are taken into account to examine the perpetrated violence employed by states through their policies against refugees. Drawing upon this dispute, evil wrongdoers, victimhood and refugee person as homo sacer are conceptualized alongside the crisis narrative throughout this Article, both from a philosophical and socio-legal standpoint.