Search

The international legal prohibition of enforced disappearances first developed in the context of authoritarianism. In particular, throughout the second half of the 20th century, several Latin American governments used state agents and non-state actors to disappear political opponents and other identity groups. Today, advocates and scholars are employing the same category to contest state violence in a very different context: the disappearance of migrants, through detention and/or death, under the guise of border enforcement. In this paper, we consider acts of border violence at the U.S.-Mexico Border and at the EU's Southern and Eastern borders, including the Mediterranean Sea, imagining the potentials and limitations of labeling such practices as enforced disappearances in legal advocacy. After first exploring the doctrinal histories prohibiting enforced disappearance in international law, the paper examines two questions: first, what are the common and differing underlying assumptions in the authoritarianism and border violence contexts that make the legal category of "enforced disappearance" relevant for migrants and their families? Second, what are the practical benefits for migrant rights struggles in such a framing? Beyond simply characterizing such acts of border violence as egregious, the categorization of certain practices as enforced disappearances under international law can provide the relatives of missing migrants with concrete informational remedies and other forms of reparation, including through their rights provisioned by the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. For countless individuals whose loved ones have gone missing on the move for reasons of State design, this legal framing could help finally uncover the truth behind the fate and whereabouts of their disappeared. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The recent electoral successes of right-wing and far-right actors in different parts of the world have prompted discussion on various topics: the causes of their rise, their characteristics and strategies, the motivations of electorates and the depth of the right-wing shifts in a range of societies. This paper proposes key themes for systematising this debate and some clues to understanding the rise of the right in such diverse and heterogeneous national realities. It also suggests recovering a constructivist conceptualisation of "authoritarian traditions" in order to analyse the mobilisation strategies, behaviour and coordination of right-wing groups from a perspective that highlights their dynamic and innovative nature. This approach allows us to (re)think authoritarianism as the result of symbolic practices and discourses that are assembled, (re)invented and updated to serve various purposes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]