Mexico City,November 27, 2023.— How should we address migration, given that what is at stake is the lives and futures of people who have left their homes for various reasons? To address this and many other questions, Dr. Cecilia Coronado Angulo of the Institute of Humanities and Dr. Luis Xavier López Farjeat of the School of Philosophy, both from the Universidad Panamericana, edited the publication *Migration, Territory, and Borders: Ethical Perspectives on the Migration Phenomenon*.
This is an anthology featuring contributions from eight authors, researchers from various countries: Canada, the United States, Germany, and Mexico. “The chapters are the result of research seminars and a colloquium organized as part of the ‘Migration, Territory, and Identities’project, ” the authors explain.
More than just a political and administrative problem
When discussing the administrative regulations imposed by different countries—which determine who is allowed to enter a country and who is not—researchers argue that it is problematic to view migration as if it were solely a political and administrative issue.
“Regulations vary from country to country, and we have come to accept them as normal. However, in many cases they violate human rights. It is paradoxical that while there is a right to migration and free movement, there is no right to immigration. This is because we have developed very rigid notions of ‘borders’ and ‘sovereignty, ’”they state.
On this point, the book discusses the pros and cons of strict border controls. “We believe that many of the unfortunate situations we are seeing today are due to the inefficiency of certain countries’ regulations, which fail to take an ethical approach to migration, ” they state.
Sovereignty and Territory
While it is legitimate for governments to regulate their borders—since their sovereignty allows them to do so—both Dr. Coronado and Dr. López Farjeat believe that this authority has limits and that“if such regulations violate human rights, the integrity of the individual takes precedence.”
They also state: “States cannot shirk their responsibilities toward vulnerable groups by arguing that they must protect their sovereignty. Therefore, while it is true that there are good reasons to control borders, there are situations in which the protection of people takes precedence over such sovereignty.”
As for whether there is a necessary link between sovereignty and territory, both authors note that it is commonly believed that such a link exists, given that the definition of “state” includes the concepts of “sovereignty” and “territory.”
“However, we believe that extreme ‘sovereigntism’ is counterproductive. We have argued that the long-standing presence of a community of people over the years, its recognition by other states, and the consensus and agreements among neighboring territories give rise to what we have called the ‘principle of public institutionality of space, ’”they note.
On this point, they explain: “This means that, over time, a community can acquire the right to control a given territory and to ensure the safety of those who live there. Therefore, we believe the idea that the state is the sole authority with the power to decide on territorial matters is debatable.”
New Approaches
Although they know that such discussions are controversial, both believe:“We need to challenge the notion of sovereignty and move toward a different way of conceptualizing territory. In our work, we are exploring these new ways of conceptualization.”
However, researchers believe that, for the time being, borders between countries are necessary given the current situation of violence and crime: “We believe, however, that in the future regulations will have to be less rigid and that in some regions borders will indeed begin to disappear.”
As for the role of liberal democracies, they agree that these have an obligation toward migrants:“The basic moral obligation of every liberal democracy is solidarity with the vulnerable ( …)”, they conclude.
Both are aware that migration is a complex and multifaceted issue, but when it comes to how to address it, they believe the approach should be grounded in applied ethics: “There is no single ethical model that serves as a panacea. When practicing applied ethics, one must engage in casuistry and develop new—and sometimes hybrid—models.”
The Future of Migrants
There are many types of migrants. Some people are able to move to another country without any difficulty, thanks to their education, social class, and economic status; “the alarming case is that of vulnerable migrants. And, in this case, the future may not look very promising, ” the scholars state.
They warn that unless states implement policies for monitoring, care, and integration—among other measures —“in many cases, migrants will be left to fend for themselves, living in poverty and marginalized, and some will become easy targets for recruitment by criminal groups.”
“There may be some more encouraging cases. But in this context, while the approach we propose from the perspective of applied ethics could serve as a starting point for devising more effective solutions, it will have to be a very long-term effort, and we will need to find ways to influence public policy, ” they conclude.
Researcher data
Dr. Cecilia Coronado Angulo, Institute of Humanities, SNI Level I.
Dr. Luis Xavier López Farjeat, School of Philosophy, SNI III.
You can get Migration, Territory, and Borders: Ethical Perspectives on the Phenomenon of Migration, here.
