Citizenship rights in a global era: The adequacy of international human rights law in providing protection to asylum seekers

The emergence of millions of refugees during the twentieth century challenged the adequacy of nation state citizenship. International human rights law theoretically provides a 'universalised' form of citizenship and claims to transcend territorial boundaries. It is argued that despite state borders having become increasingly permeable to the flows of finances and commodities, the concepts of sovereignty and citizenship are not diminishing in importance. Citizenship continues to be used by nation states as a political notion through which nation states assert their sovereignty and exclude certain people, including asylum seekers, from membership. This is made possible through the adoption of restrictive migration laws and the shortcomings of the Refugee Convention which render the state as the decisive actor on questions of entry, admission, expulsion and residence. The theoretical arguments in this article will be selectively illustrated with examples of Australia's asylum policies