Rethinking Vulnerability as a Radically Ethical Device: Ethical Vulnerability Analysis and the EU's "Migration Crisis".

We reinvigorate vulnerability theory as a radically ethical device - ethical vulnerability analysis. We bring together fuller vulnerability analysis as theorized by Fineman and Grear in conversation with Levinas and Derrida's radical vulnerability and the ethics of hospitality to construct a theoretical framework that is firmly anchored in the realities of the everyday that are vulnerability and migration. This novel framework offers a thinking space to subvert approaches to migrants and migration as it compels us to come face-to face with the "other", which in turn renders the political accountable by her. We deploy ethical vulnerability analysis to deconstruct the EU's "migration crisis" and investigate whether the activation of temporary protection for displaced persons from Ukraine signifies a humanizing turn in the EU's asylum and migration policies. In this regard, we submit that this hospitable moment constitutes an "exception to the rule" rather than a paradigm shift.

Vulnerability, irregular migrants' health-related rights and the European Court of Human Rights.

The protection of irregular migrants' health-related rights brings to the fore the tensions that exist between human rights, citizenship and the sovereign state, and exposes the protection gaps in the international human rights regime. With this in mind, I consider the merits of a vulnerability analysis in international human rights law (IHRL). I posit that, detached from specific groups and reconceptualised as universal, vulnerability can be reclaimed as a foundation and tool of IHRL. I further contend that the deployment of a vulnerability analysis can alleviate the exclusionary dimension of IHRL and extend protections to irregular migrants. On this basis, I investigate the development of a vulnerability analysis in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. I argue that, in contrast with the Court's vulnerable population approach, a vulnerability analysis can improve protection standards for irregular migrants in the field of health.

Public health powers in relation to infectious tuberculosis in England and France: a comparison of approaches.

This article examines the legal responses to infectious tuberculosis in England and France. Given that tuberculosis has re-emerged as a public health threat in both countries, the differing jurisprudence and legal frameworks of disease control in the two jurisdictions warrant examination. Two questions arise in that respect: firstly, what is the role of the State in the protection of public health in the context of tuberculosis, and secondly, to what extent can the law intervene to coerce individuals to undertake health measures for the protection of society at large. These issues reveal the tensions that exist between the individual and public interest. France and England differ greatly in their responses to such tensions. Paradoxically, France, that has traditionally embraced strong State intervention, has been reluctant to curtail individual freedoms for the benefit of public health. Conversely, England, that has tended to be more closely associated with liberalism, has been ready to accept and even promote restrictions to individual freedoms in the collective interest.