The influx of migrants from former East Pakistan and present Bangladesh has been one of the most debated issues in Assam, one of Indiaʼs northeastern states. Assam’s National Register of Citizens (NRC) was first created in 1951 to identify illegal migrants. The need to update NRC has been evident since the 1980s when the movement against illegal migration began to grow in Assam.

The Supreme Court ordered an update in 2013, and a complete draft was published in July 2018. The names of four million citizens were left off the list. It was anticipated, particularly among the pan-Indian media, that the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), known for its right-wing Hindu nationalism, would use this updated NRC to ostracize Muslims in the state. However, to date, most groups, including Muslim organizations in Assam, have supported the NRC update process.

At the same time, there have been widespread reports regarding the appalling human rights situation of people designated as “foreigners” by Assamʼs Foreigners Tribunals and detained in detention centers since 2018. There are currently 1,037 people being indefinitely detained in detention centers. Since 2017, more than 13,000 people in Assam have been designated as “foreigners,” including many citizens without proper documentation. Also it is illegal for foreigners to stay without proper passport/visa. But the government does not have the logistics to deport such a large number, and it is unlikely that the Government of Bangladesh will accept them.

Based on fieldwork and a historical analysis of Assam, this presentation seeks to identify the human rights violations being committed against these migrants and people of migrant origins and how the process of updating the NRC affects them.

This paper examines the potential cross-border cooperation among the Saami people in Sweden, Norway, and Finland, focusing on the proposed Nordic Saami Convention in 2005. It argues that the proposed convention is more progressive than the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples for several reasons. First, the proposed convention requires states parties to minimize the impact of national borders on Saami people; second, it contains several provisions that require states parties to promote their activities across national borders and stipulates their custom right to conduct reindeer husbandry across national borders; and third, it recognizes the possibility of excising their right of self-determination transnationally.

On the contrary, the proposed convention encountered the following limitations and difficulties. First, Saami people living in Russia were not protected under this convention. Second, Finland was strongly opposed to the obligation to obtain consent from the Saami Parliaments, while they supported the obligation to consult with them. Third, Norway was strongly against the custom right of Saami people to conduct reindeer husbandry across national borders.

As a result, the new draft of the Nordic Saami Convention in 2017 weakens the status of the Saami Parliaments and the rights of Saami people in many ways although it retains some provisions that require the states parties to only promote their activities across national borders. For example, the Saami Parliaments are no longer regarded as a formal party of negotiation of the Saami Convention, thus the provision that requires states to obtain consent from the Saami Parliaments before ratifying the convention had been deleted. The reference to the Saami peopleʼs custom right to conduct reindeer husbandry across national borders was deleted. The nearly equal relationship between the Saami and Nordic States assumed in the proposed convention in 2005 is unlikely to be currently realized, though it would retain its significance by showing the future direction for indigenous peoples.

In 2013, the Toronto City Council adopted a motion reaffirming the city’s “commitment to ensuring access to services without fear to immigrants without full status or without full status documents.” As one of the first Canadian cities to implement a sanctuary policy, Toronto has made city services available to undocumented Torontonians who can now live without the fear of being asked for proof of status. The purpose of this study is to introduce the idea of employing Toronto’s sanctuary policy in Japan.

The first chapter describes the outline of Torontoʼs sanctuary policy, which is based on providing “access to City Services for Undocumented Torontonians (Access T. O.).” Accordingly, “access without fear” is pivotal in this policy. The second chapter provides a brief history of the policy and clarifies that it was drafted not only to protect the human rights of undocumented Torontonians but also to maintain Canadaʼs economic growth to which they had contributed.

The third chapter addresses the tensions between the provincial government, Toronto city government, and the federal government caused by the implementation of the sanctuary policy.

In the concluding remarks, this study presents two perspectives on the study of Toronto’s sanctuary policy: defiance by the municipal government against federal immigration laws and policies and coordinately upholding Canada’s obligations under international human rights treaties such as International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

The Ottawa Treaty, or the Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention (APMBC), and the Oslo Convention, or the Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM), have attracted many international relations scholars. The multilateral regulatory conventions pertaining to military weapons were established despite the fact that great powers had opposed these conventions due to military security considerations. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and middle powers succeeded in establishing APMBC and CCM by emphasizing the inhumanity of weapons to increase the number of signatories to the conventions. Accordingly, existing studies have focused on how the humanitarian norm factor (rather than the military security factor) contributed to increasing the number of original members of the conventions before their establishment. However, we must note that the conventions faced opposition from great powers and many states did not join them at the time of their establishment as had been expected. With NGOs’ goal of abolishing weapons from the world in mind, one of the reasons why the conventions were highly evaluated is that, once established, they were considered to influence even the states that did not join the conventions through pressuring them to become members, not use the weapons, and so forth. Accordingly, it is essential to explore whether the conventions have influenced such states since their establishment. If they have, has their influence resulted from humanitarian considerations as it did before the establishment? Alternatively, as is often the case with regulatory conventions of military weapons, does their influence rest on states’ security considerations? As a first attempt to answer this research question, the present paper examines why the influence on opt-out states has been different between the conventions. The analysis shows that security considerations were more important than humanitarian norms in terms of the effects that the conventions had on states that were not party.

This article examines the current state and agenda of democratic recession globally as well as the obstacles to democracy support, specifically focusing on issues related to diminishing civil society space.

The global deterioration of democracy and backsliding of democratization are clearly observable. Such a phenomenon is caused by the long-term erosion of democratic institutions rather than short-term events such as coups. One important consequence is the restriction of civil society space, which has proliferated in various countries since the late 2000s. In countries such as Russia, several stringent measures, including harsh restrictions on foreign funding for civil society organizations, have been implemented.

However, democracy support has faced various difficulties. The Iraq War in 2003 led to the “backlash” against democracy support generally. Furthermore, the decline of Western powers associated with the emergence of China, referred to as a “power transition,” threatens the United States (US)-led liberal international order with negative effects on democracy support. The decline of Western liberal democracy’s appeal damages democratization and democracy support as well.

Consequently, democracy support has been forced to change. The de-politicization of democracy support, which avoids involvement in political arenas, is accelerating. Additionally, democracy support remains a low priority in Western countries’ foreign policies; the growing difference among actorsʼ priorities hinders its international cooperation. The US’ and European Unionʼs responses to the problems of civil society space also reflect these obstacles to democracy support. To improve the effectiveness of democracy support and protect civil society space, the actors should develop a support strategy that is adjusted to the situation of the target country while making stakeholders’ priorities clear and strengthening international cooperation. Simultaneously, the so-called “re-democratization” of Western democracies is required to recover democracyʼs appeal as a political regime model.

The Semipalatinsk Nuclear Test Site was the most frequently used nuclear test facility of the former Soviet Union. During its 40-year-old history, 456 nuclear tests were carried out until the site was closed in 1989. Surveys around Semipalatinsk area were conducted to ascertain the overall impact of these tests. We interviewed children with diseases and/or disabilities and their parents from 12 families in this area from 2009 to 2017.

Whether the disabilities or diseases were officially diagnosed by a healthcare professional or not, most parents blamed the nuclear tests at the Semipalatinsk Site for their childrenʼs health problems. The parents’ reasons for linking their children’s medical problems to nuclear tests were classified into three categories: the children’s grandparents had been exposed to radiation directly; the parents themselves grew up in a contaminated area; the area in which they currently reside is contaminated, and their children are directly affected.

We also explored whether the parents’ guilt was eased when their childrenʼs ill health was attributed to nuclear testing. A detailed analysis of the survey responses revealed that these parents tended to blame themselves for their childrenʼs illnesses regardless of the circumstances, and were left wondering “if only there were no nuclear tests.” Exploring such layers of thought would shed light on the reality of adverse mental effects on the Semipalatinsk Nuclear Test Site victims.

The influx of migrants from former East Pakistan and present Bangladesh has been one of the most debated issues in Assam, one of Indiaʼs northeastern states. Assam’s National Register of Citizens (NRC) was first created in 1951 to identify illegal migrants. The need to update NRC has been evident since the 1980s when the movement against illegal migration began to grow in Assam.

The Supreme Court ordered an update in 2013, and a complete draft was published in July 2018. The names of four million citizens were left off the list. It was anticipated, particularly among the pan-Indian media, that the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), known for its right-wing Hindu nationalism, would use this updated NRC to ostracize Muslims in the state. However, to date, most groups, including Muslim organizations in Assam, have supported the NRC update process.

At the same time, there have been widespread reports regarding the appalling human rights situation of people designated as “foreigners” by Assamʼs Foreigners Tribunals and detained in detention centers since 2018. There are currently 1,037 people being indefinitely detained in detention centers. Since 2017, more than 13,000 people in Assam have been designated as “foreigners,” including many citizens without proper documentation. Also it is illegal for foreigners to stay without proper passport/visa. But the government does not have the logistics to deport such a large number, and it is unlikely that the Government of Bangladesh will accept them.

Based on fieldwork and a historical analysis of Assam, this presentation seeks to identify the human rights violations being committed against these migrants and people of migrant origins and how the process of updating the NRC affects them.

This paper examines the potential cross-border cooperation among the Saami people in Sweden, Norway, and Finland, focusing on the proposed Nordic Saami Convention in 2005. It argues that the proposed convention is more progressive than the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples for several reasons. First, the proposed convention requires states parties to minimize the impact of national borders on Saami people; second, it contains several provisions that require states parties to promote their activities across national borders and stipulates their custom right to conduct reindeer husbandry across national borders; and third, it recognizes the possibility of excising their right of self-determination transnationally.

On the contrary, the proposed convention encountered the following limitations and difficulties. First, Saami people living in Russia were not protected under this convention. Second, Finland was strongly opposed to the obligation to obtain consent from the Saami Parliaments, while they supported the obligation to consult with them. Third, Norway was strongly against the custom right of Saami people to conduct reindeer husbandry across national borders.

As a result, the new draft of the Nordic Saami Convention in 2017 weakens the status of the Saami Parliaments and the rights of Saami people in many ways although it retains some provisions that require the states parties to only promote their activities across national borders. For example, the Saami Parliaments are no longer regarded as a formal party of negotiation of the Saami Convention, thus the provision that requires states to obtain consent from the Saami Parliaments before ratifying the convention had been deleted. The reference to the Saami peopleʼs custom right to conduct reindeer husbandry across national borders was deleted. The nearly equal relationship between the Saami and Nordic States assumed in the proposed convention in 2005 is unlikely to be currently realized, though it would retain its significance by showing the future direction for indigenous peoples.

In 2013, the Toronto City Council adopted a motion reaffirming the city’s “commitment to ensuring access to services without fear to immigrants without full status or without full status documents.” As one of the first Canadian cities to implement a sanctuary policy, Toronto has made city services available to undocumented Torontonians who can now live without the fear of being asked for proof of status. The purpose of this study is to introduce the idea of employing Toronto’s sanctuary policy in Japan.

The first chapter describes the outline of Torontoʼs sanctuary policy, which is based on providing “access to City Services for Undocumented Torontonians (Access T. O.).” Accordingly, “access without fear” is pivotal in this policy. The second chapter provides a brief history of the policy and clarifies that it was drafted not only to protect the human rights of undocumented Torontonians but also to maintain Canadaʼs economic growth to which they had contributed.

The third chapter addresses the tensions between the provincial government, Toronto city government, and the federal government caused by the implementation of the sanctuary policy.

In the concluding remarks, this study presents two perspectives on the study of Toronto’s sanctuary policy: defiance by the municipal government against federal immigration laws and policies and coordinately upholding Canada’s obligations under international human rights treaties such as International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

The Ottawa Treaty, or the Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention (APMBC), and the Oslo Convention, or the Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM), have attracted many international relations scholars. The multilateral regulatory conventions pertaining to military weapons were established despite the fact that great powers had opposed these conventions due to military security considerations. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and middle powers succeeded in establishing APMBC and CCM by emphasizing the inhumanity of weapons to increase the number of signatories to the conventions. Accordingly, existing studies have focused on how the humanitarian norm factor (rather than the military security factor) contributed to increasing the number of original members of the conventions before their establishment. However, we must note that the conventions faced opposition from great powers and many states did not join them at the time of their establishment as had been expected. With NGOs’ goal of abolishing weapons from the world in mind, one of the reasons why the conventions were highly evaluated is that, once established, they were considered to influence even the states that did not join the conventions through pressuring them to become members, not use the weapons, and so forth. Accordingly, it is essential to explore whether the conventions have influenced such states since their establishment. If they have, has their influence resulted from humanitarian considerations as it did before the establishment? Alternatively, as is often the case with regulatory conventions of military weapons, does their influence rest on states’ security considerations? As a first attempt to answer this research question, the present paper examines why the influence on opt-out states has been different between the conventions. The analysis shows that security considerations were more important than humanitarian norms in terms of the effects that the conventions had on states that were not party.

This article examines the current state and agenda of democratic recession globally as well as the obstacles to democracy support, specifically focusing on issues related to diminishing civil society space.

The global deterioration of democracy and backsliding of democratization are clearly observable. Such a phenomenon is caused by the long-term erosion of democratic institutions rather than short-term events such as coups. One important consequence is the restriction of civil society space, which has proliferated in various countries since the late 2000s. In countries such as Russia, several stringent measures, including harsh restrictions on foreign funding for civil society organizations, have been implemented.

However, democracy support has faced various difficulties. The Iraq War in 2003 led to the “backlash” against democracy support generally. Furthermore, the decline of Western powers associated with the emergence of China, referred to as a “power transition,” threatens the United States (US)-led liberal international order with negative effects on democracy support. The decline of Western liberal democracy’s appeal damages democratization and democracy support as well.

Consequently, democracy support has been forced to change. The de-politicization of democracy support, which avoids involvement in political arenas, is accelerating. Additionally, democracy support remains a low priority in Western countries’ foreign policies; the growing difference among actorsʼ priorities hinders its international cooperation. The US’ and European Unionʼs responses to the problems of civil society space also reflect these obstacles to democracy support. To improve the effectiveness of democracy support and protect civil society space, the actors should develop a support strategy that is adjusted to the situation of the target country while making stakeholders’ priorities clear and strengthening international cooperation. Simultaneously, the so-called “re-democratization” of Western democracies is required to recover democracyʼs appeal as a political regime model.

The Semipalatinsk Nuclear Test Site was the most frequently used nuclear test facility of the former Soviet Union. During its 40-year-old history, 456 nuclear tests were carried out until the site was closed in 1989. Surveys around Semipalatinsk area were conducted to ascertain the overall impact of these tests. We interviewed children with diseases and/or disabilities and their parents from 12 families in this area from 2009 to 2017.

Whether the disabilities or diseases were officially diagnosed by a healthcare professional or not, most parents blamed the nuclear tests at the Semipalatinsk Site for their childrenʼs health problems. The parents’ reasons for linking their children’s medical problems to nuclear tests were classified into three categories: the children’s grandparents had been exposed to radiation directly; the parents themselves grew up in a contaminated area; the area in which they currently reside is contaminated, and their children are directly affected.

We also explored whether the parents’ guilt was eased when their childrenʼs ill health was attributed to nuclear testing. A detailed analysis of the survey responses revealed that these parents tended to blame themselves for their childrenʼs illnesses regardless of the circumstances, and were left wondering “if only there were no nuclear tests.” Exploring such layers of thought would shed light on the reality of adverse mental effects on the Semipalatinsk Nuclear Test Site victims.