There\nhas been a normative tension between emigration and immigration since 1948.\nIndeed\, article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that\neveryone has a universal right to leave his country\, but recognizes only the\nright to enter only for those who are already citizens of their country. Thus\,\ncitizens have a right to exit and a right to enter. Others hold only a right to\nexit. What is more\, this normative tension has been built up in international\nlaw as well. (Cole\, 2006)
\n\nWith\nthe rise of mobility regimes in the beginning of the nineties\, political\nthinkers have focused on immigration in order to identify the moral obligations\nof States that could transform the right to enter into a real universal right. But\na number of authors have recently called into question the relative neglect of\nthe right to leave (Baubö\;ck 2009\, Clemens 2011\, Cole 2006\, 2011). The purpose of this workshop is to explore the\nmeaning of this turn for political theory. Contributions from empirical and\nnormative sciences are welcome. \; Here are\nsome of the questions to be examined \;: Are the effect of individuals&rsquo\;\nmobility on those who decide to stay the same in sending countries and in\narrivals countries? Do they vary with what motivates individuals to move or to\nstay according to gender\, \; to their level\nof education or to their sector of professional activities? What are the\nstandards that should be adopted to assess them? What are the moral\nobligations of States toward those who decide to stay and those who decide to\nleave and how best to protect the rights of these individuals \; What kind of\ninternational institutions does the management of migration flux require?
\n ORGANIZER: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR