Migration, Colonial Historical Injustice and Postcolonial Rectificatory Justice
The two major distinction lines in global justice are the relational approach and the non-relational approach. The relational approach is associative, that is, it is member-based. It emphasises that the common relationships that bind moral agents of justice together have moral significance. While t...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Global Justice Network
2025-05-01
|
| Series: | Global justice: Theory, Practice, Rhetoric |
| Online Access: | https://www.theglobaljusticenetwork.org/index.php/gjn/article/view/301 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849313010463539200 |
|---|---|
| author | Frank Aragbonfoh Abumere |
| author_facet | Frank Aragbonfoh Abumere |
| author_sort | Frank Aragbonfoh Abumere |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description |
The two major distinction lines in global justice are the relational approach and the non-relational approach. The relational approach is associative, that is, it is member-based. It emphasises that the common relationships that bind moral agents of justice together have moral significance. While the non-relational approach denies that justice is based on any special relationship. It asserts that justice is based on our common humanity and common human factors such as natural prerogatives, basic needs, and so on. This article argues that neither the relational approach nor the non-relational approach can resolve problems of recent and current migration, from former colonies to former colonizers, that are partly conditioned by colonial historical relationships. Due to colonial historical relationship: Contra the relational approach, although citizens of a former colony are non-citizens of their former colonizer, they may have certain right claims against their former colonizer and the former colonizer may owe them certain duties of justice; nevertheless, contra the non-relational approach, other non-citizens of the former colonizer who do not have such colonial historical relationship with the former colonizer do not have such right claims against the former colonizer and the former colonizer does not owe them such duties of justice.
|
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-fb19f7100dd84d11a71b38dee1e15353 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1835-6842 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-05-01 |
| publisher | Global Justice Network |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Global justice: Theory, Practice, Rhetoric |
| spelling | doaj-art-fb19f7100dd84d11a71b38dee1e153532025-08-20T03:52:55ZengGlobal Justice NetworkGlobal justice: Theory, Practice, Rhetoric1835-68422025-05-01150110.21248/gjn.15.01.301Migration, Colonial Historical Injustice and Postcolonial Rectificatory Justice Frank Aragbonfoh Abumere The two major distinction lines in global justice are the relational approach and the non-relational approach. The relational approach is associative, that is, it is member-based. It emphasises that the common relationships that bind moral agents of justice together have moral significance. While the non-relational approach denies that justice is based on any special relationship. It asserts that justice is based on our common humanity and common human factors such as natural prerogatives, basic needs, and so on. This article argues that neither the relational approach nor the non-relational approach can resolve problems of recent and current migration, from former colonies to former colonizers, that are partly conditioned by colonial historical relationships. Due to colonial historical relationship: Contra the relational approach, although citizens of a former colony are non-citizens of their former colonizer, they may have certain right claims against their former colonizer and the former colonizer may owe them certain duties of justice; nevertheless, contra the non-relational approach, other non-citizens of the former colonizer who do not have such colonial historical relationship with the former colonizer do not have such right claims against the former colonizer and the former colonizer does not owe them such duties of justice. https://www.theglobaljusticenetwork.org/index.php/gjn/article/view/301 |
| spellingShingle | Frank Aragbonfoh Abumere Migration, Colonial Historical Injustice and Postcolonial Rectificatory Justice Global justice: Theory, Practice, Rhetoric |
| title | Migration, Colonial Historical Injustice and Postcolonial Rectificatory Justice |
| title_full | Migration, Colonial Historical Injustice and Postcolonial Rectificatory Justice |
| title_fullStr | Migration, Colonial Historical Injustice and Postcolonial Rectificatory Justice |
| title_full_unstemmed | Migration, Colonial Historical Injustice and Postcolonial Rectificatory Justice |
| title_short | Migration, Colonial Historical Injustice and Postcolonial Rectificatory Justice |
| title_sort | migration colonial historical injustice and postcolonial rectificatory justice |
| url | https://www.theglobaljusticenetwork.org/index.php/gjn/article/view/301 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT frankaragbonfohabumere migrationcolonialhistoricalinjusticeandpostcolonialrectificatoryjustice |