Da relativização da soberania estatal ante a necessidade de proteção internacional dos direitos humanos dos imigrantes ilegais

Abstract

This paper aims to study the international law of human rights, addressing the new conception of State sovereignty that arose due to the internationalization of Human Rights. The justification for the choice of topic is related to the reality experienced by thousands of illegal immigrants who end up relegated basic rights by States under the claim of the principle of sovereignty and nonintervention. Because of the numerous reflections on human rights in post-war period has demonstrated the need for protection of human rights internationally. This led to the realization that the international law of human rights would be ineffective until it broke apart the traditional concept of State sovereignty. The work demonstrates the dichotomy between the realization of human rights in the international and State sovereignty. However, we seek to demonstrate that the dogma of absolute sovereignty is outdated compared to the new international social relations. The research theme is based on clarifying the true meaning of sovereignty. In fact, it does not deprive the State supreme power against other nations, but rather seeks to show that with the development of international law of human rights, the man became a subject of international rights, so the State can not excuse itself to protect the individual from abuses in the home under the pretext of exercising sovereignty. Once the subject of international rights, guarantees the individual extend beyond State territory. Moreover, it does not deprive the State the duty to defend the individuals with whom they do not maintain a legal relationship, precisely because the amplitude of the security protection of public international law. In fact, what occurs is not a mitigation of State sovereignty, for the protection of human rights inherent in the concept of sovereignty, since the individual is sovereign. It appears to the end that the dignity of the human person is the substance of international law, so also is the foundation of the State. Indeed, the individual can not be used as a means by State, given as a human being can never be through, but only the end. It means that the State is a tool of human beings to achieve their purposes, and we can not admit that this tool overlaps its grantor, nor even any individual, because the State's role is to ensure the welfare and dignity of human person. The violation of human rights entails, rather, a violation of sovereignty. The international protection of human rights can not therefore mean affront to sovereignty, because the State is composed of individuals who should have their dignity protected, even if these individuals are not citizens, because human rights law seeks to ensure the protection of fundamental rights of individuals.