Receiving states face binding obligation to integrate involuntary settlers who cannot be expelled
Evidence
Third, expellees and repatriates fall within the range of forms of involuntary mass migration. A closer comparison can show different degrees of coercion, both between the two groups as well as within each of them. Yet, for the receiving countries, their arrival presented similar challenges: within a short period of time, a considerable number of migrants arrived with often no more than their most personal items. As they arrived in their ‘home country’ (that is, the country they were citizens or ethnic ‘descendants’ of), they could not be sent away, and it was clear from the outset that the state had to take care of their most immediate needs and also provide for their socio-economic integration in the long run. — Manuel Borutta and Jan C. Jansen, Vertriebene and Pieds-Noirs in Postwar…, 59
Categorization
- XREF: The state’s binding integration duty frames why integration success could later dissolve the BHE’s grievance engine. — connects to: States committed illegal acts to expel stateless persons whom no country would accept