Abstract
Abstract
This article addresses the question of how draconian counter-terrorism policies are legitimized in long-established democracies. Being the heartland of liberal rights, the UK comes to the fore as a striking case where some of the most controversial security policies have been enacted. The study undertakes a systematic frame analysis of UK parliamentary debates with the help of ATLAS.ti, which allows the analyst to trace and map out recurrent concepts, themes, and arguments as well as their overall distribution. While demonstrating the workings of securitization in the formulation of key counter-terrorism legislation, the study unearths how the security narrative in the UK context evidently relies on the language of rights in invoking legitimacy. The study suggests that far from negating the indispensable status of human rights, security narrative resorts to the latter’s moral power and mimics rights language, heralding the weight of these international norms even in hard-core security matters.
Publisher
John Benjamins Publishing Company
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Sociology and Political Science,History
Reference28 articles.
1. A theory of securitization: Origins, Core assumptions and variants;Balzacq,2010
2. Human Rights and the Borders of Suffering
3. Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015 . Accessed 10 June 2015 . Available at http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/6/part/2/enacted .
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献