The article at hand attempts to string together a reflection on the awkward limits concerning the concepts of economic immigration, new refugees (per-sons warranting international protectlon who do not fall under the out-dated demands of the Geneva Convention on Refugees) and refugees protected by this Convention. The obvious reason that International Law covers refugee status and rarely does so regarding cases of economic immigration is that, historically, International Law has dictated that migratory movements respond to more or less voluntary motives, while the term refugee implies that a person has no possibility for protection in his or her State of origin. However, in present-day International Law, we find a lack of precision: Are migrations from the Third World voluntary? If the answer is no, which cases are voluntary and which are not? Or perhaps, are only those migration provoked by the State of origin to be considered involuntary ?.Then, how to consider human migrations caused by natural disasters? Finally, the answer of States to forced migration and the protection of «new refugees« brings with it a coherent response vis-à-vis cultural diversity, since this will be a determining factor in the so-called «integration» of the immigrants and refugees. Moreover, any reflexion on the peaceful co-existence of different cultures leads us to the never-ending debate on the origin of fundamental human rights and their universal nature.

Cultural diversity Economic migration human rights Refugees social integration

[No Keywords available]