This article sets out two case studies to examine the evolving reality of ‘boat migration’ and the intersecting legal frameworks at play. Our analysis takes a systemic integration approach to reflect on the complex dynamics underpinning responses to the phenomenon in Australia and the Central Mediterranean. The regime that governments purport to act under in any given instance reflects the way they choose to frame incidents and possibly exploit legal gaps in, or contested interpretations of, the relevant rules. The ‘closed ports’ strategy adopted by Italy and Malta against the MV Lifeline and the detention-at-sea policy pursued by Australia are investigated from the competing perspectives of what we call the ‘security lens’ and the ‘humanitarian lens’ to demonstrate how a good faith interpretation of the applicable (if apparently conflicting and overlapping) norms can (and should) be mobilized to save lives, and how that goal is unduly undercut when security concerns trump humanitarian interests.

中文翻译：

---

在生命、安全和权利之间：在地中海中部和澳大利亚制定拦截“移民船”的框架

本文列出了两个案例研究，以检验“船只迁移”不断演变的现实以及相互交叉的法律框架。我们的分析采用系统整合的方法来反映支持对澳大利亚和地中海中部现象作出反应的复杂动态。政府声称在任何特定情况下采取行动的制度反映了他们选择构建事件的方式，并可能利用相关规则中的法律漏洞或有争议的解释。意大利和马耳他采取的“封闭港口”战略MV 生命线以及澳大利亚推行的海上拘留政策是从我们所谓的“安全镜头”和“人道主义镜头”的相互竞争的角度进行调查的，以证明如何善意解释适用的（如果明显相互冲突和重叠）规范可以（并且应该）动员起来拯救生命，以及当安全问题胜过人道主义利益时，该目标如何被过度削弱。