scholarly journals IMMINENCE IN REFUGEE AND HUMAN RIGHTS LAW: A MISPLACED NOTION FOR INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION

2019 ◽  
Vol 68 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrienne Anderson ◽  
Michelle Foster ◽  
Hélène Lambert ◽  
Jane McAdam

AbstractThis article is an output of a major research project examining the notion of imminence in the law on international protection. It is the first piece of scholarship to identify an emerging trend, namely the introduction of imminence—whether invoked implicitly or explicitly—as a potential barrier to refugee status or complementary protection. The article analyses the jurisprudence of relevant international bodies and courts and critiques the validity of this notion as a tool for assessing States’ protection obligations.

2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 419-445 ◽  
Author(s):  
PIETRO SULLO

AbstractThis article discusses the Rwandan Law 18/2008 on genocide ideology in the light of international human rights standards. In order to put the genocide ideology law into context, it sketches a brief overview of the post-genocide scenario. Because of the influence that provisions restricting freedom of expression aimed at fighting negationism might exert on testimonies during genocide trials, it pays particular attention to the transitional justice strategies adopted in Rwanda. Finally, it assesses the law on the genocide ideology against the background provided by the measures implemented in some European countries to deal with the phenomenon of negationism.


2021 ◽  
Vol 90 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-85
Author(s):  
Nikolas Feith Tan

Abstract This contribution discusses the recent ‘paradigm shift’ in Danish refugee policy towards temporary protection and return in light of the law of the international legal standards governing when an asylum state can end the protection of refugees. The article provides an overview of the spectrum of cessation standards drawing on the 1951 Refugee Convention, complementary protection under human rights law and the concept of temporary protection, before setting out the legislative changes making up the Danish ‘paradigm shift’. The Danish case reveals a structural gap in the law of cessation as it regards to complementary protection. The lack of a comprehensive complementary protection framework in some jurisdictions leaves the law open to governments wishing to instrumentalise and minimise protection obligations. Finally, the article analyses legal and policy implications of the policy turn, discussing Denmark’s potential role as a forerunner in temporary protection and cessation, gaps in the law of cessation vis-à-vis complementary protection, and calling for increased scholarly focus on the law of cessation.


Author(s):  
Tsvetelina van Benthem

Abstract This article examines the redirection of incoming missiles when employed by defending forces to whom obligations to take precautions against the effects of attacks apply. The analysis proceeds in four steps. In the first step, the possibility of redirection is examined from an empirical standpoint. Step two defines the contours of the obligation to take precautions against the effects of attacks. Step three considers one variant of redirection, where a missile is redirected back towards the adversary. It is argued that such acts of redirection would fulfil the definition of attack under the law of armed conflict, and that prima facie conflicts of obligations could be avoided through interpretation of the feasibility standard embedded in the obligation to take precautions against the effects of attacks. Finally, step four analyzes acts of redirection against persons under the control of the redirecting State. Analyzing this scenario calls for an inquiry into the relationship between the relevant obligations under international humanitarian law and human rights law.


2004 ◽  
Vol 5 (12) ◽  
pp. 1449-1467 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Kemmerer

That the Law is never frozen in time and space is quite a trivial insight – but one, however, that is nonetheless particularly true for the area of international human rights law and the jurisdiction to see human rights norms respected and enforced. No less is it true for international criminal law and European law. It is, of course, true at the intersection of these three fields of the law as well, exactly the place I intend to explore in this paper. And, as we shall see, poetry, that rarely unveiled subtext of the law, is never steady in its foundations.


2014 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 244-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex G. Oude Elferink

On 18 September 2013, the crew of the Greenpeace vessel Arctic Sunrise tried to access the Prirazlomnaya oil rig, which was operating within the Russian Federation’s exclusive economic zone in the Arctic. The following day the Russian authorities boarded and arrested the Arctic Sunrise and detained its crew and charged them with various offenses. The flag state of the vessel, the Netherlands, started an arbitral procedure against the Russian Federation. The present article looks at the issues of international law raised by the arrest of the Arctic Sunrise—which both concern the law of the sea and human rights law—and the arbitration initiated by the Netherlands. Human rights law is essential for assessing the kind of measures a coastal state may take in enforcing its legislation based on the law of the sea in its exclusive economic zone. Providing sufficient room for the freedom of expression may limit the scope of action that might otherwise exist.


2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-27
Author(s):  
Azadeh Dastyari ◽  
Daniel Ghezelbash

Abstract Austria and Italy have recently proposed that processing the protection claims of asylum seekers attempting to cross the Mediterranean should take place aboard government vessels at sea. Shipboard processing of asylum claims is not a novel idea. The policy has been used for many years by the governments of the United States and Australia. This article examines the relevant international law, as well as State practice and domestic jurisprudence in the United States and Australia, to explore whether shipboard processing complies with international refugee and human rights law. It concludes that, while it may be theoretically possible for shipboard processing to comply with international law, there are significant practical impediments to carrying out shipboard processing in a manner that is compliant with the international obligations of States. Current practices in the United States and Australia fall short of what is required. Nor is there any indication that the Austrian/Italian proposal would contain the required safeguards. It is argued that this is by design. The appeal of shipboard processing for governments is that it allows them to dispense with the safeguards that asylum seekers would be entitled to if processed on land. Best practice is for all persons interdicted or rescued at sea to be transferred to a location on land where they have access to effective status determination procedures and are protected from refoulement and unlawful detention.


2008 ◽  
Vol 90 (871) ◽  
pp. 629-651 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvain Vité

AbstractThe current legal regime relative to occupation is no longer based solely on the contributions made by customary law and treaty-based law as set forth in the law of The Hague and the law of Geneva. It has undergone a thorough change with the progressive recognition of the applicability of human rights law to the situations which it governs, and their complementarity has been highlighted on several occasions. The question of the interrelation of international humanitarian law and human rights is not resolved merely by analysing their respective areas of application. The author examines the issue at the level of their individual rules. He considers whether the rules of international humanitarian law are confirmed, complemented, relativized or even contradicted by those deriving from human rights. The analysis focuses more particularly on the interrelation of the law of occupation and economic, social and cultural rights by concentrating on the promotion of adequate standards of living (right to food, right to health) and respect for property.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document