12. Claims for international protection

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gina Clayton ◽  
Georgina Firth ◽  
Caroline Sawyer ◽  
Rowena Moffatt ◽  
Helena Wray
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Causal Link ◽  
Parallel Process ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Refugee Law ◽  
System P ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Law ◽  
Gender Based

Course-focused and comprehensive, the Textbook on series provides an accessible overview of the key areas on the law curriculum. This chapter examines the requirements for refugee status, according to Article 1A of the UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 and the Refugee Qualification Directive EC 2004/83, referred to as the Qualification Directive. This includes case law on the main concepts in refugee law: well-founded fear, persecution, Convention reason, causal link, and internal relocation. There is a focus on the particular problems in gender-based claims. The chapter considers protection for victims of trafficking, who may go through a parallel process to the asylum system.

12. Claims for international protection

2021 ◽  
pp. 435-495
Author(s):  
Gina Clayton ◽  
Georgina Firth ◽  
Caroline Sawyer ◽  
Rowena Moffatt
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Causal Link ◽  
Parallel Process ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Refugee Law ◽  
Legal Context ◽  
The Status ◽  
Gender Based ◽  
The Uk

This chapter examines the requirements for refugee status, according to Article 1A of the UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 and the Refugee Qualification Directive EC 2004/83, referred to as the Qualification Directive. This includes case law on the main concepts in refugee law: well-founded fear, persecution, Convention reason, causal link, and internal relocation. There is a focus on the particular problems in gender-based claims. The chapter considers protection for victims of trafficking, who may go through a parallel process to the asylum system. The chapter begins with the legal context of refugee claims in the UK, and then follows the structure of Article 1A of the Refugee Convention.

Canadian Exclusion Jurisprudence post-Febles

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Molly Joeck
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Refugee Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
International Refugee Law

Abstract This article examines the state of Canadian refugee law since the decision of the Supreme Court in Febles v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) [2014] 3 SCR 431. Drawing upon an analysis of a set of decisions of the Immigration and Refugee Board, the administrative tribunal tasked with refugee status determination in Canada, the article seeks to determine whether administrative decision makers are heeding the guidance of Febles when excluding asylum seekers from refugee protection on the basis of serious criminality pursuant to article 1F(b) of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. In doing so, it examines the controversy around article 1F(b) since its inception across various jurisdictions and amongst academic commentators, situating Febles within that controversy in order to demonstrate that the Supreme Court’s reluctance to clearly set out the purpose underlying article 1F(b) is in step with a longstanding tendency to understand the provision as serving a gatekeeping function, that prevents criminalized non-citizens from obtaining membership in our society. It argues that by omitting to set out a clear and principled standard by which asylum seekers can be excluded from refugee protection pursuant to article 1F(b), the Supreme Court failed to live up to a thick understanding of the rule of law. It concludes by calling for a reassertion of the rule of law into exclusion decision making, both nationally and internationally, in order to ensure that the legitimacy of the international refugee law regime is maintained.

13. Exclusion from asylum

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gina Clayton ◽  
Georgina Firth ◽  
Caroline Sawyer ◽  
Rowena Moffatt ◽  
Helena Wray
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Host Country ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
Refugee Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Relationship

Course-focused and comprehensive, the Textbook on series provides an accessible overview of the key areas on the law curriculum. This chapter considers the provisions whereby an individual can be excluded from refugee status because of their conduct. These are as laid down in the Refugee Convention and the EC Qualification Directive. The chapter discusses up-to-date case law on exclusion from refugee status based on crimes against humanity, serious non-political crimes, and acts against the purpose and principles of the United Nations. It deals with the issue of complicity and the relationship with the UK’s anti-terrorism legislation. It also deals with the situations in which refugees can be removed from the host country.

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
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Potential Barrier ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Major Research ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
Research Project ◽  
International Protection ◽  
The Law

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.

scholarly journals Revitalizing International Protection: The UNHCR's Global Consultations

Refuge ◽  
2001 ◽  
pp. 5-7
Author(s):  
Judith Kumin
Keyword(s):  
International Protection ◽  
Refugee Law ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
The Status ◽  
And Migration ◽  
The Way

This article explains why the un High Commissioner for Refugees is convening Global Consultations on “revitalizing the international protection regime.” These consultations, which will take place throughout 2001 and probably beyond, will involve state parties to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 protocol, as well as non-signatory states, non-governmental groups, academics, and practitioners of refugee law. The consultations are intended to result in a reaffirmation of the 1951 convention, and in consensus on some of the more complex interpretative aspects of that instrument. They should show the way on thorny problems faced by states in dealing with refugee and migration challenges today.

Finding Agency in Adversity: Applying the Refugee Convention in the Context of Disasters and Climate Change

2016 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 26-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Scott
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
Social Phenomena ◽  
Refugee Law ◽  
The Social ◽  
International Refugee Law ◽  
Critical Aspects ◽  
Social Paradigm

This article argues that, as individuals are already applying for refugee status in the context of disasters and climate change, a robust understanding of why disasters happen and how different groups are affected, combined with a principled methodology for determining such claims, are critical aspects of the anxious scrutiny that each claim should receive. The limitations of the “hazards” paradigm, which is shown to be dominant in international refugee law, are highlighted. Adopting the “social” paradigm developed within the field of disaster risk reduction, the argument is advanced that an understanding of disasters as social phenomena within which existing patterns of discrimination contribute to differential impacts, provides a sharper lens with which to consider eligibility for refugee status. The article argues that recent case-law from the New Zealand Immigration and Protection Tribunal reflects an awareness of the social paradigm, and the methodology for determining such claims is described and largely endorsed. It concludes by identifying sources of country of origin information that can help to address some of the evidentiary challenges claimants may face, and argues that the risk assessment under refugee law is more generous than the “immediacy” requirement identified by the New Zealand Immigration and Protection Tribunal in relation to complementary protection claims.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document