UNHCR--The UN Refugee Agency. Guidelines On International Protection: Cessation of Refugee Status under Article 1C(5) and (6) of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (the "Ceased Circumstances" Clauses)

2003 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 307-317 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Refugee Status ◽  
International Protection ◽  
The Status

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.

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.

scholarly journals International protection of persons with mental disabilities

Temida ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 11-24
Author(s):  
Zoran Radivojevic ◽  
Nebojsa Raicevic
Keyword(s):  
Soft Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Mental Disabilities ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Persons With Disabilities ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
The Status ◽  
Special Protection

In International law, the status of persons with mental disabilities is regulated within the framework on the protection of persons with disabilities. Their rights are protected not only by international treaties comprising legal provisions of binding character for the parties but also by means of the so-called "soft law" comprising international documents which are not legally binding. Most of the general and subject specific treaties on human rights do not explicitly deal with the status of persons with disabilities. Only recently have some treaties been made containing legal provisions on special protection of persons with disabilities. The most important treaty of this kind is the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, adopted in the year 2006. The protection of such persons is regulated in much more detail by "soft law" which includes a number of documents adopted by the UN, the Council of Europe and the European Union. Although most of these documents primarily pertain to the rights and the status of persons with disabilities, there are a few that exclusively deal with the protection of persons with mental disorder.

scholarly journals The door behind the bamboo curtain - Chinese law and policy on refugee status

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Lili Song
Keyword(s):  
Large Scale ◽  
Chinese Government ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
Chinese Law ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Law And Policy ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
The Status ◽  
Definition Of

<p>This thesis systematically considers the law and policy on refugee status in the People’s Republic of China. It considers relevant Chinese legal provisions, applicable bilateral and multinational treaties, as well as China’s refugee policy and practice. It also presents and analyses first-hand information collected through interviews with refugees and aid workers.  China is an emerging destination of refugees and other displaced foreigners. Although China is a party to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol, Chinese law contains no provisions governing the definition of a refugee or the determination of refugee status. Further, there is a gap between the criteria for asylum in the 1982 Chinese Constitution and the criteria for refugee status in the 1951 Convention.  In practice, although the Chinese government has generally allowed the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to process individual applications for refugee status, the Chinese government has practically performed the function of refugee status determination in large-scale influx situations through policy decisions. In these situations, the security, political, and strategic interests of China have often overshadowed China’s commitment under the 1951 Convention.  China has been cautious about recognising refugees on its territory. However, the Chinese government has clearly demonstrated a growing interest in addressing the issue of refugee recognition within a more formalised framework.  In conclusion, this thesis recommends that China adopt a legal refugee definition in line with the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and develop a predictable and fair national RSD mechanism.</p>

scholarly journals The door behind the bamboo curtain - Chinese law and policy on refugee status

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Lili Song
Keyword(s):  
Large Scale ◽  
Chinese Government ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
Chinese Law ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Law And Policy ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
The Status ◽  
Definition Of

<p>This thesis systematically considers the law and policy on refugee status in the People’s Republic of China. It considers relevant Chinese legal provisions, applicable bilateral and multinational treaties, as well as China’s refugee policy and practice. It also presents and analyses first-hand information collected through interviews with refugees and aid workers.  China is an emerging destination of refugees and other displaced foreigners. Although China is a party to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol, Chinese law contains no provisions governing the definition of a refugee or the determination of refugee status. Further, there is a gap between the criteria for asylum in the 1982 Chinese Constitution and the criteria for refugee status in the 1951 Convention.  In practice, although the Chinese government has generally allowed the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to process individual applications for refugee status, the Chinese government has practically performed the function of refugee status determination in large-scale influx situations through policy decisions. In these situations, the security, political, and strategic interests of China have often overshadowed China’s commitment under the 1951 Convention.  China has been cautious about recognising refugees on its territory. However, the Chinese government has clearly demonstrated a growing interest in addressing the issue of refugee recognition within a more formalised framework.  In conclusion, this thesis recommends that China adopt a legal refugee definition in line with the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and develop a predictable and fair national RSD mechanism.</p>

scholarly journals SUBJECTS OF ADMINISTRATIVE AND LEGAL SUPPORT IDENTIFICATION OF CHILDREN SEPARATED WITH FAMILY IN UKRAINE

2020 ◽  
pp. 205-210
Author(s):  
А. М. Мамульчик
Keyword(s):  
Parental Care ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Her Family ◽  
The Family ◽  
Additional Protection ◽  
The Status

The relevance of the article is that the granting of special status «child divorced from the family» in the Ukrainian legislation includes three aspects: 1) identification of a person who is a child separated from the family; 2) granting the status of «child deprived of parental care»; 3) it is possible to grant the status of “refugee” or “person in need of additional protection”, as any person recognized as a child divorced from a family is recognized as a child deprived of parental care and can apply for asylum in Ukraine (and receive refugee status or a person in need of additional protection). Each of the identified aspects of the above status is the responsibility of certain public authorities, ie public administration entities, which are endowed with the appropriate powers. The purpose of the article is to identify the subjects of administrative and legal support for the identification of children separated from their families, ie the subjects of public administration, which are empowered to identify such children in Ukraine. It was found that in fact, the identification of a child separated from the family at the present stage in Ukraine does not belong to the responsibilities of public administration, but is the responsibility of the child who was forced to leave the country of origin or residence and arrived in the territory of Ukraine unaccompanied by a family member or persons determined by law/custom who are responsible for such a person, or who were left unaccompanied after arriving on the territory of Ukraine, or its legal representatives. In our opinion, the absence in the legal acts that determine the legal status of public administration entities, whose activities include the identification of children separated from their families, their obligation to identify such children is a shortcoming of administrative and legal support for child status. , separated from her family, in Ukraine. It is determined that the subjects of public administration, which have the authority to identify children separated from their families, include the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine, executive authorities, local governments, the National Police of Ukraine, the Prosecutor’s Office of Ukraine.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document