Part V The Scope of Refugee Protection, Ch.43 Protecting Refugees with Disabilities

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Crock Mary
Keyword(s):  
Human Populations ◽  
Persons With Disabilities ◽  
Left Behind ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Refugee Law ◽  
Law And Policy ◽  
Reasonable Accommodations ◽  
Durable Solutions ◽  
International Refugee Law ◽  
Definition Of

This chapter evaluates the law and policy concerning persons with disabilities displaced as refugees, beginning with a broad survey of international legal and policy frameworks. It is accepted as axiomatic that events producing refugees are a major cause of death and disability in vulnerable human populations. Counterintuitively, however, statistical data collected by both national and United Nations agencies, including UNHCR, has traditionally identified only very small numbers of refugees as having disabilities. The supposition seems to have been that persons with disabilities are not able to travel and that these individuals are most likely to be left behind to perish or otherwise suffer the slings and arrows of fate and misfortune. Research in more recent times has revealed such assumptions about the mobility of refugees with disabilities to be patently false. The chapter then looks at the intersections between refugee law and human rights laws, examining how key elements of the definition of refugee should apply to persons with disabilities. It also addresses the procedural implications of requirements that ‘reasonable accommodations’ be made in status determinations and treatment of refugees with disabilities. Finally, the chapter comments on durable solutions for refugees with disabilities and the future impact of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities on international refugee law and policy.

Part I International Refugee Law— Reflections on the Scholarly Field, Ch.8 The Intersection of International Refugee Law and International Statelessness Law

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
van Waas Laura
Keyword(s):  
First Century ◽  
Forced Displacement ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Refugee Law ◽  
Durable Solutions ◽  
Twenty First Century ◽  
International Refugee Law ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
Stateless Person

This chapter focuses on the intersection of international refugee law and international statelessness law. While refugee law, policy, doctrine, and research evolved, it was not until after the turn of the twenty-first century that international statelessness law started to draw much attention and to begin to emerge as a field of its own. As global interest in statelessness grows, the interaction between statelessness and forced displacement has also come back under the spotlight. Thus, the chapter provides an insight into the relationship between statelessness and forced displacement. It starts by unpacking how statelessness can manifest itself as a cause or consequence of displacement, as well as how statelessness can be a complicating factor for refugee protection and durable solutions. The chapter then offers a brief overview of key norms relating to the protection of stateless persons and the prevention and resolution of statelessness, setting out the contours of international statelessness law. It also looks at the implications of the statelessness–displacement nexus by exploring the conceptual and practical questions that arise when a refugee is also stateless, and when a stateless person is also a refugee.

Part V The Scope of Refugee Protection, Ch.47 Internal Displacement

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kälin Walter
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Internal Displacement ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Internally Displaced ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Refugee Law ◽  
Law And Policy ◽  
Durable Solutions ◽  
Degree Of Convergence

This chapter discusses the protection of internally displaced persons (IDPs), who are all too often neglected, not only by their governments, but also by the international community. The experiences of refugees and IDPs have much in common. Thus, it is not surprising that social science approaches tend to lump refugees and IDPs together under the notion of ‘forced displacement’. By contrast, the chapter argues that refugee law and the law related to internal displacement are conceptually fundamentally different because IDPs remain citizens or habitual residents of their countries, and thus depend on the national protection of their governments, while refugees as foreigners are in need of international protection. Discussing the protection of IDPs from a comparative perspective, it analyses the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement and their impact as a soft law instrument, as well as the legally binding Kampala Convention. Ultimately, IDP-related approaches to durable solutions can help to inform refugee law and policy, and there is already a degree of convergence between the two areas.

scholarly journals [BOOK REVIEW] Refugees, Regionalism, and Responsibility

2019 ◽  
Vol 06 (03) ◽  
pp. 638-642
Author(s):  
Jenica Alva
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Law School ◽  
Simple Manner ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Refugee Law ◽  
Innovative Idea ◽  
Durable Solutions

Penelope Mathew is a Professor of International Law and a Dean in Griffith Law School, Australia. She is a profound researcher in refugee law topics. She is admired for her innovative idea to promote regionalism as a tool for governments to leverage better protection for refugees. Studying an underexplored topic, Mathew is able to synthesize the complexity of regionalism in a simple manner to be understood easily by readers. The book is divided into two parts. The first part consists of three sub-parts: (1) regionalism position in international politics and refugee law; (2) philosophical and ethical reasons of states’ responsibility in the case of refugees; and (3) steps and actions for states to share responsibility in handling refugees. The second part looks at the regional arrangements for the protection of refugees in some detail, whether they have resulted in better refugee protection and durable solutions.

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.

Part II Sources, Ch.12 International Humanitarian Law and Refugee Protection

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ziegler Reuven
Keyword(s):  
Frame Of Reference ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Refugee Law ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
International Refugee Law

The chapter considers the interrelations between international humanitarian law and international refugee law. It seeks to illustrate that, in displacement contexts, interactions between international humanitarian law and (global and regional) refugee protection regimes, which continue to apply during conflict, are rather challenging given that, whereas international humanitarian law shares international refugee law’s concern for vulnerable individuals, its frame of reference (unlike that of international refugee law) is minimization of harm. Given that the regimes have evolved at different times and with their own specific sources, institutions, and ethos, the chapter appraises how ‘regime interaction’ would (or should) work. It then assesses the scope of application of international humanitarian law norms, looking at the significance of international humanitarian law classification, including who classifies conflicts. The chapter concludes by exploring international humanitarian law displacement-related norms and the extent to which international refugee law interpretations affect them.

Part VI Refugee Rights and Realities, Ch.56 The Digital Transformation of Refugee Governance

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandvik Kristin Bergtora
Keyword(s):  
New Technology ◽  
Digital Transformation ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
Solution Processed ◽  
Protection Policy ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Refugee Law ◽  
International Refugee Law ◽  
Data Subject

This chapter evaluates four selected issues arising from the digital transformation of refugee protection, in order to explore how this transformation shapes and challenges refugee law. It focuses on the following domains: UNHCR’s 2015 Data Protection Policy, a concept (legal identity), a platform (databases), and legal-bureaucratic processes (refugee status determination and resettlement procedures). Digital transformation generates new risks, in part because it is premised on a duty of refugee visibility. The chapter argues that international refugee law, conceptually and in practice, appears to be moving towards an idea of ‘algorithmic protection’. First, digitization and the integration of new technology create risks and harms that can compromise existing legal rights and procedural guarantees but also threaten the integrity of refugee protection in new ways. Secondly, algorithmic protection is a useful concept because the digital transformation of refugee protection means that the duty of visibility and acquiescence to become a data subject has become a requirement for being registered as a refugee, receiving aid (eg biometric banking), and having one’s claim for a durable solution processed.

Part I International Refugee Law— Reflections on the Scholarly Field, Ch.7 Refugees as Migrants

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Atak Idil ◽  
Crépeau François
Keyword(s):  
Forced Migration ◽  
Institutional Framework ◽  
Freedom Of Movement ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Refugee Law ◽  
International Refugee Law ◽  
Clear Line

This chapter details the long-standing debate on whether refugees should be portrayed as migrants. Several organizations, refugee advocates, and scholars argue for a clear line between ‘migrants’ and ‘refugees’, as a means of protecting the refugee regime. They point to the inherently distinct motivations driving refugee movements compared to other types of migration, as well as to the specific normative and institutional framework for refugee protection. The chapter argues that conceptualizing refugees as migrants does not undermine the specific normative and institutional framework for refugee protection. Rather, it further promotes refugees’ access to asylum and safety. The chapter then examines the literature on the refugee/migrant distinction, highlighting the increasingly overlapping and interconnected motivations and contexts driving forced migration. It looks at the mounting barriers refugees face to reach safety and explores the avenues to safeguarding and promoting access to asylum and refugee rights. The chapter also articulates the role that freedom of movement should play in protecting the rights of all migrants, including refugees.

scholarly journals “It Is Better to Be a Refugee Than a Turkana in Kakuma”: Revisiting the Relationship between Hosts and Refugees in Kenya

Refuge ◽  
1969 ◽  
pp. 73-83
Author(s):  
Ekuru Aukot
Keyword(s):  
Negative Impact ◽  
Local Economy ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Refugee Law ◽  
Local Integration ◽  
International Refugee Law ◽  
International Instruments ◽  
International Conventions ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Host Relations

The article echoes stories and perceptions of the hosts to the refugees in their day-to-day relations in Kakuma refugee camp with little emphasis on academic abstraction of refugee protection contained in international instruments but rather on the realities on the ground. It is argued that good refugee-host relations enhance refugees’ enjoyment of their rights under the international conventions and promote local integration. The article discusses areas of conflict between refugees and their hosts and how these factors endanger refugees’ physical protection, and it echoes the hosts’ solutions to the conflicts. The failure of local integration is attributed to poor refugee-host relations. Consequently, it is argued that even the enactment of refugee specific legislation “that would give force” to the international conventions will not necessarily improve refugees’ enjoyment of their rights as long as, through a practice of selective compassion by humanitarian agencies and international refugee law, refugees are targeted for assistance without regard to the negative impact on the local economy and its residents.

Expanding refugee ineligibility: Canada’s response to secondary refugee movements

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Idil Atak ◽  
Zainab Abu Alrob ◽  
Claire Ellis
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Critical Assessment ◽  
Effective Protection ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Refugee Law ◽  
The Us ◽  
International Refugee Law ◽  
Legislative Changes ◽  
The Uk

Abstract In 2019, Canada introduced legislative changes that made asylum seekers ineligible for protection if they have made a previous refugee claim in a country that Canada shares an information-sharing agreement with. Such agreements are currently in place with the US, Australia, the UK, and New Zealand. This article offers a critical assessment of the new ineligibility ground, arguing that the policy is designed to deter secondary refugee movements, particularly those across the Canada–US border which have considerably intensified since 2017. Based on the ‘first safe country’ rule, the new ineligibility ground enables Canada to exclude some asylum seekers from refugee protection without offering any alternative effective protection in Canada. This article demonstrates that the policy is inconsistent with Canada’s obligations under international refugee law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document