The “Internal” Dimension of the Safe Country Concept: the Interpretation of the Safe Third Country Concept in the Dublin System by International and Internal Courts

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 82-113
Author(s):  
Sílvia Morgades-Gil
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Shared Responsibility ◽  
Mutual Trust ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Academic Literature ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
International Instruments ◽  
Refugees And Asylum Seekers ◽  
The Impact

Abstract The non-refoulement principle has been interpreted extensively as regards what kind of threats prevent removal to another country through the interpretation of the international instruments for the protection of human rights. Nevertheless, authors and institutions acknowledge that this principle does not prohibit the removal to a safe country and thus that a number of States participate in a system of shared responsibility, in which refugees and asylum seekers are transferred from one country to another in order to try to obtain (the Dublin EU system) or to benefit from international protection (resettlement). The academic literature has extensively addressed the meaning of the concept of the safe third country. This contribution is aimed at analyzing the application of this concept within a system where all States are supposed to be safe for all asylum seekers, and the principle of mutual trust and equivalence of protection applies. The paper reviews the safe country concept in the context of the Dublin system and examines when and why International, European and internal courts and other institutions have considered that one of the States participating in the system was not safe ad intra. Some final thoughts consider the impact that the analysis may have on the principle of mutual trust that is at the heart of the area of Freedom, Security and Justice.

Out of Sight, Out of Mind: Post-return Monitoring – A Missing Link in the International Protection of Refugees?

2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 363-386
Author(s):  
Jari Pirjola
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Missing Link ◽  
Return Policies ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Irregular Migrants ◽  
Refugees And Asylum Seekers

Abstract Post-return monitoring of rejected asylum-seekers is the missing link in the protection chain for rejected asylum-seekers. In the European Union, for example, the rights of rejected asylum-seekers are well guaranteed and monitored in the pre-return and return phases. Systematic monitoring of forced returns stops when the deportee arrives at the airport of his or her country of origin. The sending countries do not know what happens to rejected asylum-seekers and irregular migrants upon return. International human rights organisations have started to pay attention to this gap in the international protection system. Ignorance by States in this regard deprives them of important insights from the viewpoint of human rights protection and return policies. This article explores what comprises post-return monitoring, what kinds of post-return monitoring projects have been carried out so far and how post-return monitoring could be implemented in the future. The article also discusses the role of post-return monitoring in the refugee determination procedure. It is argued that post-return monitoring could both strengthen the protection of refugees and asylum-seekers and assist States in creating effective, transparent, and morally responsible return policies.

La dottrina internazionalistica italiana e la tutela internazionale dei diritti dell'uomo (1945-2005)

2012 ◽  
pp. 513-537
Author(s):  
Pasquale De Sena
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Methodological Approaches ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Methodological Eclecticism ◽  
Rights Issues ◽  
Made In

This paper is aimed at providing an overview of the general trends of the Italian international law scholarship concerning the international protection of human rights during the period from 1945 to 2005. The idea is advanced that human rights have been considered (with one exception) only in the framework of some general issues of international law between 1945 and 1960 (para. 2), whereas human rights issues have been managed increasingly as autonomous legal issues, starting from 1960 (para. 3). Between 1970 and 1987, Italian scholars have mainly focused on judicial or quasi-judicial aspects of the international protection of human rights; at the same time, a widespread attitude to submit human rights-oriented thesis has arisen (para. 4). Moreover, some different methodological approaches have progressively been elaborated (ibid.). These tendencies increased during the period between 1987 and 2005, due to the establishment of some human rights-journals, as well as to the large attention paid by scholars to criminal international law issues and to the impact of human rights on some traditional legal issues (para. 5). Some critical remarks are made in paragraph 6, aimed at stressing the different features of the above mentioned approaches. Furthermore it is shown that, regardless of these differences, a certain methodological eclecticism has come to prevail. It is also maintained that the Italian international law scholarship cannot be considered as "human rightist" ("Droits-de-l'-hommiste"), in spite of the said attitude to advance human rights-oriented thesis.

scholarly journals The Impact of Externalization of Migration Controls on the Rights of Asylum Seekers and Other Migrants

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 190-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bill Frelick ◽  
Ian M. Kysel ◽  
Jennifer Podkul
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Responsibility ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Migration Flow ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Impact

Wars, conflict, and persecution have forced more people to flee their homes and seek refuge and safety elsewhere than at any time since the end of World War II. As displaced people and other migrants increasingly move out of the conflict-ridden and less developed regions of their displacement and into relatively rich and stable regions of the world, the countries of destination are increasingly working to contain and even stem the migration flow before it reaches their shores. Perversely, countries that have developed generally rights-sensitive standards and procedures for assessing protection claims of asylum seekers within their jurisdictions have simultaneously established barriers that prevent migrants, including asylum seekers, from setting foot on their territories or otherwise triggering protection obligations. Consequently, those who would otherwise have been able to avail themselves of asylum procedures, social support, and decent reception conditions are often relegated to countries of first arrival or transit that have comparatively less capacity to ensure protection of human rights in accordance with international standards. This paper seeks to develop a working definition of the externalization of migration controls and how such externalization of the border implicates the human rights of migrants, and asylum seekers in particular. Although the majority of those migrants seeking legal protections stay in countries neighboring their own, hundreds of thousands continue their journeys in search of protection and stability in more distant states, including in the European Union, the United States, and Australia. In response to the significant increase in asylum seekers arriving at their borders, all three entities have significantly increased deterrence measures with the hopes of keeping new arrivals from entering. This paper will thus highlight a number of the most troubling externalization strategies used by the European Union, the United States, and Australia. Finally, because rights-threatening externalization law, policies, and practices implicate the international legal responsibility of the destination states pursuing them, the paper will conclude by presenting recommendations that could strengthen protection of human rights in the context of state actions seeking to manage migration.

scholarly journals Human rights implications of the NonRefoulement & Development

2018 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Imrul Sheikh
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
International Human ◽  
Human Rights Norms ◽  
Refugees And Asylum Seekers

States are obliged for protection of refugees under international law on account of their membership of United Nations and signature or accession to International Refugee Instruments as well as International Human Rights Instruments. The legal basis for this international protection may either be customary international law or conventional international law. The basic customary international laws applicable to them are those pertinent fundamental human rights found in the International Bill of Human Rights. Hence, it is submitted that all states should protect the fundamental human rights of refugees under customary international law. Principle of non-refoulement is one of them. The refugee regime has generated a serious body of law that elaborates basic human rights norms and has important implications in and beyond the refugee context. There are a number of universal, regional and domestic human rights instruments and mechanisms which can be employed to enhance the protection of refugees and asylum seekers. This research aims at finding out the role of principle of non-refoulement in protecting refugees and asylum seekers under international human rights law.

scholarly journals MARITIME INTERCEPTION ON FOREIGN VESSELS CARRYING REFUGEES AND ASYLUM SEEKERS: A VIOLATION OF UNCLOS AND NON-REFOULEMENT PRINCIPLE?

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 114-131
Author(s):  
Mizalfia Nursabrina
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
National Security ◽  
International Law ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Illegal Acts ◽  
The Right ◽  
Refugees And Asylum Seekers

AbstractEach state has the right to protect their national security in every possible way, and illegal acts such as aliens entering their territory without permit is no exception. They implement regulations and policies to prevent people smuggling, including but not limited to maritime interception towards vessels under suspicion of carrying refugees and asylum seekers. Yet, in the implementation, human rights violations tend to happen towards the passengers. This study aims to analyze the legality of maritime interception on foreign vessels carrying refugee and asylum seekers, and whether the said conduct raised issues of state responsibility. This study was conducted by analyzing relevant international law instruments and principles such as non-refoulement and state responsibility. The analysis comes to the conclusion that states have certain jurisdiction to conduct interception operations at sea with the means of protecting their national security. Should the act of interception be proven to inflict threats of danger towards the lives of the intercepted refugees and asylum seekers, states should be held responsible for the damage bared to the refugees and asylum seekers. In conducting maritime interceptions, states should ensure the refugee identity of the intercepted vessel’s passengers and should seek that they are entitled to international protection. Keywords: Maritime Interception, Principle of Non-Refoulement, State Responsibility   AbstrakSetiap negara mempunyai hak untuk melindungi keamanan nasionalnya dengan berbagai macam cara, dan tindakan ilegal seperti warga negara asing memasuki wilayah suatu negara tanpa izin bukan merupakan pengecualian. Negara-negara telah menetapkan seperangkat peraturan dan kebijakan untuk mencegah penyelundupan manusia, termasuk namun tidak terbatas pada pencegatan kapal di wilayah laut yang dicurigai mengangkut para pengungsi dan pencari suaka. Namun, dalam pelaksanaannya tindakan pencegatan seringkali menimbulkan pelanggaran hak asasi manusia kepada para penumpang kapal. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis legalitas pencegatan kapal yang mengangkut pengungsi dan pencari suaka. Penelitian ini dilaksanakan dengan menganalisa hukum internasional yang berkaitan. Penelitian ini menunjukan bahwa negara mempunyai yurisdiksi tertentu untuk melaksanakan pencegatan di laut dengan tujuan untuk mempertahankan keamanan nasional. Selain itu, negara harus bertanggung jawab atas kerugian yang dialami oleh para pengungsi dan pencari suaka selaku penumpang kapal yang dicegat apabila pencegatan tersebut menimbulkan ancaman bagi hidup mereka. Dalam melaksanakan pencegatan di wilayah laut, negara-negara harus memastikan identitas para penumpang kapal yang dicegat, dan memberikan perlindungan internasional bagi mereka yang berstatus sebagai pengungsi dan pencari suaka. Kata Kunci: Pencegatan Wilayah Laut, Prinsip Non-Refoulement, Tanggung Jawab Negara

The Legal Protection of Minorities from International Law and Arab Mashreq Perspectives

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 555-579
Author(s):  
Jamal Barafi ◽  
Nael Georges
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
Objective Analysis ◽  
Religious Minorities ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
International Instruments

The international protection of human rights, including those of religious minorities, has mainly developed through instruments adopted under the framework of the United Nations. After clarifying the concept of minorities, this article focuses on the legal protection of minority rights, particularly of religious minorities, under international instruments. It sheds light on the participation of Arab Mashreq states in the preparation of these instruments, in terms of their position in the elaboration of the instruments, and their multiple reservations. It offers an objective analysis of the issue of religious minorities in the Arab Mashreq region, and the necessity to respect their rights fully in order to build democracy and states of citizenship.

scholarly journals Teoretycznoprawne aspekty operacjonalizacji ochrony praw człowieka w państwie z perspektywy globalnego systemu prawa (Zarys problematyki)

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 198-228
Author(s):  
Bartosz Liżewski
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Social Issues ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Effective Protection ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Cultural Aspects ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
The Impact

The article is devoted to the presentation of the outline of the concept of operationalization of human rights taking place in the states involved in the system of international protection of those rights. The concept of operationalization of protection is a collective term for a series of processes that lead to the establishment of legal provisions protecting human rights, and to transfer this abstract construct to specific societies. It includes both the decision-making processes of extralegal (uprising idea, its conceptualization, social issues and change the perception of axiology of society, cultural aspects) and legal (lawmaking and law application processes in the aspect of human rights and the impact of international institutions on them) character. The essence of the process of operationalization is providing effective protection of human rights in a state. The concept is set primarily on the consequences of membership of Poland in the system of the Council of Europe.

scholarly journals Peculiar Leap in the Protection of Asylum Seekers: The Inter-American Court of Human Rights' Jurisprudence on the Protection of Asylum Seekers

2021 ◽  
pp. 31-53
Author(s):  
Esraa Adnan Fangary
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Asylum Law ◽  
European Counterpart ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
Refugees And Asylum Seekers ◽  
The Impact

This article pursues to clarify the crucial contribution of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to protect the rights of refugees and asylum seekers. It debates that the Court has instituted its renewed jurisprudence in the sphere of refuge throughout its case-law and advisory opinionsassociated with the safeguard of refugees, specifically the Court's direction towards affirming on the extended principles affiliating to asylum. The Inter-American Court went further than its European counterpart in interpreting regional and international asylum law. However, the actual protection of asylum seekers promoted by the Court is established on some controversial concepts like jus cogens norms and obligations egra omnes. Furthermore, the Court has an unclear vision concerning asylum and refuge. This may, therefore, curb the impact of a stronger humanrights-based approach to the protection of asylum seekers in Latin America.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document