SIXTY-FIVE YEARS AND IT SHOWS THEM ALL: PROPOSALS FOR AMENDING THE 1951 CONVENTION RELATING TO THE STATUS OF REFUGEES

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-83
Author(s):  
Federico Lenzerini

The 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees was one of the major accomplishments of the post-Second-World-War international legal community. It became the cornerstone of the international regulation of the right of asylum and represented the spark that ignited subsequent developments of international law in the field of asylum and refugees. Even more notable is the fact that the Convention has continued to have considerable impact despite the passing of time. However, 65 years after its adoption the Convention is showing signs of ageing, because several of its provisions are inconsistent with the present state of evolution of international human rights law. These provisions would therefore need to be updated, taking into consideration contemporary human rights standards, so as to make the Convention a living instrument capable of effectively addressing the needs of the people to whose protection it is devoted. The provisions which most require amendment are Article 1(A)(2), providing the definition of “refugee”, the exclusion clauses included in Article 1(F), and the exceptions to the prohibition of refoulement contemplated by Article 33(2).

Author(s):  
Petra Molnar

This chapter focuses on how technologies used in the management of migration—such as automated decision-making in immigration and refugee applications and artificial intelligence (AI) lie detectors—impinge on human rights with little international regulation, arguing that this lack of regulation is deliberate, as states single out the migrant population as a viable testing ground for new technologies. Making migrants more trackable and intelligible justifies the use of more technology and data collection under the guide of national security, or even under tropes of humanitarianism and development. Technology is not inherently democratic, and human rights impacts are particularly important to consider in humanitarian and forced migration contexts. An international human rights law framework is particularly useful for codifying and recognizing potential harms, because technology and its development are inherently global and transnational. Ultimately, more oversight and issue specific accountability mechanisms are needed to safeguard fundamental rights of migrants, such as freedom from discrimination, privacy rights, and procedural justice safeguards, such as the right to a fair decision maker and the rights of appeal.


2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 351-368
Author(s):  
Joanna Nicholson

Abstract That an accused receives a fair trial is essential to the legitimacy of international criminal courts and tribunals. However, how best to interpret the right to a fair trial in order to maximize the legitimacy of international criminal courts and tribunals’ decision-making? Some argue that international criminal courts and tribunals should aspire to the highest standards of fairness and should aim to set an example for domestic courts in this regard. Others argue that the unique context within which international criminal courts and tribunals operate allows them, at times, to interpret the right to a fair trial in a way which falls below minimum international human rights standards. This article examines both of these positions and finds both to be problematic. Rather, the article argues that international criminal courts and tribunals should aim for a middle path, the ‘fair enough’ standard, when interpreting the right to a fair trial. In situations where a different standard than that found within international human rights law is applied, international criminal courts and tribunals should expend greater effort in being open and clear as to why this is so, and should take care in communicating this to their audience, including victims and the accused. By doing so, the legitimacy of their decision-making will be enhanced.


2009 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 233-243
Author(s):  
Gudmundur Alfredsson

Abstract This article surveys some of the many international human rights law issues that come up in connection with the Arctic, such as the rights of indigenous peoples and the formulation of these rights in a draft Nordic Sami Convention. The focus, however, is on recent developments concerning the status of Greenland as a result of an agreement concluded in 2008 between the Danish and Greenlandic authorities. This agreement foresees not only a significant increase in self-government but also opens the door for the Greenlandic people to create an independent State through the exercise of the right to external self-determination as a matter of political decolonisation of an overseas colonial territory.


1998 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-95
Author(s):  

AbstractWhile the notion of a prescribed set of `reproductive rights' has been advanced in various contexts, particularly in the agendas for action adopted at the United Nations conferences held in Cairo (1994) and Beijing (1995), these rights as a group remain controversial. This can be partly explained by their poor definition and often tenuous legal grounding, opening the door to easy criticism. Clarification of the essential content and scope of protection offered under existing international human rights law would be helpful. In this article, the definition of reproductive rights in the Beijing Platform for Action is critically scrutinized, leading to the conclusion that only four of the so-called `reproductive rights' are provided in existing international human rights instruments. These four may be seen as forming a bundle of inseparable rights which the author refers to as the composite right to reproductive choice. The special conflict which can arise between two members of a couple who, while bearing equal rights to reproductive choice, may hold differing views and have opposing desires regarding reproduction is also examined, specifically in relation to the role of the State in resolving the potential for the violation of one individual's right to reproductive choice by another individual.


Author(s):  
I Putu Dwika Ariestu

Human Rights and the State could not be separated from one another. Both are interconnected in terms of how to ensure internal stability in a country. With the existence of human rights, it is hoped that state is not arbitrary to treat its people and is obliged to protect everyone in its territory including in this case Stateless persons mentioned in Article 7 paragraph 1 of the Convention relating Status of Stateless Persons in 1954. This study aims to analyze the obligations the State must take in relation to the protection of persons with stateless persons status, and to recognize the legal consequences and responsibilities of States in the event of omitting acts of human rights violations against people with stateless persons status. This paper using normative research methods with statute approach and conceptual approach. The study shows that in relation to the obligation of the state that each State shall be obliged to provide protection to persons with stateless persons status as stipulated in the 1954 Convention and the provisions of the International Human Rights Law, the obligations of state protection include the protection of the right to life, the right to employment and even the right to obtain citizenship status. The international legal consequences accepted by the state are listed in Article 39, Article 41, and 42 of the UN Charter. Then for state responsibility are listed under Article 35, Article 36, and Article 37 of UNGA 56/83 of 2001.   Hak Asasi Manusia dan Negara tidak bisa dipisahkan satu sama lain. Keduanya saling terkait dalam hal bagaimana menjamin stabilitas internal di suatu negara. Dengan adanya hak asasi manusia, diharapkan negara tidak sewenang-wenang memperlakukan rakyatnya dan berkewajiban melindungi semua orang di wilayahnya termasuk dalam hal ini para warga negara yang disebutkan dalam Pasal 7 ayat 1 Konvensi terkait Status Orang Tanpa Negara di tahun 1954. Tulisan ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis kewajiban yang harus diambil Negara sehubungan dengan perlindungan orang-orang dengan status orang tanpa kewarganegaraan, dan untuk mengakui konsekuensi hukum serta tanggung jawab negara dalam hal melakukan  tindakan pelanggaran hak asasi manusia terhadap orang-orang dengan status  tanpa kewarganegaraan. Tulisan ini menggunakan metode penelitian normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan konseptual. Hasil studi menunjukkan bahwa sehubungan dengan kewajiban negara bahwa setiap Negara wajib memberikan perlindungan kepada orang-orang dengan status orang tanpa kewarganegaraan sebagaimana diatur dalam Konvensi 1954 dan ketentuan-ketentuan Hukum Hak Asasi Manusia Internasional, kewajiban perlindungan negara termasuk perlindungan hak untuk hidup, hak untuk bekerja dan bahkan hak untuk mendapatkan status kewarganegaraan. Konsekuensi hukum internasional yang diterima oleh negara tercantum dalam Pasal 39, Pasal 41, dan 42 Piagam PBB. Kemudian untuk tanggung jawab negara tercantum di bawah Pasal 35, Pasal 36, dan Pasal 37 UNGA 56/83 tahun 2001.


2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 65-74
Author(s):  
Olga O. Semyonova

Introduction. The article is devoted to the concept and legal characteristics of asylum. The relevance of the topic is due to the eclectic character of the research available in the literature on this issue. Purpose. Definition of the concept of asylum, as well as research on whether asylum is a right or an obligation of the state. Methodology. The study of problems was carried out on the basis of scientific analysis and synthesis, formal-logical, system, comparative-legal methods, the method of interpretation of law, etc. The theoretical basis of the research is the scientific works of domestic and foreign legal scientists, practicing lawyers in the field of general theory of state and law, public international law, constitutional law of Russia and Germany. Results. Asylum should be considered in three aspects: as a legal institution, as a form of protection of human rights, and as a legal position. Asylum as a form of protection is the temporary territorial protection of fundamental human rights granted by the state to a refugee (as defined in the 1951 Convention relating to the status of refugees), whose main characteristics are security, dignity, fundamental human rights and freedoms, family unity and confidentiality. The human right to asylum as temporary protection is a fundamental human right. The provision of permanent protection and integration in the state of asylum is the sovereign right of states. Conclusion. For the effective functioning of the asylum system in Russia and to avoid conflicts in law enforcement practice, it is necessary to consolidate the concept of asylum at the legislative level. When improving the legal framework for granting asylum in Russia, it is necessary to take into account the following characteristics of the right to asylum in accordance with international standards and to provide legal guarantees for granting asylum on a temporary basis.


2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Esther Gumboh

Despite the global trend towards the abolition of the death penalty, Malawi has no plans to do so. However, the country is under an obligation to ensure that the use of the death penalty is restricted in line with regional and international human-rights law. A survey of the application of the death penalty in Malawi reveals that while there are some restrictions on its use, the law and practice are not fully aligned with the regional and international standards. This is particularly the case with the scope of capital crimes, the right to seek mercy and the death row phenomenon. Malawi needs to address these shortfalls and move progressively towards the abolition of the death penalty. The task of this article is to make known some findings on how Malawi fares in this regard. The paper first discusses the regional and international human rights standards for the death penalty then it considers the Malawian Constitution and the restrictions on the death penalty under Malawian law. It concludes with an assessment of the extent to which Malawi conforms to international law insofar as the death penalty is concerned.


2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 305-330 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petra Molnar

Experiments with new technologies in migration management are increasing. From Big Data predictions about population movements in the Mediterranean, to Canada's use of automated decision-making in immigration and refugee applications, to artificial-intelligence lie detectors deployed at European borders, States are keen to explore the use of new technologies, yet often fail to take into account profound human rights ramifications and real impacts on human lives. These technologies are largely unregulated, developed and deployed in opaque spaces with little oversight and accountability. This paper examines how technologies used in the management of migration impinge on human rights with little international regulation, arguing that this lack of regulation is deliberate, as States single out the migrant population as a viable testing ground for new technologies. Making migrants more trackable and intelligible justifies the use of more technology and data collection under the guise of national security, or even under tropes of humanitarianism and development. The way that technology operates is a useful lens that highlights State practices, democracy, notions of power, and accountability. Technology is not inherently democratic and human rights impacts are particularly important to consider in humanitarian and forced migration contexts. An international human rights law framework is particularly useful for codifying and recognising potential harms, because technology and its development is inherently global and transnational. More oversight and issue-specific accountability mechanisms are needed to safeguard fundamental rights of migrants such as freedom from discrimination, privacy rights and procedural justice safeguards such as the right to a fair decision-maker and the rights of appeal.


2014 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 413-417
Author(s):  
Horace S. Adjolohoun

The right to a nationality is well established in international human rights law. In 1954 and 1961, the United Nations adopted the Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons and the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, respectively. Inspired by Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the two Conventions provide for a right to nationality and prohibit deprivation or denial of nationality. In 2012, the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) drafted four guidelines on statelessness that expand on provisions of the 1954 and 1961 UN Conventions. They contain guidance sections directed specifically at governments, civil society organizations, legal practitioners, decision-makers and the judiciary as well as UNHCR and other UN agency staff involved in addressing statelessness.


2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (3) ◽  
pp. 521-556
Author(s):  
Michael Hamilton

AbstractInformed by the ‘assembly’ jurisprudence of the United Nations Human Rights Committee, this article addresses fundamental questions about the meaning and scope of ‘assembly’ in Article 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). In seeking to determine when the right of peaceful assembly might properly be engaged, the article explores the interrelationship of assembly with expression and association and proposes a definition of ‘assembly’—for the purposes of its protection—as ‘an intentional gathering by two or more people (including in private and online/virtual spaces)’. Such definitional reflection is particularly timely in light of the Human Rights Committee's drafting of General Comment No 37 on Article 21.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document