The Right to Review in the Australian On-Shore Refugee Status Determination Process: Is It an Adequate Procedural Safeguard against Refoulement?

1994 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 300-339
Author(s):  
Savitri Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Refugee Status ◽  
Determination Process ◽  
Procedural Safeguard ◽  
The Right

Korea’s Landmark Case for Improving the Legal Process for Asylum Seekers

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 171-188
Author(s):  
Il Lee
Keyword(s):  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
High Court ◽  
Determination Process ◽  
Referral Decision ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right

The purpose of this article is to analyze the principle of non-refoulement as applied in four important recent Korea court decisions regarding the asylum-seeking process at ports of entry. Incheon District Court decision 2014 Gu-Hab 30385 and Seoul High Court decision 2014 Nu 52093 concern a non-referral decision; Inchon District Court decision 2014 In 39 concerns illegal airport detention; and Constitutional Court decision 2014 Heon-Ra 592 concerns the right to counsel. In these cases, the courts ordered changes to the previous detention and deportation system and recognized the right to counsel by asylum applicants at ports of entry. As the Korean refugee status determination process is biased towards denying entry to unwelcome foreigners and biased against recognizing refugees, it is important to recognize the duty of the government to develop a better system at ports of entry in order to prevent the unjustified deportation of asylum seekers back to their country of origin.

Self-Determination Through Autonomy or Independence? – On the Current and Future Position of New Caledonia

ICL Journal ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-105
Author(s):  
Markku Suksi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
New Caledonia ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
The Self ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Normative Framework ◽  
European Court ◽  
Determination Process ◽  
The Right

Abstract New Caledonia is a colonial territory of France. Since the adoption of the Nouméa Accord in 1998, a period of transition towards the exercise of self-determination has been going on. New Caledonia is currently a strong autonomy, well entrenched in the legal order of France from 1999 on. The legislative powers have been distributed between the Congress of New Caledonia and the Parliament of France on the basis of a double enumeration of legislative powers, an arrangement that has given New Caledonia control over many material fields of self-determination. At the same time as this autonomy has been well embedded in the constitutional fabric of France. The Nouméa Accord was constitutionalized in the provisions of the Constitution of France and also in an Institutional Act. This normative framework created a multi-layered electorate that has presented several challenges to the autonomy arrangement and the procedure of self-determination, but the European Court of Human Rights and the UN Human Rights Committee have resolved the issues regarding the right to vote in manners that take into account the local circumstances and the fact that the aim of the legislation is to facilitate the self-determination of the colonized people, the indigenous Kanak people. The self-determination process consists potentially of a series of referendums, the first of which was held in 2018 and the second one in 2020. In both referendums, those entitled to vote returned a No-vote to the question of ‘Do you want New Caledonia to attain full sovereignty and become independent?’ A third referendum is to be expected before October 2022, and if that one also results in a no to independence, a further process of negotiations starts, with the potential of a fourth referendum that will decide the mode of self-determination New Caledonia will opt for, independence or autonomy.

Refugees: The politically oppressed

2020 ◽  
pp. 019145372093192
Author(s):  
Felix Bender
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Specific Situation ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Classical Approach ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
The Core ◽  
Political Status ◽  
Normative Foundation ◽  
The Right ◽  
What Matters

Who should be recognized as a refugee? This article seeks to uncover the normative arguments at the core of legal and philosophical conceptions of refugeehood. It identifies three analytically distinct approaches grounding the right to refugee status and argues that all three are normatively inadequate. Refugee status should neither be grounded in individual persecution for specific reasons (classical approach) nor in individual persecution for any discriminatory reasons (human rights approach). It should also not be based solely on harm (humanitarian approach). Rather, this article argues, it should be based on political oppression – on persons lacking public autonomy, formally expressed as a lack of legal–political status. The normative foundation for a claim to refugee status lies in the inability of a person to control, amend and seek recourse to the specific situation she faces. It lies in the lack of public autonomy expressed as a lack of legal–political rights. What matters for a claim to refugee status is thus the legal–political disenfranchisement of a person, ultimately leaving her with no recourse to the particular situation she faces other than flight. Refugees, then, are not only those who fear harm or persecution, but those who are politically oppressed.

scholarly journals The Use of Official Notice in a Refugee Determination Process

2005 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 573-598 ◽  
Author(s):  
France Houle
Keyword(s):  
Refugee Status ◽  
Natural Justice ◽  
Decisionmaking Process ◽  
Determination Process ◽  
Large Scope

Official notice allows members of administrative tribunals to take into account on their own motion a large scope of information in the decisionmaking process. With this rule of evidence, it is possible to reach a double objective of fairness and expeditiousness. In this article, the author examines the rule of evidence. She also studies the practice of the Convention Refugee Determination Division of taking official notice of « standardized country files ». These files compile information on conditions prevailing in refugee-producing countries. This study is important because the content of these files can be used to determine whether each of the 20 000 and more claimants for refugee status in Canada has a well-founded fear of persecution. The author concludes that standardized country files can be officially noticed as long as the Convention Refugee Determination Division discloses the information in conformity with the rules of natural justice.

Palestinians to Citizens

2014 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 204-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Asem Khalil
Keyword(s):  
State Solution ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Willingness To Accept ◽  
Host Countries ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
British Mandate ◽  
Right Of Return ◽  
Palestinian Refugee ◽  
Refugee Problem ◽  
The Right

In this paper, I first argue that, since the British mandate, citizenship regulations in Palestine contributed to dispossession of the rights of Palestinians, thus laying the seeds of the Palestinian refugee problem and its eventual consolidation. I then argue that citizenship regulations in host countries were exclusionary towards refugees in general, and Palestinians in particular, making it impossible for Palestinians to integrate in host societies. The so-called “Arab Spring” did not bring about any change in that sense. Finally, I argue that the narrative of statehood, although often separated from that of the “right of return”, constitutes but one narrative, and one from a completely different angle than the narrative of a “right of return”, where the ‘just solution’ creates the possibility of establishing a homeland for Palestinians where they, and in particular the stateless refugees, can be converted into full citizens. What was part of the problem for refugees is presented as part of the solution. This discussion is very important in today’s Palestine, which was just recently accepted by the un General Assembly as a non-member observer state. The importance of that move is the official Palestinian insistence on the need for a state on the 1967 borders, and the willingness to accept the formula of a two-state solution. Discussion related to citizenship and refugee status, and the right of return, are all back at the center of political and legal discussions.

scholarly journals Asylum Seekers and the Labour Market: Spaces of Discomfort and Hostility

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 669-679 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise Waite
Keyword(s):  
Labour Market ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
Modern Slavery ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right ◽  
Hostile Environments ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Policy Shifts ◽  
Recent Policy

This article examines the relationship in the UK between asylum-seeking and the labour market. Since 2002, asylum-seekers have not been allowed to work unless they have waited over twelve months for an initial decision on their asylum claim. This policy change occurred as employment was considered a ‘pull factor’ encouraging unfounded asylum claims. Despite not having the right to work, asylum-seekers – and especially those whose applications for refugee status have been refused by the UK government – interact with the labour market in manifold ways. Drawing on an ESRC-funded study in the UK's Yorkshire and Humber region and related studies, this article argues that both asylum-seekers and refused asylum-seekers form a hyper-exploitable pool of ‘illegalised’ and unprotected workers. As a vital part of their survival terrain, work is largely experienced as for-cash labouring in low-paid labour market sectors where the spectre of exploitation and even ‘modern slavery’ are perpetual threats. Recent policy shifts are deepening such threats through creating increasingly ‘uncomfortable’ and ‘hostile’ environments for certain categories of migrants.

scholarly journals The right of minority-refugees to preserve their cultural identity: An intersectional analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 198-219
Author(s):  
Stephanie Eleanor Berry ◽  
Isilay Taban
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Identity ◽  
Current Practice ◽  
Minority Status ◽  
Host Society ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Social Categories ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
Address Forms ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact

While UN treaty bodies have sought to address forms of oppression resulting from the intersection of gender, race and/or disability through their practice, they rarely recognise the experience of groups at the intersection of other social categories. This article uses the lens of intersectionality to analyse the practice of UN treaty bodies in relation to the intersection of minority and refugee status. We argue that while minority-refugees have fled persecution connected to their minority status, UN treaty bodies have failed to appreciate the impact of their location at the intersection of persons belonging to minorities and refugees in host States on their right to preserve their cultural identity. By failing to address the distinct experience of minority-refugees, UN treaty bodies risk participating in their oppression. Further, we reveal that current practice not only has potentially negative consequences for minority-refugees – as both individuals and groups – and for the host society but may even undermine the ability of IHRL to achieve its overarching objectives.

scholarly journals Refugeeness, Sexuality, and Gender: Spatialized Lived Experiences of Intersectionality by Queer Asylum Seekers and Refugees in Paris

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florent Chossière
Keyword(s):  
Lived Experiences ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Subjective Effects ◽  
Power Relationships ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
Gender Minorities ◽  
Determination Process ◽  
Sexuality And Gender ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Asylum Seekers And Refugees

In the last few years, asylum claims based on sexual orientation and/or gender identity (SOGI) have received increased attention within migration and queer studies. Mostly focusing on the refugee status determination process, these works have emphasized how the expectations of asylum institutions about “genuine queer refugees” lead to the exclusion of many applicants from SOGI asylum. This paper aims at shifting the analysis perspective from the legal categorization process to the impacts of everyday experienced categories of “asylum seekers” or “refugees” on queer migrants in the Parisian area. Using a three-year long ethnographic fieldwork, completed through interviews with queer asylum seekers and refugees, this paper investigates how refugeeness, understood as the objective and subjective effects of migration and asylum policies on individuals, contributes to shaping lived experiences of sexual and gender minorities in France. By drawing attention to the ways that the multiple power relationships queer asylum seekers and refugees have to face are spatially grounded, this paper discusses how an intersectional understanding of sexuality, gender, and refugeeness allows us to emphasize the role played by migration status in the negotiation of hetero- and cisnormativity. This paper also argues that far from remaining passive toward the categorization process they are subjected to, queer asylum seekers and refugees strategically appropriate the administrative categories with which they are associated. Such an analysis of lived experiences of queer asylum seekers and refugees in the country of arrival thus highlights the complex reshaping of social location caused by migration.

Political Violence and Its Discontents

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-40
Author(s):  
Ergun Cakal
Keyword(s):  
Political Violence ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Refugee Camp ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
Refugee Law ◽  
Conflict Zone ◽  
International Refugee Law ◽  
The Right

The line that refugee status is of a purely ‘civilian and humanitarian’ character cannot be strictly maintained. It has become commonplace to point out the dangers posed to the general refugee population due to the presence of combatants in or within the proximity of a refugee camp, where a separation of civilian and non-civilian elements may indeed be deemed necessary. Forgoing the scholarship pertaining to the context of the refugee camp, which has absorbed most of the attention in this area, this paper will focus on the de jure legitimacy of a combatant seeking asylum, particularly away from the conflict zone. In light of this, there is a firm need to redraw the distinctions in this area and to account for the lack of dependence to and deference of international refugee law towards humanitarian law. There remain definitional and interpretative complexities that prevent a clear implementation of rules, particularly in non-international armed conflict. While the concern in not tarnishing asylum regimes is a legitimate one, it must be admitted that losing sight of the individuality and diversity of combatants and their motive, as occurs in the current discourse, is also erosive of protection needs and political rights, primarily the right to self-determination.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document