Academic literature on the topic 'Principle of nonrefoulement'

The European Convention on Human Rights does not contain any explicit reference to the right to asylum. However, the European Court of Human Rights has provided protection of asylum seekers mainly through interpretation of Article 3 of the Convention. Moreover, even if there is no specific mention of non-refoulement in this Article, the Court has interpreted it to include the prohibition of refoulement. Today, the ECHR is one of the most important juridical instruments for protection of asylum seekers throughout Europe. The main reason for this is that the principle of nonrefoulement under the Convention extends to inhuman and degrading behavior. This paper has placed its focus on the applicability of the ECHR to asylum cases, particularly the development and treatment of the principle of non-refoulement, as a form of complementary protection to those seeking asylum. This will be elaborated mainly through analysis of the jurisprudence of the ECtHR. It will be shown that the principle of non-refoulement under the ECHR, as a barrier to removal, plays a significant complementary role regarding the protection of asylum seekers. It will also be shown that the jurisprudence of the ECtHR has important relevance to EU asylum law and policy. In this sense, a comparison between EU law and ECHR protection standards for asylum seekers will be elaborated as well. Finally, it will be concluded that EU Member States are faced with dual systems providing protection to asylum seekers, and a possible solution will be suggested in order to overcome this situation.

O aumento do número de refugiados no mundo hoje tem evidenciado uma crise de imigração com a procura de novos lares por milhares de pessoas que se qualificam como refugiados. No Brasil, o regime jurídico foi estabelecido pela Lei 9.474 que consigna uma definição ampliada do conceito de refugiados logo em seu artigo 1º. A referida legislação foi adotada tendo em vista a adesão ao Brasil à Convenção das Nações Unidas relativa ao Estatuto dos Refugiados de 1951. No entanto, a legislação nacional apresenta novas hipóteses de exclusão em relação ao cometimento de crimes hediondos, atos terroristas e tráfico de drogas, sem igual previsão no principal tratado internacional sobre o tema. O desenvolvimento do estudo sobre a temática irá evidenciar que a cláusula de exclusão contida no art. 3º da Lei nº 9.474 revela uma interferência de política criminal que viola a proteção internacional dos direitos humanos. A análise a respeito do cometimento dos delitos apontados poderá descaracterizar a condição jurídica de refugiado instrumentalizada na referida Convenção, com expressa violação ao princípio do nonrefoulement. Admitindo-se a natureza de Direitos Humanos ao Direito dos Refugiados, a sua proteção não pode estar condicionada à interferência da política criminal nacional, cada vez mais acentuada e discriminatória dos indivíduos, pois o respeito aos direitos humanos tem aplicação universal e incondicional. As considerações sobre a interferência do Direito Penal no conceito de refugiado, revela enfraquecimento da proteção dos direitos humanos a que o Brasil se comprometeu no âmbito do direito internacional.

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.

Alors que les flux migratoires « spontanés » sont en recrudescence depuis le début du XXIe siècle, la mer est devenue le théâtre d’un drame humanitaire qui semble sans fin. Sur toutes les façades maritimes européennes, les décès ou disparitions de migrants demeurent fréquents du fait de conditions de transport extrêmes, le plus souvent liées au trafic dont ils sont l’objet, ou de manoeuvres dangereuses opérées à l’occasion de leur arraisonnement. Au risque de perdre la vie en mer s’ajoutent des atteintes répétées à la dignité et à la liberté du migrant imputables à certains États côtiers de départ et de destination qui cherchent à interrompre sa navigation, y compris lorsqu’il manifeste un besoin de protection internationale. Si la lutte contre l’immigration irrégulière ou la criminalité organisée constitue un motif légitime d’interception en vertu du droit international de la mer, les actions (recours abusif à la force, refoulement, expulsion collective, privation arbitraire de liberté) et inactions (refus de coordonner un sauvetage ou de coopérer au débarquement des rescapés dans un lieu sûr) de certains États dans cet espace constituent une grave méconnaissance des droits de l’Homme, du droit des réfugiés et du droit relatif à la sauvegarde de la vie humaine en mer. Le comportement des acteurs privés du monde maritime peut également se révéler préjudiciable au migrant en détresse, rescapé ou passager clandestin. Le constat ainsi dressé impose de réfléchir à la manière d’assurer la jouissance et l’exercice effectifs des droits du migrant en mer. À cet égard, la présente thèse se propose de résoudre des problématiques insuffisamment ou non appréhendées par le droit positif : elles concernent la teneur et la portée du droit fondamental d’émigrer appliqué à l’espace maritime, la question de la licéité d’un refus de débarquement opposé à un migrant rescapé, ou encore l’incapacité apparente des juridictions supranationales à contrôler les pratiques d’États européens qui tentent de diluer leur responsabilité à l’égard du migrant en mer dans celle d’États tiers
While “spontaneous” migratory flows are on the increase since the beginning of the 21st century, the sea has become the scene of a humanitarian drama that seems endless. On all the European seaboards, the deaths or disappearances of migrants remain frequent due to extreme transport conditions, most often linked to the smuggling in which they are the object, or dangerous maneuvers carried out during their boarding. In addition to the risk of losing their life at sea, there are repeated attacks on the dignity and freedom of the migrant attributable to certain coastal States of departure and destination which seek to interrupt his navigation, including when he requires international protection. The fight against irregular immigration or organized crime constitutes a legitimate reason for interception under the international law of the sea; however, the actions (abusive use of force, refoulement, collective expulsion, arbitrary deprivation of liberty) and inactions (refusal to coordinate a rescue or to cooperate in the disembarkation of the survivors in a place of safety) of some states in this space constitute a serious disregard for human rights, refugee law and the law relating to the safeguard of human life in sea. The behavior of private users of the sea can also be detrimental to migrants in distress, survivors or stowaways. This observation requires to think about how to ensure the effective enjoyment and exercise of the rights of migrants at sea. In this respect, the thesis proposes to resolve issues that are insufficiently or not apprehended by positive law and which concern the content and scope of the fundamental right to emigrate applied to the maritime space, the question of the legality of a refusal to disembark opposed to a surviving migrant, or the apparent inability of supranational jurisdictions to control the practices of European States which attempt to dilute their responsibility with regard to the migrant at sea in that of third States

Abstract This chapter concludes the book with final thoughts on reforming the durable solutions and identifying new directions. Having examined each durable solution separately and in depth, this chapter presents reforms for the overall refugee system. It discusses implications for strengthening global refugee policy towards human rights, integration, and sustainable development. Key strategies for improving refugee solutions overall include strengthening asylum and nonrefoulement, prioritizing integration, facilitating international cooperation, and increasing funding. The international community should seek to prevent forced displacements and link refugee solutions to migration policy. Human rights-based approaches with refugees are presented, including how to incorporate the principles of human dignity, nondiscrimination, participation, transparency, and accountability into refugee solutions. The role of climate change in forced displacement and the Sustainable Development Goals are discussed. Current trends are reviewed including the global coronavirus pandemic. The chapter concludes on a note of hope and optimism for the future.