Abstract
In recent years, the United States Congress has enacted multiple anti-terrorism laws in its efforts to exclude from the country terrorists and those who associate with terrorists or provide them material support. The anti-terrorism provisions, particularly the material support bar, prevent many individuals with a well-founded fear of persecution based on race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group from receiving asylum or protection from refoulement. These statutes deny protection to refugees even though there are no reasonable grounds to consider them dangers to the security of the United States, and, accordingly, these legislative provisions violate International Refugee Law. In apparent recognition that applying the anti-terrorism bars can lead to unjust and illegal results, Executive Branch officials have issued a series of ad hoc waivers of the material support bar. These waivers, though beneficial to the individuals who successfully navigate the waiver procedures, are insufficient to bring the United States into compliance with International Refugee Law. Another avenue of protection, the non-refoulement obligation of the Convention Against Torture, has also been utilised when the material support bar has threatened to deprive refugees and asylum-seekers of protection under the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its Protocol. This is a welcome outcome for the sub-group of refugees and asylum-seekers who fall with its scope, but the Convention Against Torture also falls far short of affording all asylum-seekers and refugees the non-refoulement protection guaranteed by the Refugee Convention. Without new legislation, such as the proposed 2010 Refugee Protection Act, United States anti-terrorism statutes will remain in violation of International Refugee Law.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call