Principle Of Non-refoulement Research Articles

Utilizing Eurocentric Temporary Protection Directive as a Global Approach of Refugee Protection

The temporary protection directive is one of the noblest mechanisms of the European refugee protection regime. The European Union has designed it following the principle of temporary protection and non-refoulement of international refugee law. The United Nations Refugee Convention is the institutional root of these principles. In 2001, the EU has adopted the directive to improve its refugee protection mechanism. But they have never activated the directive until the current Ukrainian refugee crisis. This has remained as a piece of paper or unnecessary tool for the European countries. Their reluctance towards activating the directive seems to be hegemonic and political to some extent. Though they had all the grounds for activating the directive during the Syrian, Afghan or Tunisian refugee crisis, they did not choose to activate it. The paper doesn’t oppose the activation of TPD for Ukrainian refugees. It only explores and discusses the dualist role of the EU in activating TPD. The paper is also asking for its universal application for any refugees irrespective of their origin and the EU’s geopolitical interest. Lastly, it solicits for the utilization of the ‘doctrine of temporary refuge’ across the countries in the best possible manner considering the example of EU’s TPD.

Implementation of Non-Refoulement Principles in Legislation as Protection of Refugees in Indonesia

This article is about the implementation of the principles of non-refoulement related to refugee protection in Indonesia, the problem is that Indonesia still has not ratified the 1951 convention and the 1967 additional protocol, this has an impact on refugees who come to Indonesia. The purpose of this article is to see how the implementation of the principles of non-refoulement in Indonesian legislation, then to analyze the challenges and dynamics of refugees in Indonesia. The method used in this article is normative method, the type of analysis used is qualitative, the type of this article is library research. Then the results of this article found that the complexity of global problems related to refugees requires serious attention from the international community. Although Indonesia has not ratified the 1951 Convention and 1967 Protocol, the commitment to protect and assist refugees remains a focus to fulfill international responsibilities. The principle of non-refoulement is one of the foundations of refugee protection that prohibits forced return. Although Indonesia already has a national legal framework related to refugee protection, the implementation of the principle of non-refoulement needs to be analyzed more deeply. This article is important because it provides a deeper understanding of the challenges and steps that can be taken to improve refugee protection in Indonesia. This paper fills the knowledge gap regarding the implementation of the principle of non-refoulement in Indonesia and is expected to provide suggestions and recommendations to improve the protection and implementation of the principle of non-refoulement of refugees in Indonesia.

Legal Disruption and Sharia Arbitration: Navigating Change, Measuring Impact, and Fostering Innovation

This article evaluates the doctrinal challenges encountered by the law amid technological advancements, specifically in the areas of blockchain technology, smart contracts, digital assets, and data privacy. Certain conventional legal doctrines, including intellectual property law, privacy, and evidence, and the principle of nonrefoulement, may no longer be applicable amidst the introduction of disruptive technological developments. We present methods for identifying irrelevant legal issues using the TRIZ approach, which enables the identification, evaluation, and updating of legal doctrine. Additionally, this article illustrates how TRIZ principles can develop more adaptable contract principles in response to technologies such as smart contracts. By applying these principles, the law can more effectively manage change, promote innovation in consumer protection, and support the use of smart contracts.

How Could Deportation become Illegal Deportation? (The Case of Deportation of Myanmar Nationals by Malaysia)

February 2022; Malaysia deported more than 1000 undocumented migrants from Myanmar back to Myanmar, even though a coup d’état had already occurred in Myanmar. This paper will explore the nexus between coup d’état and well-founded fear of persecution and assess the decision by Malaysia to deport Myanmar immigrants back to Myanmar with the nonrefoulement principle. This paper's findings showed a clear nexus between a coup d’état and well-founded fear of persecution to some extent; the nexus appears when the Coup creates uncertainty in citizen's live and people in a dangerous situation. Consequently, the deportation decision by Malaysia violated the non-refoulment principle, and the deportation became illegal. This paper utilized the normative method to analyze the research problem.

Tanggung Jawab Negara Terhadap Pengungsi Dan Pengaruhnya Bagi Hubungan Diplomatik, Perspektif Konvensi Wina 1961

Introduction: The Afghan government's pro-Western policies and secular ideologies caused a strong reaction from radical groups who wanted to establish a new Afghan government, resulting in a civil war in Afghanistan.Purposes of the Research: The purpose of this study is to examine and discuss the implementation of state responsibilities and their impact on Afghan refugees in Indonesia for diplomatic relations, from the perspective of the 1961 Vienna Convention.Methods of the Research: This research is based on the normative legal research method which is also known as library research. The approach used is a conceptual approach, a statutory approach, and a case approach. The procedure for collecting legal materials is carried out by studying and analyzing library materials in relation to literature, conventions, and laws. Processing and analysis of legal materials is carried out by examining, researching, and compiling legal materials in an orderly and logical manner to ensure the completeness of legal materials so that they can be interpreted.Results of the Research: Based on the results of research on state responsibility for refugees and its effect on diplomatic relations, the perspective of the 1961 Vienna Convention. The principle of state sovereignty in international relations has a very large influence on the right of a country to control a government territory, society or over itself so that in practice it is against refugees a state is negligent or violates what is required by international law, namely in providing protection, promotion and respect for human rights based on a treaty and customary international law. As an example; there are several countries that are parties to the 1951 Convention, act to receive and provide protection, expel and return refugees to other places or to their countries of origin where these actions have violated the Non-Refoulement Principle Article 33 paragraph 3 which is basically related to the principle of protecting human rights. Meanwhile, there are also countries that, although not participants in the 1951 Convention, accept and make laws and regulations that apply to refugees to ensure the protection of human rights that refugees do not get because of conflicts that occur in their place or country of origin.

Non-Incorporation of the Principle of Non-Refoulement in the Chilean Immigration and Aliens Law

This paper critically analyses the non-incorporation of the principle of non-refoulement in the Chilean Immigration and Aliens Law 21.325 of 20 April 2021. It was published in the context of migratory pressures within the Latin American region, deriving mainly from the Venezuelan socio-political crisis. It was also published after the recommendations given by the CMW in the last two periodic reviews of 2011 and 2021 to update the previous version dictated during the Pinochet dictatorship. As a state party to the core international human rights treaties and the American Convention on Human Rights, an urgent claim existed in Chile to adapt its migration law. Following a heated debate in 2019, the parliament eliminated the recognition of the principle of non-refoulement contained in the draft law arguing it was already recognised in refugee legislation. Instead, they identified a ‘complementary protection’. This paper examines whether this decision breaches human rights standards, particularly the obligation to adopt legislative measures to give effect to the principle of non-refoulement. It begins by analysing the principle of non-refoulement in international refugee law. Then, it turns into identifying the human rights obligations emanating from the principle of non-refoulement. Finally, the paper applies this standard to law 21.325. The paper concludes that not incorporating the principle of non-refoulement into law 21.325 constitutes a breach of Chile’s human rights obligations, facing the risk of incurring international responsibility.

To derogate or not to derogate: health securitisation challenges to the principle of non-refoulement in the Central Mediterranean

Recent threats to the durability of the non-refoulement principle brought on by COVID-19 demonstrate how the pandemic has been much more than a health crisis. Public health emergency measures issued in response to the global outbreak, such as port closures, the suspension of search-and-rescue operations and privatised pushbacks at maritime borders, have exposed fundamental weaknesses in the international protection regime. With Italy and Malta in profile, this article examines how the elevation of COVID-19 to a national security threat has occasioned a shift in the migration and security discourse, challenging the very existence of the non-refoulement principle’s non-derogable character. In support of conceiving the principle as absolute, the article reviews how the denial of protections under non-refoulement has contributed to the scale and gravity of the present health crisis, forcing mixed migrant arrivals to either stay in overcrowded camps or in protracted situations of distress at sea. The article thereby concludes that the framing of migration as a health security issue appears to only breed greater insecurity.

The Application of the Non-Refoulement Principle as a Form of Protection for Refugees in Semarang City

This research aims to identify and analyze the handling of refugees from abroad or stateless who enter the jurisdiction of Semarang City. The 1951 Refugee Convention has set minimum standards for the treatment of refugees, including their basic rights. Besides, the 1951 Convention also prohibits expulsion and forced repatriation of people with refugee status, which is referred to as the principle of non-refoulement. This research used the socio-legal research method. The primary data used was based on observation, attendance in the field, and interviews; as well as secondary data through the study of documents, laws, and regulations, and existing concepts. The results of the research showed that even though Indonesia has so far not ratified and become a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention. On the other hand, national legislation and policies that support the implementation of the non-refoulement principle are needed, because the Indonesian State is factually faced with a large number of Foreign refugees entering Indonesia's sovereign territory have shown an increase. Policy implementation and application of the principle of non-refoulment in the context of protecting foreign refugees in Indonesia has become a serious concern of the government of the Republic of Indonesia, including the government of Semarang City.

The Application of the Non-Refoulement Principle as a Form of Protection for Refugees in Semarang City

The Application of the Non-Refoulement Principle as a Form of Protection for Refugees in Semarang City

No Choice but Welcoming Refugees: The Non-Refoulement Principle as Customary International Law in Indonesia

The non-refoulement principle requires each country to consider refugees and asylum seekers in their country of origin if they are subject to persecution and threaten their lives. As a geographically strategic country, Indonesia has been a significant crossroad for international refugees and asylum seekers often consider Indonesia their temporary destination. Moreover, the complex situation of international refugees has encouraged to reinterpret of the principle of non-refoulement into various national measures and domestic policies, given that Indonesia is deemed a transit country for refugees and has not ratified the 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees. This paper aims to analyse the concept of refugee protection under international law, particularly the non-refoulement principle and investigate the application of the non-refoulement principle in Indonesia. This study employed normative and empirical legal research with statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches. This study confirms that the non-refoulement principle is part of jus cogens norms in international law but does not fit in its application. Indonesia has inconsistency in upholding the non-refoulement principle into the binding normative rules. Refugees have received far less attention from the Indonesian government due to insufficient infrastructure and financial allocation. Moreover, the existing executive regulations do not provide effective enforcement since these regulations have a lower position in the hierarchy and cannot have deterrent sanctions. Hence, ratification of the 1951 Convention is urgently needed by Indonesia to guarantee the protection of refugees within its jurisdiction. At the regional scope, Indonesia can encourage ASEAN countries to adopt good practices in the European Union to set sharing quotas to ensure that not most refugees escape to Indonesia.

Climate mobility to Europe: The case of disaster displacement in Austrian asylum procedures

Disaster displacement is an increasing challenge in the context of climate change. However, there is a lack of research focusing on Europe as a destination area, including on the question how the normative protection gap with regard to cross-border disaster displacement is addressed from a European perspective. Against this background this article provides evidence from a European case study focusing on the role of disaster, such as droughts or floods, in asylum procedures in Austria. Based on a qualitative content analysis of 646 asylum decisions rendered by the Austrian appellate court (supplemented by qualitative interviews with relevant Austrian stakeholders), it is demonstrated that disasters are—to a certain extent—already taken into consideration in Austrian asylum procedures: impacts of disasters are not only brought forward by applicants for either leaving the country of origin or for not wanting or not being able to return. They are also increasingly discussed in the legal reasoning of judgments of the Austrian appellate court. The analysis shows that impacts of disasters play an important role mainly in decisions concerning persons from Somalia, and here primarily in the assessment of the non-refoulement principle under Article 3 ECHR and subsidiary protection. This can be regarded as a response to the protection gap—even though not necessarily applied consistently.

عدم طرد اللاجئ في القانون الدولي

Abstract The principle of non-refoulement is considered one of the basic principles in the international refugee law, as it protects the refugees from falling at the hands of the authorities persecuting them. The rights that the refugees enjoy according to the international conventions is considered as obligations over the refugees’ host State. The most important of which are: Right to protection against refoulement and constraining the host State’s authority regarding the expulsion of the refugee. The international refugee law rejects the expulsion of the refugee. Also, the principle of Non Refoulement is well entrenched in customary international law; it is binding for contracting and non-contracting states. In addition, he Contracting States shall not expel a refugee lawfully in their territory save on grounds of national security or public order. Articles (32) and (33) of the 1951 refugee convention are the core of international refugee protection. Keywords: Refoulement of Refugee, Host State, the 1951 refugee convention.

THE LEGAL STATUS AND LEGAL PROTECTION TOWARDS CLIMATE REFUGEES UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW: A STUDY OF IOANE TEITIOTA CASE

This study aims to examine the legal status of climate refugees in international law according to the Ioane Teitiota case and how international law in general protects climate refugees. This study is a normative legal research. The types of approach used are statute, case, and conceptual approaches. The legal materials of this study comprise of primary, secondary, and tertiery legal materials. In collecting data this study used the library research data collection technique. The analysis technique used is the inductive reasoning method. The results of this study reveal that the 1951 Refugee Convention is unable to accommodate climate refugees. However, UN Human Rights Committee in its reccomendation acknowledges the effects of climate change as one of the determining factor for the affected persons to seek asylum in other countries which triggers the enforcement of non-refoulement principle. The protection under international law towards climate refugees derive from state obligation to comply with the non-refoulement principle, ad hoc aids from other states influenced by Nansen Initiative’s Protection Agenda, and the tangible protections provided by UNHCR and its cooperation with local authorities.

Detainee Transfers and the Principle of Non-refoulement in Relation to ‘Non-belligerent Supporting States’ in Non-international Armed Conflicts

Abstract In the past 20 years, many States have purposefully shifted away from taking detainees in non-international armed conflicts (NIACs) and have instead relied on partner forces—both State and non-State actors—to take responsibility for any NIAC detainees. The question this article seeks to address is to what extent ‘non-belligerent supporting States’ have obligations to ensure that detainee transfers by partners comport with the principle of non-refoulement, by which a person may not be transferred if they are at a real (or substantial) risk of a violation of their fundamental rights. The authors explore several legal approaches to better understand how a non-belligerent supporting State may incur legal obligations in relation to detainee transfers through the support it provides. The article first examines how support triggers belligerent status (and thus belligerent obligations) under International Humanitarian Law (IHL), and tackles to what extent non-belligerent supporting States may incur legal obligations under IHL more generally, noting the gap between the rules of International Armed Conflict and NIACs in this respect. Secondly, specific obligations non-belligerent States may incur with respect to the principle of non-refoulement in relation to detainee transfers by a belligerent party during a NIAC are identified. Finally, the authors examine three categories of support—logistics/transportation support, intelligence sharing, and belligerent-party-to-non-belligerent-party detainee transfers—to demonstrate how varying degrees of support by non-belligerent States in the context of a NIAC could trigger the obligations to ensure respect of the prohibition against non-refoulement by belligerent partners through the auspices of Common Article 1. The article concludes that while Common Article 1 obligations indeed arise in these scenarios, the scope of the external or positive obligations of Common Article 1 are still unsettled under IHL and thus require further development to create a common understanding of the international legal obligations to avoid the violation of the principle of non-refoulement by partner forces.

China's Participation in Refugee Protection and Relief from the Perspective of International Law

As the international society is paying more and more attention to refugee protection, there are still several controversies. The first one is whether granting asylum to refugees should be defined as an obligation of a state. The second one is whether the expansionary interpretation of the border of the non-refoulement principle should be applied. The third one is whether all states need legislation focusing on refugee protection. In this context, China has always adhered to a governance model that addresses both the symptoms and the root causes, and has gradually increased its participation in international refugee affairs, taking into account its national conditions. However, China still lacks an integrated system for refugee protection to further fully fulfill the relief obligation of great powers in the international community. Based on adhering to a multidimensional and co-governance model of governance and active extraterritorial material assistance, China should in the future expand its interpretation of the boundaries in the principle of non-refoulement of refugees from a humanitarian perspective and use this as a policy guide for legislation on the resettlement of refugees within its territory. China should use its action to call for a wider interpretation of the obligation to assist from a humanitarian perspective so that the international community can improve the overall level of refugee assistance.

The use of the precautionary principle and the non-refoulement principle in public law

In addition to interpreting the precautionary principle, the present article shows that this principle of environmental law applies to agricultural practice as well. In a separate chapter, we analyze the relationship between the non-refoulement (also known as non-derogation) principle and the precautionary principle in connection with the latest cases of the Hungarian Constitutional Court’s practice. This article summarizes the counter-arguments of the constitutional judges against a strong interpretation of the precautionary principle and analyzes whether a strong interpretation of said principle prevails in the practice of the Deputy Ombudsman for Future Generations.

The Refugee in Law and Practice: In the Face of Western States’ Pushback Policies

The present Article revisits the refugee definition and the non-refoulement principle in the context of some western states’ pushback policies under international law. Recent incidents have shown that some western states have pushed back refugees by employing a nativist approach for political ends. In addition, mentioned western states in many situations have made references to produced false narratives about refugees to justify their illicit actions. By bringing the refugee definition of international law to light, this Article aims to set forth the illegality of these states’ goal of manipulating the existing legal definitions. To this end, the Article first explains what a refugee is in international law, freeing it from the above-mentioned false narratives. Second, the analysis establishes the illegality of refugees’ pushback under international law, which contradicts the non-refoulement principle. Furthermore, potential solutions to suppress the states’ illegal actions within the scope of pushbacks will be discussed separately by this Article. Finally, to conclude, the Article points that states find ways to create legal loopholes by ignoring the recognized rights of refugees. But it also underlines that being determined to find solutions that will deactivate pushback policies is essential to ensure that every alien has the right to seek asylum.

Third Country Processing Regimes and the Violation of the Principle of Non-Refoulement: a Case Study of Australia’s Pacific Solution

Third Country Processing Regimes and the Violation of the Principle of Non-Refoulement: a Case Study of Australia’s Pacific Solution

KOMITMEN UNI EROPA DALAM PEMENUHAN PRINSIP NON-REFOULEMENT TERHADAP NEGARA-NEGARA ANGGOTA (Studi Kasus Krisis Pengungsi di Yunani Pascakebakaran Kamp Moria)

One of the countries in Europe with the biggest refugee crisis is Greece and triggers the emergence of refoulement. The non-refoulement principle is an absolute form protection for a refugee and must be obeyed by all ratifying countries. On that basis, Greece needs an additional assistance from the European Union as a regional organization that houses most European countries. This study aims to explain the commitment of the European Union in fulfilling the principle of non-refoulement to the refugee crisis in Greece, especially after the fire incident at Camp Moria. This research is a normative legal research with a statute approach and a conceptual approach. The sources of legal materials used are based on 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees also the non-refoulement principle. The technique of collecting legal materials used is library research and analyzed through inductive analysis techniques. The results showed that the condition of the refugee crisis in Greece especially after the fire at Camp Moria was so alarming where the refugees are in danger of being refoulemented. In dealing with the refugee crisis that occurred in Greece, the European Union has tried to issue policies and decisions but the policies have not been implemented optimally.

How the Safe Third Countries Concept Results in Prohibited Non-Refoulement and What Are the Limits of Forum Shopping in Migration?

Contemporary refugee law builds on the 1951 Geneva Convention, but causes of forced migration not regulated by the Convention need to be addressed by national border and migration authorities. The right to asylum beyond the definition of the Convention does not entail the right of the migrant for refugee status but still entails the right to individual assessment of his legal status. This right remains relevant even if the respective state applies safe third country lists resulting in an almost instant rejection violating the nonrefoulement principle. Naturally, states have the right to expel irregular migrants without legal grounds to stay. However, during this process, the state shall respect the prohibition of collective expulsion. Yet, as the ECtHR holds, if the lack of individual assessment derives from the culpable conduct of the alien – e.g. due to unauthorised en masse entry – the state can expel them without individual assessment.