No description available.

The number of refugees worldwide has never been higher, with an estimate of 65.3 million forcibly displaced persons by the end of 2015. The brunt of the material, economic and social burdens these waves of often destitute persons represent is borne by a minority of closeproximity States, ill-equipped to handle mass influxes of people in dire need of protection and assistance. This dissertation explores the legal obligations of States to share the burden of international refugees, through four select research questions. Firstly, the existence of universal and regional obligations to burden-share are examined. Secondly, the legality of the 'third safe country' notion is examined under international law. Thirdly, the economic responsibilities of refugee-generating States towards refugees, asylum States and the UNHCR is examined. Fourthly, the obligations of States to rescue asylum seekers in distress at sea, and to process their asylum claims is examined. The fundamental observation of the dissertation is that although the 1951 Convention provides a generous set of rights to persecuted persons, its primary shortcoming in the context of this dissertation, is the lack of a clear and positive obligation, ensuring a fair distribution of the burdens of refugees between the signatory States. However, regional efforts do, to a degree, mitigate this issue by establishing obligations which seek to distribute the costs and burdens of refugees.

The albinism community in Malawi has been faced with gruesome human rights violations for the past decade. These violations have included, assaults, kidnapping, mutilations, and murder. The cause of such violations is that the community of Malawi has for so long embraced the superstitious belief that the body parts of people with albinism are an essential charm for good luck. As a result of this, the albino community faces extinction because of the small population. The definition of a refugee under the 1951 Refugee Convention on the other hand, only provides for five grounds of persecution which includes race, religion, nationality, political opinion and membership of a particular social group. The dissertation seeks to unravel whether the international law grants refugee status to people with albinism. In response to the question, the dissertation analyses the definition of a refugee under the 1951 Convention. Persecution and inability of a State to protect victims of human rights violations are important elements to establish a solid case for refugee application. Hence, the dissertation tends to analyse whether the treatment of people with albinism in Malawi amounts to persecution. Besides, whether, they could be granted refugee status in other countries. The dissertation, furthermore, tends to analyse whether there are other mechanisms of the international community that are used to protect people with albinism. The findings in this thesis are that albinism is a ground of persecution because of the treatment that is followed due to their defined characteristics. That due to certain factors that needs to be satisfied to amount to effective national protection; Malawi has failed to protect people with albinism. Therefore, based on those factors, people with albinism could be granted international protection of refugees. Though there are other mechanisms by the international community used to protect people with albinism, there is a need to change the definition of a refugee under the 1951 Convention to accommodate problems arising in the contemporary world.

This thesis evaluates Canada‘s compliance with human rights-based complementary international protection. Through an analysis of the roots of international refugee protection, it first links the evolution of the latter with the development of human rights law instruments. It then defines complementary protection as the corpus of legal bases for asylum claims outside of the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. It uses various human rights instruments to outline international protection obligations, which take three different forms of complementary protection. The first one consists in independent protection mechanisms outside of the Refugee Convention, the most important being the formulation of non-refoulement in the Convention Against Torture. The others are rights that expand the application of existing protection mechanisms, and protection mechanisms established by the UNHCR outside of existing international treaties. This thesis argues that Canada‘s application of these norms reflects partial compliance with its obligations, as it acknowledges important humanitarian concerns regarding international protection, while attempting to preserve its prerogative to exclude individuals based on national security.

Abstract Women claiming refugee status in Canada must demonstrate to the Immigration and Refugee Board [IRB] that their claim is valid and plausible. Canada’s legislative framework acknowledges that gender-related persecution can qualify as a ground for refugee status under the United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees [Refugee Convention]. Specifically, the IRB’s Chairperson’s Guideline 4 – Women Refugee Claimants Fearing Gender-Related Persecution [Gender Guidelines] assist IRB decision-makers in deciding gender-related refugee claims by offering options for procedural accommodation and analytical guidance in the evaluation of gender-related claims. The Gender Guidelines aim to ensure decision-makers have “the degree of knowledge, understanding, and sensitivity” needed to make a “fair and correct judgment” of gender-related claims (Griffith v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1999] FCJ No 1142 (QL)). The purpose of this research is to critically examine the use of the Gender Guidelines in IRB decisions on gender-related refugee claims and Federal Court judicial reviews of those claims. Looking at 166 Federal Court of Canada judicial reviews of gender-related claims of persecution previously rejected at the IRB level from 2003 to 2013, I used a grounded theory methodological basis and content analysis approach informed by Michel Foucault’s insights on power relationships and Judith Butler’s insights on performativity to examine discursive deployment of gender in refugee determinations through the treatment of the Gender Guidelines. I examined four legal standards used in these judicial reviews of gender-related claim determination—credibility assessments, plausibility assessments, availability of state protection, and the availability of an internal flight alternative [IFA]. I analyzed the application of these standards and looked at how variables such as country of origin or type of persecution or extrajudicial factors such as Canadian political discourse and rigid understandings of gender identity result in inconsistent application of the Gender Guidelines, thereby violating women refugee claimants’ right to procedural fairness. Several recommendations are made for changes at both the IRB and Federal Court level to correct identified barriers and to ensure all claims related to gender-related persecution have a full and fair opportunity to provide evidence and have it considered on its merits.

The increasing frequency and/or severity of climate-related disasters has pushed “environmental refugees” onto center stage, capturing headlines the world over. Although the urgency implied by the “refugee” terminology is apt, the legal reality is that few “environmental refugees” can enjoy the protections of refugee law—a system of law that was created in the post-World War II era to respond to the ongoing needs of Jews displaced during the War and whose stringent requirements reflect the particular historical moment of its creation. Despite evolutions in other areas, refugee law does not typically provide recourse for environmental harms. By contrast, human rights law, at both the international and domestic levels, has continued to evolve to recognize environmental and social environmental rights; for example, the General Assembly of the United Nations in 2010 recognized a human right to water. Issues related to water scarcity or water (mis)management may already be causing affected individuals to leave their homes, and concerns about water availability in the near future necessitate the development of legal tools for protecting these populations. This paper draws on human rights law, as it exists in the international system and as applied in Colombia, to create a framework that may provide greater protection for so-called “water refugees,” given the increasing salience of displacements related to water, the lack of movement in refugee law regarding environmental displacements, and the promise of social and economic rights discourse. / text

The apparent normative and implementation gaps within the international refugee protection regime suggest the need to reform its implementation and accountability processes. Increasingly, the focus is being shifted to local or domestic actors to attempt to address the challenges faced in realising refugee rights effectively. Among the key domestic accountability actors for the realisation of rights, are national human rights institutions (NHRIs). NHRIs are considered a bridge between the international and domestic human rights systems. NHRIs act as entities that facilitate the diffusion of international human rights norms and standards, including those with respect to refugee rights, into the national spheres. Notwithstanding this, there is paucity in empirical evidence within the refugee rights discourse on the role that NHRIs can play to promote the effective realisation of refugee rights. This study explores the role that NHRIs in South Africa and Kenya play in promoting and protecting refugee rights. It utilises a non-doctrinal and qualitative research approach, to examine the extent to which the NHRIs engage with refugee rights and to explore their capacity to do so effectively. It situates NHRIs within the nexus between international human rights law and international refugee law to frame the understanding for their role within the refugee protection regime. The findings indicate that the NHRIs in South Africa and Kenya that are compliant with the Paris Principles display significant engagement with refugee rights promotion and protection. As accountability mechanisms, they have contributed to the development and implementation of domestic refugee law and policy in accordance with international norms and standards. This has occurred despite the lack of an explicit refugee rights' promotion and protection mandate, but they face barriers and challenges. Various underlying factors that impede their effectiveness to address refugee rights were identified. These included the sociopolitical contexts within which they operate, capacity constraints and invisibility within the refugee protection regime. The socio-political challenges included xenophobia and the securitisation of the asylum space. These compounded organisational and operational weaknesses such as scarce specialist skills in refugee law, limited financial resources, and the absence of strategic and sustained partnerships for refugee rights protection. The overall absence of norms for NHRI engagement with refugee rights was identified as a contributory factor for the lack of a coherent approach for promoting and protecting these rights. Possible avenues to enhance NHRI engagement with refugee rights were identified. For instance, NHRIs building partnerships for refugee rights promotion and protection with CSOs, the UNHCR and regional institutions based on a clear understanding of an NHRI's role as accountability mechanisms. For NHRIs, the imperative lies in building their capacity to address refugee rights to ensure a clear understanding of what the promotion and protection of these rights entails.

Women in the Context of International Refugee Law Abstract The refugee definition enshrined in Article 1(A)(2) of the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees does not mention gender or sex as a potentially relevant factor when establishing the refugee status. However, with the human rights evolution at the end of the 20th century, it became imperative that the definition is interpreted in a way which will provide protection to women facing either gender-specific persecution (persecution in specific forms only applicable to women for the reason of their sex), or gender-related persecution (persecution for the reason of being a woman). The thesis explores the interpretation of the notion of gender-specific persecution and discusses several examples of this form of persecution: forced marriage, female genital mutilation and sexual violence. Then it considers the Convention grounds for persecution (i.e. particular social group, political opinion, religion, race and nationality) and a variety of possible arguments for a gender- sensitive interpretation of these grounds for the purpose of encompassing cases of women facing persecution because of their opposition, whether explicit or tacit, to patriarchal traditional societies based on inequality between sexes manifesting for example in resistance to female...

O processo para o refúgio é o conjunto de regras e princípios necessários à aplicação do Direito dos Refugiados aos casos concretos. Quando este conjunto respeita os padrões democráticos do Devido Processo Legal, as tendências históricas de exploração e manipulação política do instituto de refúgio podem ser limitadas e os objetivos humanitários deste ramo dos Direitos Humanos podem ser alcançados com maior transparência. Quando o Devido Processo Legal para o refúgio é respeitado, também se permite que a pessoa que figura como solicitante de refúgio seja tratada como sujeito de direitos - e não como objeto do processo. Uma vez que a Convenção de Genebra de 1951, sobre o Estatuto dos Refugiados, não estabeleceu normas de processo, cada país signatário necessita criar um regime próprio para processar os pedidos de determinação, extensão, perda e cessação da condição de refugiado em seus territórios. O primeiro regime processual brasileiro foi criado no ano de 1997, pela Lei Federal 9497. Desde então, o país vem desenvolvendo, através do Comitê Nacional para Refugiados (CONARE), regras infra legais e rotinas práticas que têm determinado um padrão processual ainda fragmentado e inseguro. O estudo do aparato normativo nacional e da realidade observada entre 2012 e 2014 revelam a existência de problemas (pontuais ou crônicos) sobre o cumprimento de diversos princípios processuais, tais como a Legalidade, a Impessoalidade e Independência da autoridade julgadora, o Contraditório, a Ampla Defesa, a Publicidade, a Fundamentação, a Igualdade e a Razoável Duração do Processo. Estes problemas impõem desafios variados ao Brasil, tanto em dimensão legislativa quanto estrutural. O enfrentamento destas questões precisa ocorrer com rapidez. O motivo da urgência, porém, não é a nova demanda de imigração observada no país, mas sim o fato de que as violações ao Devido Processo Legal, verificadas no processo para o refúgio brasileiro, representam, em si, violações de Direitos Humanos, que, ademais prejudicam o compromisso do país para com a proteção internacional dos refugiados. / The Refuge Process is a set of rules and principles which are necessary to the enforcement of Refugee Rights in specific cases. When this set of rules and principles complies with the democratic standards of the Due Process of Law, historical tendencies of exploitation and political manipulation of the Refuge Process can be limited and the humanitarian purposes of this branch of Human Rights can be achieved with greater transparency. When the Due Process of Law for Refuge is followed, it also allows for the refuge seeker to be treated as a legal subject, rather than an object, in the process. As the Geneva Convention, in 1951, did not establish procedural norms on the matter of the Refugee Status, each signatory country must create its own legal framework to deal with requests of declaration, extension, loss and termination of said status in their territory. The first Brazilian procedural norm on this topic was created in 1997, by Federal Law No. 9.497. Since then the country has been developing, through the National Committee for Refugees (Comitê Nacional para Refugiados CONARE), regulatory provisions and protocols which have given rise to a procedural standard that remains fragmented and unsafe. The analysis of the national legal framework and the reality observed between 2012 and 2014 reveals a series of issues (which can be specific in some cases and persistent in others) concerning the enforcement of many procedural canons, such as the Principle of Legality, Impersonality, the Independence of the Judiciary, the Contradictory, Full Defense, Publicity, Statement of Reasons, Equality and the Reasonable Duration of the Procedure. These problems present Brazil with a number of challenges, regarding not only legislation, but also structure. These matters mustbe addressed with haste. What motivates such urgency, however, is not the recent increase in immigration, but the fact that the infringements of the Due Process of Law (seen in the Brazilian refuge process) represent, in themselves, violations of Human Rights, which, moreover, compromise the countrys commitment to the international refugee protection.

O processo para o refúgio é o conjunto de regras e princípios necessários à aplicação do Direito dos Refugiados aos casos concretos. Quando este conjunto respeita os padrões democráticos do Devido Processo Legal, as tendências históricas de exploração e manipulação política do instituto de refúgio podem ser limitadas e os objetivos humanitários deste ramo dos Direitos Humanos podem ser alcançados com maior transparência. Quando o Devido Processo Legal para o refúgio é respeitado, também se permite que a pessoa que figura como solicitante de refúgio seja tratada como sujeito de direitos - e não como objeto do processo. Uma vez que a Convenção de Genebra de 1951, sobre o Estatuto dos Refugiados, não estabeleceu normas de processo, cada país signatário necessita criar um regime próprio para processar os pedidos de determinação, extensão, perda e cessação da condição de refugiado em seus territórios. O primeiro regime processual brasileiro foi criado no ano de 1997, pela Lei Federal 9497. Desde então, o país vem desenvolvendo, através do Comitê Nacional para Refugiados (CONARE), regras infra legais e rotinas práticas que têm determinado um padrão processual ainda fragmentado e inseguro. O estudo do aparato normativo nacional e da realidade observada entre 2012 e 2014 revelam a existência de problemas (pontuais ou crônicos) sobre o cumprimento de diversos princípios processuais, tais como a Legalidade, a Impessoalidade e Independência da autoridade julgadora, o Contraditório, a Ampla Defesa, a Publicidade, a Fundamentação, a Igualdade e a Razoável Duração do Processo. Estes problemas impõem desafios variados ao Brasil, tanto em dimensão legislativa quanto estrutural. O enfrentamento destas questões precisa ocorrer com rapidez. O motivo da urgência, porém, não é a nova demanda de imigração observada no país, mas sim o fato de que as violações ao Devido Processo Legal, verificadas no processo para o refúgio brasileiro, representam, em si, violações de Direitos Humanos, que, ademais prejudicam o compromisso do país para com a proteção internacional dos refugiados. / The Refuge Process is a set of rules and principles which are necessary to the enforcement of Refugee Rights in specific cases. When this set of rules and principles complies with the democratic standards of the Due Process of Law, historical tendencies of exploitation and political manipulation of the Refuge Process can be limited and the humanitarian purposes of this branch of Human Rights can be achieved with greater transparency. When the Due Process of Law for Refuge is followed, it also allows for the refuge seeker to be treated as a legal subject, rather than an object, in the process. As the Geneva Convention, in 1951, did not establish procedural norms on the matter of the Refugee Status, each signatory country must create its own legal framework to deal with requests of declaration, extension, loss and termination of said status in their territory. The first Brazilian procedural norm on this topic was created in 1997, by Federal Law No. 9.497. Since then the country has been developing, through the National Committee for Refugees (Comitê Nacional para Refugiados CONARE), regulatory provisions and protocols which have given rise to a procedural standard that remains fragmented and unsafe. The analysis of the national legal framework and the reality observed between 2012 and 2014 reveals a series of issues (which can be specific in some cases and persistent in others) concerning the enforcement of many procedural canons, such as the Principle of Legality, Impersonality, the Independence of the Judiciary, the Contradictory, Full Defense, Publicity, Statement of Reasons, Equality and the Reasonable Duration of the Procedure. These problems present Brazil with a number of challenges, regarding not only legislation, but also structure. These matters mustbe addressed with haste. What motivates such urgency, however, is not the recent increase in immigration, but the fact that the infringements of the Due Process of Law (seen in the Brazilian refuge process) represent, in themselves, violations of Human Rights, which, moreover, compromise the countrys commitment to the international refugee protection.