This thesis examines whether and in what ways 'terrorism' has featured in the UK's interpretation of Article 1F, the 'exclusion clause' of the 1951 Refugee Convention, and how the provision is applied to suspected terrorists in the practice of decision makers. This research draws on a number of sources, including Freedom of Information requests, questionnaires and interviews conducted with immigration judges, the Home Office's exclusion unit and legal practitioners. All reported UK cases concerning Article 1F were analysed, as were the Home Office's asylum guidance documents, primary and secondary UK legislation and international legal sources pertaining to exclusion from refugee status. This research therefore provides an unprecedented and thorough analysis of whether and how terrorism is being employed in the interpretation and application of each of the individual limbs of Article 1F. Although there has been a clear governmental and political drive to ensure that refugee status is not granted to terrorists, this research reveals that the predominant practice of both courts and tribunals in the UK and the Home Office's exclusion unit has not been to focus on whether an individual is a 'terrorist', but instead whether they have committed a serious crime within the meaning of Article 1F. Where the term 'terrorism' has been employed, courts and tribunals have looked to international rather than domestic definitions of the term in order to arrive at an 'autonomous meaning'. While there has been an increase in the application of Article 1F in the UK over the last decade, in practice the use of the provision has remained exceptional and appears to be subject to a fair degree of rigour. Nevertheless, a number of recommendations are made by which the quality of decision making could be improved and a greater degree of fairness added to the exclusion process in the UK.

CHARLES UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES Institute of political sciences LGBTQ issues of the right to asylum and the refugee status Master thesis 2019 Jon Landaluze Aurre Author: Jon Landaluze Aurre Supervisor: JUDr. Milan Lipovsky, Ph.D. Study programme: MAIN Academic Year: 2018/2019 Bibliographic note LANDALUZE, Jon. (2019) LGBTQ issues of the right to asylum and the refugee status. Master thesis. Charles University, Faculty of Social Sciences. Institute of Political Science. Supervisor: JUDr. Milan Lipovsky, Ph.D. Abstract Here we find a thesis on the topic of refugee protection and the specific area of LGBTQ applicants. This is a topic that still nowadays is important to analyze, since the acceptation and evolution of these specific cases is something that evolves throughout the present times. The objective of it is to first define the refugee definition and to see if the definition that is given is actually interpreted in the way that it protects this group of people worldwide. It then goes to analyze the European interpretation of the topic and the issues that usually arise when making decisions about international protection of the applicants, concluding with the problems that actually happen and the possible solutions to avoid them. Keywords Refugees, Asylum, LGBTQ, Persecution, International...

"The plight of refugees is becoming more prevalent in Africa with the intensification of conflicts in most countries in Africa especially the Great Lakes region. This means that there are more people fleeing from the conflicts. How refugees are identified and accorded status is very crucial to the protection of their rights. There have been serious complaints and cries from refugees and human rights organizations on the treatment of refugees by the state in Kenya and the UNHCR in Egypt. This study seeks to discuss the refugee status determination practice in Kenya and Egypt and how it affects the rights of refugees within their jurisdiction. This will give an insight in the protection of refugees’ rights in both countries. There is need to research on the possibility of an effective regime on status determination. Asylum seekers are vulnerable and have continued to suffer for lack of a proper framework to seek protection. The lack of specific refugees policies and laws have also put the refugees at the risk of being mistreated and their rights infringed upon with impunity by security agents and agents who should otherwise protect them. Protection of refugees’ rights involves first of all legal protection, i.e. seeking to ensure that refugees are treated in accordance with internationally accepted standards including protection against refoulement, freedom from discrimination and the enjoyment of economic and social rights. Secondly, it entails action to promote the development of standards for the treatment of refugees through the adoption of appropriate legal provisions in national legislation and efficient and effective practices by the states. ... Chapter one will set out the content of the research, identify the problem and outline the methodology. Chapter two will discuss the international and regional refugees’ standards on status determination. The chapter will also discuss the role of the UNHCR and obligations of host governments in granting refugee status. Chapter three will discuss the case studies. It will compare the refugee status determination regimes in Kenya and Egypt. This chapter will discuss what UNHCR and the government are doing on RSD. It will explore the underlying reasons they are done that way. Chapter four will analyse the extent to which Kenya and Egypt have complied with international and regional refugees’ standards on RSD and the way forward. Chapter five will draw a conclusion and recommendations." -- Chapter 1. / Mini Dissertation (LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa))--University of Pretoria, 2003. / http://www.chr.up.ac.za/academic_pro/llm1/dissertations.html / Centre for Human Rights / LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa)

Actividad formativa equivalente a tesis (AFET) para optar al grado académico de magíster en derecho con mención en derecho público. / Este trabajo examina la valoración que hace la autoridad administrativa del conjunto de los elementos de juicio aportados al procedimiento administrativo de determinación de la condición de refugiado. Constata la configuración de dos momentos valorativos, cada uno a cargo de órganos distintos y sometidos a leyes diversas, y de cómo esa circunstancia no contribuye a disolver la incertidumbre acerca de la condición de refugiado, imponiéndose la búsqueda de una solución. Para asegurar la fiabilidad de esa determinación se propone que en la decisión del hecho los órganos competentes apliquen combinadamente los métodos atomista y holista. / This paper examines the assessment made by the administrative authority of all the elements of judgment contributed to the administrative procedure for the determination of refugee status. It notes the configuration of two evaluative moments, each one in charge of different bodies and subject to different laws, and of how that circumstance does not contribute to dissolve the uncertainty about refugee status, imposing the search for a solution. In order to assure the reliability of this determination, it is proposed that in the decision of the fact the competent bodies apply in addition the atomistic and holistic methods.

This thesis addresses the topic of mass influx of refugees and its possible solutions. It examines the concept of prima facie refugee status determination in group situations, which is plentifully used in states of the economic South as a solution to mass influx of refugees. Despite its ample use, it is not entirely clear what can be understood by it. A better way to tackle mass influxes of refugees is sought here in response to the European migration "crisis" which has shed light on the unpreparedness of the Common European Asylum System for a large scale influx. The prima facie refugee status determination is put here as an opposite to individualized refugee status determination, which is assumed by the western doctrine and practice to be the only possible way of determining refugee status under the 1951 Convention. Even though individualized refugee status determination may be an appropriate tool in times of relatively low number of refugees, as it has been the case for a long time at the European continent, it may be different in situations of mass influx of refugees. Such individualized refugee status determination is very costly and lengthy procedure and as such not very suitable for situation of mass influx of refugees. To answer the question of whether the prima facie refugee status...

in English - The Status of Child Soldiers in International Refugee Law The main aim of this thesis is to investigate to what extent the international refugee law protects children who flee from armed forces recruitment. The chosen problem was solved using the question whether it is possible to grant a refugee status according to the 1951 Refugee Convention, or a status complementing the refugee status according to regional regulatory instruments, to a child who flees from armed forces recruitment. The conception of the refugee status was divided into constituent elements and it was considered whether children who flee from recruitment into armed forces and former child soldiers comply with attributes of these elements. The first examined element is the inclusion clause. In this part, the thesis examined the following questions: Is recruitment of children into armed forces and their use in hostilities a form of persecution? Can such children be considered a particular social group? Can rejection of participation in armed forces by such children be considered holding a political opinion? Is there a causal link between persecution and membership to a particular social group or between persecution and holding a political opinion in the context of children who flee from recruitment into armed forces?...

Depuis quelques années, les États adoptent des politiques qui cherchent à séparer l’admission des réfugiés sur le territoire d’un État et l’attribution du statut de réfugié. En Europe, ce genre de politique est désigné par le terme externalisation. Cependant, par souci d’objectivité, nous avons choisi d’employer le terme extraterritorial. En effet, l’expression externalisation comporte en elle-même la critique de son objet. En Europe, aucune politique qui dissocie l’attribution du statut de réfugié et l’entrée sur le territoire d’un État n’a été mise en place, toutefois, cette idée fait partie des réflexions institutionnelles et elle reste un objectif de l’agenda européen. Ce mémoire cherche donc à analyser la proposition de traitement extraterritorial des demandes de statut de réfugié, faite en Europe, au regard de l’obligation la plus contraignante au sein du droit international des réfugiés : le principe de non refoulement. En ce sens, il sera nécessaire d'analyser l'étendue ainsi que les limites du principe de non refoulement, au regard de l’interprétation et de la mise en œuvre qui en sont faites. Ce mémoire démontrera que derrière une vive polémique sur la question, la proposition de traitement extraterritorial des demandes de statut de réfugié est compatible avec l’article 33 alinéa 1 de la Convention relative au statut des réfugiés. / For the past few years, States have been adopting policies aimed at separating the admission of refugees on a territory from the determination of their refugee status. In Europe, this kind of political choice is usually designated by the term externalization. However, we have used the term extraterritorial to qualify this process, as we felt that externalization lacked objectivity. Indeed, externalization contains an implicit criticism of our research object. In Europe, these extraterritorial policies have not yet attained a legal status. Indeed, no legal rules are being currently applied which provide for the dissociation between admission and determination. Nevertheless, this idea is part of ongoing reflections and it remains an objective of the European agenda. This thesis analyzes the legality of the European proposal related to an extraterritorial treatment of the status of refugee, in light of the theoretical principle of non-refoulement which is at the heart of the protection granted to refugees by international refugee law. To this end, it is necessary to analyze the scope and the legal limits of the non-refoulement principle in regards to its interpretation and implementation. Although there exists a lively debate on this issue, extraterritorial treatment of refugee claims does not, at least prima facie, violate the principle of non-refoulement enshrined in s. 33, para. 1 of the Convention relating to refugee status.

Depuis quelques années, les États adoptent des politiques qui cherchent à séparer l’admission des réfugiés sur le territoire d’un État et l’attribution du statut de réfugié. En Europe, ce genre de politique est désigné par le terme externalisation. Cependant, par souci d’objectivité, nous avons choisi d’employer le terme extraterritorial. En effet, l’expression externalisation comporte en elle-même la critique de son objet. En Europe, aucune politique qui dissocie l’attribution du statut de réfugié et l’entrée sur le territoire d’un État n’a été mise en place, toutefois, cette idée fait partie des réflexions institutionnelles et elle reste un objectif de l’agenda européen. Ce mémoire cherche donc à analyser la proposition de traitement extraterritorial des demandes de statut de réfugié, faite en Europe, au regard de l’obligation la plus contraignante au sein du droit international des réfugiés : le principe de non refoulement. En ce sens, il sera nécessaire d'analyser l'étendue ainsi que les limites du principe de non refoulement, au regard de l’interprétation et de la mise en œuvre qui en sont faites. Ce mémoire démontrera que derrière une vive polémique sur la question, la proposition de traitement extraterritorial des demandes de statut de réfugié est compatible avec l’article 33 alinéa 1 de la Convention relative au statut des réfugiés. / For the past few years, States have been adopting policies aimed at separating the admission of refugees on a territory from the determination of their refugee status. In Europe, this kind of political choice is usually designated by the term externalization. However, we have used the term extraterritorial to qualify this process, as we felt that externalization lacked objectivity. Indeed, externalization contains an implicit criticism of our research object. In Europe, these extraterritorial policies have not yet attained a legal status. Indeed, no legal rules are being currently applied which provide for the dissociation between admission and determination. Nevertheless, this idea is part of ongoing reflections and it remains an objective of the European agenda. This thesis analyzes the legality of the European proposal related to an extraterritorial treatment of the status of refugee, in light of the theoretical principle of non-refoulement which is at the heart of the protection granted to refugees by international refugee law. To this end, it is necessary to analyze the scope and the legal limits of the non-refoulement principle in regards to its interpretation and implementation. Although there exists a lively debate on this issue, extraterritorial treatment of refugee claims does not, at least prima facie, violate the principle of non-refoulement enshrined in s. 33, para. 1 of the Convention relating to refugee status.

Šio darbo tikslas yra ištirti ES prieglobsčio politikos įgyvendinimą Lietuvoje instituciniu ir teisiniu aspektais. Darbe yra tiriama ES prieglobsčio politikos teisinė bazė, išskiriant pagrindinius šią politiką reglamentuojančius teisės aktus ir įgyvendinančias institucijas. Taip pat yra atliekama dabartinės Lietuvos prieglobsčio politikos situacijos analizė bei nagrinėjama kaip Lietuvoje yra harmonizuojami be įgyvendinami ES prieglobsčio politikos teisės aktai. Empiriniu tyrimu buvo siekiama įvertinti ES prieglobsčio politikos įgyvendinimo Lietuvoje institucinės ir teisinės bazės probleminius aspektus. Šiuo metu yra įgyvendinamas antrasis BEPS kūrimo etapas, kuriuo yra numatyta iki 2015 m. liepos mėn. galutinai suvienodinti ES valstybių narių prieglobsčio sistemas. Lietuvos narystė ES nebuvo reikšmingas kriterijus pabėgėlių srautų padidėjimui šalyje, Lietuva tapo patraukli kaip tranzito valstybė. Didžioji dalis ES prieglobsčio direktyvų nuostatų atsispindi UTPĮ, tačiau jų yra ir poįstatyminiuose teisės aktuose. Dalies ES prieglobsčio direktyvų nuostatos yra perkeltos teisingai, tačiau kai kuriose srityse direktyvos turėjo neigiamą poveikį, ypač dėl papildomų pabėgėlio statuso netaikymo ir pasibaigimo nuostatų. Vertinant iš kitos pusės ES prieglobsčio direktyvų įgyvendinimas turėjo teigiamą poveikį, kaip, pavyzdžiui, nemokamos teisinės pagalbos prieglobsčio prašytojams įteisinimas, įvestos platesnės galimybės pasinaudoti švietimo ir sveikatos apsaugos sistema ir pan... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / The aim of this paper is to analyse the implementation of EU asylum policy in Lithuania by institutional and legal aspects. This paper analyses the legal basis of EU asylum policy, marking the main laws which regulate EU asylum policy and its implementing institutions. It also examines the current situation of Lithuanian asylum policy and how the legal basis of EU asylum policy is harmonized and implemented in Lithuanian system. The empirical research was aimed at evaluating the problemical aspects of institutional and legal basis in the implementation of EU asylum policy in Lithuania. At the moment the second stage of common EU asylum policy system is being exercised. In conformity with it, the main asylum system procedures in EU member states should be equalized by July 2015. Lithuania‘s EU memebership was not a significant criterion for the increase of refugees‘ flows in the country but Lithuania has become attractive as a transit country. The main part of the provisions of EU asylum directives reflect in the law on the legal status of foreigners, though they also reflect in secondary legislation acts. The most of provisions are transfered correctly, however in some areas directives has had a negative impact, especially concerning the provisions about additional refugee status. On the other hand, the implementation of EU asylum directives has provided a positive effect in such areas as the validation of free legal assistance to asylum seekers, introducing wider... [to full text]

<p>The purpose of this study has been to investigate the prospects for identifying and prosecuting individuals suspected of war crimes, within the process of exclusion from refugee status under article 1F(a) of the 1951 Refugee Convention, and using subsequent mechanisms for extradition or prosecution in international criminal law. A number of principles within human rights law and public international law have been advocated by the UNCHR and several human rights NGOs as necessary for a thorough application of the exclusion clauses; one that takes individual responsibility into account and upholds the aims and purposes of the exclusion clauses. There is a discussion as to whether specialised or accelerated exclusion procedures are justified for reasons of security and efficiency, or if they put the rights of the individual at risk and limit the opportunities for gathering information to support investigation and prosecution of the crime in question. Apart from the instruments of asylum law and procedure that have emerged within the EU harmonisation process, there are no general, binding rules on the procedural aspects of the exclusion clauses. One principle that regulates the consequences for the individual of exclusion from refugee status and decisions on extradition is, however, the principle of <em>non-refoulement</em>. Although partly contested in state practice, there is widespread consensus in international jurisprudence and doctrine that the principle, following its status as a <em>jus cogens</em> rule, prohibits every state from returning any individual to a territory where he or she may face torture or other cruel and inhuman treatment or punishment, irrespective of any security risks that the individual may pose to the custodial state.</p><p>Extradition or prosecution of individuals suspected of crimes under article 1F(a), based on universal jurisdiction and the principle of <em>aut dedere aut judicare</em>, has gained increased support from international conventions, such as the 1948 Convention on Genocide and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The principles are widely upheld by human rights NGOs, and tendencies in practice and policy among the member states of the EU and the parties to the Rome Statute point towards the development of a customary rule of universal jurisdiction among these states. Continuing resistance to the Rome Statute and to universal jurisdiction among influential states such as the USA, Russia, China and India nevertheless serves to exclude these states from being bound by such an emerging customary rule of universal jurisdiction. There are compelling arguments as to why breaches of <em>jus cogens</em>-rules should include or give rise to <em>erga omnes</em> rights or obligations for all states to exercise universal jurisdiction over such breaches. Without the support of major states it is, however, difficult to establish the existence of the general state acceptance of universal jurisdiction as is required for the principle to attain <em>jus cogens</em>-status and become universally applicable, regardless of state consent. Future prospects for adequate and efficient identification and prosecution of suspected war criminals depend on the correct and thorough application of the exclusion clauses, in combination with the development of existing rules of universal jurisdiction, and not least on the willingness and ability of states to overcome the political, economic and institutional obstacles that presently may prevent many states from extraditing or prosecuting individuals who fall within the scope of article 1F(a) of the exclusion clauses.</p>