A Centrepiece of International Refugee Law and Human Being

A Centrepiece of International Refugee Law and Human Presented by: Dr. Béres Date: 19 October 2023 Concluding Remarks - No Contracting State shall expel or return ("refueler") a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. Non-Refoulement vs. Asylum - Non-refoulement: a negative obligation of States - Asylum: a positive obligation of States - Art. 14 of the UDHR: Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution. - This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from nonpolitical crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations. Non-Refoulement under the Refugee Convention Relatively broad scope, but not an absolute one! - Application: • Material scope? • Personal scope? • Territorial scope? Art. 33(2) of the Refugee Convention - The benefit of the present provision may not, however, be claimed by a refugee whom there are reasonable grounds for regarding as a danger to the security of the country in which he is, or who, having been convicted by a final judgment of a particularly serious crime, constitutes a danger to the community of that country. Non-Refoulement under International Human Rights Law - Art. 3 of the 1984 UN Convention against Torture - Art. 16 of the 2006 UN International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance - Art. 3(2) of the 1957 European Convention on Extradition - Art. 22(8) of the 1969 American Convention on Human Rights - Article 4(5) of the 1981 Inter-American Convention on Extradition - Art. 13(4) of the 1985 Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture - Art. 19(2) of the 2000 Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Art. 28 of the 2004 Arab Charter on Human Rights - Para. III (5) of the 1984 Cartagena Declaration of Central America, Mexico and Panama The ECtHR and Non-Refoulement - Soering v the United Kingdom - Vilvarajah and Others v the United Kingdom - Chahal v the United Kingdom - Salah Sheekh v the Netherlands - Saadi v Italy - MSS v Belgium and Greece - Sufi and Elmi v the United Kingdom - Othman (Abu Qatada) v the United Kingdom Universal Monitoring Bodies and Non-Refoulement - Committee of the Rights of the Child - Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women - Inter-American Commission of Human Rights - African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights - Human Rights Committee • Kindler v Canada • General Comment No. 31 Differences and Similarities - The human rights aspect of non-refoulement coincides substantially with its refugee law counterpart - Differences: • Five limitative grounds • 'Outside the country of nationality rule' • Absolute nature under human rights law