International Refugee Law in Crisis: Islands, Incarceration and Neo-Refoulement during COVID-19

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-64
Author(s):  
Jessica Hambly

Abstract Attempts by states to deter refugee movement have evolved to a point that routine and systematic breach of non-refoulement and associated human rights frequently constitutes a central pillar in their asylum architectures. The expansion of state policies and practices under which people seeking asylum are prevented from reaching safe places and lodging asylum claims has accelerated during the Covid-19 pandemic. Drawing on examples from Australia and Europe, this article uses neo-refoulement—a concept introduced by geographers Jennifer Hyndman and Alison Mountz—to signal not only the rise in pushbacks at land and sea borders, but also practices that occur well within the boundaries of sovereign territory. These include the use of island incarceration, fast-track border procedures, and denial of legal presence on sovereign territory, even where physical presence is achieved. Such measures have often been introduced under the pretext of responding to situations of ‘mass influx’. And yet, far from providing an adequate response to a so-called ‘refugee crisis’, they serve only to facilitate a greater humanitarian crisis.

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 142-163 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pauline Maillet ◽  
Alison Mountz ◽  
Kira Williams

This article explores and unpacks the entanglements between law and geography that enable and advance the exclusion of non-citizens from entry into sovereign territory. We suggest that states manipulate jurisdiction within and beyond sovereign territory to extend enforcement. This jurisdiction applies primarily to the bodies of migrants themselves as opposed to fixed spaces. Like Elden’s (2009, 2013) imperio, or imperial power, this extension is spatially boundless, limitless in internal checks and administrative. Imperio places migrant bodies into new legal regimes with subjectivities that overlap and override existing protections, such as international refugee law. We develop our argument by considering enforcement practices in three areas: the waiting zone at Paris Charles de Gaulle airport, search and rescue areas on the Central Mediterranean Sea and Australian excision zones.


Author(s):  
Violeta Moreno-Lax

This chapter identifies the content and scope of application of the EU prohibition of refoulement. Following the ‘cumulative standards’ approach, the analysis incorporates developments in international human rights law (IHRL) and international refugee law (IRL). Taking account of the prominent role of the ECHR and the Refugee Convention (CSR51) as sources of Article 19 CFR, these are the two main instruments taken in consideration. The scope of application of Articles 33 CSR51 and 3 ECHR will be identified in turns. Autonomous requirements of EU law will be determined by reference to the asylum acquis as interpreted by the CJEU. The main focus will be on the establishment of the territorial reach of EU non-refoulement. The idea that it may be territorially confined will be rejected. Drawing on the ‘Fransson paradigm’, a ‘functional’ understanding of the ‘implementation of EU law’ standard under Article 51 CFR will be put forward, as the decisive factor to determine applicability of Charter provisions. The implications of non-refoulement for the different measures of extraterritorial control considered in Part I will be delineated at the end.


2020 ◽  
Vol 114 ◽  
pp. 102-113
Author(s):  
Obiora Chinedu Okafor

As Professor Jastram has noted, in and of itself, international refugee law is not explicit enough on the issue at hand. It is not clear enough in protecting persons who come in aid of, or show solidarity to, refugees or asylum-seekers. That does not mean, however, that no protections exist for them at all in other, if you like, sub-bodies of international law. This presentation focuses on the nature and character of those already existing international legal protections, as well as on any protection gaps that remain and recommendations on how they can be closed. It should be noted though that although the bulk of the presentation focuses on the relevant international legal protection arguments, this presentation begins with a short examination of the nature of the acts of criminalization and suppression at issue.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document