Looking to Human Rights and Humanitarian Law to Determine Refugee Status

By Jastram, Kate | Proceedings of the Annual Meeting-American Society of International Law, Annual 2012 | Go to article overview

Looking to Human Rights and Humanitarian Law to Determine Refugee Status


Jastram, Kate, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting-American Society of International Law


The definition of a refugee in international law is famously vague. Two particularly challenging elements are the nature of "persecution" and the scope of involvement in "a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity, as defined in [...] international instruments" (1) such that an otherwise eligible refugee would be excluded from international protection.

Given that asylum adjudicators have had over sixty years of experience in interpreting the 1951 Refugee Convention definition, now governing in the 148 states parties to the Convention and/or its 1967 Protocol, there should be ample opportunities for comparative analysis and judicial conversation. Outside the confines of the Convention itself, the evolution of human rights law since 1951 and the explosive growth in international humanitarian law and international criminal law since the mid-1990s have created a rich environment for situating the refugee definition in a more comprehensive international law context.

Some jurisdictions have interpreted persecution using the language of human rights, while others have developed what might be characterized as a more inward-looking, refugee-specific, sense of the word. Similarly, some jurisdictions have indeed looked to "international instruments" to inform their understanding of exclusion for war crimes and related offenses, while others have based their exclusion analysis on other factors. The United States has taken a different direction, by excluding those who persecute others, with the result that persecution for the purposes of exclusion is a mirror image of persecution as defined for the purposes of inclusion.

My work looks at the use, or lack thereof, of international and comparative law in refugee status determination, and explores the consequences for coherence and consistency in international protection. To the extent that international law is taken into account in refugee status determination, it is generally regarded as a positive development. It may feel intuitively correct that this is so, and some scholars have argued that an external legal framework provides analytical rigor to refugee status determination, but it does not empirically appear to be the case.

My intention is to raise questions about these links. I am a skeptic when it comes to the utility, or even the usage, of international law norms in refugee status determination. I question the significance of finding citations to external sources of law in domestic asylum jurisprudence. To the extent that these citations reveal serious engagement with an analytic framework, and not just boilerplate language, there is a risk of making a refugee definition that is famously vague and difficult to apply consistently even more unwieldy by interpreting it with the often indeterminate norms of international law.

With respect to inclusion, is it helpful to say, as the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has done, that persecution is a serious violation of human rights? (2) Or in the European Union formulation, that it is a severe violation of basic human rights? (3) Human rights law does not recognize a division of basic and non-basic rights. To the contrary, human rights are interrelated, interdependent, and indivisible. With respect to exclusion, is it useful to know that an asylum seeker may be excluded under Article 1F(a) of the Refugee Convention for a war crime as defined under international law? Would that refer to all violations of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, which do not themselves use the terminology of war crimes, or perhaps just grave breaches?

I have looked at the use of human rights law in refugee status determination in the context of claims of persecution based on economic harm, comparing Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, which interpret persecution in human rights terms, with Australia and the United States, which do not. (4) I found that despite de jure differences in the legal standard employed, all five countries applied a de facto similar, strict, standard. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Looking to Human Rights and Humanitarian Law to Determine Refugee Status
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Author Advanced search

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.