Refugees Part 8

Victims of Terror Stopped at the Gate to Safety: The Impact of the “Material Support to Terrorism”Bar on Refugees
Jennie Pasquarella
Human Rights Brief
Volume 13, Issue 3, Spring 2006 p.28

James C. Hathaway, The Rights of Refugees under International Law, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005, ISBN 0521542634 (hardback), 0521834945 (paperback), li + 1184pp
Kay Hailbronner
International Journal of Refugee Law
Volume 18, Number 3-4, September/December 2006 p.722-725

Australia’s obligations under Article 31(1) of the Refugees Convention: What are penalties?
Graham Thom
Alternative Law Journal
Volume 31, Number 3, September 2006

Article 31(1) of the 1951 Refugees Convention underscores the right of individuals to flee persecution and seek protection. In particular it recognises that people will have to flee undocumented and subsequently that they should not be ‘penalised’ for entering a state ‘illegally’. Following the granting of refugee status to 42 individuals from the Papuan province of Indonesia, the Australian government announced, in April 2006, that it would be introducing legislation (the Migration Amendment (Designated Unauthorised Arrivals) Bill 2006) targeting individuals who attempted to reach Australia, undocumented, by boat. The government has specifically stated this legislation would not breach art 31(1). Only by taking a very narrow view of what constitutes a penalty could this conclusion be drawn. This interpretation is clearly at odds with the original intent and purpose of art 31(1), as well as subsequent developments in international interpretation and practice. This article examines what can be considered a penalty under art 31(1) and concludes, when looking at the detention and refugee status determination components of the legislation, that it would breach Australia’s international obligations under art 31(1).

Refugee status in Australia and the cessation provisions: QAAH of 2004 v MIMIA
Emily Hay and Susan Kneebone
Alternative Law Journal
Volume 31, Number 3, September 2006

This article analyses the interaction between Australia’s temporary protection visa regime and the ‘ceased circumstances’ clause in art 1C(5) of the Refugees Convention. Different judges in the Federal Court have drawn conflicting conclusions about how the Migration Act should be interpreted on this issue, and in particular whether an asylum seeker who applies for a permanent protection visa is required to establish the claim for protection de novo. This issue is currently the subject of appeal to the High Court in QAAH of 2004 v MIMIA. The authors urge the High Court to follow an approach to interpretation of the Migration Act which reflects the spirit and purpose of the Refugees Convention.

Women as ‘members of a particular social group’: some flexible judicial developments
Udara Jayasinghe
Alternative Law Journal
Volume 31, Number 2, June 2006

An examination of the interpretation of the definition of a refugee as defined under the Refugees Convention by Australian courts and the extent to which claims relating to sexual and gender based persecution have been considered as falling within that definition.

Denying the Right of Trafficked Minors to be Classed as Convention Refugees: The Canadian Case Example
Grover, Sonja
International Journal of Children’s Rights
Volume 14, Number 3, 2006 p.235-249

James C. Hathway, The Rights of Refugees Under International Law
Cambrian Law Review
Volume 37, 2006

Genuine protection of international refugees: A study of the influence of Western states on the mandate of the UNHCR
Sugiyama Kanako
Asian Yearbook of International Law
Volume 11, 2003-2004 p.89

Author: international

Mentioned in these Entries

Refugees.