The principle of non-refoulement: the legitimacy of refugee policies in Western countries

Authors

  • Jinhao Liu

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61173/sp8dkq68

Keywords:

Refugees, non-refoulement principle, Border control, Safe third countries

Abstract

In recent years, affected by the influx of refugees, some Western countries have suffered blows in the security, economic, and other fields and are faced with the dilemma of safeguarding national interests and fulfilling the principle of non-refoulement under international law. Western countries are broadly adopting the following three policies to restrict and control the entry of refugees into their territories: the policy of extraterritorial refoulement, the policy of interception at sea, and the policy of safe third countries. They are adopting several flexible measures to circumvent the application of the principle of non-refoulement, believing that they are not violating the principle of non-refoulement. However, the United Nations and human rights organizations are still skeptical of the abovementioned policies. This thesis will mainly discuss the legality of these behaviors and make some suggestions based on the full understanding and respect of national sovereignty and territorial integrity, which can deal with the refugee problem more humanely and provide feasible ideas for solving the refugee problem.

References

British Alien Act, Chapter 13,1905, available at: http://www. uniset.ca/naty/aliensact1905,accessed March 4, 2020. Jun Hua Xu, “On the Application of the Principle of Non- Referral in Maritime Interception,” in Politics and Law Forum,

No. 3, 2017, p. 49. Miranda B, Silva Hernández A. Overwhelmed management: asylum applications in the United States and waiting mechanisms

beyond its borders[J]. Migraciones internacionales, 2022, 13. Riva S. Across the border and into the cold: Hieleras and the punishment of asylum-seeking Central American women in the

United States[J]. Citizenship studies, 2017, 21(3): 309-326. Ulusoy O, Battjes H. Situation of readmitted migrants and refugees from Greece to Turkey under the EU-Turkey

statement[J]. VU Amsterdam Migration Law Series, 2017, 15. Adar S, Angenendt S, Asseburg M, et al. The refugee drama in Syria, Turkey, and Greece: why a comprehensive approach is needed[J]. 2020. The 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (Geneva Convention on Refugees) places an explicit ban on the expulsion and return of refugees to countries where their lives or freedom can be considered threatened. Radjenovic A. Reform of the Dublin system[J]. European

Parliamentary Research Service’, PE, 2019, 586. Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person (recast), 26 June 2013, p.5. Kasparek B. Complementing Schengen: The Dublin system and the European border and migration regime[M]//Migration policy and practice: Interventions and solutions. New York: Palgrave

Macmillan US, 2016: 59-78. Bačić N. Asylum policy in Europe-the competences of the European Union and inefficiency of the Dublin system[J].

Croatian yearbook of European law & policy, 2012, 8(1): 41-76. Moore A F. Unsafe in America: a review of the US-Canada safe

third country agreement[J]. Santa Clara L. Rev., 2007, 47: 201. Gil-Bazo M T. The safe third country concept in international agreements on refugee protection assessing state practice[J].

Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, 2015, 33(1): 42-77. Moreno-Lax V. The legality of the “safe third country” notion contested: insights from the law of treaties[J]. Migration & Refugee Protection in the 21st Century: Legal Aspects, 2015: 665-721.

Downloads

Published

2024-04-16