International Journal of Refugee Law - current issue

Letter to the Editor

2008-07-09

The UNHCR's Guidelines on Human Trafficking

Piotrowicz, R. — 2008-07-09

In April 2006 the UNHCR published Guidelines on the application of the Refugees Convention to people who have been trafficked. While there is little doubt that trafficked people are subjected to serious violations of their basic rights and interests, the applicability of the Convention is problematic because they do not fit easily into any of the categories recognised by the Convention as giving rise to an entitlement to refugee status. The Guidelines adopt the definition of trafficking contained in the Palermo Protocol to the UN Convention on Transnational Organised Crime 2000. The various elements of the refugee definition are then analysed for their relevance to trafficking. The Guidelines show that the Refugees Convention may be applicable, but in limited cases, particularly through the possibility of victims of trafficking being members of a particular social group.

The Legal Status of Afghan Refugees in Pakistan, a Story of Eight Agreements and Two Suppressed Premises

Zieck, M. — 2008-07-09

Over 25 per cent of present day refugees enjoy asylum in Pakistan, most of them having been there for more than a quarter of a century. Pakistan is not, however, a party to either the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees or the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees. The legal status of the Afghan refugees it hosts is therefore not a foregone conclusion, even though they were considered to be refugees on a prima facie basis during the first two decades of their exile in Pakistan. This article identifies the legal status of the Afghan refugees on the basis of a series of agreements Pakistan concluded with UNHCR and also occasionally with Afghanistan. By virtue of the last of the series of agreements, Afghan refugees can return to Afghanistan under a UNHCR-assisted voluntary repatriation programme until December 2009. In view of the fact that all Afghans have been granted leave to stay in Pakistan until the same date, many are expected to stay in Pakistan rather than return with the assistance of UNHCR. Unlike the preceding agreements, the last one does not address the fate of those who will still be in Pakistan upon completion of the voluntary repatriation programme. It seems therefore imperative to identify the legal status and corresponding entitlements of the Afghan refugees. It is argued that the prima facie recognition of refugee status can be sustained on the basis of the agreements referred to. In addition it is argued that the current ‘profiling’ exercise of UNHCR, even while presumably beneficial for the most vulnerable refugees, is irreconcilable with the status and entitlements of the Afghan refugees, and the same holds true with respect to the usual practice of ‘screening’ those refugees who have opted not to return under a voluntary repatriation programme. An alternative that would be reconcilable is a collective cessation of refugee status if and when the situation in the country of origin so warrants, provided individual refugees may contest this.

Bringing Protection Home: Healing the Schism Between International Obligations and National Safeguards Created by Extraterritorial Processing

Francis, A. — 2008-07-09

Extraterritorial processing schemes are designed to prevent and deter access to statutory and judicial safeguards in the country responsible for the interception and transfer of asylum seekers to a third country. In line with this objective, they incorporate interdiction, transfer and processing practices and standards that are deliberately isolated from the national legal and institutional protections within either the intercepting state or the third country where processing occurs. Australia's recent disbandment of its extraterritorial processing centres in third countries highlights the fact that extraterritorial processing schemes have proven unworkable as a matter of international law, as they negate the national safeguards fundamental to the satisfaction of a state's protection obligations.

Case of Saadi v. Italy

Chamber, G. — 2008-07-09

'States Should Not Impose Penalties on Arriving Asylum-Seekers'

Hammarberg, T. — 2008-07-09

Book Review

Yarwood, L. — 2008-07-09