Unaccompanied children seeking international protection often find themselves with forms of discretionary, time-limited, or otherwise uncertain legal status in countries outside their own. This may be due to the available options for legal status or to long delays in determination of protection claims, among other factors. While the legal and policy reasons for this vary, of particular concern is the imposition of such uncertainty to discourage children from persisting with protection claims, to deter others from arriving, to delay status resolution until adulthood, or to facilitate removal. Children possessing a legal status that is insecure or uncertain may be described as being in ‘legal limbo’. This article explores this issue and examines the often deleterious consequences of limbo for unaccompanied children. Through an analysis and comparison of Australia and the United Kingdom, it explains ‘legal limbo’ as a function of States’ desire to deter, control, and punish irregular migration. This article argues that an approach based on rights, as opposed to migration control, must guide the availability of secure legal status to unaccompanied children. To this end, it articulates the basis of an obligation to provide these children such status, drawing on their rights under the Convention on the Rights of the Child and on the commentary of treaty bodies. The article concludes by calling for better pathways to permanent stay for unaccompanied children.
{"title":"Unaccompanied Children in Limbo: The Causes and Consequences of Uncertain Legal Status","authors":"Joseph Lelliott","doi":"10.1093/ijrl/eeac024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eeac024","url":null,"abstract":"Unaccompanied children seeking international protection often find themselves with forms of discretionary, time-limited, or otherwise uncertain legal status in countries outside their own. This may be due to the available options for legal status or to long delays in determination of protection claims, among other factors. While the legal and policy reasons for this vary, of particular concern is the imposition of such uncertainty to discourage children from persisting with protection claims, to deter others from arriving, to delay status resolution until adulthood, or to facilitate removal. Children possessing a legal status that is insecure or uncertain may be described as being in ‘legal limbo’. This article explores this issue and examines the often deleterious consequences of limbo for unaccompanied children. Through an analysis and comparison of Australia and the United Kingdom, it explains ‘legal limbo’ as a function of States’ desire to deter, control, and punish irregular migration. This article argues that an approach based on rights, as opposed to migration control, must guide the availability of secure legal status to unaccompanied children. To this end, it articulates the basis of an obligation to provide these children such status, drawing on their rights under the Convention on the Rights of the Child and on the commentary of treaty bodies. The article concludes by calling for better pathways to permanent stay for unaccompanied children.","PeriodicalId":45807,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Refugee Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138510103","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
D. Cantor, N. Tan, M. Gkliati, Elizabeth Mavropoulou, K. Allinson, Sreetapa Chakrabarty, Maja Grundler, Lynn Hillary, Emilie McDonnell, Riona Moodley, Stephen E. Phillips, Annick Pijnenburg, Adel-Naim Reyhani, Sophia Soares, Natasha Yacoub
{"title":"Externalisation, Access to Territorial Asylum, and International Law","authors":"D. Cantor, N. Tan, M. Gkliati, Elizabeth Mavropoulou, K. Allinson, Sreetapa Chakrabarty, Maja Grundler, Lynn Hillary, Emilie McDonnell, Riona Moodley, Stephen E. Phillips, Annick Pijnenburg, Adel-Naim Reyhani, Sophia Soares, Natasha Yacoub","doi":"10.1093/ijrl/eeac023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eeac023","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45807,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Refugee Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43704637","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Refugee Law Initiative Declaration on Externalisation and Asylum","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/ijrl/eeac022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eeac022","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45807,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Refugee Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45638172","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Clamouring for Legal Protection: What the Great Books Teach Us About People Fleeing from Persecution","authors":"S. Behrman","doi":"10.1093/ijrl/eeac031","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eeac031","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45807,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Refugee Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41862758","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The view that subsidiary protection status is a lesser form of protection than refugee status is widespread among European Union (EU) Member States’ asylum authorities and courts. This view is based on the assumption that the protection needs of beneficiaries of subsidiary protection are of shorter duration than those of refugees. Based on this assumption, several EU Member States have curtailed the rights of beneficiaries of subsidiary protection and national courts have upheld these restrictions. This article argues that the assumption of a shorter duration of subsidiary protection, and therefore lesser protection needs, is empirically unfounded and normatively untenable. The assumption is based on the premise that the principal circumstances justifying subsidiary protection – poor security situations or armed conflicts – are temporary in nature. Contrary to tendencies in EU Member States, it is argued that the development of EU asylum law points towards the creation of a uniform status of protection that entails the same rights for refugees and beneficiaries of subsidiary protection. Why, then, does the assumption of the temporary nature of subsidiary protection persist? This article posits that the persistence of the assumption of the temporary nature of subsidiary protection derives from a more profound perception in international legal thought of wartime as exceptional and of short duration.
{"title":"Constructing Equality in EU Asylum Law","authors":"Stefan Salomon","doi":"10.1093/ijrl/eeac012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eeac012","url":null,"abstract":"The view that subsidiary protection status is a lesser form of protection than refugee status is widespread among European Union (EU) Member States’ asylum authorities and courts. This view is based on the assumption that the protection needs of beneficiaries of subsidiary protection are of shorter duration than those of refugees. Based on this assumption, several EU Member States have curtailed the rights of beneficiaries of subsidiary protection and national courts have upheld these restrictions. This article argues that the assumption of a shorter duration of subsidiary protection, and therefore lesser protection needs, is empirically unfounded and normatively untenable. The assumption is based on the premise that the principal circumstances justifying subsidiary protection – poor security situations or armed conflicts – are temporary in nature. Contrary to tendencies in EU Member States, it is argued that the development of EU asylum law points towards the creation of a uniform status of protection that entails the same rights for refugees and beneficiaries of subsidiary protection. Why, then, does the assumption of the temporary nature of subsidiary protection persist? This article posits that the persistence of the assumption of the temporary nature of subsidiary protection derives from a more profound perception in international legal thought of wartime as exceptional and of short duration.","PeriodicalId":45807,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Refugee Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-03-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138510102","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Palestinian Refugees in International Law","authors":"Jasmin Fritzsche-El-Shewy","doi":"10.1093/ijrl/eeac020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eeac020","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45807,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Refugee Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43197604","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Asylum Matters: On the Front Line of Administrative Decision-Making","authors":"D. Ozkul","doi":"10.1093/ijrl/eeac019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eeac019","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45807,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Refugee Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48561431","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：