UPHOLDING THE INTEGRITY OF THE INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE REGIME: CONSISTENCY IN STATE PRACTICE REGARDING THE EXCLUSION OF WAR CRIMINALS FROM REFUGEE STATUS: A DEEP ASSESSMENT INTO ARTICLE 1(F)(a) OF THE 1951 REFUGEE CONVENTION
Author
Raithatha, Kush Ramniklal
Term
4. term
Education
Publication year
2021
Submitted on
2021-05-21
Pages
97
Abstract
This thesis examines how and why alleged war criminals may be excluded from refugee status under Article 1(F)(a) of the 1951 Refugee Convention, with the aim of safeguarding the integrity of the international refugee regime. Anchored in the post–Second World War evolution from UNRRA and the IRO to the creation of UNHCR and the 1951 Convention, it traces the historical development of the exclusion clauses and their intersection with international criminal law and the laws of war. The study adopts a doctrinal legal approach: interpreting Article 1(F)(a) through the Vienna Convention’s rules of treaty interpretation, analyzing the standard of proof for exclusion, distinguishing war crimes from ordinary national crimes, reviewing relevant international instruments and examples of war crimes, and assessing proportionality considerations. A central focus is the consistency of state practice, particularly in the Global South, including legislation and practice in Sub-Saharan Africa. Drawing on case law from national and international tribunals and treaties, the thesis advances the argument that exclusion, as an exceptional measure, should be applied in a restrictive, just, and consistent manner that protects those in need while respecting states’ immigration authority. It seeks to revive scholarly attention to the exclusion of alleged war criminals and to pave the way for a more detailed account of Global South state practice; no empirical findings are reported in this excerpt. Two annexes list acts that may constitute war crimes in international and non-international armed conflicts.
Dette speciale undersøger, hvordan og hvorfor formodede krigsforbrydere kan udelukkes fra flygtningestatus efter artikel 1(F)(a) i Flygtningekonventionen af 1951, for at bevare den internationale flygtningeordnings integritet. Med udgangspunkt i efterkrigstidens institutioner (UNRRA, IRO) og tilblivelsen af UNHCR og 1951-konventionen kortlægger arbejdet den historiske udvikling af udelukkelsesklausulerne og deres samspil med international strafferet og krigens love. Specialet anvender en doktrinær juridisk metode: fortolkning af artikel 1(F)(a) gennem Wienerkonventionens traktatfortolkningsprincipper, analyse af beviskravet for udelukkelse, sondring mellem krigsforbrydelser og nationale forbrydelser, gennemgang af relevante internationale instrumenter og eksempler på krigsforbrydelser, samt proportionalitetshensyn. Et centralt fokus er konsistensen i statspraksis med særlig vægt på det Globale Syd, herunder lovgivning og praksis i lande i det syd for Sahara. Argumentet, som fremføres på baggrund af retspraksis fra nationale og internationale domstole og traktater, er at udelukkelse som en undtagelse skal anvendes restriktivt, retfærdigt og konsekvent, så både beskyttelsen af personer med behov og staters immigrationsmyndighed respekteres. Specialet søger at genoplive forskningsinteressen for udelukkelse af formodede krigsforbrydere og bane vej for en mere detaljeret forståelse af statspraksis i det Globale Syd; der præsenteres ikke empiriske resultater i dette uddrag. To bilag oplister handlinger, der kan kvalificeres som krigsforbrydelser i internationale og ikke-internationale væbnede konflikter.
[This apstract has been generated with the help of AI directly from the project full text]