The Grey Zone Of Asylum: Balancing Refugee Protection With Exclusion For International Crimes
- IJLLR Journal
- Apr 29
- 2 min read
Nandita Saha, Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad (SLSH), Hyderabad, India
ABSTRACT
In this research paper, the interaction between international criminal law and refugee law is reviewed with special focus on how “Article 1F of the 1951 Refugee Convention” works. Although the law on refugees aims at affording protection to persons fleeing persecution on the basis of race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership of a specific social group, Article 1F places a major constraint by denying protection to persons who have committed serious international offences like war crimes, crimes against humanity or orchestrated some heinous non-political crimes.
The paper examines how international criminal law principles affect the way asylum is decided and how states decide whether to give asylum seekers protection or not because they were involved in serious criminal activities. It also examines the legal and practical issues that arise before refugee authorities, such as the challenge of obtaining credible evidence, the challenge of discerning the voluntary and involuntary involvement in criminal acts and the fairness in procedures as evaluated in the process of exclusion. Special attention is paid to such complicated cases as child soldiers and people who are forced to engage in military conflict.
Another issue that is addressed in the paper is the role of universal jurisdiction and international cooperation in holding people accountable, given that the non-refoulement principle cannot safely ensure that the excluded individuals are safely returned to their home countries. The paper finds that there should be a fair balance between safeguarding the real refugees and avoiding abuse of the refugee protection system by perpetrators of heinous international crimes.
Keywords: “Refugee law, International Criminal law, War crimes, Crimes Against Humanity, Genocide”.
