Advanced

Article 31

Noll, Gregor LU (2011) In The 1951 convention relating to the status of refugees and ite 1967 protocol p.1243-1276
Abstract
Article 31 remains a vital provision of the 1951 Convention as much as an uneasy compromise. It is a rather complex provision affecting a much broader range of issues than the criminalization of immigration infractions and detention. Due to the difference between contemporary migratory realities and those of the drafting period, it is not straightforwardly applied. Resort to the travaux préparatoires in defiance of the interpretation norms of the VCLT amplifies them acutely. There should be no mistake about the fatal consequences of an overly narrow construction; it risks exacerbating contemporary obstacles to refugees’ access to territory, procedure, and protection.

Even with the most meticulous interpretation efforts, there are... (More)
Article 31 remains a vital provision of the 1951 Convention as much as an uneasy compromise. It is a rather complex provision affecting a much broader range of issues than the criminalization of immigration infractions and detention. Due to the difference between contemporary migratory realities and those of the drafting period, it is not straightforwardly applied. Resort to the travaux préparatoires in defiance of the interpretation norms of the VCLT amplifies them acutely. There should be no mistake about the fatal consequences of an overly narrow construction; it risks exacerbating contemporary obstacles to refugees’ access to territory, procedure, and protection.

Even with the most meticulous interpretation efforts, there are some issues which Art. 31 is unable to address fully. How are lawyers to deal with the cumulative deterrent effect of measures which are not penalties in the technical sense? What should be done with refugees recognized as such, yet denied authorization to remain in the territorial State? How should the suffering of those lawfully detained be alleviated? These and other questions may to some extent find answers in human rights law or domestic law. There is a residual, though, to which the current State of the law outrageously fails to attend.
(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding
publication status
published
subject
keywords
mänskliga rättigheter, human rights, folkrätt, public international law
in
The 1951 convention relating to the status of refugees and ite 1967 protocol
editor
Zimmermann, Andreas; Dörschner, Jonas and Machts, Felix
pages
1243 - 1276
publisher
Oxford University Press
ISBN
978-0-19-954251-2
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
b72b5b40-c2e6-4be0-ae23-4f6810a946d7 (old id 1545481)
date added to LUP
2010-02-17 16:51:15
date last changed
2016-06-07 14:15:55
@misc{b72b5b40-c2e6-4be0-ae23-4f6810a946d7,
  abstract     = {Article 31 remains a vital provision of the 1951 Convention as much as an uneasy compromise. It is a rather complex provision affecting a much broader range of issues than the criminalization of immigration infractions and detention. Due to the difference between contemporary migratory realities and those of the drafting period, it is not straightforwardly applied. Resort to the travaux préparatoires in defiance of the interpretation norms of the VCLT amplifies them acutely. There should be no mistake about the fatal consequences of an overly narrow construction; it risks exacerbating contemporary obstacles to refugees’ access to territory, procedure, and protection.<br/><br/>Even with the most meticulous interpretation efforts, there are some issues which Art. 31 is unable to address fully. How are lawyers to deal with the cumulative deterrent effect of measures which are not penalties in the technical sense? What should be done with refugees recognized as such, yet denied authorization to remain in the territorial State? How should the suffering of those lawfully detained be alleviated? These and other questions may to some extent find answers in human rights law or domestic law. There is a residual, though, to which the current State of the law outrageously fails to attend.<br/>},
  author       = {Noll, Gregor},
  editor       = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Dörschner, Jonas and Machts, Felix},
  isbn         = {978-0-19-954251-2},
  keyword      = {mänskliga rättigheter,human rights,folkrätt,public international law},
  language     = {eng},
  pages        = {1243--1276},
  publisher    = {ARRAY(0xb664b20)},
  series       = {The 1951 convention relating to the status of refugees and ite 1967 protocol},
  title        = {Article 31},
  year         = {2011},
}