The Evolving Definition of the Refugee in Contemporary International Law

W. T. Worster
{"title":"The Evolving Definition of the Refugee in Contemporary International Law","authors":"W. T. Worster","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1736547","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many scholars of international refugee law assert that there is no definition of refugee under international law except that given in the Refugee Convention. This assertion, however, overlooks the dynamic way that the Refugee Convention is interpreted and is usually made without a detailed analysis of customary international law. This article attempts to address this shortcoming in the literature by examining conventional and customary international law contributing to the contemporary definition of refugee. Furthermore, it will attempt to do this is an even-handed manner, concluding that the definition has expanded in favor of claimants in some aspects, but, actually, contracted against the favor of claimants in others. First, the article will examine the definition of refugee under the Refugee Convention, especially the evolving technique for interpreting the Convention, to determine whether the definition has outgrown its conventional shell. Second, the article will undertake a comprehensive analysis of state practice and opinio juris on this question, examining the most up-to-date sources. In particular, it will reflect on the role of specially interested or specially affected states in the formation of customary international law and the growth of “subsidiary” protection. Also the article will consider the contribution of the practice and opinio juris of international organizations in the frame of the contemporary international law’s understanding of the contribution international organizations can make. Lastly, the article will look at the opposite side of the coin: the ways in which customary international law may have narrowed the definition beyond the terms of the Refugee Convention. It will conclude by proposing the new definition of a refugee under conventional and customary international law based on the findings.","PeriodicalId":325917,"journal":{"name":"Berkeley Journal of International Law","volume":"88 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"21","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Berkeley Journal of International Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1736547","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

Abstract

Many scholars of international refugee law assert that there is no definition of refugee under international law except that given in the Refugee Convention. This assertion, however, overlooks the dynamic way that the Refugee Convention is interpreted and is usually made without a detailed analysis of customary international law. This article attempts to address this shortcoming in the literature by examining conventional and customary international law contributing to the contemporary definition of refugee. Furthermore, it will attempt to do this is an even-handed manner, concluding that the definition has expanded in favor of claimants in some aspects, but, actually, contracted against the favor of claimants in others. First, the article will examine the definition of refugee under the Refugee Convention, especially the evolving technique for interpreting the Convention, to determine whether the definition has outgrown its conventional shell. Second, the article will undertake a comprehensive analysis of state practice and opinio juris on this question, examining the most up-to-date sources. In particular, it will reflect on the role of specially interested or specially affected states in the formation of customary international law and the growth of “subsidiary” protection. Also the article will consider the contribution of the practice and opinio juris of international organizations in the frame of the contemporary international law’s understanding of the contribution international organizations can make. Lastly, the article will look at the opposite side of the coin: the ways in which customary international law may have narrowed the definition beyond the terms of the Refugee Convention. It will conclude by proposing the new definition of a refugee under conventional and customary international law based on the findings.
当代国际法中难民定义的演变
许多国际难民法学者认为,除了《难民公约》中给出的定义外,国际法中没有关于难民的定义。然而,这种说法忽略了解释《难民公约》的动态方式,而且通常在没有详细分析习惯国际法的情况下作出。本文试图通过审查有助于当代难民定义的常规和习惯国际法来解决文献中的这一缺陷。此外,它将试图以一种不偏不倚的方式做到这一点,得出结论认为,该定义在某些方面扩大了有利于索赔人,但实际上在其他方面缩小了不利于索赔人。首先,本文将审查《难民公约》下的难民定义,特别是解释《公约》的不断演变的技术,以确定该定义是否已经超出其传统的外壳。其次,本文将对这一问题的国家实践和法律意见进行全面分析,考察最新的资料来源。特别是,它将反映特别感兴趣或特别受影响的国家在习惯国际法的形成和“附属”保护的增长中的作用。本文还将在当代国际法对国际组织所能作出的贡献的理解的框架内,考虑国际组织的实践和法律意见的贡献。最后,本文将探讨硬币的反面:习惯国际法可能将定义缩小到《难民公约》规定之外的方式。最后,它将根据调查结果提出根据常规国际法和习惯国际法对难民的新定义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信