In recent decades, asylum has emerged as a highly politicized European issue. The term ’asylum seeker’ has suffered a negative perception and has been associated with notions of illegality and criminality in mainstream media. These misconceptions have been supported by politicians as a distraction from economic and political uncertainties with the result that asylum seekers have been deprived of significant rights. This book examines the effect of recent attempts of harmonization on the identification and protection of refugees. It considers the extent of obligations on the state to admit and protect refugees and examines the 1951 Refugee Convention. The motivations of European legislators and legislation concerning asylum procedures and reception conditions are also analysed. Proposals and initiatives for refugee movements and determinations are examined and assessed. The author makes suggestions for better protection of refugees while responding to the security concerns of States, and questions whether European law and policy is doing enough to uphold the fundamental right to seek and enjoy asylum as set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This book takes a bold look at a controversial issue and generates discussion for those involved in the fields of human rights, migrational and transnational studies, law and society and international law.

This book, told by Kenney and his lawyer Philip G. Schrag from Kenney's own perspective, tells of his near-murder, imprisonment, and torture in Kenya; his remarkable escape to the United States; and the obstacle course of ordeals and proceedings he faced as U.S. government agencies sought to deport him to Kenya. As we travel with Kenney through the bureaucracies that regulate immigration, we learn that despite this country's claim to welcome political refugees, our system is too often one of arbitrary justice highly dependent on individual public officials. A story of courage, love, perseverance, and legal strategy, Asylum Denied brings to life the human costs associated with our immigration laws and suggests policy reforms that are desperately needed to help other victims of human rights violations.

Contents.

This book presents the first comprehensive analysis of the human rights of refugees as set by the UN Refugee Convention. In an era where States are increasingly challenging the logic of simply assimilating refugees to their own citizens, questions are now being raised about whether refugees should be allowed to enjoy freedom of movement, to work, to access public welfare programs, or to be reunited with family members. Doubts have been expressed about the propriety of exempting refugees from visa and other immigration rules, and whether there is a duty to admit refugees at all. Hathaway links the standards of the UN Refugee Convention to key norms of international human rights law, and applies his analysis to the world's most difficult protection challenges. This is a critical resource for advocates, judges, and policymakers. It will also be a pioneering scholarly work for graduate students of international and human rights law.

This report calls on Congress to eliminate a technical asylum filing deadline in U.S. law that has barred thousands of legitimate refugees with well-founded fears of persecution from receiving asylum in the United States. The report finds that in the 12 years since the provision took effect, more than 53,400 asylum applications have been rejected, denied or delayed based on the deadline and many of these cases have been pushed unnecessarily into the already overstretched immigration court system. The report uses real case examples and Human Rights First's own refugee representation experience to demonstrate the harmful effects of the provision. That provision has consistently denied asylum to persecuted individuals in ways that are inconsistent with the nation's leadership in protecting victims of political, religious and other forms of persecution and has caused inefficiencies and delays in the asylum system and diverted significant governmental resources.

The international refugee regime is fundamentally broken. Designed in the wake of World War II to provide protection and assistance, the system is unable to address the record numbers of persons displaced by conflict and violence today. States have put up fences and adopted policies to deny, deter, and detain asylum seekers. People recognized as refugees are routinely denied rights guaranteed by international law. The results are dismal for the millions of refugees around the world who are left with slender prospects to rebuild their lives or contribute to host communities. T. Alexander Aleinikoff and Leah Zamore lay bare the underlying global crisis of responsibility. The Arc of Protection adopts a revisionist and critical perspective that examines the original premises of the international refugee regime. Aleinikoff and Zamore identify compromises at the founding of the system that attempted to balance humanitarian ideals and sovereign control of their borders by states. This book offers a way out of the current international morass through refocusing on responsibility-sharing, seeing the humanitarian-development divide in a new light, and putting refugee rights front and center.