This work analyses the legal challenges posed by contemporary practices of extraterritorial immigration control: visas, pre-embarkation checks and the interception of irregular migrants. It examines the international law framework, and provides case-studies from Europe, Australia and the United States.

In times of the proclaimed 'refugee crisis' this book aims to shed light on human rights and refugee law responsibilities of EU member states and other relevant actors when engaging in border control measures beyond the territory of the EU.

The Routledge Handbook on Extraterritorial Human Rights Obligations brings international scholarship on transnational human rights obligations into a comprehensive and wide-ranging volume. Each chapter combines a thorough analysis of a particular issue area and provides a forward-looking perspective of how extraterritorial human rights obligations (ETOs) might come to be more fully recognized, outlining shortcomings but also best state practices. It builds insights gained from state practice to identify gaps in the literature and points to future avenues of inquiry. The Handbook is organized into seven thematic parts: conceptualization and theoretical foundations; enforcement; migration and refugee protection; financial assistance and sanctions; finance, investment and trade; peace and security; and environment. Chapters summarize the cutting edge of current knowledge on key topics as leading experts critically reflect on ETOs, and, where appropriate, engage with the Maastricht Principles to critically evaluate their value 10 years after their adoption. The Routledge Handbook on Extraterritorial Human Rights Obligations is an authoritative and essential reference text for scholars and students of human rights and human rights law, and more broadly, of international law and international relations as well as to those working in international economic law, development studies, peace and conflict studies, environmental law and migration. The Open Access version of this book, available at www.taylorfrancis.com, has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 license

The European migration and asylum policy has been shaped by efforts to establish an efficient migration management system in order to protect the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice from the new security threat of "irregular migration". The extraterritorialisation of immigration control measures beyond territorial borders form part of this strategy and the EU-Turkey deal and the call for an increased cooperation with Northern Africa are but two examples. Pre-border control mechanisms composed of administrative, legislative and operational measures, are largely perceived as effective means to channel flows of migrants avoiding logistical and financial burdens for Member States. However, from a legal perspective, this shift to extraterritorial activities raises important questions related to the creation of zones in which responsibilities for legal norms related to the protection of refugees may be circumvented by States or any other actors involved in migration control activities. 'Protecting the Rights of Refugees Beyond European Borders' tries to reconcile the motives behind extraterritorialisation strategies with actual legal consequences. It carefully examines the legal frameworks that govern situations in which a migrant meets an authority in the context of extraterritorial immigration control measures.

Increasingly, European and other Western states have sought to control the movement of refugees outside their borders. To do this, states have adopted a variety of measures - including carrier sanctions, interception of migrants at sea, posting of immigration officers in foreign countries and external processing of asylum-seekers. This book focuses on the legal implications of external mechanisms of migration control for the protection of refugees and irregular migrants. The book explores how refugee and human rights law has responded to the new measures adopted by states, and how states have sought cooperation with other actors in the context of migration control. The book defends the thesis that when European states attempt to control the movement of migrants outside their territories, they remain responsible under international law for protecting the rights of refugees as well as their general human rights. It also identifies how EU law governs and constrains the various types of pre-border migration enforcement employed by EU Member States, and examines how unfolding practices of external migration control conform with international law. This is a work which will be essential reading for scholars and practitioners of asylum and refugee law throughout Europe and the wider world. The book received 'The Max van der Stoel Human Rights Award 2011' (first prize category dissertations); and the 'Erasmianum Study Prize 2011'.

Is there still a right to seek asylum in a globalised world? Migration control has increasingly moved to the high seas or the territory of transit and origin countries, and is now commonly outsourced to private actors. Under threat of financial penalties airlines today reject any passenger not in possession of a valid visa, and private contractors are used to run detention centres and man border crossings. In this volume Thomas Gammeltoft-Hansen examines the impact of these new practices for refugees' access to asylum. A systematic analysis is provided of the reach and limits of international refugee law when migration control is carried out extraterritorially or by non-state actors. State practice from around the globe and case law from all the major human rights institutions is discussed. The arguments are further linked to wider debates in human rights, general international law and political science.

How is access to asylum and other forms of extraterritorial protection regulated in the European Union? Is the EU acquis in these areas in conformity with international law? Which tools does international law offer to solve collisions between both? And, finally, is law capable of bridging the foundational oppositions embedded in migration and asylum issues? This work combines the potential of legal formalism with an analytical framework drawing on political theory. It analyses the argumentative strategies used by international lawyers, and developed them further, exploiting the interpretative methodology of international law as well as elaborate discrimination arguments. The author concludes that deflecting protection seekers by means of visa requirements may constitute a violation of the European Convention of Human Rights, and that the prescriptions of international law oblige Member States to apply the Dublin Convention and the Spanish Protocol in a manner emptying it of its main control functions. The author also shows that burden-sharing remains the pivotal element in the normative dynamics behind the EU acquis, and explains why the European Court of Human Rights must be regarded as the only transnational forum for the legitimate negotiation of asylum in Europe.