Rights of Refugees

Human migration was amplified a lot when contrasting the Stone Age time to today but this was not a result of the socio-economic or political factors that external players could control. Today however the refugee crisis is strongly growing and it has been brought into view as an obstacle that the International Human Rights Law has to assist on solving In such a definition by H. Arendt, she defines refugees as the people who are the ones who simply abandon the country they regarded as being their homeland only due to the fear of persecution. Right after the Second World War, the level of refugees and the concern and feeling of sympathy for these people grew so profound, that World Leaders thought that they should put in place special mechanisms to tackle this problem of refugees and those that had been displaced. Art 3 of the 1951 Geneva Convention and the New York Protocol ensure the states' party to guarantee rights of the refugees by – Hence, the given topic involves examination of this universal peril and to see what rights are allowed to refugees` under International Law, which is an emerging field of law.

A refugee can be viewed same way to an asylum seeker whereby the term refugee is used to be bit too vast than the latter terms and, because of this, any individual who has not been suffered from persecution of the United Nations Refugee Agency is termed as an asylum seeker; however, these both refugees and asylum seekers have rights to apply for refugee in their respective countries according In accordance with provisions of 1951 Convention and 1967 Protocol, a new order is introduced whereby states provide a guarantee of rights prescribed by the 1951 Convention and 1967 Protocol, taking the form of the positive obligation known as the shirt duty which can be best described as an open-ended duty. This makes a state reluctant to ensure such set of rights for It could be stated that such a mission has an indefinite nature and the state must deal with both social and political rights as stipulated by the provisions of 1951 Convention according to the opinion in 2001 by the UK Home Secretary, Jack Straw. The state's obligation is of high degree, as it is stated in Article 33 that the state should not send a refugee back to his country from where he was running from. Henceforth, the state party could not send a refugee back to his country, which used to violate human rights in that nation. On the other hand, Article 33 line of prosecution and the fear of such can disqualify any refugee and this verifies that the term of well found fear of persecution shall be assessed through objective standards and this is whether the fear of persecution is valid or not in the event of such refoulement taking place acting on the nationality of the refugee to ascertain whether the refugee can be b

Nevertheless, one can assert that the influx currently of the refugees into sovereign States' jurisdiction is a strong reason to hesitate on the part of the latter in observance of the rights

Rights of Refugees

under Convention and Protocol by making use of the technical escape route of the ideas of public policy and public order. Will it be allowed if the refugee overstays the country this person came to search for refuge in? If their life would be in danger once they are expelled to the country, they just arrived from, then through the use of clause in the article 1, a state will not impose any delays penalties by default for they have not fulfilled their obligations as both positive and negative in regard to those refugees. When it comes to refugee, the most vulnerable category is the women refugees. The article 3, which ban against female refugees and their rights is among the worst victims. However, two different approaches in the thought of Islam and Shah; enable the citizens to do the choice about assuring women asylum first. To give effect to that, measures would be to involve women police officers in the probing process/ provide support to women refugees/ giving councelling and psychological help in line with article 3, to make sure that no discrimination is observed.

Furthermore, the question arouses; could it be permitted to assert that the denying a refugee his refugee status would make the application of article 26 and article 28 rights viz the right of freedom of movement; impossible? This to mention, they will be differentiated from the human rights. Due to the fact that human rights are such that the people can only see that they really exist if they are recognised and protected, there is a duty imposed on the state to try and make the refugees to be recognised and undergo the process of alienating rights of them is the work of the state party to fulfil its role. Unlike individuals whose presumed rights no longer exist, overlapping with them, are internally displaced persons. In decent Omnian regimes, the 1951 and 1977 statutes should include these people, otherwise, these people cannot safely rely on the state to protect their rights, especially with the recent UNHCR reports showing the international population of refugees has multiplied significantly. This of course is contributed by the