International Refugee Law and Refugee Policy: The Case of Deterrence Policies

Thomas Gammeltoft-Hansen, "International Refugee Law and Refugee Policy: The Case of Deterrence Policies" Journal of Refugee Studies 27(4): 2014.

Introduction 

Does International Refugee Law Matter? 

the non-refoulement principle, was described as ‘an exceptional limitation of the sovereign right of states to turn back aliens to the frontiers of their country of origin’ by the Israeli delegate Nehemiah Robinson at the Ad Hoc Committee on Statelessness and Related Problems

http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae68c1c0.html 

Development of deterrence policies in three key respects: 

1. deterrence policies are non-entrée policies designed to restrict access to asylum 
2. deterrence policies are progressive mechanisms that aim to physically or legally prevent refugees from reaching the asylum state 
3. deterrence policies as part of a state's migration control has become a foreign policy issue 

Attempts to explain states' ambiguous relationship to international refugee law by trying to explain the development of deterrence policies (ie. lack of political support, lack of respect for international refugee law, politicization of refugee law itself) have been unsatisfactory.

Gammeltoft-Hansen's article seeks to offer the missing link by aligning refugee scholars' arguments in terms of liberal institutionalism, IR realism, and critical legal studies and thus provide a more nuanced understanding of the interplay between international refugee law and politics.

This 'theoretical triangulation' is to avoid a priori theorization that interdisciplinary scholarship, especially international law and international relations, is prone to.

The Progressive View 

The Realist View

The Critical View 

The Power of Human Rights and Refugee Law 

Creative Legal Thinking as Political Strategy 

Conclusion 

Danish Institute for Human Rights http://www.humanrights.dk/staff/thomas-gammeltoft-hansen