CORE
🇺🇦
make metadata, not war
Services
Services overview
Explore all CORE services
Access to raw data
API
Dataset
FastSync
Content discovery
Recommender
Discovery
OAI identifiers
OAI Resolver
Managing content
Dashboard
Bespoke contracts
Consultancy services
Support us
Support us
Membership
Sponsorship
Community governance
Advisory Board
Board of supporters
Research network
About
About us
Our mission
Team
Blog
FAQs
Contact us
research
Human rights, non-refoulement and the protection of refugees in Hong Kong
Authors
A Biswas
A Rosencwaig
+10 more
CI Nicholls
DJ Radcliffe
DL Balageas
DL Balageas
KW Johnson
MJ Adams
P Charpentier
RE Taylor
RE Taylor
RT Swimm
Publication date
1 January 1988
Publisher
United Kingdom
Doi
Cite
Abstract
Although the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol do not apply to Hong Kong, asylum seekers have challenged Hong Kong's lack of an adequate refugee policy in a series of judicial review actions grounded in human rights and common law principles. This article focuses on two cases in particular in which the applicants have attempted to rely, in part, on a right to non-refoulement, derived from international and domestic law, to compel the Government to establish procedures to determine the status of refugees and other similar categories of claimants. The first, Secretary for Security v. Sakthevel Prabakar, led to the creation of a 'torture screening' mechanism based on article 3 of the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. In the second, C v. Director of Immigration, the court considered whether a rule of non-refoulement has emerged in customary international law and, if so, whether it applies to Hong Kong and requires government-administered refugee status determination. Although the applicants failed at first instance,1 an analysis of the judgment with reference to Hong Kong's human rights obligations reveals gaps in the court's reasoning and demonstrates the potential for greater reliance on these standards as the basis for developing a more comprehensive protection framework. This examination of the Hong Kong experience may have broader comparative value, especially in the Asian region and in jurisdictions not bound by the Refugee Convention or its Protocol. © The Author (2010). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.postprin
Similar works
Full text
Open in the Core reader
Download PDF
Available Versions
HKU Scholars Hub
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
oai:hub.hku.hk:10722/92989
Last time updated on 01/06/2016
Digital Repository @ Iowa State University (ISU)
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
oai:dr.lib.iastate.edu:20.500....
Last time updated on 11/01/2024
Crossref
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
info:doi/10.1007%2F978-1-4613-...
Last time updated on 27/03/2019