Covid-19 border closures: A violation of non-refoulement obligations in international refugee and human rights law?

Kate Ogg*, Chanelle Taoi

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    1 Citation (Scopus)

    Abstract

    COVID-19 has presented a number of challenges for the international refugee protection regime. An issue that has received little attention is the relationship between states tightening their borders in an effort to reduce the spread of COVID-19 and their non-refoulement obligations. This raises the question of how international law responds when non-refoulement obligations may conflict with other international human rights such as the rights to life and health. Further, the legal analysis of whether a particular COVID-19 border policy is in violation of non-refoulement obligations must take into account how the travel restriction will be implemented. This article provides an overarching analysis of non-refoulement provisions in international refugee and human rights law and which COVID-19 international travel restrictions may be in breach of these obligations. We examine different types of COVID-19 travel restrictions and argue that many are undoubtedly violations of non-refoulement, but others raise unsettled questions of international law. Nevertheless, there is jurisprudence and scholarship to support the proposition that a states non-refoulement obligations can be triggered even in these more contested scenarios.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)32-48
    Number of pages17
    JournalAustralian Year Book of International Law
    Volume39
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2021

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Covid-19 border closures: A violation of non-refoulement obligations in international refugee and human rights law?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this