In this study, Eman Hamdan examines the protection against refoulement under the European Convention on Human Rights and the UN Convention against Torture, with the aim to determine which of those Conventions affords better protection for international protection seekers.
Hamdan explores the scope and content of the principle of non-refoulement under both Conventions and the application of the principle to the immigration control measures and the extraordinary rendition operations.
The author provides a comprehensive and comparative analysis of the case-law of both the European Court of Human Rights and the UN Committee against Torture on the procedural and substantive aspects of the principle of non-refoulement, in order to help practitioners to determine which of these human rights treaty bodies is more favorable for their specific non-refoulement case.
This book was chosen to participate in the Professor Walther Hug Prize 2014-2015, which is a prize for the best legal researches in Switzerland for each academic year.
Eman Hamdan, graduated from the faculty of law, University of Aleppo (2003), had a master’s degree in International Law, University of Damascus (2006), and a doctorate’s degree in Constitutional Law, University of Geneva (2015).
In sum, I can warmly recommend this very well written and structured book to anyone working in the area of or interested in non-refoulement. With the current refugee crisis and attempts to counter terrorism, the very essence of the principle of non-refoulement is under threat. This book is thus highly relevant and very timely. The direct comparison between the procedures and jurisprudence of the ECtHR and the ComAT, the two most important bodies in the context of nonrefoulement, make this book an invaluable reference for practitioners. Moreover, the detailed analysis of the tension between certain immigration control policies and non-refoulement is a particular strength of this book. Similarly, the comprehensive list of factors and evidence that are taken into account by the ECtHR and the ComAT in assessing the risk of torture are an especially welcome contribution for practitioners when substantiating a complaint. NICOLE BÜRLI, Human Rights Adviser, World Organisation against Torture,
Israel Law Review 50(2) 2017, pp 245–250.
Table of contents
Excerpt of table of contents:
Acknowledgements; List of Abbreviations;
I Setting of the Problem
II Purpose and Context of the Study
III Structure of the Book
Chapter I The Principle of Non-Refoulement under the ECHR and the CAT
Section 1 The Protection of Refoulement under the ECHR and the CAT
Section 2 The Nature of the Principle of Non-Refoulement
Section 3 The Scope of the Protection of Refoulement under the ECHR and the CAT
Chapter II The Content of the Principle of Non-Refoulement
Section 1 The Treatment from Which the Person is Protected
Section 2 The Prohibited Conduct under the Principle of Non-Refoulement
Chapter III The Individual Complaints Procedures in the Context of Non-Refoulement Allegations
Section 1 Interim Measures
Section 2 Admissibility Criteria
Section 3 Standard and Burden of Proof
Chapter IV Assessment of the Risk of Being Subjected to Ill-treatment
Section 1 The Time of the Risk Assessment
Section 2 The Assessment of Evidence
Section 3 Factors Used to Assess the Risk
Section 4 The National Protection Arguments and their Effects on the Risk Assessment
Chapter V Summary of the Conclusions
All interested in refugee law and international protection issues, and anyone concerned with the non-refoulement case-law of both the European Court of Human Rights and the UN Committee Against Torture.