Refugee Law and Policy

A Comparative andInternational Approach

Fourth Edition

Karen MusaloCLINICAL PROFESSOR OF LAW AND DIRECTOR,

CENTER FOR GENDER AND REFUGEE STUDIES,

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, HASTINGS COLLEGE OF THE LAW

Jennifer MoorePROFESSOR OF LAW,

UNIVERSITY OF N E W MEXICO SCHOOL OF LAW

Richard A. BoswellPROFESSOR OF LAW,

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, HASTINGS COLLEGE OF THE LAW

CAROLINA ACADEMIC PRESS

Durham, North Carolina

Contents

Table of Cases xxvii

Acknowledgments (K. Musalo) xxxv

Acknowledgments (J. Moore) xxxvii

Acknowledgments (R. Boswell) xxxix

Chapter 1 • The International Origins of Refugee Law 3A. Overview 3B. The Ancient Roots of Refugee Protection 4

1. Protection of the Stranger in the Arab World: The Ancient Conceptsof "ijara" and "aman" 5

Ghassan Maarouf Arnaout, Asylum in the Arab-Islamic Tradition 5Notes 7

2. Refugee Protection in the Judeo-Christian Tradition: Sanctuary inAncient Greece, Rome and the Early Christian Church 8

Ignatius Bau, This Ground Is Holy: Church Sanctuary andCentral American Refugees 8

Notes 11C. Twentieth Century Ultra-Nationalism and the Creation of the

"New Refugees" 12Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism 12Notes 17

D. The Crystallization of an International Refugee ProtectionRegime (1921-1951) 191. Early Efforts to Establish Formal Mechanisms for the Protection

of Refugees (1921-1946) 19United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, An Introduction

to the International Protection of Refugees 19Notes 21

2. The International Refugee Organization (1946) 21Constitution of the International Refugee Organization 21Preamble 21Notes 23

3. The Birth of UNHCR (1951) 23United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, An Introduction

to the International Protection of Refugees 23Notes 24

E. The Evolution of the Modern International Law Definition of theRefugee (1920-1951) 24

CONTENTS

1. Early Twentieth Century Concepts of the Refugee 24James C. Hathaway, The Development of the Refugee Definition

in International Law, The Law of Refugee Status 24Notes 26

2. The IRO Refugee Definition (1946) 27Constitution of the International Refugee Organization 27Notes 31

3. The Refugee Definition Found in the UNHCR Statute (1950) 32The Statute of the Office of the United Nations HighCommissioner for Refugees 32Notes 33

4. The Convention Refugee Definition (1951) 331951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 33Notes 33James C. Hathaway, The Development of the Refugee Definition

in International Law, The Law of Refugee Status 34Notes 36

F. The UN. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) 371. The 1951 Convention and Palestinian Refugees 37

1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, Art. 1(D) 37Note 37

2. UNHCR and Palestinian Refugees 38United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, The State of the

World's Refugees 1997: A Humanitarian Agenda 38The Problem of Palestinian Nationality 38Notes 40

3. Responding to the "Protection Gap" for Palestinian Refugees 41No Man's Land: Government Mistreatment of Palestinian

Asylum Seekers 41Note 43

4. Closing the Gaps Between Protection and Durable Solutions:Inter-Agency and NGO Efforts to Make the International RefugeeRegime Relevant for Palestinian Refugees 43

A Memorandum Prepared by BADIL Resource Center for theUNHCR Pre-Excom NGO 43Notes 46

G. The Fundamental Challenges of Refugee Protection 471. The Non-Entitlement to Asylum and the Norm of Non-Refoulement 48

Guy S. Goodwin-Gill, The Refugee in International Law 48Notes 49

2. Full Membership in a Political Community: The Search forDurable Solutions 50

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, The State of the World'sRefugees 1993: The Challenge of Protection 50

Notes 53H. Contemporary and Expanded Notions of the Refugee 53

1. Regional Organizations, Armed Conflict and Human Rights Abuses:New Definitions of the Refugee 54

a. Refugees in the Region of Africa 54

CONTENTS ix

OAU Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of RefugeeProblems in Africa 54b. The Central American Region and Refugees 55Cartagena Declaration on Refugees 55Notes 55

2. International Humanitarian Law and the Refugee 56United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, The State of the World's

Refugees 1993: The Challenge of Protection 56The Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian

Persons in Time of War 57Notes 57James C. Hathaway, The Development of the Refugee Definition

in International Law, The Law of Refugee Status 58Notes 59Jennifer Moore, Simple Justice: Humanitarian Law as a Defense

Against Deportation 59Notes 60

3. Refugees from within: UNHCR and the Protection of InternallyDisplaced Persons 61

UNHCR, Organizational Responsibility for Internally DisplacedPeople, The State of the World's Refugees 1997:A Humanitarian Agenda 62

Note 63

Chapter 2 • International Norms and State Practice 65A. Introduction 65B. U.S. Law and International Norms 66

1. International Law as the "Law of the Land" 67Restatement (Third) of the Foreign Relations Law 68

2. The Period Preceding the 1980 Refugee Act: Was the Protocol the"Law of the Land"? 69

a. The Protocol's Definition of Refugee and the Obligation ofNon-Refoulement 69

b. The Historical Context 70Center for Civil and Human Rights, Admission of Refugees and

Asylees Under the Law: Reports on Current United StatesProcedures and Policies, and Their Origins, withRecommendations for Change 71

Notes 72Cong. Research Serv., Library of Congress, 96th Cong., 1st Sess.,

Review of U.S. Refugee Resettlement Programs and Policies 15 (Comm.Print 1979) Prepared at the Request of Senator Kennedy, Chairman,Comm. on the Judiciary, U.S. Senate 73

Notes 733. The 1980 Refugee Act 74

a. The U.S. Definition of Refugee 74b. Overseas Refugee Program/Resettlement Program 75Notes 80

CONTENTS

Tahl Tyson, The Refugee Act of 1980: Suggested Reforms in theOverseas Refugee Program to Safeguard HumanitarianConcerns from Competing Interests 81

Notes 83c. Asylum and Restriction on Removal: Applications for Protection

at the Border and Within the U.S. 85Political Asylum Procedure 85Restriction on Removal 86

C. Selected Issues: Bias in the Adjudicatory Process & Access to the Territory 861. Bias in the Adjudicatory Process 87

James Silk, U.S. Committee for Refugees, Despite a Generous Spirit:Denying Asylum in the United States 87

Note 88American Baptist Churches v. Richard Thornburgh 89Notes 90

2. Access to the Territory and Process 92Cheryl Little, United States Haitian Policy: A History of

Discrimination 93Notes 96Harold Hongju Koh, Reflections on Refoulement 99Sale v. Haitian Centers Council 104Note 123Louis Henkin, Notes from the President, American Society of

International Law Newsletter 123Harry A. Blackmun, The Supreme Court and the Law of Nations 125Notes 128a. Interdiction in the Wake of the Sale Decision 131b. Expedited Removal as a Means of Limiting Access 134Karen Musalo, Lauren Gibson, Stephen Knight & J. Edward Taylor,

The Expedited Removal Study, Report on the First Three Yearsof Implementation of Expedited Removal 135

Note 136Testimony of Eleanor Acer, Lawyers Committee for Human Rights,

Hearing on Asylum Policy, U.S. Senate Committee on theJudiciary, Immigration Subcommittee 136

Notes 139U.S. Comm'n on Int'l Religious Freedom, Report on Asylum

Seekers in Expedited Removal 139Volume I: Findings and Recommendations, 6-9 (February 2005) 139Notes 141Notes 146D. Asylum Policy in the European Union 146Johannes van der Klaauw, Towards a Common Asylum Procedure,

in Implementing Amsterdam: Immigration and Asylum Rightsin EC Law 148

Jane McAdam, Regionalising International Refugee Law in theEuropean Union: Democratic Revision or Revisionist Democracy? 151

E. An Overview of Select Issues in State Practice within the E.U. 1541. Accelerated Procedures 154

CONTENTS xi

2. Safe Country of Origin 1553. Safe Third-Country 1564. Right of Appeal/Suspensive Effect 1575. Visa Requirements 1586. Carrier Sanctions 159

Director-General for External Policies of the Union, Analysis ofthe External Dimensions of the E.U.'s Asylum and ImmigrationPolicies — Summary and Recommendations for the EuropeanParliament 160

Notes 160F. South Africa's Emerging Refugee Protection System 161

1. Background 1612. The South Africa Refugee Act and Regulations 162

Jacob van Garderen & Vinodh Jaichand, Preface in Jeff Handmaker,Lee Anne de la Hunt, Jonathan Klaaren, Perspectives onRefugee Protection in South Africa 162

Notes 165

Chapter 3 • Degrees of Risk: The Standard of Proof in Claims for Protection 169A. Introduction 169

1. Definitions in UN. Refugee Convention/Protocol 1702. U.S. Statutory Provisions 170

B. Standards Defined by the United States Supreme Court 1711. The Standard of Proof for Withholding (Non-Refoulement) 171

I.N.S. v. Predrag Stevic 171Notes 182

2. The Standard of Proof for Refugee Status 183I.N.S. v. Luz Marina Cardoza-Fonseca 183Notes 199

C. A Critique of U.S. Standards from an International Perspective 200Joan Fitzpatrick, The International Dimension of U.S. Refugee Law 200Notes 203

D. The Interpretation of the Well-Founded Fear Standard 2041. UNHCR and State Practice 204

Notes 2052. The Board Applies the Well-Founded Fear Standard 206

Matter of Mogharrabi 206Notes 211

3. U.S. Courts Distinguish the Asylum and Withholding/RestrictionStandards 213

Jose Garcia-Ramos v. I.N.S. 213Notes 216

E. Issues Related to Well-Founded Fear and Clear Probability Standardsof Proof 217

1. The Standard in Expedited Removal—A "Credible Fear of Persecution" 217Notes 218

2. The Relationship between the Standard of Proof for Likelihood ofHarm and the Burden of Proof/Burden of Persuasion 219

Notes 220

xii CONTENTS

3. Regulations Addressing the Standard of Proof 220a. Regulations on Prospective Risk 221Notes 221b. Past Harm and Its Relevance to Claims for Protection 222The Past Persecution Presumption of 8 C.F.R. §§ 208.13 and 208.16 225Notes 225

4. The Relationship between Countrywide Persecution and aWell-Founded Fear 226

Canada 227Interpretation of the Convention Refugee Definition in the Case Law 227Switzerland 228Klaus Hullman, Switzerland, in Jean-Yves Carlier, et. al.

Who Is a Refugee?: A Comparative Case Law Study 228European Union 229E.U. Qualifications Directive 229Notes 229

F. The Role of Discretion in the Refugee Determination Process 2311. Considering the "Totality of Circumstances" in the Exercise

of Discretion 232Matter ofPula 232Notes 238Appendix 2398C.F.R. §208.16(b) 239Withholding of removal under section 241(b)(3)(B) of the Act

and withholding of removal under the ConventionAgainst Torture 239

Chapter 4 • The Definition of Persecution—Its Forms and Sources 241A. Introduction 241B. The Relationship between Human Rights Norms and Persecution 241

UNHCR Handbook 242Guy Goodwin-Gill, The Refugee in International Law 242Refugee Status Appeals Authority (1999) 2000 242Notes 245

C. The Forms of Persecution 2451. Economic Harms as Persecution 246

Djordje Kovac v. I.N.S. 246Notes 250

2. Physical and Mental Violations and the Issue of Punitive Intent 252Alia Konstantinova Pitcherskaia, Petitioner, The International

Human Rights Law Group, Intervenor v. INS 252Notes 257

3. Severe & Atrocious Persecution—The Requirement for aHumanitarian Grant 258

Matter of Chen 258Notes 261

4. Discrimination as a Form of Persecution 264

CONTENTS xiii

Brian Brosnahan & Robert Borton of Heller, Ehrman, White &McAuliffe and Mark Silverman of the Immigrant LegalResource Center—Applicant's Brief in Support of a Requestfor Political Asylum & Withholding of Deportation 266

Notes 271David Stephen & Phillip Wearne, Central America's Indians 271Notes 276Vera Korablina v. INS 277Notes 282

5. Distinguishing Prosecution from Persecution 287Ebrahim Sadeghi v. I.N.S. 288Notes 293

D. The Source of Persecution: State and Non-State Agents 2941. Protection and Accountability/Complicity Views, and State Practice 294

a. UNHCR—The "Protection" View 294Tatiana Pavlova v. Immigration and Naturalization Service 295Notes 297b. The Accountability or Complicity Approach 298c. Evolving Practice—The Qualifications Directive: State and

Non-State Agents of Persecution and the Question ofEffective Protection 299

Notes 300

Chapter 5 • The Nexus Requirement 301A. Introduction 301B. United States Jurisprudence 302

1. 1980-1992: The Period Preceding Zacarias 302Sofia Campos-Guardado v. I.N.S. 303Notes 306Olimpia Lazo-Majano v. I.N.S. 308Notes 316a. Proving "On Account Of"—The Use of a Rebuttable Presumption 317Adela Hernandez-Ortiz v. I.N.S. 317Notes 321Jairo Jonathan Elias Zacarias v. I.N.S. 322Note 325

2. The U.S. Supreme Court's Imposition of an Intent Requirement 325I.N.S. v. Jairo Jonathan Elias Zacarias 325a. A Critique of the Zacarias Decision 331b. Statutory Interpretation: Plain Meaning and Deference 332Karen Musalo, Irreconcilable Differences? Divorcing Refugee

Protections from Human Rights Norms 333Note 338

3. Mixed Motives and the "Central Reason" Requirement of theREAL ID Act of 2005 339

a. Mixed Motives 339In re S-P- 339Notes 342b. The "Central Reason" Requirement of the REAL ID Act of 2005 342

xiv CONTENTS

The REAL ID Act of 2005 343Notes 343

C. International and Comparative Practice on the Requirement of Nexus 3441. UNHCR 345

Written Submission on Behalf of the U.N. High Comm'r forRefugees in the [U.K.] Court of Appeal in Yasin Sepet andErdem Bulbul v. Secretary of State for the Home Department 345

Notes 3482. Australia 349

a. The High Court's Approach 349Chen Shi Hai (an infant) by his next best friend Chen Ren Bing v.

The Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs 349Notes 354b. The Legislature's Approach 355

3. A Bifurcated Analysis in International Jurisprudence 355D. Protection under the Torture Convention 357

1. Background 3572. CAT Implementation in U.S. Law 358

a. The Court Compares Asylum to CAT Relief 363Navaratwam Kamalthas v. INS 363Note 367

3. An International Perspective—Decisions of the U.N. Committeeagainst Torture in Cases of Asylum Seekers Who Have Been Tortured 367

Decision of the Committee Against Torture In the Matter ofPauline Muzonzo Paku Kisoki against Sweden 368

Notes 373

Chapter 6 • Persecution on Account of Political Opinion 375A. Introduction 375B. Persecution on Account of Political Opinion: When Are Activities

& Opinions Political? 3761. Anti-Communism as a Political Opinion 376

Fidele Sanon v. I.N.S. 377Notes 381

2. Trade Union Activity as an Expression of Political Opinion 381Vicente Osorio v. I.N.S. 381Notes 390

3. Neutrality as Political Opinion 391Espectacion Bolanos-Hernandez v. I.N.S. 392Notes 395

4. Imputed Political Opinion 397Jose Doney Argueta v. I.N.S. 397Notes 400a. Canadian Perspective on Neutrality and Imputed Political Opinion 402Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada Guidelines on Civilian

Non-Combatants Fearing Persecution in Civil War Situations 402Notes 402

5. Opposition to Corruption as a Political Opinion/Refugee Statusfor "Whistle-Blowers" 403

CONTENTS xv

Alexander Klinko, Lyudmyla Klinko, and Andriy Klinko v.Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) 403

Notes 406C. Selected Issues—Prosecution vs. Persecution, Refusal to Serve in the

Military and Coercive Population Control 4091. When Is Prosecution Persecution? 409

a. Prosecution for a Convention Reason 410Li Wu Lin v. Immigration and Naturalization Service 410Notes 414b. Prosecution for a Convention Reason/Pretextual Prosecution 415Efrain Carranza-Hernandez v. I.N.S. 415Notes 418c. Prosecution vs. Persecution; Is There a Legitimate Governmental

Investigation and Prosecution? 419Hugo Ivan Bellido, Miriam Puna-Villaneuva v. John Ashcroft,

Attorney General 419Notes 423d. Punishment for a Crime Committed: Resistance to Repressive

Regimes 427Nana Asante Dwomoh v. Sava 427Notes 434

2. Refusal to Serve in the Military 436a. UNHCR Guidance 436Notes 439b. Evolving U.S. Jurisprudence 439Jose Antonio Barraza-Rivera v. I.N.S. 444Notes 446Slavko Ciric and Slavica Ciric v. Canada (Minister of Employmentand Immigration) 447Notes 451

3. Coercive Population Control (CPC) 452a. Background—Nexus Barriers in CPC Cases 452Guo Chun Di v. Carroll 453Note 460b. Congress "Legislates" Nexus in 1996 461c. Canada—A Different Approach to Nexus 461d. UNHCR Guidelines 463e. Selected Issues in Population Control Cases under the

1996 Legislation 464

Chapter 7 • Persecution on Account of Religion 467A. Introduction 467B. Freedom of Religion in International Practice and Its Relationship

to Refugee Norms 468Karen Musalo, Irreconcilable Differences? Divorcing Refugee

Protections from Human Rights Norms 468Notes 470

C. Different Degrees of Consistency with International Norms: UnitedStates, United Kingdom and Australia 471

xvi CONTENTS

1. United States 472Matter ofLiadakis 472Notes 474

2. United Kingdom 475Ahmad and Others v. Sect'y of State for the Home Department 475Notes 477Amnesty International, Report on Religious Intolerance 479Notes 480

3. Australia 480Commonwealth of Australia 480RRT Reference: N93/01843 Refugee Review Tribunal (7 July 1994) 480Notes 485Amnesty International, Conscientious Objection to Military Service 486Notes 487

D. U.S. Constitutional Law Principles: First Amendment Free Exerciseof Religion 488Jason W. Rockwell, When Congress Answers Religion's Prayer:

The Religious Liberty Protection Act of 1999 489Notes 492Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 492

E. Select Issues in U.S. Jurisprudence 4941. Credibility and Knowledge of Religious Doctrine 494

Yong Ting Yan v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General 494Notes 500

2. Overlapping Grounds of Persecution 501a. Religion and Its Overlap with Political Opinion Claims 502Masood Shirazi-Parsa, et al. v. I.N.S. 502Notes 505b. Religion and Its Overlap with Gender/Social Group Claims 506In re S-A- 506Notes 511Susan Musarrat Akram, Orientalism Revisited in Asylum and

Refugee Claims 512Note 515Appendix 515Guidelines on International Protection 515Religion-Based Refugee Claims under Article 1 A(2) of the

1951 Convention and/or the 1967 Protocol relating to theStatus of Refugees 515

Chapter 8 • Persecution Based on Race or Nationality 527A. Introduction 527B. Basic Concepts 529

1. Race 529Cheikh Anta Diop, Civilization or Barbarism, An Authentic

Anthropology 529The 1950 UNESCO Statement on Race 530Ashley Montagu, Race, Science, and Humanity 530The 1967 UNESCO Statement on Race and Racial Prejudice 530

CONTENTS xvii

Notes 5312. Nationality 531

Elizabeth Kiss, Is Nationalism Compatible with Human Rights?Reflections on East Central Europe, Identities, Politics and Rights 532

Notes 533Liisa H. Malkki, Purity and Exile: Violence, Memory, and National

Cosmology among Hutu Refugees in Tanzania 533Notes 534

C. Historical Perspectives on Nationalism and Persecution 534Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism 535Notes 538Liisa H. Malkki, Purity and Exile: Violence, Memory, and National

Cosmology among Hutu Refugees in Tanzania 538Notes 540

D. An Analysis of Asylum Claims Based upon Race or Nationality fromthe Perspective of the UNHCR Handbook 543

1. Persecution on Account of Race 543United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Handbook on

Procedures & Criteria for Determining Refugee Status 543Notes 543

2. Persecution on Account of Nationality 544United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Handbook on

Procedures & Criteria for Determining Refugee Status 544Notes 544

E. Treatment of Race and Nationality Claims by U.S., U.K. andAustralian Courts 545

1. Ethnicity, Politics and Social Status 545a. Elite Oromo Opposition Member from Ethiopia: The Case

of Makonnen 545Elizabeth Makonnen v. I.N.S. 545Notes 549b. Roma Family from the Czech Republic: The Case of ZL and VL 552ZL and VL and [United Kingdom] Secretary of State for the

Home Department and Lord Chancellor's Department 552Notes 557c. Uyghur Activist in Kazakhstan: The Case of Aliyev 558Arkin Aliyev and Paridam Arziyeva v. Mukasey 558Notes 563

2. Ethnicity and Gender in the Case of Shoafera, an Amhara Womanfrom Ethiopia 564Nigist Shoafera v. I.N.S. 564Notes 568

3. Ethnicity and Religion 570a. Russian Jews from the Ukraine: The Case of O-Z- and I-Z- 570In re O-Z- & I-Z- 570Notes 573

b. Moslem Arab from Israel: The Case of Baballah 575Abrahim Baballah, Ula Baballah, Ahmad Baballah v. Ashcroft 575Notes 582

xviii CONTENTS

c. Ethnic Hazara Shi'a from Afghanistan: The Case of Wahk 583Wahk v. Minister for [Australian] Immigration and Multicultural

& Indigenous Affairs 583Notes 589

F. International Treaties Relating to Crimes against Humanity 5911. The Genocide Convention and Ethnic Persecution 591

Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crimeof Genocide 591

Notes 5922. The International Criminal Court 593

Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court 593Note 593

G. Contemporary Case Studies of Ethnic Persecution and the Establishmentof International Criminal Tribunals 595

1. The Former Yugoslavia and the ICTY 595Steve Coll, War Crimes and Punishment: Bosnia in the Shadow

of the Holocaust 595Notes 602

2. Rwanda, the ICTR and Gacaca Courts 6033. Darfur, Sudan and the International Criminal Court 605

Jennifer Moore, Stop Genocide and Protect Civilians inDarfur, Sudan 605

Notes 606H. Humanism in the Face of "Organized Ethnic Hatred:"

A Further Commentary 607Marieme Helie-Lucas, The Face of Women Refugees from Muslim

Communities: Algeria to Ex-Yugoslavia, The Suitcase:Refugee Voices from Bosnia and Croatia 607

Notes 611Majana Burazovic, Don't Call Me That Way, The Suitcase:

Refugee Voices from Bosnia and Croatia 612

Chapter 9 • Persecution Based on Membership in a Particular Social Group 615A. Introduction 615B. Conceptual Background 617

1. Social Group Membership under International Refugee Law 618Guy S. Goodwin-Gill & Jane McAdam, The Refugee in

International Law 618Notes 619

2. Social Group Membership from the Perspective of theUNHCR Handbook 619

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Handbookon Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status 619

Notes 620C. Defining Particular Social Group Claims—Immutable and

Fundamental Characteristics 6211.Matter ofAcosta; Defining Social Groups by Immutable or

Fundamental Characteristics 621Matter of Acosta 621Notes 625

CONTENTS xix

2. Sexual Orientation as Immutable or Fundamental 627a. United States 627Matter of Toboso-Alfonso 627Notes 630Nasser Mustapha Karouni v. Alberto Gonzales, Atty. Gen. 630Notes 637b. New Zealand 640Refugee Appeal No. 74665/03 640Notes 650

3. UNHCR Guidance on Sexual Orientation Claims 651Notes 653

D. Immutable and Fundamental as a "Threshold"; the EvolvingRequirements of Social Visibility and Particularity 653

1. The BIA's Imposition of Social Visibility and Particularity 655In Re C-A- 655Notes 662

2. UNHCR's Position in its Guidelines and Brief Amicus Curiae 663a. UNHCR Guidelines 663UNHCR Guidelines on Social Group Claims United Nations

High Commissioner for Refugees, Guidelines onInternational Protection 663

Notes 667b. UNHCR Brief Amicus Curiae 669Mauricio Edgardo Valdiviezo-Galdamez v. Eric Holder, Atty. Gen. 670Notes 681

3. Circuit Courts begin to Question the Social Visibility Requirement 682Francis Gatimi et al. v. Eric H. Holder, Atty. Gen. 682Notes 685

E. Conclusion 687

Chapter 10 • Gender-Related Claims to Refugee Status 689A. Introduction 689B. Conceptual Background: The Women's Human Rights Movement and

the Challenge of International Protection for Refugee Women 690Karen Musalo & Stephen Knight, Unequal Protection Bulletin

of the Atomic Scientists 690Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women 691Notes 693

C. Earliest Developments: UNHCR Guidance and State Response 6941. UNHCR's Executive Committee and Refugee Women (1985) 694

Notes 6952. UNHCR's First Guidelines on Refugee Women (1991) 696

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Guidelineson the Protection of Refugee Women 696

Notes 6973. UNHCR's Executive Committee's 1993 Conclusion 698

Executive Committee Conclusion No. 73 (XLIV) on RefugeeProtection and Sexual Violence 698

Notes 7004. Canadian Gender Guidelines 701

CONTENTS

Women Refugee Claimants Fearing Gender-Related Persecution:Guidelines Issued by the Chairperson Pursuant to Section 65(3)of the Immigration Act 701

Notes 7085. U.S. Gender Guidelines 710

Considerations for Asylum Officers Adjudicating Asylum Claimsfrom Women 710

Notes 711D. The Development of U.S. Precedent on Gender-Based Claims 712

1. In re Kasinga 712Karen Musalo, In re Kasinga: A Big Step Forward for Gender-Based

Asylum Claims 712Notes 715In re Fauziya Kasinga 716Notes 726

2. Matter ofR-A-: The Case of Rody Alvarado 727Karen Musalo, Matter ofR-A-: An Analysis of the Decision and

Its Implications 727Notes 730In re R-A- 730Notes 747

E. UNHCR and Comparative Jurisprudence on Gender Claims 750Karen Musalo, Revisiting Social Group and Nexus in Gender

Asylum Claims: A Unifying Rationale for Evolving Jurisprudence 750Notes 758

F. Selective Issues in Gender-Based Cases 7591. Repressive Social Norms 759

Saideh Fisher v. I.N.S. 760Notes 768New Zealand Refugee Status Appeals Authority 770Notes 776

2. Rape as a Basis for Refugee Protection 776In re D-V- 777Notes 778

3. The Legacy of Matter of Kasinga; Claims based on Past FGC, andClaims of Parents Whose Daughters Fear FGC 781

Khadija Mohamed v. Alberto Gonzales 782Notes 790Salimatou Bah v. Mukasey 791Notes 804

4. Mothers and Daughters—Persecution to Others as Persecution to Self 806Yayeshwork Abay & Burhan Amare v. John Ashcroft 806Notes 812

G. Alternative U.S. Forms of Relief from Gender-Related Violence:VAWAandTVPA 814

H. Conclusion—The Personal Is Universal 815Appendix 816

CONTENTS xxi

UNHCR's 2002 Gender Guidelines, United Nations HighCommissioner for Refugees, Guidelines on InternationalProtection: Gender-Related Persecution within the contextof Article 1A(2) of the 1951 Convention and/or Its 1967Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees 816

Chapter 11 • Qualifications upon Protection 821A. Introduction 821B. Overview of the Statutory Bars in U.S. Law 821C. Persons Excluded for Being Unworthy of Protection or for Posing a

Danger to the Host Country within the Context of the 1951Refugee Convention and U.S. Law 8221951 Refugee Convention 823Note 823

1. International Commentary on Art. l.F and Art. 33.2 823Volker Turk, Forced Migration and Security 823Notes 826The European Council on Refugees and Exiles, Position on

Exclusion from Refugee Status 827Notes 832

2. Caselaw on the Application of Article l.F 834(Australia) 834RRT Reference N 93/01843 834Notes 841(Canada) 842Moreno v. Canada (Minister of Employment & Immigration) 842Notes 847

3. U.S. Law 850a. Persecutor of Others 850Matter of Rodriguez-Majano 850Notes 853

4. Serious Non-Political Crimes—International and U.S. Perspectives 855a. International Framework 855b. Serious Non-Political Crimes in U.S. Law 857Juan Anibal Aguirre-Aguirre v. INS 858I.N.S. v. Juan Anibal Aguirre-Aguirre 860Notes 865Brief for Amicus Curiae in Support of the Respondent Submitted

by Iris Gomez, Esq., Counsel of Record, Massachusetts LawReform Institute, James F. Smith, Esq., Amagda Perez, Esq.,Immigration Law Clinic, University of California Schoolof Law, Davis 866

Notes 870D. Particularly Serious Crimes and Security Risk to the Host Country 870

1. Introduction 8702. International Guidance 871

Rene Bruin & Kees Wouters, Terrorism and the Non-Derogabilityof Non-Refoulement 871

Notes 872

xxii CONTENTS

3. Application of the Particularly Serious Crime Bar in the United States 873a. Rejecting the International Approach: All Particularly Serious

Crime Offenders Constitute a Danger to the Community 873Matter of Carballe 873Notes 875b. The "Per Se" Approach to Defining "Particularly Serious Crimes" 877Note 877

4. Danger to Security of the Host Country 878a. Application of Security Bar in the United States 878Georgetown University Law Center, Human Rights Institute,

Unintended Consequences: Refugee Victims of the War on Terror 879Notes 886

E. Applying the Exclusion Clauses 887Notes 888

E Not in Need of Protection 8891. The Cessation Clauses of Art. l.C. — International Standards 889

Notes 890Guy S. Goodwin-Gill, The Refugee in International Law 891Notes 893

2. "Termination" of Asylum Status under U.S. Law 893Note 894

3. Preclusion — Safe Third Country—The U.S. Canadian Agreement 8944. The Exclusion Clause of Art. l.E and Firm Resettlement under

U.S. Law—Effective Protection in a Third State 896Matter of Soleimani 897Notes 900

G. Filing Deadline as a Basis for Exclusion under U.S. Law 901Leena Khandwala, Karen Musalo, Stephen Knight and Maria

Anna K. Hreshchyshyn, The One Year Bar: Denying Protectionto Bona Fide Refugees Contrary to Congressional Intent andViolative of International Law 902

Notes 905Appendix 908The Qualifications on Protection—Governing Domestic

Statutory ProvisionsThe Refugee Definition — Persecutorof Others Exclusion 908

Asylum Procedure and Statutory Bars 909Restriction on Removal & Statutory Bars 912Aggravated Felonies as a Bar 913The "Terrorism Bars" 915INA §237(a)(4)(B), 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(4)(B) 917Nazi Persecution or Genocide 917

Chapter 12 • The Process and Rights of Asylum Seekers 921A. Introduction 921B. An International Perspective on Procedures 921

Guy S. Goodwin-Gill, The Refugee in International Law 921Note 923

CONTENTS Kxiii

C. Overview of the Refugee Status Determination System in theUnited States 9241. The Adjudicatory Structure 924

a. The Asylum Office—Adjudicating "Affirmative" Applicationsfor Asylum 924

b. The Immigration Court — "Defensive" Applications 926INA § 240, 8 U.S.C. § 1229a 926

c. The Board of Immigration Appeals—Administrative Appeals 927d. The Circuit Courts of Appeals and the U.S. Supreme

Court—Federal Court Review 928Tarek Ghebllawi v. I.N.S. 929Notes 932

2. Realpolitik Constraints—Refugee Adjudicatory Systems in theU.S. and Beyond 933

Stephen H. Legomsky, An Asylum Seeker's Bill of Rights in aNon-Utopian World 933

Notes 9383. Limits on Constitutional Protections for Asylum Seekers in the

United States 939Kendall Coffey, The Due Process Right to Seek Asylum in the

United States: The Immigration Dilemma and ConstitutionalControversy 940

Notes 945D. Selected Issues in State Practice 946

1. Conditions and Components of a Fair Refugee DeterminationProcedure 946

a. Legal Representation 946Note 947Margaret H. Taylor, Promoting Legal Representation for

Detained Aliens: Litigation and Administrative Reform 947Notes 950b. Language Interpretation as a Guarantor of Related Rights 952EIRescatev. Exec. Office for Imm. Rev. 953Notes 955Martin Perez-Lastor v. I.N.S. 957Notes 963c. Detention of Asylum Seekers 963United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Guidelines

on Applicable Criteria and Standards Relating to the Detentionof Asylum-Seekers 964

Notes 971Wendy Young, U.S. Detention of Women and Children Asylum

Seekers: A Violation of Human Rights 972Notes 975

i. Child Asylum Seekers 977Wendy Young & Megan McKenna, The Measure of a Society:

The Treatment of Unaccompanied Refugee and ImmigrantChildren in the United States 977

Notes 981d. An Independent and Unbiased Adjudicator 983

xxiv CONTENTS

i. A Journalist's Expose of The Immigration Courts 983Fredric N. Tulsky, Judges Who Grant Asylum Show Extreme

Differences in Rulings 983Notes 988

ii. A Litany of Criticism from the Federal Courts 990Lorraine Fiadjoe v. Attorney General of the U.S. 991Notes 1008

iii. Explanations for Adjudicatory Failings and Proposals for Reform 1008e. Right to Work/Social Benefits 1010Ryszard Cholewinski, Economic and Social Rights of Refugees

and Asylum Seekers in Europe 1011Note 1014

Chapter 13 • Proving the Claim 1015A. Introduction 1015B. International Perspectives 1016

Atle Grahl-Madsen, The Status of Refugees in International Law 1016U.N. High Comm'r for Refugees, Handbook on Procedures and

Criteria for Determining Refugee Status 1016Notes 1018

C. The Burden of Proof 1019D. Establishing Credibility 1020

REAL ID Act of 2005 10201. Demeanor 1020

Jeremy A. Blumenthal, A Wipe of the Hands, A Lick of the Lips:The Validity of Demeanor Evidence in Assessing WitnessCredibility 1022

Note 1024Pensaquitos Village, Inc. v. NLRB 1024Notes 1025In re Berta Lidia Iraheta 1026Notes 1031

2. The Impact of Psychological Factors on Credibility—Demeanor,Consistency and Detail 1032

Physicians for Human Rights, Medical Testimony on Victims ofTorture: A Physician's Guide to Political Asylum Cases 1032

Notes 1033Psychological Evaluation of R-C- by Adrianne Aron, Licensed

Clinical Psychologist 1033Notes 1036

3. Cross-Cultural Issues and their Relationship to the Determinantsof Credibility 1039

Juan Francisco Cordero-Trejo v. I.N.S. 1040Notes 1047Walter Kalin, Troubled Communication: Cross-Cultural

Misunderstandings in the Asylum-Hearing 1048Notes 1055Veronika Kot, The Impact of Cultural Factors on Credibility

in the Asylum Context 1055Notes 1056

CONTENTS xxv

Everth Ceballos-Castillo v. I.N.S. 1058Commonwealth of Australia 1059Notes 1064

4. Medical Testimony Relating to Persecution 1065Physicians for Human Rights Medical Testimony on Victims of

Torture: A Physician's Guide to Political Asylum Cases 1065Notes 1066

5. The Use of Experts 1067Rachael Keast, Using Experts for Asylum Cases in Immigration Court 1067Notes 1074

6. The Corroboration Requirement: From Mogharrabi to theREAL ID Act of 2005 1075

REAL ID Act of 2005 1075Note 1076Abdelhadi Hor v. Alberto R. Gonzales 1076Notes 1080

7. The Requirement of Corroboration within the European UnionQualifications Directive 1081

Note 10828. Special Guidance for Child and Women Applicants 1083

a. Child Applicants 1083Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees,

Refugee Children: Guidelines on Protection and Care 1083Notes 1084b. Women Applicants 1085Australian Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs,

Guidelines on Gender Issues for Decision Makers 1086UNHCR, Guidelines on International Protection: Gender-Related

Persecution within the context of Article 1A(2) of the1951 Convention and/or Its 1967 Protocol Relating to theStatus of Refugees 1086

Notes 1087E. Credibility Determinations from the Perspective of the Examiner 1088

Audrey Macklin, Truth or Consequences: CredibilityDeterminations in the Refugee Context 1088

Notes 1094Appendix 1095American Psychiatric Association, Diagnostic and Statistical

Manual of Mental Disorders 1095

Chapter 14 • Current and Future Challenges in Refugee Protection 1101A. Introduction 1101B. UNHCR: The United Nations Refugee Agency Renews Its Commitment

to Refugee Protection in the Twenty-First Century 1103Erika Feller, Statement by the Director, UNHCR Department

of International Protection, to the 18th Meeting of theUNHCR Standing Committee (Jul. 5, 2000) 1104

Notes 1106C. Temporary Protection and Complementary Protection: A Retreat

from Asylum or an Overture to Protection? 1107

xxvi CONTENTS

1. UNHCR and Temporary Protection 1108United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, The State

of the World's Refugees 1993: The Challenge of Protection 1108United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, The State

of the World's Refugees 1995: The Search for Solutions 1109Notes 1111UNHCR, Complementary Forms of Protection: Their Nature and

Relationship to the International Refugee Protection Regime 1113Notes 1118

2. The European Union and Complementary Protection 1119[EU] Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 1119Notes 1121

D. Non-Refoulement to Human Rights Emergencies: Harbinger of aCustomary Norm? 1122Jennifer Moore, Simple Justice: Humanitarian Law as a Defense

against Deportation 1123Notes 1126

E. Responding to the Internally Displaced: The Problem of Failed Statesand the Concept of Effective Protection 1127

1. The London Declaration on IDP's 1127Luke T. Lee, The London Declaration of International Law

Principles on Internally Displaced Persons 1127Notes 1132

2. Action by the United Nations Secretary General and the AfricanUnion on Behalf of the Internally Displaced 1133

F. Resolving the Problem of Exile: The Seamless Web of Prevention,Protection and Solutions 1134

1. Voluntary Repatriation: Return in Safety and Dignity, orReturn to Exile? 1135

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, The State of theWorld's Refugees 1993: The Challenge of Protection 1135

Notes 11382. Nation-Building: Principled Pragmatism as a Response to

Global Interdependence 1139Jonathan Moore, The U.N.'s New Mission: Nation-Building 1139Notes 1141

3. Tolerance vs. Fear: The Global War on Terror and the Need for aRenewed Commitment to Refugee Protection 1142

Marisa Silenzi Cianciarulo, Terrorism and Asylum Seekers:Why the REAL ID Act Is a False Promise 1142

Notes 1144G. Refugees as Survivors of Conflicts and Healers of Communities 1144

Steve Coll, The Other War 1144Notes 1159Judith Mayotte, Beyond the Balkans, The Suitcase: Refugee Voices

from Bosnia and Croatia 1160H. Conclusion 1165

Index 1167