File #2403: "2018_Book_ChildRefugeeAsylumAsABasicHuma.pdf"
Testo
1|Acknowledgements|6
1|Contents|7
1|Chapter 1: Introduction: Contesting Barriers to Child Refugee Asylum|10
2|Literature, Materials and Cases|22
2|Literature|22
2|Materials|23
2|Cases|24
1|Chapter 2: The Intersection of Collective and Individual Child Refugee Asylum Seeker Rights|25
2|2.1 An Overview: Individual Refugee Rights Predicated on Collective Refugee and Human Rights|25
2|2.2 Media Efforts to `Humanize´ the Refugee Asylum Seeking Collective Through Profiling of Individual Suffering|38
2|2.3 Negation of Child Asylum Seekers´ Collective Rights as `Children´ and as `Refugees´ as a Vehicle to Denial of Their Indivi...|43
3|2.3.1 Case 1:Tarakhel, Mubilanzila Mayeka and Kaniki Mitunga v. Belgium (European Court of Human Rights)|43
4|2.3.1.1 The Facts|43
4|2.3.1.2 Commentary on the Significance of Tarakhel, Mubilanzila Mayeka and Kaniki Mitunga v. Belgium (European Court of Human ...|50
3|2.3.2 Case 2:AM (Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (and Lord Chancellor as Intervenor), UK Court of Ap...|58
4|2.3.2.1 The Facts|58
4|2.3.2.2 Commentary on AM (Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (and Lord Chancellor as Intervenor), UK Co...|60
3|2.3.3 Case 3: JA (Child: Risk of Persecution-Nigeria) v UK Secretary of State for the Home Department, UK Upper Tribunal Immig...|62
4|2.3.3.1 The Facts|62
4|2.3.3.2 Commentary on JA (Child: Risk of Persecution-Nigeria) v UK Secretary of State for the Home Department, UK Upper Tribun...|63
3|2.3.4 Case 4: Khadra Hassan Farah, Mahad Dahir Buraleh, Hodan Dahir Buraleh Immigration Refugee Board of Canada|73
4|2.3.4.1 The Facts|73
4|2.3.4.2 Commentary on Khadra Hassan Farah, Mahad Dahir Buraleh, Hodan Dahir Buraleh Immigration Refugee Board of Canada|74
2|Literature, Materials and Cases|76
2|Literature|76
2|Materials|76
2|Cases|78
1|Chapter 3: `Pushback´ and `Extraterritorial Collective Migration Control Measures´ Imposed on Child Refugee Asylum Seekers|79
2|3.1 Introduction: `Refoulement´ by Any Other Name Is Still `Refoulement´|79
2|3.2 The Right to Asylum Where the State Exercises `Pushback´ or `Extraterritorial Control´ and Denial of Asylum Amounts to Inh...|81
3|3.2.1 Case 1: SSHD (UK Secretary of State of the Home Department) v ZAT (Syria) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) UK Royal Cour...|81
4|3.2.1.1 The Facts|81
4|3.2.1.2 Commentary on SSHD (UK Secretary of State of the Home Department) v ZAT (Syria) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) UK Ro...|82
4|3.2.1.3 Concluding Remarks|105
3|3.2.2 Case 2: The Queen on the Application of MK, IK (a Child by His Litigation Friend MK) and HK (a Child by Her Litigation F...|110
4|3.2.2.1 The Facts|111
4|3.2.2.2 Judicial Review Decision of the UK Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber: The Queen on the Application of MK, ...|113
4|3.2.2.3 Commentary on The Queen on the Application of MK, IK (a Child by His Litigation Friend MK) and HK (a Child by Her Liti...|116
2|Literature, Materials and Cases|121
2|Literature|121
2|Materials|121
2|Cases|122
1|Chapter 4: `Unaccompanied Child Refugee Asylum Seekers´ as a Persecuted `Social Group´|123
2|4.1 A Cycle of Persecution for `Child Refugee Asylum Seekers´ Relating to Their Social Group Status|123
2|4.2 More on the Contentious Notion of Persecution Relating to `Membership of a Particular Social Group´|130
2|4.3 Case 1: AA v [UK] SSHD and Wolverhampton City Council (Interested Party) UK High Court of Justice, Queens Bench (Administr...|135
3|4.3.1 The Facts|135
3|4.3.2 The Arguments of the Parties|136
3|4.3.3 The Court´s Assessment|139
3|4.3.4 Commentary on AA v [UK] SSHD and Wolverhampton City Council (Interested Party) UK High Court of Justice, Queens Bench (A...|141
2|4.4 Case 2: Abdullahi Elmi and Aweys Abubakar v Malta (European Court of Human Rights, Chamber Judgment)|144
3|4.4.1 The Facts|144
3|4.4.2 The Court´s Assessment|146
3|4.4.3 Current Situation in Malta, and New EU Agreements Criticized as Violating the Principle of Non-Refoulement|158
3|4.4.4 Further Comment: Collective Refugee Control Measures in Selected Western European States|161
2|Literature, Materials and Cases|162
2|Literature|162
2|Materials|163
2|Cases|164
1|Chapter 5: Child Refugees and Recent U.S. Migration Control Strategies|165
2|5.1 Unaccompanied Child Refugee Asylum Seekers from Central America and Mexico|165
3|5.1.1 Child Victims of Political or Gang Violence as Convention Refugees|165
3|5.1.2 Denial of Legal Assistance to Child Refugee Asylum Seekers (a Violation of CRC Article 12)|171
3|5.1.3 Case 1: J.E. F.M. v. Lynch (U.S. Attorney General) et al., United States Federal Court of Appeals for the Ninth District|174
4|5.1.3.1 The Facts|174
4|5.1.3.2 The Federal Court of Appeals´ Assessment (Appeal from the U.S. Federal District Court for the Western District of Wash...|175
5|Substantive Question: Do Indigent Children Have a Right to Counsel in Immigration Proceedings Under the U.S. INA Act (Immigrat...|175
5|Jurisdictional Question: Does a U.S. District Court Have Jurisdiction to Hear Right-to-Counsel Constitutional Claims Brought b...|176
4|5.1.3.3 The Position of the Child Appellees|177
4|5.1.3.4 Commentary on J.E. F.M. v. Lynch (U.S. Attorney General) et al., United States Federal Court of Appeals for the Ninth ...|178
2|5.2 Some Historical Background Regarding the Treatment Accorded by the U.S. to Refugee Asylum Seekers from Central America: Un...|198
2|5.3 The United States´ `In-Country´ Refugee Processing for Minors in Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala (Central American Min...|200
2|5.4 U.S. Border Control: On Whether There Is U.S. `Outsourcing´ of `Refoulement´ of Unaccompanied Minors from Central America ...|204
2|5.5 The `Bona Fide Relationship to the U.S.´ Rule in U.S. Refugee Policy|209
3|5.5.1 Re-Considering the Legal Viability of the USSC `Bona Fide Relationship to the U.S.´ Rule as Applied to Refugees|213
3|5.5.2 The Refugee´s `Bona Fide Relationship with a U.S. Legal Entity´: U.S. Resettlement of Refugees and the Trump Travel Ban|215
3|5.5.3 Concluding Remarks|222
2|Literature, Materials and Cases|227
2|Literature|227
2|Materials|228
2|Cases|231
1|Chapter 6: In Defence of Non-Refoulement|232
2|6.1 Introduction|232
2|6.2 Case 1: Reconsidering the Judgment in X and X v. Belgium (European Court of Justice, Grand Chamber Judgment)|236
3|6.2.1 The Facts|236
3|6.2.2 Commentary on X and X v. Belgium (European Court of Justice, Grand Chamber Judgment)|237
2|Literature, Materials and Cases|243
2|Literature|243
2|Materials|243
2|Cases|244
1|Index|245
1|Contents|7
1|Chapter 1: Introduction: Contesting Barriers to Child Refugee Asylum|10
2|Literature, Materials and Cases|22
2|Literature|22
2|Materials|23
2|Cases|24
1|Chapter 2: The Intersection of Collective and Individual Child Refugee Asylum Seeker Rights|25
2|2.1 An Overview: Individual Refugee Rights Predicated on Collective Refugee and Human Rights|25
2|2.2 Media Efforts to `Humanize´ the Refugee Asylum Seeking Collective Through Profiling of Individual Suffering|38
2|2.3 Negation of Child Asylum Seekers´ Collective Rights as `Children´ and as `Refugees´ as a Vehicle to Denial of Their Indivi...|43
3|2.3.1 Case 1:Tarakhel, Mubilanzila Mayeka and Kaniki Mitunga v. Belgium (European Court of Human Rights)|43
4|2.3.1.1 The Facts|43
4|2.3.1.2 Commentary on the Significance of Tarakhel, Mubilanzila Mayeka and Kaniki Mitunga v. Belgium (European Court of Human ...|50
3|2.3.2 Case 2:AM (Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (and Lord Chancellor as Intervenor), UK Court of Ap...|58
4|2.3.2.1 The Facts|58
4|2.3.2.2 Commentary on AM (Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (and Lord Chancellor as Intervenor), UK Co...|60
3|2.3.3 Case 3: JA (Child: Risk of Persecution-Nigeria) v UK Secretary of State for the Home Department, UK Upper Tribunal Immig...|62
4|2.3.3.1 The Facts|62
4|2.3.3.2 Commentary on JA (Child: Risk of Persecution-Nigeria) v UK Secretary of State for the Home Department, UK Upper Tribun...|63
3|2.3.4 Case 4: Khadra Hassan Farah, Mahad Dahir Buraleh, Hodan Dahir Buraleh Immigration Refugee Board of Canada|73
4|2.3.4.1 The Facts|73
4|2.3.4.2 Commentary on Khadra Hassan Farah, Mahad Dahir Buraleh, Hodan Dahir Buraleh Immigration Refugee Board of Canada|74
2|Literature, Materials and Cases|76
2|Literature|76
2|Materials|76
2|Cases|78
1|Chapter 3: `Pushback´ and `Extraterritorial Collective Migration Control Measures´ Imposed on Child Refugee Asylum Seekers|79
2|3.1 Introduction: `Refoulement´ by Any Other Name Is Still `Refoulement´|79
2|3.2 The Right to Asylum Where the State Exercises `Pushback´ or `Extraterritorial Control´ and Denial of Asylum Amounts to Inh...|81
3|3.2.1 Case 1: SSHD (UK Secretary of State of the Home Department) v ZAT (Syria) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) UK Royal Cour...|81
4|3.2.1.1 The Facts|81
4|3.2.1.2 Commentary on SSHD (UK Secretary of State of the Home Department) v ZAT (Syria) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) UK Ro...|82
4|3.2.1.3 Concluding Remarks|105
3|3.2.2 Case 2: The Queen on the Application of MK, IK (a Child by His Litigation Friend MK) and HK (a Child by Her Litigation F...|110
4|3.2.2.1 The Facts|111
4|3.2.2.2 Judicial Review Decision of the UK Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber: The Queen on the Application of MK, ...|113
4|3.2.2.3 Commentary on The Queen on the Application of MK, IK (a Child by His Litigation Friend MK) and HK (a Child by Her Liti...|116
2|Literature, Materials and Cases|121
2|Literature|121
2|Materials|121
2|Cases|122
1|Chapter 4: `Unaccompanied Child Refugee Asylum Seekers´ as a Persecuted `Social Group´|123
2|4.1 A Cycle of Persecution for `Child Refugee Asylum Seekers´ Relating to Their Social Group Status|123
2|4.2 More on the Contentious Notion of Persecution Relating to `Membership of a Particular Social Group´|130
2|4.3 Case 1: AA v [UK] SSHD and Wolverhampton City Council (Interested Party) UK High Court of Justice, Queens Bench (Administr...|135
3|4.3.1 The Facts|135
3|4.3.2 The Arguments of the Parties|136
3|4.3.3 The Court´s Assessment|139
3|4.3.4 Commentary on AA v [UK] SSHD and Wolverhampton City Council (Interested Party) UK High Court of Justice, Queens Bench (A...|141
2|4.4 Case 2: Abdullahi Elmi and Aweys Abubakar v Malta (European Court of Human Rights, Chamber Judgment)|144
3|4.4.1 The Facts|144
3|4.4.2 The Court´s Assessment|146
3|4.4.3 Current Situation in Malta, and New EU Agreements Criticized as Violating the Principle of Non-Refoulement|158
3|4.4.4 Further Comment: Collective Refugee Control Measures in Selected Western European States|161
2|Literature, Materials and Cases|162
2|Literature|162
2|Materials|163
2|Cases|164
1|Chapter 5: Child Refugees and Recent U.S. Migration Control Strategies|165
2|5.1 Unaccompanied Child Refugee Asylum Seekers from Central America and Mexico|165
3|5.1.1 Child Victims of Political or Gang Violence as Convention Refugees|165
3|5.1.2 Denial of Legal Assistance to Child Refugee Asylum Seekers (a Violation of CRC Article 12)|171
3|5.1.3 Case 1: J.E. F.M. v. Lynch (U.S. Attorney General) et al., United States Federal Court of Appeals for the Ninth District|174
4|5.1.3.1 The Facts|174
4|5.1.3.2 The Federal Court of Appeals´ Assessment (Appeal from the U.S. Federal District Court for the Western District of Wash...|175
5|Substantive Question: Do Indigent Children Have a Right to Counsel in Immigration Proceedings Under the U.S. INA Act (Immigrat...|175
5|Jurisdictional Question: Does a U.S. District Court Have Jurisdiction to Hear Right-to-Counsel Constitutional Claims Brought b...|176
4|5.1.3.3 The Position of the Child Appellees|177
4|5.1.3.4 Commentary on J.E. F.M. v. Lynch (U.S. Attorney General) et al., United States Federal Court of Appeals for the Ninth ...|178
2|5.2 Some Historical Background Regarding the Treatment Accorded by the U.S. to Refugee Asylum Seekers from Central America: Un...|198
2|5.3 The United States´ `In-Country´ Refugee Processing for Minors in Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala (Central American Min...|200
2|5.4 U.S. Border Control: On Whether There Is U.S. `Outsourcing´ of `Refoulement´ of Unaccompanied Minors from Central America ...|204
2|5.5 The `Bona Fide Relationship to the U.S.´ Rule in U.S. Refugee Policy|209
3|5.5.1 Re-Considering the Legal Viability of the USSC `Bona Fide Relationship to the U.S.´ Rule as Applied to Refugees|213
3|5.5.2 The Refugee´s `Bona Fide Relationship with a U.S. Legal Entity´: U.S. Resettlement of Refugees and the Trump Travel Ban|215
3|5.5.3 Concluding Remarks|222
2|Literature, Materials and Cases|227
2|Literature|227
2|Materials|228
2|Cases|231
1|Chapter 6: In Defence of Non-Refoulement|232
2|6.1 Introduction|232
2|6.2 Case 1: Reconsidering the Judgment in X and X v. Belgium (European Court of Justice, Grand Chamber Judgment)|236
3|6.2.1 The Facts|236
3|6.2.2 Commentary on X and X v. Belgium (European Court of Justice, Grand Chamber Judgment)|237
2|Literature, Materials and Cases|243
2|Literature|243
2|Materials|243
2|Cases|244
1|Index|245