Suchergebnisse

This article uses data obtained from Canada's Immigration and Refugee Board [IRB] to calculate the refugee claim grant rates of individual IRB adjudicators.The data reveals that, in 2006, grant rates varied significantly across adjudicators.Some adjudicators accorded refugee status in virtually all cases they heard, others granted refugee status rarely, if at all. The article explores several explanations offered by the IRB for refugee claim grant rate variations. These explanations relate to patterns in case assignment due to adjudicator specialization in particular types of cases from particular regions of the world. The author contends that while patterns in case assignment do affect grant rates, they do not account for the full variations evident in the data. Rather, outcomes in refugee adjudication appear to hinge, at least in part, on the identity of the adjudicator assigned. The author draws three main conclusions from the data on refugee adjudication in 2006. First, further empirical research should be undertaken to verify the results of the study and to identify specific features of adjudicator identity that affect refugee claim outcomes. Second, the appointment process for IRB adjudicators should be carefully scrutinized in light of grant rate disparities.Third, given both the grant rate disparities and the life and death stakes involved in refugee adjudication, it is imperative there be opportunities to meaningfully review negative first instance refugee determinations. To this end, the government should immediately implement the provisions in Canada's immigration legislation that establish a Refugee Appeal Division at the IRB.

This article discusses the case of refugees who are LGBT, and the possible grounds for using LGBT status as a basis for prioritizing LGBT persons in refugee admissions. I argue that those states most willing and able to protect LGBT persons against a variety of (also) non-asylum-grounding injustices have strong moral reasons to admit and prioritize refugees with LGBT status over non-LGBT refugees in refugee admissions. These states – typically, Western liberal democracies – are uniquely positioned to provide effective protection for refugees who are LGBT, owing to the failures of other, also refugee receiving, states to do so. The case for prioritizing refugees with LGBT status is built upon two interrelated factors. First, on the specific vulnerability of LGBT persons to a variety of (also) non-asylum-grounding injustices, and second, on the relatively low number of countries that are both willing and able to protect LGBT persons against such injustices.

Refugees began to flee South Vietnam after its collapse in Apr 1975. Three years later, the ethnic Chinese left the country in another exodus. Of the 270,000 arriving in the People's Republic of China, nearly half were accommodated in Guangxi, where they were to rebuild life anew on farms, factories, & fishing villages. While it has been found that refugees from Vietnam in the West continue experiencing difficulties, little is known about the condition of those in China. As a first attempt, this paper examines the strategies adopted by the Guangxi authorities in receiving the incomers & assisting them to settle in the province. Upon arrival in China, the refugees were faced with problems somewhat different from those encountered by their counterparts in the West. There was neither language nor cultural barrier to overcome. The fact that they were able to gain employment had more to do with the local economic structure & the nature of work than with effective planning. But given the suddenness & the sheer volume of the influx, the efforts made by the Chinese authorities cannot be dismissed. 54 References. Adapted from the source document.

Afghanistan is an increasingly dangerous war zone, but, according to journalist Lam Thuy Vo, Germany hasn't exactly laid out the welcome mat for Afghan refugees. While Germany approved 96 percent of asylum applications for Syrians in 2015, Afghan asylum-seekers have less than a 50-50 shot of securing permission to stay in the country.

Canada is widely known today to accept migrants seeking refuge, however, some groups received preferential treatment when entering Canada after the Second World War. The purpose of this study is to examine the political, economic, and social reasons behind why the Canadian government wrote preferential refugee policies for specific groups seeking refuge. Utilizing government correspondence written between 1948 and 1957 and literature that reviews the implementation of public policy and its effects, this study analyzes the motivations and factors that led to the government's policy decisions on American draft dodgers fleeing the draft, Baltic refugees fleeing Soviet repatriation and rule, and Hungarian refugees who fled communism. This reveals that the Government of Canada established preferential policies for refugees based on race, religion, and assimilationist principles. It proves that although Canada embraces multiculturalism and humanitarian refugee policies today, in its past, it chose to selectively accept refugees and provide preferential avenues for refugees seeking safety in Canada.

The world is currently facing the largest refugee crisis since the end of World War II, but the international response lacks cohesiveness and aid has been far less than what is needed. The situation requires international cooperation in the form of financial, geographic, and political solidarity, which necessitates strong political leadership and public support.

This article examines how grassroots refugee-activists and 'solidarians' in Greece articulate a collectivist political vision and praxis of care through an expanding network of social obligation that upends narrow understandings of refugees' 'basic' rights and moral obligations of care. The refugees draw on a wide range of universalising collectivist frames including Islamic, Anarcho-Marxist and Palestinian-liberationist frames to articulate visions of solidarity and nurture trust and mutual care amongst refugees.

Abstract
This article discusses the pragmatic dimension humanitarian classifications and discourses play in hierarchical and discriminatory practices taking place in the refugee regime. It does so by focusing on the notion of "vulnerability," very much used in contemporary humanitarianism. The paper deconstructs the two main uses/understandings of this notion: its use as a humanitarian tool to categorize those most in need among the humanitarian beneficiaries – i.e. its use to categorize "people with specific needs;" and its "unofficial" use by humanitarian workers. In addition to being both limited and stereotyped, they are further in contradictions with each other; yet, they both ultimately reproduce hierarchies and inequalities among refugees from Mali. Eventually, performing the ideal, vulnerable refugee becomes impossible for urban refugees in Burkina Faso, and most other refugees too, thus making it harder for them to be perceived as legitimate refugees in the eyes of the humanitarian community.