Suchergebnisse

Disagrees with Michael Barutciski & Astri Suhrke's "Lessons from the Kosovo Refugee Crisis: Innovations in Protection and Burden-Sharing" (2001) in their assertion that Macedonia in 1999 was not legally obligated to open its borders for the Kosovar refugees. Barutciski & Suhrke believe there are arguments for burden sharing when a mass influx of refugees into a vulnerable state increases its instability, and this implies some discretion under international law concerning acceptance of refugees. The international refugees law becomes threatened if it can be overridden by policy discretion. Burden sharing would likely decrease if neighboring nations had the option of denying asylum. Nations must choose between chaos in a vulnerable state, arbitrary burden spreading, or planned burden sharing. As in Kosovo, the international community should work toward burden sharing within the framework of law for future cases of mass flight. 6 References. L. A. Hoffman

Contents 16. International refugee law – yesterday, today, but tomorrow? - Guy S. Goodwin-Gill (page 1) 17. The universal asylum system and the 2016 New York Declaration: towards an improved 'global compact' on refugees? - Terje Einarsen and Marthe Engedahl (page 10) 18. The origins of 'burden sharing' in the contemporary refugee protection regime - Claire Inder (page 25) 19. Bilateral resettlement agreements: any promising future for expanding refugee protection space? A case study of the Guantanamo ex-detainees seeking asylum in Central Asia - Khalida Azhigulova (page 42) 20. Non-refoulement under the Inter-American Human Rights System - Rodolfo Marques (page 58) 21. Resettlement mission: under international law, can the Security Council issue resolutions obligating states to resettle displaced persons? - Margarita Fourer (page 70) 22. The European Union Temporary Protection Directive: an example of solidarity in law but not in practice – a review of temporary protection in the European Union (1990–2015) - John Koo (page 96)