Non-Expulsion and Non-Refoulment : The Prohibition against Removal of Refugees with Special Reference to Articles 32 and 33 of the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees

The 20th century has, for a very good reason, been called the century of the homeless man.

More than 100 million people have either been displaced within their own country or have been forced to move to another country.

This fact, coupled with the large discretion which States sometimes enjoy under general international law with regard to aliens, has necessitated the formulation of rules of international law which grant refugees added protection against removal, particularly to countries where they may risk persecution.

The purpose of these rules is to balance the legitimate interests to the States against those of the refugee. This thesis analyzes the substantive rules of international law relating to these issues.

The author concentrates on Articles 32 and 33 of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and on the question of whether or not the so-called principle of non-refoulement constitutes a rule of customary international law, binding on States regardless of their consent. In contrast to other recent academic opinion, the author finds that this is the case.

Nevertheless, the recent trend of States to introduce restrictive measures, such as visa requirements, and sanctions on carriers which do not comply with these requirements, undermines the principle and may in the end lead to a destabilization of the whole corpus of international refugee law.