Those fleeing from persecutions or other situations endangering their lives or physical integrity, from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, benefit from the effects of the obligation weighing on the States from which they request protection and consisting in the duty not to return the fled person back to the source of the danger, be it the persecuting Country, or another State, which – in turn – could send her/him there. This obligation is referred to as of non-refoulement. This principle is the thread that weaves the normative (multi-level: national, regional, international) scheme of the right of asylum. In this essay, I will try to describe the evolution of this principle from the subjective point of view (ratione personae), by comparing what is prescribed by the international legal order and the system created in the framework of the European Union (Directive 2001/55/EC, Directive 2013/33/EU i.e. Directive Reception, Directives 2011/95/EU i.e. Qualification Directive, 2013/32/EC i.e. New Asylum Procedures Directive and Regulation No. 604/2013i.e. Dublin iii Regulation). This way, it emerge how the multilevel legal structure in favour of individuals seeking protection is based on a scope of the principle of non-refoulement, which, limited at its origin, is nowadays structured in different modalities with different content, depending on the beneficiaries of the obligation.
|Titolo:||The Principle of Non-refoulement between International Law and European Union Law|
|Data di pubblicazione:||2016|
|Appare nelle tipologie:||Contributo in volume (capitolo o saggio)|