CEU Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2012
| Author | Kapustová, Eva |
|---|---|
| Title | Different Perceptions of the Obligation not to Refoule: the European and the Canadian Approach |
| Summary | The existence of a variety of sources containing the non-refoulement principle results in differing legal positions to refoulement among individual jurisdictions, depending on which legal sources are applicable. The interaction between these sources is displayed in the divergent approach to the obligation not to refoule a person to the risk of ill-treatment between the Supreme Court of Canada and the European Court of Human Rights, as manifested in the cases Suresh v. Canada and Saadi v. Italy. Subsuming the prohibition to deport a person to ill-treatment under the State’s negative obligation not to engage in such ill-treatment by the ECtHR is another factor explaining this divergence, as is the fundamental justice concept of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the Canadian context. While refoulement where a real risk of ill-treatment exists is absolutely prohibited under the ECHR, deportation to torture could be found as justified by the Supreme Court of Canada given exceptional circumstances. |
| Supervisor | Nagy, Boldizsár |
| Department | Legal Studies LLM |
| Full text | https://www.etd.ceu.edu/2012/kapustova_eva.pdf |
Visit the CEU Library.
© 2007-2021, Central European University