Customary Non-Refoulement of Refugees and Automatic Incorporation Into the Common Law

A Hong Kong Perspective

Bibliographic Data

ID9934575
AuthorsOliver Jones (0000-0003-4548-8735, British Institute of International and Comparative Law, corresponding author)
Year2009
Volume58
Issue2
Pages443-468
Publication date2009-04-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueInternational and Comparative Law Quarterly (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0020-5893 • E-ISSN: 1471-6895
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s0020589309000992
OpenAlexW2123258545
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited6

The judgment of Hartmann J of the Hong Kong Court of First Instance in C v Director of Immigration [2008] 2 HKC 165 (“C”) was ground-breaking. For the first time, a common law court unequivocally recognized a customary norm of non-refoulement of refugees. However, Hartmann J denied that the norm had attained the status of jus cogens and found Hong Kong, always guarded about asylum seekers, to be a persistent objector. His Lordship proceeded to deny the applicants any relief. They had invoked the norm to overcome the Hong Kong government’s practice of leaving the assessment of refugee status to the UNHCR. Hartmann J refused to give the norm any such procedural reach. His Lordship also refused to apply the doctrine of automatic incorporation. Through the prism of C, this article seeks to clarify the application of that doctrine, in the context of persistent objection, a constitutionally prescribed separation of powers, inconsistency between custom and statute, as well as administrative law and tortious liability. The author concludes that C should be reversed on appeal

Appeal · Common law · Doctrine · Immigration · Norm (philosophy · Political science · Refugee · Refugee law · Sociology · Statute · European Criminal Justice and Data Protection · European Law and Migration · Gender and Women's Rights · Law

Tools

Open DOISci-HubOpen Access