- Thread starter
- Staff
- #1
Dadparvar
Staff member
- Nov 11, 2016
- 11,124
- 0
- 6
A UN expert warned on Tuesday that policies on border protection and migration cannot nullify the absolute ban on returning a person to torture as set out in international law.
UN Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Alice Jill Edwards, published a position paper on the principle of non-refoulement to torture. The paper stipulates that this principle is one of the “most important safeguards in international human rights law”, emphasizing that it creates an absolute prohibition of torture, without exception.
The non-refoulement principle prohibits States from “transferring or removing individuals from their jurisdiction or effective control when there are substantial grounds for believing that the person would be at risk of irreparable harm” including torture.
Edwards responded to the recent moves made by governments, such as the United States and United Kingdom, to “accelerate removals” and “expand third-country return arrangements“. She warned that policies or bilateral deals must not contravene the non-refoulement principle, as externalizing asylum processing to third countries does not absolve a nation of its legal duty to protect vulnerable individuals from being returned to a dangerous and potentially life-threatening situation.
On 1 June 2026, the Council of the EU approved the Return Regulation whose powers include the expansion countries of return and return hubs, and the expansion of entry bans. The UK government also recently announced plans to incorporate AI facial recognition technology to assess younger asylum seekers’ ages.
Edwards elaborated that, while states do have the “right to control their borders” and remove those who have not followed legal processes, they cannot return persons to torture. She reiterated the importance of fair assessments of every person facing removal, warning that diplomatic assurances “must never become paper promises used to legitimise an otherwise unlawful return.”
Her warning comes amidst a time of global turbulence for refugees and asylum seekers, with Egyptian authorities forcibly deporting Sudanese nationals fleeing armed conflict, which results in them having to live in an active war zone where they face a compounded risk of being subjected to extrajudicial killings, and torture. In India, its strict border enforcement policies which saw a naval vessel cast Rohingya refugees adrift into the Andaman Sea was decried by rights groups as a direct contravention of this principle.
Although many states have justified their acts of forcibly returning asylum seekers to dangerous situations as an act to control their border security and have emphasized that since they are not signatories to the 1951 UN Refugee Convention, they are not under any legal obligation to do so, Edwards notes that it is important for them to comply by their obligations under customary international law.
The post UN expert warns that border policies cannot override the absolute ban on deportation to torture appeared first on JURIST - News.
Continue reading...
Note: We don't have any responsibilities about this news. Its been posted here by Feed Reader and we had no controls and checking on it. And because News posted here will be deleted automatically after 21 days, threads are closed so that no one spend time to post and discuss here. You can always check the source and discuss in their site.
UN Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Alice Jill Edwards, published a position paper on the principle of non-refoulement to torture. The paper stipulates that this principle is one of the “most important safeguards in international human rights law”, emphasizing that it creates an absolute prohibition of torture, without exception.
The non-refoulement principle prohibits States from “transferring or removing individuals from their jurisdiction or effective control when there are substantial grounds for believing that the person would be at risk of irreparable harm” including torture.
Edwards responded to the recent moves made by governments, such as the United States and United Kingdom, to “accelerate removals” and “expand third-country return arrangements“. She warned that policies or bilateral deals must not contravene the non-refoulement principle, as externalizing asylum processing to third countries does not absolve a nation of its legal duty to protect vulnerable individuals from being returned to a dangerous and potentially life-threatening situation.
On 1 June 2026, the Council of the EU approved the Return Regulation whose powers include the expansion countries of return and return hubs, and the expansion of entry bans. The UK government also recently announced plans to incorporate AI facial recognition technology to assess younger asylum seekers’ ages.
Edwards elaborated that, while states do have the “right to control their borders” and remove those who have not followed legal processes, they cannot return persons to torture. She reiterated the importance of fair assessments of every person facing removal, warning that diplomatic assurances “must never become paper promises used to legitimise an otherwise unlawful return.”
Her warning comes amidst a time of global turbulence for refugees and asylum seekers, with Egyptian authorities forcibly deporting Sudanese nationals fleeing armed conflict, which results in them having to live in an active war zone where they face a compounded risk of being subjected to extrajudicial killings, and torture. In India, its strict border enforcement policies which saw a naval vessel cast Rohingya refugees adrift into the Andaman Sea was decried by rights groups as a direct contravention of this principle.
Although many states have justified their acts of forcibly returning asylum seekers to dangerous situations as an act to control their border security and have emphasized that since they are not signatories to the 1951 UN Refugee Convention, they are not under any legal obligation to do so, Edwards notes that it is important for them to comply by their obligations under customary international law.
The post UN expert warns that border policies cannot override the absolute ban on deportation to torture appeared first on JURIST - News.
Continue reading...
Note: We don't have any responsibilities about this news. Its been posted here by Feed Reader and we had no controls and checking on it. And because News posted here will be deleted automatically after 21 days, threads are closed so that no one spend time to post and discuss here. You can always check the source and discuss in their site.