Minimum Standards for Return Procedures and International Human Rights Law

Abstract

Th e European Commission has fi nally released its long-awaited proposed directive on minimum standards for return procedures (COM (2005) 391). Taking as a starting point that standards on return procedures, however minimal they are, must comply with those international human rights norms that are binding upon EU Member States, this article seeks to identify which restrictions these norms impose on States seeking to expel foreigners from their territory. Th is article reviews what substantive protection is available to individuals facing expulsion to a country where they may be exposed to grave human rights violations, including torture. It identifi es what procedural guarantees are available to persons who are subject to an expulsion decision and those restrictions placed by international human rights law on the methods of expulsion. Finally, the proposed directive will be assessed against the benchmarks which have been identifi ed.

‘Illegal Migrants’, Gender and Vulnerability: The Case of the EU’s Returns Directive

“…Much has been written about the tensions inherent in developing a strict and securitised external migration policy for the Union while ensuring respect for the human rights of all migrants (Huysmans 2000;Cholewinski 2000;Boswell 2003), and the alleged failures of the Returns Directive in this respect have already drawn criticism (Phuong 2007;Baldaccini 2009). Despite extensive lobbying from organisations concerned with the rights of migrants and asylumseekers, the adopted text generally provides fewer protections for irregular migrants than initially envisaged (Baldaccini 2009).…”

Migrants and Religion: Paths, Issues, and Lenses

“…75-78, and Kaboulov v. Ukraine, 19 November 2009 In The evolution of the principle of non-refoulement triggered by the case law of the European Court has influenced international law as a whole. The Human Rights Committee for example, as well as the Committee against Torture, have repeatedly recognized that "the principle of 'non-refoulement' of persons to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that they would be in danger of being subjected to torture" or inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment, or would be in a danger for their life, is absolute (Bouziri, 2003;Phuong, 2007;Weissbrodt, Hörtreiter, 1999).37…”