Interception of Asylum Seekers at Sea in Distress from the European Court of Human Rights’ Perspective

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

Associate Prof. of Payam-e-Noor University

10.22099/jls.2022.39254.4193

Abstract

Rescuing people from distress at sea is one of events to the Coastal State is involved. But some EU member states in recent years not only do not save people from distress at sea, but also they have begun overseas controls, interception asylum seekers and returning them from the High Seas, Exclusive Economic Zone and territorial sea to home or third state. Purpose and subject of this article is to study different dimensions of the Coastal State obligations in rescuing people from distress from the European Court of Human Rights’ view. The research method is analytical descriptive, based on requirements of the UNCLOS, the Asylum Convention and the European Court of Human Rights’ jurisprudence. Main research question is what is the International Law of the Sea approach to interception asylum seekers rescued from distress at sea? Research findings show that rescuing people from distress at sea based on the International Law of the Sea teachings is the Coastal State obligations and the rights of survivors. But the Coastal State’s approach is severe ban in the ECHR’ jurisprudence to overseas control and interception of ships carrying asylum seekers in distress at the High Sea to return them to the home or third state from the High Seas has led to ignoring its obligations and the rights of survivors in the UNCLOS.

Keywords

References

Aalberts, Tanja (2014) “Sovereignty at Sea: The Law and Politics of Saving Lives in Mare Liberum”, Journal of International Relations and Development, Vol. 17(4), pp. 439–468. Carling, Jorgen (2007) “Migration Control and Migrant Fatalities at the Spanish‐African Borders”, Journal of International Migration Review, Vol. 41, No.2, pp. 316-343. Executive Committee of the United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees (2003) Conclusion, No. 97 (LIV). European Commission (2017) “Migration on the Central Mediterranean Route Managing Flows, Saving Lives”, Joint Communication to the European Parliament the European Council and the Council, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri= CELEX:52017JC0004&from=LT. European Court of Human Rights (2012) Hirsi Jamaa and others v. Italy, Judgment, Ap‌plication No. 27765/09, 23 February 2012. Frelick, Bill; Kysel, Ian and Podkul, Jennifer (2016) “The Impact of Externalization of Migration Controls on the Rights of Asylum Seekers and Other Migrants”, Journal on Migration and Human Security, Vol. 4(4), pp. 190–220. Heijer, Maarten (2013) “Reflections on Refoulement and Collective Expulsion in the Hirsi Case”, International Journal of Refugee Law, Vol. 25(2), pp. 265–290. Heijer, Maarten; Rijpma, Jorrit and Spijkerboer, Thomas (2016) “Coercion, Prohibition, and Great Expectations: The Continuing Failure of the Common European Asylum System”, Journal of Common Market Law Review, Vol. 53(3), pp. 607-642. International Maritime Organization (1979) Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue (SAR Convention). Pattison, James (2015) “Mapping the Responsibilities to Protect: A Typology of International Duties”, Journal of Global Responsibility to Protect, Vol. 7(2), pp. 190–210. Pijnenburg, Annick (2018) “From Italian Pushbacks to Libyan Pullbacks: Is Hirsi 2.0 in the Making in Strasbourg?”, European Journal of Migration and Law, Vol. 20, pp. 396–426. Trauner, Florian (2016) “Asylum Policy: the EU’s ‘Crises’ and the Looming Policy Regime Failure”, Journal of European Integration, Vol. 38(3), pp. 311–325. Weinzierl, Ruth and Lisson, Urszula (2007) “Border Management and Human Rights: A Study of the EU Law and the Law of the Sea”, German Institute for Human Rights, No. 13. United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees (2011a) Intervention before the European Court of Human Rights in the Case of Hirsi and Others v. Italy, 29 March 2011, Application No. 27765/09, www.refworld.org/docid/4d92d2c22.html. United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees (2011b) Oral Intervention before the European Court of Human Rights in the Case of Hirsi and Others v. Italy, 22 June 2011, Application No. 27765/09, www.refworld.org/docid/4e0356d42.html. Trevisanut, Seline (2008) “The Principle of Non-Refoulement at Sea and the Effectiveness of Asylum Protection”, Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law, Vol. 12, pp. 205-246. Trevisanut, Seline (2014) “Is There a Right to be Rescued at Sea? A Constructive View”, Journal of Questions of International Law, Vol. 4, pp. 3-15.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics