Full Description
Based on a systematic and empirical comparative study of six European Union countries, Christel Querton explores judicial decision-making in the context of persons fleeing armed conflicts in the EU. Addressing and redressing misconceptions about the relevance of the Refugee Convention, this book demonstrates how appellate authorities across the EU approach situations of armed conflict predominantly through outdated understandings of warfare and territoriality. Thus, they apply a higher standard of proof than is warranted by international refugee law. Adopting a gender perspective, Querton also shows how appellate authorities fail to acknowledge the gender-differentiated impact of armed conflicts. Drawing from gender and security studies, this book proposes an original conceptual framework which, supported by existing international legal standards, reframes the definition of 'refugee' and better reflects the reality of violence in modern-day conflicts. In doing so, it re-asserts the Refugee Convention as the cornerstone of international protection.
Contents
Part I: 1. Introduction; 2. The legal framework: the international protection of persons fleeing armed conflicts; 3. Contemporary armed conflicts, violence and gender in international refugee law; 4. Judicial constructions of risk on return to situations of contemporary armed conflict; 5. Judicial constructions of well-founded fear of being persecuted in situations of contemporary armed conflicts; 6. Judicial constructions of the refugee convention reasons for persecution in situations of contemporary armed conflict; 7. Conclusion.
