Joan Fitzpatrick

Temporary Protection of Refugees: Elements of a Formalized Regime

Temporary protection of refugees (TP) gained surprising prominence during the 1990s as a response to forced migration, at times seeming poised to displace the regime based on the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol. The unprecedented Humanitarian Evacuation Programme to airlift Kosovar refugees to temporary safety in European and more distant states exemplifies TP’s appeal and adaptability. The Kosovo experience, by restoring faith that some mass influxes are genuinely temporary, may reinvigorate enthusiasm for TP, which had flagged during the endgame to the Bosnian refugee crisis.

Jurisdiction of Military Commissions and the Ambiguous War on Terrorism

The Military Order issued on November 13,2001,1 by President George W. Bush does not offer a clear rationale for subjecting international terrorists, and persons suspected of links to them, to trial by military commissions. Military commissions can be designed for several purposes: (1) to prosecute violations of the law of war, as an alternative to courts-martial; (2) to fill a legal vacuum where armed conflict disables the civil courts; and (3) to impose swift and certain punishment against civilians suspected of specific crimes. While the first two purposes are legitimate and reflected in past United States practice, the third is questionable and a sharp departure from democratic traditions. The ambiguous nature of the “war” against international terrorism and the sweeping text of the November 13 Military Order obscure which objective(s) the order is intended to accomplish.

The Refugee Convention, 1951 : the travaux préparatoires analysed, with a commentary

This work provides the first authoritative commentary on articles 2-37 of the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees and is essential reading for practitioners, academics and researchers in the field of refugee protection. The Convention, which provides the basic definition and enshrines the rights of the refugee, remains the cornerstone of protection throughout the world. The commentary graphically illustrates the issues raised by the refugee problem for the International Community of the time and provides a valuable point of reference through the similarities it reveals to the issues arising out of many refugee questions today. It is a unique research resource containing comments and debates of representatives of those states who cooperated with the drafting of the Convention. The authors direct participation in the process which led to the adoption of the Convention by the UN has enabled him to provide an invaluable guide to the understanding of the text.

Republic of South Africa v. Grootboom, and Minister of Health v. Treatment Action Campaign

Republic of South Africa v. Grootboom. Case No. CCT 11/00. 2000 (11) BCLR 1169. Constitutional Court of South Africa, October 4, 2000. Minister of Health v. Treatment Action Campaign. Case No. CCT 8/02. At . Constitutional Court of South Africa, July 5, 2002. Two cases decided by the Constitutional Court of South Africa in 2000 and 2002 implement several economic, social, and cultural rights guaranteed by the Constitution of South Africa. The decisions illuminate the role in such reasoning of human rights treaties to which South Africa is a state party or a signatory. They also analyze General Comment No. 3 of die UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Committee). These cases, Republic of South Africa v. Grootboom, decided October 4,2000, and Minister of Health v. Treatment Action Campaign, decided July 5, 2002, illuminate questions concerning both die jusdciability of economic, social, and cultural rights—at least as incorporated into Soudi Africas Bill of Rights, sections 7 through 39 of its Constitution—and the concept of “minimum core obligations” as developed by the Committee.