Who Are Stateless Persons?

The definition of the concept human rights can differ for each person. The basic definition of human rights is the rights each person deserves to live their life in an equal and just society regardless of where they live, what they believe in, or the color of their skin. The years between 1933 and 1945, post-World War I, is sometimes viewed as the worst decade in history. The Holocaust, was a big reason for this belief. Holo meaning whole, and Kaustos meaning burned or burning was the phrase used to describe this horrific genocide . Should there be limits to state sovereignty when basic human rights are threatened by genocide? It began around 1933, when people in Germany, Poland, and many other places in Europe, started to separate

“Ideas about human rights have evolved over many centuries. But they achieved strong international support following the Holocaust and World War II. To protect future generations from a repeat of these horrors, the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948 and invited states to sign and ratify it”

In 1951 we stood tall and proud with our green and gold colours as we signed the non refoulement and become a part of the refugee convention. We vowed to ensure the protection and basic human rights of asylum seekers and refugees are meant. This momentous day came as a glimpse of hope to

A refugee is a person who was forced to leave their country. Whether it be from warfare or natural disaster, their homes are no longer safe to live in, so they need to relocate elsewhere. Once someone sets foot on the journey of becoming a refugee, they become vulnerable and dependent with no sense of what the future will bring. In an attempt to accommodate them, first world countries with the resources necessary to assist these refugees, are struggling to determine whether or not they should step-in and help. Some argue that taking them in could come with excessive consequences, while others believe they could be assets. Although there may be a few consequences, they are outweighed by the benefits and undeniable severity of the situation.

Implementation of international human rights law can happen on either a local, a territorial or a global level. States that endorse human rights arrangements confer themselves to regarding those rights and guaranteeing

The Act of State Doctrine: states that the judicial branch of one country will not examine the validity of public acts committed by a recognize foreign government within the latter’s own territory.

A few United Nations representatives from Cuba, India, and Panama have wished to resolve the problem of genocide by recognizing it as an international crime, as stated in Document A. For example, inadequate provisions were placed when various Nazis were not punished for their wrongdoings. Nonetheless, this is seen as a negative aspect; however, it should be seen as motivation for others to strive to prevent further acts of genocide by punishing it as an international crime and create international laws. Since the late 1940s the United Nations has brought forth countless amounts of articles and documents such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Document E), which includes various articles that back up specific rights such as the right to life, liberty, and security of person, for these rights have since then helped prevent acts of genocide. It is through international laws where genocide will be ceased by making it an international crime, where it will assure international cooperation for its prevention and be dealt with its true deserving

The State Action Requirement is a condition of law deeming that in order for an individuals rights to be violated, it has to be by a member of or someone acting upon behalf of the State. In Thomas Pogge’s essay he argues that the SAR is a reasonable condition, while Catherine MacKinnon argues in her work that the State Action Requirement excludes women’s suffering because it does not fit within the realm of SAR. Pogge believes that rights violations can come from the State’s own acts of disrespect, and also they can come from the State’s inability or refusal to act in certain situations. MacKinnon believes that there should be not State Action Requirement, because it systematically ignores or disregards women’s suffering under the guise of not seeing gender (in order to indiscriminate), which results in crimes against women being seen as inevitable of the state of their nation or just things that happen because of their gender. The State Action Requirement can be useful in certain situations, but it is not of my belief that it should be mandatory for any human rights violations, as violations occur every day around the world and because they are not committed by a State agent, they are not seen for what they truly are: violations of the rights of groups that are in no position to defend themselves. Because of this, through looking at both author’s assessments of the SAR, I have to agree with MacKinnon that the State

A determination of convention refugee status is made by an immigration officer or tribunal, based on several factors under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (“the Act”).

(Human Rights Law Centre, 2011). It is stated that immigration detention is not used to punish people, but instead it is administrative function whereby those people do not have a valid visa were detained and assessed and if proven to be legal they have a rights to stay and if not they will be immediately removed from the country. The concern is to reconcile what the requirements of the UN and those of the Migration Act.

Reason: Under Articles 3 and 5, only a citizen of the united states is allowed to be a citizen of a state.

In 2000, Ahmed Al-Kateb came to Australia without a visa. He was immediately taken into custody and was declined a temporary protection visa. Because he was born in Palestine to Kuwaiti parents, it did not enable him the right of any citizenship to those countries nor in Australia. Therefore, Al-Kateb was officially defined as a stateless

And The Article 2 of the UDHR provides that “Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it is independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.”

Refugees, asylum seekers and UASC are terms which are often used interchangeably but have different legal definitions (Ruxton, 1996). For the purpose of this assignment it is important to differentiate between these terms. A refugee is a person "owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality, and is unable to or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country…" (Article 1 of the United Convention of Human Rights, 1951). An asylum seeker is “a person who has left their country of origin, has applied for recognition as a refugee in

The United Nations is widely regarded and respected as the most powerful institution that promotes international cooperation and human rights action. In theory, actions implemented by and within the United Nations are based on the mutual global goal of protecting international human rights and preventing human sufferings. These actions are constituted through three main mechanisms: the Treaty-based system, the Human Rights Council, and Security Council and Humanitarian Interventions, with the level of confrontation and seriousness in each mechanism increases respectively. While aimed to serve the mutual goal of protecting human rights over the world and have shown some successes, in a world of sovereignty, actions when implemented are in fact grounded by the national interests of each state, including embracing its national sovereignty, concreting its strategic relationships with other states, and enhancing its reputation in the international community. This paper will analyze the successes and failures of each of the three mechanisms of the United Nations regime, through which it aims to prove that when it comes to actions, states focus more on their national, and in some cases, regional interests than on the mutual goal of strengthening human rights throughout the world, thus diminishing the legitimacy of the whole United Nations system.