LEADER 04469nam 22007695 450 001 9911034955103321 005 20251023130419.0 010 $a3-032-08351-6 024 7 $a10.1007/978-3-032-08351-7 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC32373405 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL32373405 035 $a(CKB)41705297100041 035 $a(DE-He213)978-3-032-08351-7 035 $a(EXLCZ)9941705297100041 100 $a20251023d2025 u| 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aurcnu|||||||| 181 $ctxt$2rdacontent 182 $cc$2rdamedia 183 $acr$2rdacarrier 200 10$aCounteracting Containment Policies in the EU $eSafeguarding the Non-Refoulement Principle /$fby Jenny Poon 205 $a1st ed. 2025. 210 1$aCham :$cSpringer Nature Switzerland :$cImprint: Springer,$d2025. 215 $a1 online resource (344 pages) 225 1 $aEuropean Union and its Neighbours in a Globalized World,$x2524-8936 ;$v31 311 08$a3-032-08350-8 327 $aChapter 1: Introduction: Setting the Stage -- Chapter 2: Non-Refoulement Protection under International and European Refugee Law -- Chapter 3: The Common European Asylum System and Non-Refoulement -- Chapter 4: Containment in Europe -- Chapter 5: The United Kingdom and Non-Refoulement -- Chapter 6: Germany and Non-Refoulement -- Chapter 7: Conclusion: Protecting Non-Refoulement -- Chapter 8: Bibliography. 330 $aThis monograph examines an individual?s right not to be returned to places where they may be in danger of serious human rights violations (termed ?non-refoulement?). It argues that EU asylum practices can lead to a failure to observe this important right. As dire consequences can result if individuals are returned to places where they may face death, torture, or other cruel treatment, the European asylum system must comply with non-refoulement. However, EU countries use various tactics, including legal measures, to ?contain? asylum claimants and refugees to other countries and to evade their responsibilities to observe non-refoulement under international and European law. These ?containment? strategies are demonstrated in two case study examples: the United Kingdom and Germany. In the first example, the United Kingdom returns asylum claimants and refugees back to transit countries where they did not claim asylum. This method of ?containing? asylum claimants and refugees effectively increases the chances of them being indirectly returned to face violations of human rights. In the second example, Germany returns these claimants and refugees through transfer processes back to another EU country by relying solely on guarantees from national governments. This effectively ?contains? the claimants and refugees outside of Germany, again increasing the risks of human rights violations. As violence and conflicts persist, this book contributes to existing literature by providing human rights law analysis with a unique lens of ?containment?. 410 0$aEuropean Union and its Neighbours in a Globalized World,$x2524-8936 ;$v31 606 $aCivil rights 606 $aEuropean communities 606 $aHuman rights 606 $aLaw$zEurope 606 $aConflict of laws 606 $aConflict of laws 606 $aInternational law 606 $aComparative law 606 $aEmigration and immigration$xGovernment policy 606 $aEuropean Fundamental Rights and Freedoms 606 $aHuman Rights 606 $aEuropean Law 606 $aPrivate International Law, International and Foreign Law, Comparative Law 606 $aMigration Policy 615 0$aCivil rights. 615 0$aEuropean communities. 615 0$aHuman rights. 615 0$aLaw 615 0$aConflict of laws. 615 0$aConflict of laws. 615 0$aInternational law. 615 0$aComparative law. 615 0$aEmigration and immigration$xGovernment policy. 615 14$aEuropean Fundamental Rights and Freedoms. 615 24$aHuman Rights. 615 24$aEuropean Law. 615 24$aPrivate International Law, International and Foreign Law, Comparative Law. 615 24$aMigration Policy. 676 $a341.2422 676 $a342.085 700 $aPoon$b Jenny$01852983 801 0$bMiAaPQ 801 1$bMiAaPQ 801 2$bMiAaPQ 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9911034955103321 996 $aCounteracting Containment Policies in the EU$94448981 997 $aUNINA