WHAT ARE REFUGEES?

user ballots

WHAT ARE REFUGEES?


[+] serious ballot by EUROTOPIA
ACTIVE Mon Sep 17, 07 - Tue Sep 16, 08

Do you consider people who flee their country of origin due to severe poverty, widespread disease or a natural disaster to be 'refugees'?

If so, by international law you are incorrect. People cannot be recognised as refugees by those claims. Such people are certainly 'asylum seekers', but not 'refugees'.

Under international law, refugees are individuals who:

- are outside their country of nationality or habitual residence;
- have a well-founded fear of persecution because of their race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion; and
- are unable or unwilling to avail themselves of the protection of that country, or to return there, for fear of persecution.

A 'refugee' under actual international law is thus very specfically in regards to people whom face persecution which have to fall strictly under the above guidelines.

Do you think the legal definition of a 'refugee' in the international framework should be expanded to include those fleeing from severe poverty, the effects of a natural disaster or widespread disease?

Yes, the term should be expanded to include them
No, the term should remain specific
In between


Ballot #118403 : SEE RESULTS

Comment:

show your vote with comment?

v 2.0 © BESTANDWORST.COM
smile bank:









similiar ballots:
102655. Should the U.N. assist the 250,000 war refugees in Iraq, too?
118434. Should Europe continue to allow refugees to stay?
118404. Should Japan, South Korea and Taiwan be letting in much much more refugees?
105520. Idaho town urges the purchase of guns to shoot refugees


COMMENTS:
I have seen the media seriously misuse the term 'refugee', expanding to include things which in reality to not legally fall under the definition.

Even in regards to escape from armed conflict in one's country, the definition of a refugee is even then much more specific than you may imagine.
by EUROTOPIA on Mon Sep 17, 07 7:33am [+]

Voted : No, the term should remain specific
I personally believe that the definition of a refugee should remain specific. Refugees should be specifically in regards to those that would face persecution for one of the defined reasons if they were to return to their country of origin. Keeping the definition specific is for practical reasons that the international community has unique obligations toward such defined people.

That is not to say that I believe those fleeing disease, poverty or natural disasters should not also be helped. On the contrary, such 'asylum seekers' should be helped out as well, of course. But I believe that if the definition is expanded, then there will be less nations willing to devote themselves to the signatory obligations of the refugee convention and the specific needs of those whom would face real and imminent persecution upon a forced return may as a result be overlooked.
by EUROTOPIA on Mon Sep 17, 07 7:41am [+]

Voted : In between
A tsunami or armed conflict should qualify some for refugee assistance.
by skylab on Mon Sep 17, 07 12:31pm [+]






About Us | Join Us | Privacy Policy | Contact
© 2002-2008 BestAndWorst.com All Rights Reserved