A comparative study on the "Safe Country of Origin" principle between the European Union and Canadian asylum legislations
Two decades following the adoption of the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, the growing number of asylum seekers arriving at the Western countries’ borders convinced European States to put in place new asylum rules to prevent asylum seekers from reaching their borders and dissuade the potential refugee applicants from seeking international protection in their respective territories. One of the most recent preventive measures has been the “Safe Countries of Origin” rule (hereafter SCO) whose main purpose is to identify and reject refugee applicants who are not in real need of international protection since they originate from countries which are deemed generally safe. In this research, we conduct a comparative study between the European Union’s Directives adopted in 2005 and recasted in 2013, and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act enacted by the Canada.  At the first step, we intend to verify the adverse impact of this deterrent rule, during the expeditious determination procedure, on the SCO asylum seekers’ fundamental human rights including the right to personal interview and the right to appeal. At the second step, our objective is to demonstrate to which extent the fundamental human rights limitations imposed on SCO asylum seekers are in contradiction with the EU’s and Canada’s constitutional obligations undertaken respectively in EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Based on this comparative research we illustrate that, while the elaboration and the application of the SCO rule in both the above-mentioned legal systems suffer from inherent flaws which infringe the basic human rights of SCO refugee applicants, Canada’s approach has had more drastic consequences on the SCO refugee applicants than those resulting from the EU’s common asylum law. Finally, we conclude that, instead of a short-term solution such as the SCO rule, the Western States must accept more responsibilities in providing international protection by supporting the countries that border the crisis zones, and establishing a workable program to accept a specific number of asylum seekers every year. Keywords: Safe Countries of Origin - Designated Countries of Origin - Human Rights -Procedural Rights - Right to Personal Interview - Right to Appeal - the European Union - Canada - Refugee Applicants - Asylum Seekers
Canada Safe Countries of Origin Designated Countries of Origin Human Rights Procedural Rights Right to Personal Interview Right to Appeal the European Union Canada Refugee Applicants Asylum Seekers