Asylum Decision-Making in the Context of the Eritrean Military/National Service: Persecution amounting to Slavery?

为了有权获得1951年《关于难民地位的公约》及其1967年《议定书》(下称《1951年难民公约》)的保护，庇护申请者必须符合《公约》第1A(2)条对“难民”的定义，也就是说，他们必须表现出“有充分理由害怕因种族、宗教、国籍、某一特定社会群体的成员身份或政治见解而受到迫害”。然而，1951年《难民公约》没有详细说明“迫害”的概念，也没有专门的条约机构能够对1951年《难民公约》的条款作出具有约束力的解释(只有在发生国家间争端的情况下才有国际法院)。因此，第1A条第(2)款中的难民定义受国内司法解释的制约。在这一背景下，本博士项目侧重于批判性地分析厄立特里亚军队/国家服务在难民地位确定程序中是否可以被概念化为“迫害”(1951年《难民公约》第1A(2)条的含义)。在此过程中，本研究评估了国际难民法与国际人权法、国际人道主义法和国际刑法等其他国际法分支之间的联系，以及欧洲各国庇护决策者如何适用这些不同的法律领域，以赋予“迫害”这一法律概念的内容。本研究将法律渊源研究、政策研究和实践研究相结合。因此，除了以图书馆为基础的研究外，它还包括海外的田野调查。这项实地研究包括与联合王国、瑞士、德国、丹麦和瑞典(这些国家是厄立特里亚在欧洲的庇护申请的主要接受国)的庇护律师进行半结构化访谈；与厄立特里亚难民和寻求庇护者进行访谈；以及与民间社会组织成员进行讨论。

In order to be entitled to protection under the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol (hereinafter "1951 Refugee Convention"), asylum applicants must fall within the definition of "refugee" in its article 1A(2), that is, they must demonstrate a "well-founded fear of being persecuted" for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. The 1951 Refugee Convention, however, does not elaborate on the notion of "persecution", and there exists no specialised treaty body capable of providing a binding interpretation of the provisions of the 1951 Refugee Convention (only the International Court of Justice in the case of an inter-state dispute). Therefore, the refugee definition in article 1A(2) is subject to domestic judicial interpretation. This, coupled with other factors, has led to conflicting interpretations of "persecution" within the specific context of the Eritrean Military/National Service by asylum decision-makers in various European states.Against this background, this PhD project focuses on critically analysing whether the Eritrean Military/National service could be conceptualised as "persecution" (within the meaning of Article 1A(2) of the 1951 Refugee Convention) in refugee status determination proceedings. In doing so, this research assesses the interface between international refugee law and other branches of international law such as international human rights law, international humanitarian law and international criminal law and how these distinct areas of law are applied, if at all, by national asylum decision-makers in Europe in giving content to the legal concept of "persecution". The research combines the study of primary and secondary legal sources, policy and practice. As such, besides library-based research, it also includes overseas fieldwork research. This fieldwork research comprises semi-structured interviews with asylum lawyers in the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Germany, Denmark, and Sweden (which are among the major recipients of Eritrean asylum applications in Europe); interviews and FGDs with Eritrean refugees and asylum-seekers; and discussions with members of civil society organisations.