Persecution in the Fog of War: The House of Lords' Decision in Adan

Posted: 22 Oct 2011

See all articles by Michael Kagan

Michael Kagan

University of Nevada, Las Vegas, William S. Boyd School of Law

William P. Johnson

Saint Louis University

Date Written: 2002

Abstract

International law requires that a person have a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership of a particular social group in order to be recognized as a refugee. That is, under the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, there must be a nexus between the danger faced by the refugee and one of the five Convention-recognized reasons for persecution. However, in a 1998 decision of the House of Lords in the United Kingdom, the House of Lords concluded that a man fleeing clan warfare in Somalia could not meet the nexus test because the claimant, who indisputably faced danger for reasons of his clan membership, faced no greater danger than the dangers faced by members of other clans. This conclusion was incorrect, however, because differential impact is not required by the Refugee Convention.

In addition, the House of Lords improperly applied a different standard in the case of the claimant as a result of the state of civil war in Somalia, reasoning that the Refugee Convention does not apply to those caught up in civil war where law and order have broken down and every group seems to be fighting some other group. But review of the language of the Refugee Convention and its drafting history shows that the House of Lords was mistaken in concluding that fighting between clans engaged in civil war cannot constitute persecution for reasons of a Convention ground.

Fleeing from civil war is not enough by itself to satisfy the requirements of the Refugee Convention, but in some circumstances war-related danger can give rise to a valid claim to refugee status. And there is no requirement that an applicant for refugee status be more at risk than other persons or groups in his or her country of origin. The relevant question is whether the Convention ground is causally connected to the applicant's predicament.

Keywords: international law, refugee status, civil war, differential impact

Suggested Citation

Kagan, Michael and Johnson, William P., Persecution in the Fog of War: The House of Lords' Decision in Adan (2002). Michigan Journal of International Law, Vol. 23, No. 2, 2002. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1662680

Michael Kagan

University of Nevada, Las Vegas, William S. Boyd School of Law ( email )

4505 South Maryland Parkway
Box 451003
Las Vegas, NV 89154
United States

William P. Johnson (Contact Author)

Saint Louis University ( email )

100 N. Tucker Blvd.
St. Louis, MO 63101
United States
(314) 977-8172 (Phone)

HOME PAGE: http://www.slu.edu/law/faculty/william-johnson.php

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
346
PlumX Metrics
!

Under construction: SSRN citations will be offline until July when we will launch a brand new and improved citations service, check here for more details.

For more information