Safeguarding the Integrity of the Asylum System and the Moral Rights of Rejected Asylum Seekers: A Conditional Right to Remain

Abstract

Following the 2015 refugee crisis, concerns about the integrity and the sustainability of the asylum system have deepened. Policies that aim to deter ingenuine asylum seeking through economic and social rights restrictions, and the swift return of those whose protection claim has been rejected, have consequently increased. However, this goal is in tension with moral claims of asylum seekers during the asylum process, and also with a potential right of rejected asylum seekers to remain, if they have developed social ties in the receiving society during the lengthy asylum process. Taking the perspective of an ethical policy maker, this working paper develops guidelines towards a policy response to the dilemma between maintaining the integrity and sustainability of the asylum system and the moral rights of rejected asylum seekers.
The working paper argues that restricting the rights of asylum seekers and reducing the length of the asylum process raise ethical concerns and practical problems. Rejected asylum seekers should be treated differently depending on their normative attitude to the refugee system. Those who have made their claim in good faith should have a social membership-based right to remain in the host society. By contrast, those rejected asylum seekers who have made disingenuous claims in bad faith should be legitimately returned.

Keywords: Asylum, ethical dilemma, right to remain, rejected asylum seeker