I Book Review: Complementary Protection in International Refugee Law
| DOI | 10.1177/016934410902700309 |
| Date | 01 September 2009 |
| Published date | 01 September 2009 |
| Subject Matter | Part D: DocumentationI Book Review |
I Book Reviews
Netherlands Q uarterly of Human R ights, Vol. 27/3 (2009) 427
diversity of regul atory levels (international, European and nationa l) hinders eective
participat ion.
Part VI, entitled international humanitaria n law, contains an article by Luisa
Vierucci about oensive milita ry applications of biotechnologies. e chapter studies
dierent treaties and conventions and shows that there seems to exist an agreement on
a ban on milita ry applications of biotechnology. at agreement does not rest merely
on the principle t hat human suering shou ld be avoided, but also on a concern with
environmental protection. Vierucci investigate s what obstacles might hinder eective
control mechanisms of this ba n.
Even if not a ll articles reac h the same level of reection, the volume i n general is
highly valuable a s an overview of debates on the interface bet ween human rights and
biotechnology. Also, t he tables on diverse legislations and internationa l instruments
and the index included by the editors, a re extremely helpful.
Jane McAdam, C omplementary Protection in Internatio nal Refuge e Law, Oxford
University Press, Oxford, 20 07, 336 p., ISBN: 9780199203062*
Over the past decades, Western States have developed a practice of grant ing asylum
to persons who, according to the criteria the se States apply, do not qualify as refu gees
in the sense of the 1951 Refugee Convention. In her book on this phenomenon, which
she cal ls complementary protection, Jane McAdam addres ses the question what the
criteria a re for granti ng complementary protection, and what t he rights attac hed to
that st atus should be. is is an important issue, both conceptually (what do es this
practice mean for ref ugee status, how does it transform t he idea of asylum) and from
a pract ical point of view (in terms of numb ers, complementary protec tion in ma ny
States surpasses protec tion oered to those with refugee status).
Aer an introductory chapter, McAdam focuses on the lega l instru ment which
most explicitly puts in place a regime of complementary protection, being the EU
Directive on refugee status and subsidiary protection (the Qualication Directive). is
Directive grants a right to asylum not only to Convention refugees, but also to persons
eeing: (a) t he deat h pena lty or execut ion; (b) torture or inhuman or degrading
treatment or pun ishment in their count ry of origin; a nd (c) a serious a nd individual
threat to life or person as a consequence of indiscriminate violence in an international
or domestic armed conict. is last , slightly obscure provision was the subject of the
European Court of Justice (ECJ)’s recent Elgafaji judgement.1 Subsidia ry protection is
not granted to persons excluded on grounds para llel to (but a bit wider than) Articles
1F and Ar ticle 33(2) Refugee Convention. As McAdam shows, t he rights attached to
* omas Spijkerboer, Profess or of Migration Law, Free University A msterdam, the Net herlands.
1 17 February 2009, Cas e C465/07.
To continue reading
Request your trial