LEFT HANGING: HOW FIRST WORLD COUNTRIES EXPLOIT LOOPHOLES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW AND LEGAL DOCTRINE IN ORDER TO SUBVERT THE RIGHTS OF REFUGEES AND ASYLUM SEEKERS

Abstract

This paper conducts a comparative analysis of the policy actions of four advanced industrial countries and their use of loopholes and other tactics to sidestep international law regarding refugees and asylum seekers. Inspired in part by fieldwork in 2024 working with refugees and asylum seekers in Denmark, the paper discusses how the Danish “zero-asylum” policy and immigration system evades and corrupts the intention of 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. My subsequent comparative research has demonstrated that these evasive and “deterrence” policy tactics exist in other first-world countries. This paper focuses specifically on instances in Denmark, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Japan. (The Japanese case illustrates how this phenomenon is global and not specific to Western polities.) The paper develops these four case studies, examining each country’s refugee policies in practice, the relevant international legal sources and precedents, and the impact of these practices on refugee populations. I situate these cases in a cross-country analysis to expose a common pattern of exploited legal loopholes. My conclusions speak to possible legal responses or solutions to mitigate this problem in the future and safeguard the intentions of international refugee law.