International and Comparative Law Quarterly
Volume 64, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 405-444

Evolving interpretation of multilateral treaties: 'Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the united nations' in the refugee convention (Review)

McKeever D.*
  • a International Court of Justice, LL.M (Cantab), M.St (Oxon), United Kingdom

Abstract

The 1951 Refugee Convention does not apply to a person with respect to whom there are serious reasons for considering that 'he has been guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations' (Article 1(F)(c)). To date, this exclusion clause has generally been interpreted by courts, commentators and UNHCR in a static manner which fails to take into account developments in international law and practice. This paper considers the 'evolutive approach' to treaty interpretation, generally, and applies this approach, alongside standard rules of treaty interpretation, to Article 1(F)(c). This paper challenges a number of assertions commonly made regarding this clause, and concludes that it should be interpreted to the effect that conduct amounting to serious or sustained human rights violations, such that would constitute 'persecution' for the purposes of Article 1(A)(2) of the Convention, meets the standard for exclusion under Article 1(F)(c). © 2015 British Institute of International and Comparative Law.

Author Keywords

United Nations Charter treaty interpretation exclusion purpose and principles Refugee Convention

Index Keywords

[No Keywords available]

Link
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84929158336&doi=10.1017%2fS0020589315000032&partnerID=40&md5=b198193aceb393c066a60779a9d21f4c

DOI: 10.1017/S0020589315000032
ISSN: 00205893
Original Language: English