Asylum Decision-Making in the Context of the Eritrean Military/National Service: Persecution amounting to Slavery?

In order to be entitled to protection under the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol (hereinafter "1951 Refugee Convention"), asylum applicants must fall within the definition of "refugee" in its article 1A(2), that is, they must demonstrate a "well-founded fear of being persecuted" for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. The 1951 Refugee Convention, however, does not elaborate on the notion of "persecution", and there exists no specialised treaty body capable of providing a binding interpretation of the provisions of the 1951 Refugee Convention (only the International Court of Justice in the case of an inter-state dispute). Therefore, the refugee definition in article 1A(2) is subject to domestic judicial interpretation. This, coupled with other factors, has led to conflicting interpretations of "persecution" within the specific context of the Eritrean Military/National Service by asylum decision-makers in various European states.

Against this background, this PhD project focuses on critically analysing whether the Eritrean Military/National service could be conceptualised as "persecution" (within the meaning of Article 1A(2) of the 1951 Refugee Convention) in refugee status determination proceedings. In doing so, this research assesses the interface between international refugee law and other branches of international law such as international human rights law, international humanitarian law and international criminal law and how these distinct areas of law are applied, if at all, by national asylum decision-makers in Europe in giving content to the legal concept of "persecution". The research combines the study of primary and secondary legal sources, policy and practice. As such, besides library-based research, it also includes overseas fieldwork research. This fieldwork research comprises semi-structured interviews with asylum lawyers in the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Germany, Denmark, and Sweden (which are among the major recipients of Eritrean asylum applications in Europe); interviews and FGDs with Eritrean refugees and asylum-seekers; and discussions with members of civil society organisations.