Published in 1998. This title brings together 18 essays by a selection of experts in the area of refugee and asylum law and policy. Each essay examines an issue of contemporary interest to those working in the refugee field in the UK. They have been selected from papers presented at a highly successful conference on Refugee Rights and Realities which was held at the University of Nottingham in November 1996, organized by the Human Rights Law Centre at the University and funded by the Airey Neave Trust. The essays are organised into two sections. The first covers issues of legal process and policy ranging from the development of asylum law and policy in the UK to the country’s obligations under international law. Special emphasis is placed on the most recent developments surrounding the 1996 Asylum and Immigration Act. The second section provides the context for a more detailed examination of the social, health and welfare issues relevant to refugees and asylum seekers. These range from access to health care, housing rights and the education of refugees in London to questions of language and of race relations.

'Modern Legal Studies' is a series of short monographs which aims to make a significant contribution to legal scholarship and curriculum development. This title focuses on UK asylum law and policy.

Even though legal aid is available for people seeking asylum, there is uneven access to advice across Britain. Based on empirical research, this book offers fresh thinking on what has gone wrong in the legal aid market. It presents a rare picture of the barristers, solicitors and caseworkers practising immigration law in charities and private firms. In doing so, this book examines supply and demand and illuminates what constitutes high-quality legal aid work/provision, subsequent conflicts with financial rationality and how practitioners resolve these issues. Challenging existing legal aid policy, this book presents innovative insights to ensure public service markets around the globe function well for all those involved.

The word ‘refugee’ is both evocative and contested. In this essential guide for students, lawyers and non-specialists, Colin Yeo draws on his experience as an immigration barrister and key legal cases to explore international refugee law.

This volume examines the law and system of control which govern immigration and asylum in the UK. It begins with the historical and legal context, explains who is subject to immigration control, and describes the legal and administrative structure of the system.

This book fills a significant lacuna in our understanding of the refugee crisis by analyzing the dynamics that lie behind fifteen years of asylum policies in the European Union. It sheds light on why cooperation has led to reinforced refugee protection on paper but has failed to provide it in practice. Offering innovative empirical, theoretical and methodological research on this crucial topic, it argues that the different asylum systems and priorities of the various Member States explain the EU's lack of initiative in responding to this humanitarian emergency. The author demonstrates that the strong regulators of North-Western Europe have used their powerful bargaining positions to shape EU asylum policies decisively, which has allowed them to impose their will on Member States in South-Eastern Europe. These latter countries, having barely made a mark on EU policies, are now facing significant difficulties in implementing them. The EU will only identify potential solutions to the crisis, the author concludes, when it takes these disparities into account and establishes a functioning common refugee policy. This novel work will appeal to students and scholars of politics, immigration and asylum in the EU.

The first in-depth exploration of the persistence and pervasiveness of a dangerous legal fiction about people who cross borders: the binary distinction between migrant and refugee. Today, the concept of "the refugee" as distinct from other migrants looms large. Immigration laws have developed to reinforce a conceptual dichotomy between those viewed as voluntary, often economically motivated, migrants who can be legitimately excluded by potential host states, and those viewed as forced, often politically motivated, refugees who should be let in. In Crossing, Rebecca Hamlin argues against advocacy positions that cling to this distinction. Everything we know about people who decide to move suggests that border crossing is far more complicated than any binary, or even a continuum, can encompass. The decision to leave home is almost always multi-causal and often involves many stops and hazards along the way--a reality not captured by a system that categorizes a majority of border-crossers as undeserving, and the rare few as vulnerable and needy. Drawing on cases of various "border crises" across Europe, North America, South America, and the Middle East, Hamlin outlines major inconsistencies and faulty assumptions upon which the binary relies, and explains its endurance and appeal by tracing its origins to the birth of the modern state and the rise of colonial empire. The migrant/refugee binary is not just an innocuous shorthand, indeed its power stems from the way in which is it painted as objective, neutral, and apolitical. In truth, the binary is a dangerous legal fiction, politically constructed with the ultimate goal of making harsh border control measures more ethically palatable to the public. This book is a challenge to all those invested in the rights and study of migrants, to interrogate their own assumptions and move towards more equitable advocacy for all border crossers.