Right to asylum

[Jonathan Buhacoff]

The proposed right:

No person shall be denied asylum without consideration of their circumstances.

No person shall be extradited to another country without a fair trial.

Intent:

The right to asylum is different from other rights in that it applies to people who are not yet part of society. The right to asylum means that a person who is not part of society, and has not previously consented to be governed according to society’s rules, may seek protection and shelter from prosecution in another country. If asylum is granted, or as a condition of granting asylum, that person must then integrate with society and accept its rules and consent to be governed according to society’s rules. If a person seeking asylum does not consent to be governed by society’s rules while under the protection of society, asylum cannot be granted.

The due consideration includes whether the person is considered an enemy of the state, or accused of having committed crimes in another country, or has previously sought and been denied asylum due to false statements, and whether the person consents to be governed by society’s rules. This right ensures that people seeking asylum at least have a chance to be heard and considered, but does not guarantee that all people seeking asylum will be granted it.

The prohibition against extraditing without a fair trial applies both to people seeking asylum and to citizens who are accused by foreign countries of crimes, for example crimes allegedly conducted while traveling through or visiting other countries.

Discussion:

The right to asylum has some important limitations:

First, the people will protect and shelter a person seeking asylum only if the person seeking asylum agrees to live by society’s rules, in accordance with its laws, and with all rights and duties that are expected of a member of society. If a person does not agree to join the society, the society should not protect and shelter them because a situation will inevitably arise that a protected person does something illegal and suddenly it’s not clear what can be done with them, which rights they have or don’t have, which punishments can apply, and so on.

Second, if a representative of the person’s country of origin (whether they were a resident there or were passing through as a traveler) contacts the society seeking to obtain the extradition of the person, society shall demand evidence of crimes committed in the other country. The alleged crimes must also be things that society itself finds criminal. For example, we have the right to religion, and a person arrives seeking asylum because they were exposed as a religious person in a country where that religion is prohibited. If there is no evidence of the person harming anyone else and the charge is merely having a religious belief, the person will be protected even if in the other country that religion is illegal. If the alleged crime would also be a crime in society, and the evidence presented by the country of origin appears to be persuasive, there must be a trial because the person has the right to a fair trial. If they are found innocent in accordance with society’s standards, they will remain protected. If they are found guilty in accordance with society’s standards, they are not eligible for asylum and they will be extradited to the country of origin. It’s important that the fair trial be held by society and in accordance with society’s standards for procedure, evidence, etc. The country seeking extradition must send a representative to participate as the plaintiff in the trial, and behave in accordance with society’s rules.

Comparison with the United Nations:

Article 14 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights states “Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.” A society can only create the right of asylum to people arriving in that society, it cannot create it in other societies. The right to travel out of a country and the right to seek asylum in that country are the most that can practically be done in relation to this article. The article also states “This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.” This is covered by our definition of the right of asylum that it is revoked if the person is found to have committed crimes in the other country, and that the person has the right to fair trial in determining whether or not this applies.

[Author]

Posts