The principle of non-refoulement vs national security in the post 9/11 era

Abstract

The terrorist attack on September 11, 2001, had largely raised the problem of terrorism in international society. Governments launched campaigns against terrorism, one of them being the War on Terror, which as a result, raised controversial issues. One of the challenges is the fundamental human rights protection, namely the protection granted under the principle of non-refoulement. In the post-9/11 era, states started to be more concerned about their national security, and thus of individuals who enter their territories or already reside there. The main research question of this thesis is to analyze the impact of 9/11 on striking balance between the principle of non-refoulement and national security. During the research, the aim is to identify whether the balance has been recalibrated in favor of national security by examining the change in the perception of international terrorism, the attitude of governments, and the decisions of the ECtHR before to and after 9/11 attack. In result, the research shows that the perception of the society and states’ motivation to defend their national security has changed, however, the justifications and approach of the ECtHR in the analyses cases have not changed. However, the Abu Qatada judgment demonstrates another perspective.