Skip Navigation


Refugee Survey Quarterly Advance Access originally published online on September 16, 2008
Refugee Survey Quarterly 2008 27(3):16-32; doi:10.1093/rsq/hdn043
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
27/3/16    most recent
hdn043v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lambert, H.
Right arrow Articles by Tiedemann, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© UNHCR [2008]. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

This article appears in the following Refugee Survey Quarterly issue: ASYLUM AND THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS [View the issue table of contents]

Comparative Perspectives of Constitutional Asylum in France, Italy, and Germany: Requiescat in Pace?

Hélène Lambert, Francesco Messineo, and Paul Tiedemann *


   Abstract

Most countries provide asylum through domestic legislation, such as a statute incorporating the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. France, Italy, and Germany stand out as three of very few European countries specifically to guarantee a right of asylum in their national Constitutions. The origin, wording, and scope of these constitutional provisions vary, depending on historical factors specific to each country. This article examines the right of asylum guaranteed in the Constitutions of France, Italy, and Germany from a historical perspective. It discusses how this right has evolved in all three countries, especially in light of the Refugee Convention and recent European Asylum Legislation. It concludes that however unique and individual constitutional asylum has traditionally been regarded as in France, Italy, and Germany, international obligations and recent European commitments have absorbed its distinctiveness, making it a redundant, almost obsolete, concept.


* Hélène Lambert [Maitrise droit public (Strasbourg), PhD (Exeter)] is Reader in Law, University of Westminster. Francesco Messineo [Dott. giur. (Catania); LL.M. (Cantab.)] is Whewell Scholar in International Law 2007–8 and postgraduate research student at the University of Cambridge (King's College). He was Refugee and Migrants’ Rights Coordinator of Amnesty International Italy, 2004–6. Paul Tiedemann (Dr iur, Dr phil.) is a Judge at the Administrative Court, Frankfurt am Main, and Lecturer at the Justus-Liebig-University-Gießen. He is also Director of the International Association of Refugee Law Judges’ Database. Lambert is grateful to the Nuffield Foundation and the British Academy for their financial support. Many thanks to Dinesh Rajp, Janine Silga, Giusy D’Alconzo, and Donato Messineo for their help and comments. The opinions expressed (and any mistakes) are the authors’ alone.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.