E Tobin Shiers
Extract
Conclusion
When President Bush successfully thwarted passage of the Emergency Chinese Immigration Relief Act of 1989 and implemented his own order insisting upon “careful consideration” of victims who plead for political asylum because of coercive population control measures in their homelands, he unwittingly illustrated the need for a change in the statutory language. The Executive Order unwisely forces the issue of coercive population control policies into statutory language designed to protect victims of discrimination. Such manipulations would not be necessary if the Refugee Act of 1980 were amended to encompass the Handbook’s interpretation of the U.N. Protocol.
The interpretative guidelines to the U.N. Protocol, and derivatively
to the Convention, call for a “conscientious objector” exception to
military service. The grant of refugee status to individuals who prove
“valid reasons of conscience,” even reasons distinct from religious
claims, recognizes that fitting an individual within the protections of
the refugee definition requires a judgment on the means other nations
use to implement their policy ends, not just the ends themselves.
Rather than relying solely on the five narrow grounds for granting
asylum that were developed in response to the atrocities of World
War II, the U.N. Protocol, as interpreted by the Handbook, also
advocates protection for the individual persecuted by virtue of
mandatory participation in a military service with which he morally
disagrees. Because the debate regarding coercive population control
considers the legitimacy of means employed in achieving governmental
policy objectives, the logic of the conscientious objector exception
also applies to claims such as that of Chang.
Shiers ET. Coercive Population Control Policies: An Illustration of the Need for a Conscientious Objector Provision for Asylum Seekers. Va J Int Law. 1990;30(4):1007-1037.