ANALYSIS OF 'IMMINENCE' IN INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION CLAIMS: TEITIOTA V NEW ZEALAND AND BEYOND. Issue 4 (October 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Foster, Michelle; McAdam, Jane
• Is Part Of: International and comparative law quarterly. Volume 71:Issue 4(2022)
• Page Start: 975
• Page End: 982
• Publication Date: 2022-10
• Subjects: human rights law -- refugee law -- imminence -- climate change -- displacement; International law -- Periodicals; Comparative law -- Periodicals; 340.2
• DOI: 10.1017/S0020589322000367
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0020-5893

Abstract

Abstract: The UN Human Rights Committee's finding in Teitiota v New Zealand has garnered widespread global attention for its recognition that the effects of climate change may put people's lives at risk or expose them to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, thus triggering States' non-refoulement obligations. However, a secondary—and highly problematic—consequence of the decision has been its confusing and misplaced focus on 'imminence' of harm. This reflects a concerning, albeit uneven, trend in human rights cases generally (and cases concerning climate change and human rights, in particular) to recognize violations only where rights are immediately threatened. This short article reflects on the assumptions that Teitiota has triggered about the place of imminence in international protection claims, identifies the source of confusion, and suggests a more appropriate framework to guide a category of case that is likely to become the subject of intense litigation in the future.