International crimes / Serious non-political crime

The Tribunal is not satisfied that there are serious reasons for considering that the appellant “has committed a serious non-political crime outside [New Zealand] prior to his admission to [New Zealand] as a refugee” because any crime he committed was of a political kind. [125] Accordingly, the appellant is not excluded from the protection of the Refugee Convention under Article 1F(b) of that Convention.

18 November 2019 | Judicial Body: New Zealand: Immigration and Protection Tribunal | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Exclusion clauses - Serious non-political crime - Trafficking in persons | Countries: China - Korea, Democratic People's Republic of - Korea, Republic of - New Zealand

12 August 2010 | Publisher: Ireland: Refugee Documentation Centre | Document type: Query Responses

Application for judicial review.

5 April 2007 | Judicial Body: Canada: Federal Court | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Diplomatic assurances - Exclusion clauses - Prosecution vs persecution - Right to justice - Serious non-political crime | Countries: Canada - China

Application for judicial review.

5 April 2007 | Judicial Body: Canada: Federal Court | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Diplomatic assurances - Exclusion clauses - Prosecution vs persecution - Right to justice - Serious non-political crime | Countries: Canada - China

Application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed on 9 May 2005.

11 April 2005 | Judicial Body: Canada: Federal Court of Appeal | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Burden of proof - Credibility assessment - Criminal justice - Death penalty - Evidence (including age and language assessments / medico-legal reports) - Exclusion clauses - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Persecution based on political opinion - Prosecution vs persecution - Serious non-political crime - Social group persecution | Countries: Canada - China