<![CDATA[The principle of non-refoulement is a fundamental norm of international law that prohibits countries from returning refugees or asylum seekers to territories where they are at risk of torture, ill-treatment, or serious threats to their life and freedom. Its implementation faces challenges when refugees or asylum seekers are suspected of being involved in serious crimes, such as terrorism, war crimes, or transnational crimes. This study uses a juridical-normative approach by examining international legal instruments, including the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol (Article 33 on non-refoulement and Article 1F on exclusion clauses), and the Convention Against Torture (CAT) Article 3. At the national level, the study refers to Law No. 6 of 2011 on Immigration and Presidential Regulation No. 125 of 2016 on the Handling of Refugees from Abroad. The analysis shows that although exclusion clauses allow countries to refuse protection to perpetrators of serious crimes, the principle of non-refoulement remains binding when there is a risk of torture or inhumane treatment. Thus, states need to prioritize alternative mechanisms such as domestic prosecution (aut dedere aut judicare), extradition with guaranteed human rights protection, or resettlement in a third country. This study recommends the creation of a comprehensive national refugee law to balance international obligations, human rights protection, and state sovereignty.]]>
Copyrights © 2025
