Abstract
This Article assesses the wisdom of the substantive laws enacted in the wake of 9/11 and the procedures set up to combat this enemy. This Article is divided into four parts. Part I evaluates the doctrinal debate relating to the definition of terror, terrorism and terrorists. More particularly, it attemps to demonstrate the difficulty in identify the "terrorist" that needs to be excluded, and how that definition affects the immigration laws. Part II sets the stage for a comparative analysis by briefly surverying the terrorism-related immigration laws and procedures of each jurisdiction to this study. Part III provides a detailed comparative analysis of the most important substantive and procedural laws of the four jurisdictions. Part IV identifies a model approach that combines the best practices of all four jurisdictions.
Recommended Citation
Won Kidane,
The Terrorism Bar to Asylum in Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States: Transporting Best Practices,
33 Fordham Int'l L.J. 300
(2009).
Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ilj/vol33/iss2/2