The cornerstone of international refugee law is the principle of non-refoulement, which protects refugees, asylum seekers, and other persons with protection needs from being returned against their will to a place where they risk facing persecution or other fundamental rights violations. A person who is protected against refoulement may, however, return voluntarily. Determining when such returns are truly voluntary is an issue increasingly at the heart of discussions about the lawfulness of returns, including recently in the Lake Chad Basin, East Africa, the Middle East, Southeast Asia, Europe, and Australia. Today, there does not appear to be a generally agreed legal standard to determine when a return is truly voluntary. Likewise, international law does not define a clear line at which State action to ‘incentivize’ or ‘induce’ returns amounts to refoulement or an unlawful expulsion. However, recent publications by international law expert bodies and ensuing debate among States have provided some indications as to where international law stands on the issue and the direction in which it might develop. Thus, this article first examines the interplay between voluntary returns and the principle of non-refoulement. Secondly, it analyses recent positions taken by the International Law Commission and the United Nations Committee against Torture concerning legal limits on the measures that States may take to incentivize or induce returns. Thirdly, the article considers certain measures taken by States to incentivize or induce the ‘voluntary’ return of a person and indicates when such measures may amount to acts of coercion or force in violation of international law.

中文翻译：

---

被推到了崩溃点？国际法禁止“推定”或“变相”驱回

国际难民法的基石是不驱回原则，该原则保护难民、寻求庇护者和其他有保护需要的人，以免他们在违背自己意愿的情况下被遣返到可能面临迫害或其他基本权利遭到侵犯的地方。然而，受到保护免遭驱回的人可以自愿返回。确定此类回归何时真正是自愿的，日益成为关于回归合法性讨论的核心问题，包括最近在乍得湖流域、东非、中东、东南亚、欧洲和澳大利亚的讨论。如今，似乎没有一个普遍认可的法律标准来确定何时返回是真正自愿的。同样，国际法也没有明确规定国家“激励”或“诱使”回返的行动是否构成驱回或非法驱逐。然而，国际法专家机构最近的出版物以及随后各国之间的辩论已经提供了一些迹象，表明国际法在这一问题上的立场及其可能发展的方向。因此，本文首先探讨自愿遣返与不驱回原则之间的相互作用。其次，它分析了国际法委员会和联合国禁止酷刑委员会最近就各国为激励或诱使回返而采取的措施的法律限制所采取的立场。第三，该条考虑了各国为激励或诱使某人“自愿”返回而采取的某些措施，并指出这些措施何时可能构成违反国际法的胁迫或武力行为。