Assessing Damage, Urging Action the human rights violations that would trigger the non-refoulement provision has been extended over time, and has its origins in refugee law. Article 33 of the 1951 United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, sets down that no contracting State shall expel or return (“refouler”) a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his/her life or freedom would be threatened on account of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. Similar protections are expressed in international regulations on extradition.237 The non-refoulement principle is an integral part of human rights law applicable to all individuals under the jurisdiction of the State. As well as being firmly established in several universal and regional human rights instruments, and in the jurisprudence of universal and regional human rights bodies,238 the principle forms part of customary international law, binding on all States. Unlike the provisions of the 1951 Refugee Convention,239 the principle of non-refoulement under human rights law does not provide for any exceptions on the grounds of national security. Non-refoulement applies to any transfer where there is a real risk of serious human rights violations, including torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, enforced disappearances, extrajudicial execution, or a manifestly unfair trial.240 In addition, countries that are, for example, State Parties to the European Convention on Human Rights, or State Parties to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights who have abolished the death penalty, are prevented from transferring persons who may face the death penalty on return.241 Yet it is clear from the Hearings that this principle of international law is seriously under attack because of the increased reliance by some States on deportation/ 237 See, among others, the International Convention against Taking Hostages, Article 9; European Convention on Extradition, Article 3; European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism, Article 5; the Inter-American Convention on Extradition, Article 4 and the UN Model Treaty on Extradition, Article 3. 238 See, among others, CAT, Article 3, para. 1; the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, Article 16; the Declaration on Territorial Asylum, Article 3, para. 1; the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances, Article 8; the Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions, Principle 5; the Inter-American Convention on Human Rights, Article 22, para. 8; the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture, Article 13, para. 4; the Arab Charter of Human and Peoples’ Rights, Article 28; and the European Convention of Human Rights, Article 3. See also UN Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 20: concerning prohibition of torture and cruel treatment or punishment Article 7, reprinted in UN Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.7, 12 May 2004, at 152, para. 9. 239 Article 31, para. 2, UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees of 1951. 240 See ICJ Berlin Declaration, Principle 10, Annex 1, and (with more references) Legal Commentary to the ICJ Berlin Declaration, p. 93 et seq. 241 See in this regard UN Human Rights Committee, Views of 5 August 2003, Roger Judge v. Canada, Communication No. 829/1998, para. 10.4. 101