Likim Ng

PhD Candidate
LL.M. (UHelsinki), LL.B (UTS), B.Bus (UTS)
Room H Block Open Plan

home icon ANU College of Law, Bld 5, Fellows Rd, Acton ACT 2601

mail icon ANU College of Law, 5 Fellows Rd, Acton ACT 2601

 

Biography

Likim is a PhD candidate and Tutor at the ANU College of Law, Australian National University, teaching in the areas of legal theory, critical legal theory and human rights law. Her research is supported by the Australian Government Research Training Program. She obtained a Masters in International and Comparative Law at the University of Helsinki where her thesis was accepted with Exceptional Praise (2013). Prior to commencing at the Australian National University, Likim worked as a Judge's Associate at the Federal Circuit Court of Australia assisting Judge Street and Judge Driver to judicially review protection visa matters. She also has refugee law experience at the Refugee Advisory & Casework Service where she was involved in organising legal advice clinics She has worked as a legal intern in international criminal law at the Office of the Prosecutor at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in Tanzania and the Special Tribunal for Lebanon in The Hague. Her primary research area focuses on critical legal theory approaches to refugee law, particularly the intersection between refugee law and international criminal law namely the Exclusion Clause of the Refugee Convention. 

Please note, only a small selection of recent publications and activities are listed below.

Grants

2017 Australian National University Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship

2012 University of Helsinki Mobility Grant 

Books & edited collections

Ng, Likim: 'The transfer cases of the ICTR to the Republic of Rwanda: The challenges of implementing Rule11bis'. Listed in United Nations Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) Special Bibliography. MICT Library: 2015.

 

Conference papers & presentations

'Securitization Of Refugees: A Discourse Analysis Of The Exclusion Clause', International Interdisciplinary Conference on Minority Studies with Women and Gender Studies Conference' (Eastern Mediterranean Academic Research Center, Istanbul, 2017).                 

Committees

ANU Higher Degree Research Forum Steering Committee

Past courses

Guest Lecturer

2017 Critical Legal Theory LAWS4288

2017 International Law and Human Rights LAWS4225

Tutor

2017 Legal Theory LAWS2249

Program

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Further information

Under the Refugee Convention, states can exclude asylum seekers from refugee status if they have committed international crimes. This article shows that in the Australian jurisdiction, Article 1F otherwise known as the exclusion clause has taken on the burden of a national security provision from other articles of the Refugee Convention. Unlike its intention, the exclusion clause has been used to exclude asylum seekers on a security basis. In the securitization process, a state of emergency is enacted where it is necessary to suspend law by going above the normal political decision making process and depart from international  criminal law statutes and rules.

By analysing select cases from Australia such as SRYYY v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs (2005) 137 FCR 1 and SHCB v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 229, this article shows how asylum seekers are presented as securitised by the language and discourse of decision makers which increases ‘othering’.  In particular, excluded asylum seekers are not given access to an adequate fair trial process, which determines whether the international crime has been committed. Consequentially, from the lens of Agamben, the exceptional nature of the exclusion clause becomes the norm and genuine refugees become increasingly excluded from the political community.  They are unable to access rights such as being subject to indefinite detention. We see this treatment applied to qualified refugees who have had an adverse security assessment made against them.  Australia’s restrictive policies and case law towards refugees and asylum seekers makes the jurisdiction particularly applicable to the application of this critical legal theory lens.

Primary supervisor

Associate supervisor

Associate Supervisor

Updated:  10 August 2015/Responsible Officer:  College General Manager, ANU College of Law/Page Contact:  Law Marketing Team