A primary duty owed by State parties to asylum seekers in their territory is the obligation not to return that individual to a country where their life or freedom would be threatened on account of their race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. This is known as the non-refoulement principle and is set out in Article 33(1) as follows: Article 33. Prohibition of expulsion or return (‘refoulement’) 1. No Contracting State shall expel or return (‘refouler’) a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.128 The fundamental nature of the non-refoulement obligation is emphasised by the fact that it is one of the few articles to which reservations cannot be made.129 It is also considered likely to be a part of customary international law.130 The obligation is not, however, absolute and the Refugees Convention makes provision for national security and public order concerns. Article 33(2) permits exceptions where there are reasonable grounds for regarding individuals as a danger to the security of the country in which they are, or where they, having been convicted of a particularly serious crime, constitute a danger to the community of that country. The security concern must, under this article, relate to the security of the host country. In addition, expulsion of refugees lawfully in a territory is permitted by Article 32 on the grounds of national security or public order.131 This provision would also have the 127 Office of the UNHCR “The Events of September 11: Possible Repercussions on Refugees Protection in Terrorism and International Law: Challenges and Responses (International Institute of Humanitarian Law, San Remo, June 2003) 15, 16. 128 Article 33(2) goes on to provide that: The benefit of the present provision may not, however, be claimed by a refugee whom there are reasonable grounds for regarding as a danger to the security of the country in which he is, or who, having been convicted by a final judgement of a particularly serious crime, constitutes a danger to the community of that country. 129 Article 42, Refugees Convention. 130 See for example, Professor Guy S Goodwin-Gill, The Refugee in International Law (2 ed, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1996) 167-171 who concluded that ‘‘there is substantial, if not conclusive authority that the principle is binding on all states, independently of specific assent’. The UNHCR Executive Committee has consistently endorsed the fundamental character of the principle of non-refoulement in its annual general and specific conclusions. In its 1982 general conclusion the Executive Committee expressed the view that the principle was becoming a peremptory norm of international law: see General Conclusion on International Protection (No. 25 (XXXIII) - 1982) Report of the 33rd Session: UN doc A/AC 96/614, para 70. 131 Article 32 provides: (1)The Contracting States shall not expel a refugee lawfully in their territory save on grounds of national security or public order. (2)The expulsion of such a refugee shall be only in pursuance of a decision reached in accordance with due process of law. Except where compelling reasons of national security otherwise require, the refugee shall be 69