The impacts of geographical limitation practice on the right to asylum as a human right: A comparative analysis

According to Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the right to asylum is a human right. However, due to the geographical limitation that various countries practiced/are practicing, not all asylum seekers were/are able to enjoy the right to asylum in the same way and to the same extent. The main purpose of the study is to analyze comprehensively and comparatively the effect of geographical limitation on the right to asylum in different geographies. In this framework, the practices of Hungary, which had terminated the geographical limitation application many years ago, the Principality of Monaco, which has recently terminated the mentioned application, and the Republic of Türkiye, which still maintains the application, discussed in the study. The appearance of the right to asylum in the practices of Hungary and Monaco was examined through a comparison in the form of pre- and post-geographical limitation, while the comparison concerning the practice of Türkiye was approached in a more abstract but presumable way in reference to the practices of Hungary and Monaco. As a result of the analysis conducted throughout the study, it was revealed that the practice of geographical limitation should be terminated for the right to asylum to be more inclusive and for everyone could enjoy the right in the same way and to the same extent. Nevertheless, this change alone is not enough, it is necessary to introduce rights-based regulations and procedures and not to pursue non-asylum seeker policies; in summary, lifting the geographical limitation should also be supported by other relevant means. Additionally, attention was drawn to the importance of the fact that lifting the limitation should not only stay as an improvement on paper but also be put into practice within the shortest possible time for a concrete difference.