The Transnational Human Rights Review, Vol. 8, Iss. 1 [2021], Art. 1 persecution”.70 Thus, the general presumption is that those in need of international protection are the ones fleeing conflict or failed states, while populist states are merely the recipients of such individuals. In fact, populist regimes that survive through acts of ‘othering’ and claim to represent the will of the nation are more likely to be illiberal and capable of stripping the independence of institutions responsible for upholding civil liberties. 71 III Defining Persecution and its Constitutive Elements Several scholars have noted that there purposely exists no definition of persecution, since not all such acts can be listed. To do otherwise, would be limiting. Rather, it must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, to see the nature of rights violated (such as those of dignity and integrity), and the manner and gravity of such violation. 72 Some state legislations, such as Australia’s Migration Act, 1958 (Cth) (amended in 2003), have attempted to define persecution. However, they are not comprehensive, since they exist for the limited purpose of an asylum seeker’s admittance into a specific state, 73 and not for a larger question before the international community of whether persecution is underway. The benefit of the latter is that it would allow states to intervene before such persecution-related consequences (in this case, statelessness) are effected. The English Court of Appeal has previously relied on Professor Hathaway’s definition to hold that persecution comprises a systemic or sustained deprivation of core entitlements (nonderogable rights) or of derogable rights in a discriminatory manner, whether by the state or nonstate actors (and there is no effective state remedy). 74 Nevertheless, threats to life or freedom, Lisa Schlein, “UN: Populist politics eroding international protection for refugees”, Voice of America (4 October 2018), online: <https://www.voanews.com/europe/un-populist-politics-eroding-international-protection-refugees>. 71 See, Dagny Anderson et al.,“The Global Implications of Populism on Democracy - Task Force 2018”, University of Washington: The Henry M. Jackson School of International Studies (2018), online (pdf): <https://jsis.washington.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Task-Force_C_2018_Pekkanen_robert.pdf>. 72 Guy S Goodwin-Gill & Jane McAdam, The Refugee in International Law, 3rd ed, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007) at 93-94; Volker Türk & Frances Nicholson, “Refugee protection in international law: an overall perspective” in Erika Feller, Volker Türk & Frances Nicholson, eds, Refugee Protection in International Law (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2003) 3 at 39. 73 Storey, supra note 65 at 275. 74 Ravichandran v Secretary of State for the Home Department, United Kingdom: Court of Appeal [England and Wales], 11 October 1995, online: <https://www.refworld.org/cases,GBR_CA_CIV,3ae6b677c.html>. 70 https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/thr/vol8/iss1/1 DOI: 10.60082/2563-4631.1096 12