The Evolving Role of the UNCHR: Should the Conventional Role of UNHCR Be Expanded?

This paper focuses on the question of whether the UNHCR should be governed only by its original 1950 mandate to provide international protection to refugees or should its role be re-defined in order to cover those who are not refugees, yet in refugee-like conditions. The purpose of this study is to scrutinize what rights UNHCR already possesses with regards to its newly-evolved tasks and what sort of legal framework is required today.

Current Challenges regarding the International Refugee Law, with focus on EU Policies and EU Co-operation with UNHCR. CEPS Paper on Liberty and Security in Europe No. 59, September 2013

From an examination of the instruments of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) and related policy measures regarding border surveillance and migration management, two interrelated issues stand out as particularly sensitive: Access to asylum and responsibility for refugee protection. The prevailing view, supported by UNHCR and others, is that responsibility for the care of asylum seekers and the determination of their claims falls on the state within whose jurisdiction the claim is made. However, the possibility to shift that responsibility to another state through inter-state cooperation or unilateral mechanisms undertaken territorially as well as abroad has been a matter of great interest to EU Member States and institutions. Initiatives adopted so far challenge the prevailing view and have the potential to undermine compliance with international refugee and human rights law. This note reviews EU action in the field by reference to the relevant legal standards and best practices developed by UNHCR, focusing on the specific problems of climate refugees and access to international protection, evaluating the inconsistencies between the internal and external dimension of asylum policy. Some recommendations for the European Parliament are formulated at the end, including on action in relation to readmission agreements, Frontex engagement rules in maritime operations, Regional Protection Programmes, and resettlement.

Realistic yet humanitarian? The comprehensive plan of action and refugee policy in Southeast Asia

The 1989 Comprehensive Plan of Action (CPA) has recently been described as a successful example of how to manage large protracted refugee flows. However, this article revisits the circumstances surrounding the CPA used to resolve the prolonged Indo-Chinese refugee crisis to highlight that part of its development was linked to the fact that Southeast Asian states refused to engage with proposed solutions, which did not include repatriation for the majority of the Indo-Chinese asylum seekers who were deemed to be ‘non-genuine’1 ( UNGA, 1989a) refugees. This resulted in the CPA often forcibly repatriating ‘non-genuine’ refugees, particularly near the end of its program. This article reviews the CPA in order to assess whether its practices and results should be repeated.

Refugees : the Millenium Development Goals' overlooked priority group

The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) apply to the world’s 43 million refugees and forcibly displaced. While States have an obligation to meet minimum human rights levels for all persons including 'non-citizens', UNHCR must ensure countries adopting MDG targets report on the progress of their refugee populations. If we are to make significant change within the MDG time-frame, the health and human rights needs of refugees and the displaced must be urgently integrated into the development policy agendas of sovereign States, and be at the fore of the international community’s attention.

Review essay -- Weber L and Pickering S (2011) Globalization and borders : death at the global frontier

The pertinence of this book cannot be overemphasised. The world’s refugee crisis has reached a two‐decade high with the United Nations recently announcing that ‘displacement is the new 21st century challenge’ (UNHCR 2013). The transnational movement of dislocated peoples fleeing conflict, persecution and poverty is a global responsibility requiring nation states to collaborate for humanitarian resolutions embedded in human rights. However, in times of human rights expansionism, and the relaxation of borders for maximising free‐trade and fiscal prosperity, the movement of people experiencing immense abuse and deprivation has witnessed an increase in draconian regulation within discourses of intolerance and deterrence. Weber and Pickering cogently and emphatically emphasise the human cost of inhumane and populist government immigration and border‐entry polices underpinned by ideologies of retribution, suspicion, and demonisation. It is a moving and engaging narrative: a book that exposes state prejudice and abuse, whilst advocating for the victims who undertake perilous journeys in search of safety from lives of violence and persecution. Moreover, it is a book that pushes ideological boundaries and seeks new criminological horizons, for which the authors must be sincerely congratulated. It is a text of innovation, inspired thinking and long lasting criminological value.

Shifting Powers : Protection of Refugees and Displaced Persons in the Asia Pacific Region

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees' (UNHCR) 2011 statistics on refugee populations residing by region are a stark reminder of the challenge facing states and civil society in the Asia Pacific. In 2011, Africa hosted 2,149,000 refugees; the Americas, Europe, and Middle East and North Africa hosted 513 ,500, 1,605,500 and 1,889,900 respectively, while the Asia Pacific hosted a staggering 3,793,900. The fact that 35 per cent of the world's refugees reside in the Asia Pacific, coupled with the fact that 84 per cent of refugees displaced in Asia remain in the region,raises the questions why so few countries in the region are signatories to the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees ('Refugee Convention') or cognate rights instruments and why no formally binding regional agreement exists for the equitable sharing of responsibilities for refugees...

Good Starts for recently arrived youth with refugee backgrounds : promoting wellbeing in the first three years of settlement in Melbourne, Australia

This report describes the key findings of a longitudinal study (2004—2008) investigating the experiences of settlement among a group of 120 recently arrived young people with refugee backgrounds settling in Melbourne, Australia. Each year, less than one per cent of the world’s refugees are offered resettlement in one of 18 countries participating in The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) resettlement programme. Australia offers places to around 13,500 people per year, of whom about 26 per cent are between the ages of 10 and 19. What are the experiences of these young people in their early settlement years? How do they negotiate the transition from childhood to adulthood given the traumas of their past and the challenges of their present and future in Australia? What are the key social determinants of wellbeing and good settlement and what can we learn from these young people about what social policies and services will most effectively support them to make successful lives in their new home? This study explores these questions, the overall aim being to identify the key social determinants of wellbeing and settlement and to describe the lived experiences of these young people as they shape their lives in Australia.

Redundant or essential? How politics shaped the outcome of the 1967 Protocol

The 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees has been described as an unnecessary addendum to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. However, if the 1967 Protocol was superfluous, why did the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in the early 1960s insist on its development? This article seeks to establish that the 1967 Protocol was originally intended to encompass the broader concerns of African and Asian states concerning refugee populations in their region. However, the political influence upon the development of international refugee law radically altered the UNHCR's endeavour to make the 1951 Convention universally accessible.

Legitimising Rejection : International Refugee Law in Southeast Asia

The 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees are the two primary international legal instruments that states use to process asylum seekers' claim to refugee status. However, in Southeast Asia only two states have acceded to these instruments. This is seemingly paradoxical for a region that has been host to a large number of asylum seekers who, as a result, are forced to live as ‘illegal migrants’. This book examines the region's continued rejection of international refugee law through extensive archival analysis and argues that this rejection was shaped by the region’s response to its largest refugee crisis in the post-1945 era: the Indochinese refugee crisis from 1975 to 1996. The result is a seminal study into Southeast Asian's relationship with international refugee law and the impact that this has had on states surrounding the region, the UNHCR and the asylum seekers themselves.

The 1989 Comprehensive Plan of Action (CPA) and refugee policy in Southeast Asia : twenty years forward what has changed?

In 2012, the only South East Asian countries that have ratified the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (hereafter referred to as the 1951 Convention and 1967 Protocol) is Philippines (signed 1954), Cambodia (signed 1995) and Timor Leste (signed 2001). Countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand have annual asylum seeking populations from Myanmar, South Asia and Middle East, that are estimated to be at 15 000-20 000 per country (UNHCR 2012). The lack of a permanent and formal asylum processing process in these countries means that that asylum-seeking populations in the region are reliant on the local offices of the United Nations High Commission for Refugees based in the region to process their claims. These offices rely upon the good will of these governments to have a presence near detection camps and in capital cities to process claims of those who manage to reach the UNHCR representative office. The only burden sharing mechanism within the region primarily exists under the Bali Process on People Smuggling, Trafficking in Persons and Related Transnational Crime (the Bali Process), introduced in 2002. The Bali Process refers to an informal cooperative agreement amongst the states from the Asia-Pacific region, with Australia and Indonesia as the co-chairs, which discusses its namesake: primarily anti-people smuggling activities and migration protocols. There is no provision within this process to discuss the development of national asylum seeking legislation, processes for domestic processing of asylum claims or burden sharing in contrast to other regions such as Africa and South America (i.e. 2009 African Union Convention for the Protection and Assistance of the Internally Displaced, 1969 African Union Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa and 1984 Cartagena Declaration on Refugees [Americas]) (PEF 2010: 19).