Refugee Protection Research Articles

Regulating refugee protection through social welfare: Law, policy and praxis, PeterBillings (Ed.), Abingdon: Routledge. 2022. ISBN: 9780367480417; £130.00 (pbk)

Social Policy & AdministrationEarly View BOOK REVIEW Regulating refugee protection through social welfare: Law, policy and praxis, Peter Billings (Ed.), Abingdon: Routledge. 2022. ISBN: 9780367480417; £130.00 (pbk) Fadli Agus Triansyah, Corresponding Author Fadli Agus Triansyah [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0001-6156-2216 Faculty of Economics and Business Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia Correspondence Fadli Agus Triansyah, Faculty of Economics and Business Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorKennedy Acheampong, Kennedy Acheampong orcid.org/0000-0002-1687-9879 Faculty of Economics and Business Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, IndonesiaSearch for more papers by this author Fadli Agus Triansyah, Corresponding Author Fadli Agus Triansyah [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0001-6156-2216 Faculty of Economics and Business Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia Correspondence Fadli Agus Triansyah, Faculty of Economics and Business Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorKennedy Acheampong, Kennedy Acheampong orcid.org/0000-0002-1687-9879 Faculty of Economics and Business Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, IndonesiaSearch for more papers by this author First published: 12 April 2023 https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12917Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL No abstract is available for this article. Early ViewOnline Version of Record before inclusion in an issue RelatedInformation

The ethics of tradable refugee quotas

Thousands of refugees die each year fleeing prosecution in their home state. But receiving states are often reluctant to admit, process and house refugees. This is in part because refugee protection is a public good, and so subject to free-riding. A promising, but controversial, solution is to set up markets in tradable refugee quotas (e.g., in the European Union). One of the main objections to such proposals is that they lead to the commodification and objectification of refugees. Another objection, less often discussed, is that such markets seem to legitimate negative and prejudicial attitudes towards refugees. In this article, I defend markets in refugee quotas against such criticisms. Given how many die each year, we are more than ever in need of creative solutions. Tradable quotas provide a promising mechanism to increase the number of refugees processed and protected, especially in regional schemes like the EU. Ethical objections such as the ones canvassed here should not stand in our way.

The politics around safe zones: a comparative perspective on return to Northern Syria

Safe zones, initially established as practical tools for refugee protection, have evolved into diplomatic instruments. Through the case of Northern Syria in a historical-comparative perspective, this article explains the link between border politics and host state-induced return to the safe zones; and questions the viability of return within this politicised environment. Considering the earlier experiences of six cases in Sri Lanka, Iraq, Somalia, Bosnia, Rwanda, and Afghanistan, it shows how safe zones and refugee return have become venues for power struggles, not only between the origin and host states but also amongst regional and global powers; established with respect to their economic, political and strategic interests. The Northern Syrian case is distinguished by Turkey’s pressure for returns during the conflict, which makes conditions for return dependent on Turkish military presence. Without international support or a UNSC decision, Turkey’s self-proclaimed safe zone lacks international legitimacy, and refugee returns remain dependent on unilateral efforts by the Turkish government. Lack of security, rule of law, access to basic services, reconstruction, and overall prospects undermine the feasibility of safe, voluntary and sustainable returns. And as all actors involved place their military objectives above civilian governance, conditions for security in the safe zone remain precarious.

Making EU refugee policy in 2001, applying it in 2022: Directive 2001/55/EC and its use in 2022

AbstractThe Ukraine crisis brings European Union (EU) refugee policy into the spotlight. Temporary protection for Ukrainian refugees was granted under Directive 2001/55/EC—a directive that had never been applied until 2022. This article seeks to explain why a directive that had not been used for 20 years was now applied. Our argument rests on liberal intergovernmentalism: Conflicts between countries with high and low migration pressure dominated negotiations in the Council of Ministers. These intergovernmental conflicts were not solved but built into the wording of the Directive. Each attempt to apply the Directive triggered a new round of intergovernmental conflict. However, in the Ukraine crisis, the cost–benefit calculation of the countries that had hitherto opposed application of the Directive changed, because they received most of the refugees. Hence, a policy window opened, and the Commission could use old ‘dormant’ legislation to further integration.

Legal Framework for the Protection of Ukrainian Refugees: A Comparative Study

The article focuses on the issue of Ukrainian refugees who have been forced to flee abroad due to the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, and the complex and challenging legal framework for their protection. The study reviews relevant literature and previous studies on the legal framework for the protection of refugees, with a particular focus on the situation of Ukrainian refugees. The methodology for this article includes a comprehensive analysis of the existing legal instruments and frameworks that are applicable to refugees, including the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and the Temporary Protection Directive. The study aims to contribute to the ongoing discussion on the legal protection of Ukrainian refugees by providing a detailed analysis of the legal framework and identifying specific areas in need of improvement. The objective of the study is to further examine the legal framework for the protection of Ukrainian refugees and to identify ways in which the current system can be improved to better protect this vulnerable population.

Turkey’s asylum policies over the last century: continuity, change and contradictions

ABSTRACT This article explores Turkey’s century-long asylum policies by highlighting two enduring policy considerations. The first is Turkey's process of convergence with the norms and principles of the global refugee regime. The second is the persistent practice of granting refugees protection of a temporary nature. These two policy considerations are discussed by employing the conceptual frameworks of ‘policy diffusion’ and the ‘nationalizing migration state.’ The study concludes that Turkey’s asylum policies have been shaped by the tension between these two policy considerations over the past century.

How refugees work together: the politics of solidarity and ‘invisible’ collective action during COVID-19

ABSTRACT Recent scholarship on refugee assistance has begun shifting the focus from traditional humanitarian interventions to alternative forms of refugee response, undertaken through more local, informal networks. These forms of humanitarian assistance and solidarity can transcend national refugee politics, and function as an alternative form of political engagement with the issue of refugee protection. Much of this emerging literature focuses on how host communities, diaspora networks, and activist groups support refugees. However, we know very little about how solidarities are generated between different refugee groups in the same host state, which has important implications for understanding the ways in which different refugee groups organise and seek to secure their own welfare in shared displacement. This study draws on evidence from India during the COVID-19 pandemic to analyze how such intergroup cooperation in exile develops. I find, first, that refugees navigate their vulnerabilities through informal, interpersonal forms of care and solidarity, which bolsters identification with shared challenges and goals. Second, such solidarities can generate collective action that helps refugees carve out certain spaces of inclusion in a larger context of structural exclusion. Third, the network structure of these solidarities is shaped by existing policy regimes and social relationships in key ways.

Is Australia a Model for the UK? A Critical Assessment of Parallels of Cruelty in Refugee Externalization Policies

Abstract For several years, Australia has been regarded by some politicians and observers in Europe as a model for hard-line policies towards refugees. At the same time, Australia’s implementation of refugee externalization measures has been subject to considerable scholarly attention and critique. Although the Australian approach has featured prominently in political debates in several European states, this article analyses the implications of a possible adoption of the Australian offshore detention approach for refugee policy-making in the UK, and the consequences this will have for the integrity of the international refugee protection regime. The article considers how states might influence each other’s policies—both directly and indirectly—by focusing on a case study of offshore detention and processing with regard to Australia’s influence on—and similarity to—the UK, to the extent that we observe policy parallels, as the article brings to light substantial policy convergence of detrimental practice of these two countries.

Refugee Return, Reintegration, and Sustainable Futurity: Politics, Pitfalls and Possibilities of Repatriation in Post/Conflict Situations

ABSTRACT With conflict and displacement among the most pressing issues of our time, refugee repatriation and reintegration are integral to post-conflict development and enduring peace. Regarded by the UN as a durable solution, repatriation has come to be viewed as the most viable option given the prevailing global landscape of increased displacement and stringency of national policies towards asylum seekers. These realities have also engendered a pragmatic turn from the principle of voluntariness to an emphasis on safety and the politicisation of the humanitarian agenda that destabilise the foundational principles of the refugee protection regime. Drawing upon the experiences of the Cambodian refugee repatriation in 1992–93, the more recent repatriation of Burmese refugees1 from Thailand and insights from other instances of return, this paper examines the politics, pitfalls, and possibilities of Southeast Asian refugee repatriation following political settlements, prompted as they were by political and other exigencies rather than the restoration of peace and stability. With attention to the relationships between refugees, refugee originating and receiving countries, and the UNHCR, it underscores the predicament, ambivalence, and dismissal that undergird refugee return. It interrogates notions of voluntariness in the context of constrained choice, and of safe and dignified return, citizenship, and belonging in the context of fragile peace. It also reflects on the delimitation of accountability by the changing status of refugees when they re-crossed the border and argues for looking at repatriation and re-integration as a continuum, and for centering sustainability and the restoration of refugee futurity in the discourse of return.

Temporary Protection Directive: Testing New Frontiers?

Abstract The activation of the Temporary Protection Directive has been considered a manifestation of solidarity towards refugees that enhances responsibility sharing between the Member States and is, therefore, perceived as a positive development. Focusing on the specific case of Ukrainian refugees, this paper explores the possible implications of the Temporary Protection Directive from the perspective of asylum solidarity. The purpose of the article is twofold. First, to dispel the assumption that the activation of the Directive is a positive step forward in addressing the Ukraine refugee incidence and challenge the presumed benefits of the Directive in terms of asylum solidarity. Second, the article seeks to explore how the detrimental effects of temporary protection can be mitigated both in the short and long term. It proposes possible solutions to prevent a regression in refugee protection standards through temporary protection and examines how a free choice model can be integrated to remedy some of the shortcomings of the current emergency management system.

Between Humanitarian Assistance and Externalizing of EU Borders: The EU-Turkey Deal and Refugee Related Organizations in Turkey

This paper examines whether multilevel transnational cooperation makes a difference in refugee protection, especially in protracted displacement. In response to the forced migration of millions of Syrians to Turkey starting in 2011, the EU and Turkish government published a joint statement in March 2016. The so-called EU-Turkey deal (EUTD) provided a substantial flow of money (EUR 6 billion in four years) from the EU to Turkey. In return Turkey had to commit to contain and control migration movement toward the EU. In social science, there are quite diverse evaluations of the EUTD. Whereas some studies focus on its effectiveness and efficiency in reaching the outlined goals, other publications stress its geo-political effects on migrants’ mobility and (externalized) border control. Meanwhile some studies look for points to improve the EUTD while others criticize it fundamentally. This article analyzes the involvement of different types of international governmental and non-governmental organizations (IGOs and INGOs) in the four main action fields of the EUTD and its implicit side effects on the Turkish regime of migration management. It first summarizes some crucial findings and pending questions in the social science literature. Based on analysis of available documents and our own interviews in Turkey, we then shed light on the organizations involved in the implementation of the EUTD and its effects on the Turkish regime of refugee protection. In 2022, Turkey hosted some 3.7 million Syrian refugees of a total of almost four million registered international forced migrants. The EUTD of 2016 was mainly a response by the EU to the large numbers of Syrian refugees arriving in its members’ territories. When more than 1.2 million asylum seekers were registered in the then EU-28 in 2015 alone — more than twice the number in the preceding year — some EU member states (MS) negotiated with the Turkish government (Eurostat 2015, 2016). Based on a meeting of the European Council and its “Turkish counterpart” the so-called “EU-Turkey statement” was published on March 18 in 2015 (European Council 2016). From the very beginning, this EUTD was controversial — both in public discussions and in the social science literature. Was it primarily a payment from the EU to the Turkish government for externalizing its responsibilities of refugee protection? Or was it an appropriate measure for sharing the burden of an urgent humanitarian crisis? Was the money spent for refugee-oriented humanitarian aid and development expenses or was it instrumentalized by the Turkish government for its own ends? How did refugee related IGOs and INGOs participate in the management of the EUTD? In the following sections, we focus on some selected aspects of the role of national and international, governmental and non-governmental organizations active in the field of refugee protection, specifically the role and cooperation dynamics of these refugee related organizations (RRO) in implementing the Facility for Refugees in Turkey (FRIT) as part of the EUTD. Based on expert interviews in Turkey and an analysis of spending under the EUTD, the paper analyzes (1) how the landscape of RROs developed in the context of the EUTD, (2) how the budget of the EUTD was spent, and (3) how the cooperation between these RROs developed. The paper adds new insights into the contradictory dynamics between organizing services for refugees and controlling and containing refugee movements to the EU, between assisting and instrumentalizing forced migrants in Turkey, and between humanitarian aid and development activities. Especially the last point is relevant for contexts of protracted displacement as instruments of immediate humanitarian assistance have to be combined with means of longer-term development. From a perspective of organizational sociology, it argues that the EUTD contributed to a multi-level transnational organizational field of refugee protection, where collective and corporate actors relate in conflict and cooperation between the poles of rational self-interests and mutually recognized norms, between control-oriented state authorities up to grass root action networks. Analysis of the EUTD enables us to draw out specific insights and practical lessons for a broader audience. Before presenting our own empirical findings we first will sketch out the broader landscape of social science research and analysis of the EUTD. 2

Beyond rights-based social protection for refugees

The use of social protection measures has garnered increasing attention in recent years from academics and policymakers aspiring to unite the humanitarian origins and development ambitions of displacement governance regimes. Much of this attention has been focused on establishing and strengthening national systems of social protection provision. Analysis of policy approaches to social protection has become increasingly detailed, but typically does not extend beyond formal rights-based provision. This article seeks to address the paucity of literature on how refugees strategise around access to social assistance beyond Northern-mandated approaches. We review existing research on Syrian displacement in Lebanon to interrogate assumptions that refugees automatically seek institutionalised assistance. Drawing on postcolonial literature, we explore why modalities of social and humanitarian assistance offered through a rights-based approach represent only a partial mapping of the social protection that refugees avail themselves of. In doing so, we signal a move beyond the narrow and restrictive binary of formal/informal and attempt to consider the range of social protection opportunities from the perspective of refugees. Though unequal, we argue that both national systems of social protection provision and alternative approaches identified by displaced people are currently necessary, although a language of rights is only applicable to the former. Ultimately, greater coordination between the two is required. In conclusion, this article describes directions for future research aimed at a holistic understanding of how social protection is accessed in displacement and a more explicit interrogation of the impact of social protection measures in displacement settings.

The Vulnerability of Young Refugees Living in Reception Centres in Luxembourg: An Overview of Conditions and Experiences across Subjective Temporal Imaginaries

Vulnerability has become a key concept in discourses and policies on international protection and reception of refugees. In this context, the notion has been described as a tool to provide special provisions to groups at higher risk or one to perpetuate political agendas within increasingly hostile reception systems. However, vulnerability as an analytical concept has received less attention, with both policymakers and scholars often employing different conceptualisations of vulnerability or treating it as a self-explanatory condition. Building on a previous conceptual elaboration, this paper sets out to apply an understanding of vulnerability as multi-layered, dynamic and embedded in a study of the lived experiences of a group of potentially ‘vulnerable’ migrants, based on ‘fixed’ contextual criteria. Drawing from in-depth interviews with young adults who obtained refugee status in Luxembourg but still live in ‘temporary’ reception centres, this paper provides a wide analytical overview of the conditions of vulnerability encountered by this specific group of migrants, in the process of building their lives in a new country. Following the participants’ subjective temporal imaginaries of past, present and future, the analysis highlights and problematises conditions of structural, situational and experiential vulnerability emerging from their accounts and experiences, and discusses their possible implications.

South-South Solidarity and the Latin American Left

Most studies of international solidarity focus on movements connecting the global North and South, sidelining the vital connections within the South. While revolutionaries have long prioritized both North-South and South-South relationships, academics have been slower to catch on. Only recently have we begun to give “South-South solidarity” the attention it merits.Jessica Stites Mor's study examines South-South solidarity movements involving the Latin American Left, primarily during the late 1960s and early 1970s. This was the heyday of internationalism driven by radical visions of anti-imperialism and socialism. South-South cooperation took new form following the 1959 Cuban Revolution, the 1966 Tricontinental Conference in Havana, and the 1966 formation of the Organization of Solidarity with the People of Asia, Africa, and Latin America (OSPAAAL). Cuba in particular supported anticolonial and anticapitalist struggles across Africa and Latin America. Meanwhile, nonrevolutionary states and private institutions like the Catholic Church scrambled to fend off revolutionary change through a combination of reform and repression.Despite the book's narrow temporal frame, its scope is ambitious. It tackles four very different cases of South-South connections using archives from eight countries. The first chapter addresses Mexico's protection of Chilean political refugees after the 1973 coup. This policy followed an effort by Mexican legal scholars and certain regime officials to strengthen international asylum law by asserting the right of receiving countries to determine the validity of claims. Though some of these advocates had principled motives, the regime was also concerned with “shoring up domestic support” following the 1968 Tlatelolco massacre (p. 185n9). As many have noted, Mexico's less-than-revolutionary regime sought to boost its tarnished legitimacy by opposing some aspects of US imperialism in Latin America. It was essentially forced to practice some level of solidarity in the interest of maintaining power. And even that posture had major limits: for example, the regime simultaneously collaborated with Washington by sharing intel on Cubans and waging a brutal counterinsurgency in Guerrero state.OSPAAAL's artistic production is the topic of chapter 2. Stites Mor analyzes the organization's printed materials, which were designed in Cuba and disseminated around the world. Posters promoted solidarity with revolutionaries in Vietnam, South Africa, Palestine, Yemen, and elsewhere. Although these materials have been discussed in other studies, the visual analysis of the artists' decisions is a valuable contribution. The chapter reflects one of Stites Mor's overarching arguments, about how “representational solidarity” aimed to forge a shared revolutionary imaginary (p. 20).Chapter 3 addresses a more neglected case: the Argentine Left's solidarity with the Palestinian liberation struggle. Unlike OSPAAAL art, which was accompanied by Cuban material assistance to revolutionary movements, Argentines' use of representational solidarity was “mostly symbolic” (p. 124). They championed the Palestinian cause largely as a way to unify the domestic Left around a common agenda. This is an example of how domestic politics informs international solidarity, which is a common thread across all four case studies. The chapter also draws an insightful contrast with the Chilean Left. Stites Mor argues that the presence in Chile of a conservative Palestinian immigrant population, including many vocal capitalists, slowed the growth of solidarity efforts as compared with Argentina.The global transmission of liberation theology, another understudied question, is the focus of the final chapter. Stites Mor shows that Latin American articulations of liberation theology had a significant impact in apartheid South Africa. Antiapartheid activists read and circulated the writings of Peruvian priest Gustavo Gutiérrez, for example. The chapter says rather little about direct relationships between South Africans and Latin Americans, though it does suggest how ideas were transmitted via publications.Such a wide-ranging book is bound to have some limitations. It focuses on the discourse of solidarity emanating from top figures; it says less about the organizing of material solidarity, about how rank-and-file activists understood solidarity, or about how survivors view that era and its legacies. Oral histories might have offered insight into these questions. South-South solidarity in other times and places, such as Central America in the 1980s, is not addressed in any depth. In short, there is much research still to be done. This book's welcome reframing of solidarity should help inspire that work.

Pension and disability protection for Ukrainian refugees on the basis of the Polish-Ukrainian Agreement on social security in the situation of the armed conflict in Ukraine

Introduction: In view of the armed conflict in Ukraine after 23 February 2022, the Polish social security system has faced the challenge of providing adequate assistance to all groups of persons in need, while maintaining social justice and taking into account the financial capacity of the Polish state.Objective: The article examines the status of Ukrainian citizens in terms of pension entitlements on the basis of the Polish-Ukrainian Agreement on social security in the context of Russia's armed invasion of Ukraine.Materials and methods: The article has been drawn up based on ZUS data on benefits handling as well as on the review of legal provisions and procedures in the field of social protection, with a particular focus on Ukrainian citizens in Poland.Results: Polish social insurance law offers sufficient guarantees of social insurance protection to persons from Ukraine and other foreigners. The Polish social insurance system is characterised by rights egalitarianism. The Social Security Agreement and the Special Law provide important complementary protection to migrants whose careers are built on insurance periods in Poland and in another state party to the Agreement. Practical cooperation between the pension authorities of Poland and Ukraine is also important. Based on good cooperation between social security institutions, it is possible to establish solutions for customers which would facilitate them to acquire rights or to transfer benefits in a war situation.

A feminist geopolitics of living: Syrians’ struggles to maintain and reunite intimate ties across borders

In this article, I examine the protracted separation of Syrian families. As the number of people seeking asylum in Europe spiked during the summer of 2014, Denmark introduced a new refugee protection status to the Danish Aliens Act, known as §7.3: A General Temporary Protection Status (GTPS). This status enables recipients to legally reside in Denmark. Yet, it crucially permits the Danish state to suspend recipients’ right to family reunification for a three-year period, creating a condition of protracted separation. While feminist scholars have called attention to how intimate ties are being deliberately targeted by western states, I argue that there remains much to be said about how people actively negotiate these forms of bordering, sustain kinship, and build futures. To this end, I examine Syrians’ lived experiences of forced separation and their efforts to maintain intimate ties across time and space. Building on feminist and postcolonial scholars’ attention to life-making practices, I develop the analytic of a feminist geopolitics of living. This article offers two crucial insights. First, it makes visible the intimate and often hidden ways that the violence of protracted separation is materialized through kinship ties. Second, it illuminates the central roles of kinship ties within the struggles against violent bordering regimes. I argue that this analytic helps to understand how people make lives, assert rights, and build alternative futures collectively. In doing so, I grapple with the uncomfortable tensions, possibilities, and constraints at work within intimate ties.

How the African Union can Improve the Protection and Integration of Refugees in Africa: An Analysis of Policy Frameworks and Implementation Strategies

The refugee crisis in Africa is a growing concern, with millions of people forced to flee their homes due to conflict, persecution, and natural disasters. The African Union (AU) has a critical role to play in protecting refugees and promoting their integration into African societies. However, despite the AU’s efforts to address the refugee crisis, significant challenges remain, including inadequate policy frameworks, lack of implementation strategies, and limited resources. This research topic seeks to explore how the African Union can improve the protection and integration of refugees in Africa. The study will examine the current policy frameworks and implementation strategies adopted by the AU to address the refugee crisis, as well as the challenges and gaps in these frameworks. The study will also analyze the impact of external factors such as global migration patterns, economic downturns, and climate change on the refugee crisis in Africa. The proposed study’s original contribution is that it focuses specifically on the African Union’s role in addressing the refugee crisis in Africa, which has received limited attention in the literature. The study’s findings will be useful to policymakers, practitioners, and stakeholders working in the field of refugee protection and integration, both in Africa and globally.

ГЛОБАЛІЗАЦІЯ РИНКУ ПРАЦІ: ДИНАМІКА МІГРАЦІЙНИХ ПОТОКІВ У КОНТЕКСТІ МІЖНАРОДНИХ УГОД

Research on the labor market within the context of globalization and migration flows remains pertinent in today's globalized world. This article aims to analyze changes in migration processes, particularly their dynamics, directions, and volumes, considering the influence of international agreements. The study illuminates the key trends in migration, taking into account economic, social, and political factors shaping these flows. The investigation elucidates the interplay between globalization, migration, and international agreements, unveiling how global processes impact the development of the labor market. The analysis draws upon a wide spectrum of theoretical sources, ranging from statistical data to scholarly research and documents from international organizations pertaining to migration regulation and agreement formulation. It is crucial to note that the impact of international agreements on migration processes spans various aspects, encompassing human rights, labor migration, and refugee protection. These agreements define rules for border crossings, the status of individuals crossing borders, and the regulation of their employment. In particular, the article scrutinizes the latest trends in migration and their influence on the labor market, specifically within the framework of formulating and executing international agreements related to migration. The article aims to uncover key aspects that aid in a better understanding of globalization's impact on the labor market and in defining strategies for optimal management of migration processes within the context of global economics and regulation through international agreements. Thus, examining migration processes in the context of international agreements allows for comprehension not only of migration dynamics but also of factors influencing these processes, fostering the development of effective migration management strategies. However, it's crucial to acknowledge that the realization of agreements requires joint efforts from countries and partners in the international community to achieve stability and fairness in the migration market.

No Way Out for Climate Refugees’ Asylum Applications in Court Decisions and Conventions


 
 
 
 One major consequence of climate change is the migration problem caused by internal and international displacement of people due to environmental disasters. The cross-border effects of climate-induced displacement have naturally sparked novel debates in the field of refugee law, and has created a group of people commonly called ‘climate refugees’. Climate refugees do not necessarily fall within the definition of ‘refugee’ under the 1951 Geneva Convention. While certain states and international organisations, including the UN, approach the situation of climate refugees solely from a security point of view, others see these people as victims of climate-induced disasters. No country is truly willing to share the burden caused by the climate-induced mass migration or address the full extent of this major phenomenon. Moreover, the international agreements on which they base their asylum claims fail to adequately address the circumstances surrounding their requests. Differing opinions have been expressed in academia as to the appropriate protection mechanisms and assistance that can be provided to climate refugees. In article, we explain the differences between the conventional refugees and climate refugees, discuss the reasons why the existing international conventions fail to protect climate refugees, and highlight the proposed solutions for the protection of such refugees.
 
 
 

Protection of the Rights of Refugees and Asylum Seekers: Examining the Role of South African NGOs

In the past ten years, there were so many. The country rose to the challenge enacting one of the most liberal pieces of refugee legislation in the world. Despite these developments, the status of refugees and asylum seekers in South Africa, and their substantive access to human rights provisions, has in recent times been subjected to greater public and judicial scrutiny after the violent episode of xenophobic attacks unfolded in 2008. This sector of society has always been vulnerable as a result of numerous factors and the weak institutional framework for facilitating refugee rights, either in terms of suitable policies or their implementation has always been part of the broader human rights discourse in South Africa. This state of affairs, poses something of a unique challenge for NGO’s specializing in the area of refugee rights to advocate for their rights as well as to monitor the implementation of polices and processes, in an environment lacking political will and public support. This research essentially explores whether refugees and asylum seekers in South Africa have been able to claim rights they are entitled to, in a substantive manner and to examine the degree to which NGOs working in the area of human rights and tasked with assisting refugees, have been able to contribute in this regard. The researcher collected data from Ethiopian and Congolese refugees and asylum seekers in South Africa to examine their perception of the contribution by NGOS and also interviewed personnel from the three case study NGOs. It is obvious that NGOS have made significant contribution to the protection of refugees and asylum seekers and continue to do so. However, their effectiveness has decreased since their relationship with government department has changed and their agenda lacks public support and political will of political elites.