Non-signatory States and the international refugee regime - a FMR mini-feature
The 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol form the foundations of the international refugee system and provide the legal foundation of refugee assistance and the basic statute guiding the work of the UNHCR. The great majority of the world’s nations have signed or ratified the Convention and its Protocol yet many of the world’s top refugee-hosting countries have not done so. The reasons for not being party to the Convention or its Protocol are varied but the fact of not being a party affects, for example, the ability of UNHCR to work with and within that State. However, the actual actions of States in relation to key aspects of protection of refugees are not directly correlated with whether they have signed or ratified either Convention or Protocol. The BEYOND project focuses precisely on this issue globally, while the REF-ARAB examines it from the perspective of Arab states in the Middle East.
In February 2021 and in February 2023, the BEYOND and REF-ARAB projects will each publish a mini-feature in Forced Migration Review, the most widely read publication on forced migration, published by the Refugee Studies Centre in the Oxford Department of International Development, University of Oxford. The concept note for the BEYOND mini-feature Non-signatory States and the international refugee regime is already posted online and available here. A full call for articles, with deadline for submissions, will be issued in due course.
We expect submissions to reflect a diverse range of experience and opinions and address questions such as the following:
What are the reasons for States refusing to sign or ratify and what are the repercussions and implications for States, the international community and displaced people?
What alternative mechanisms for protection (including signature to other conventions and instruments) are in place in non-signatory States and how do they resemble and differ from the protection provided by signatory States?
What can be learned from both the failures of signatory States to ensure protection, and the successes of non-signatories in so doing?
What influence does the Refugee Convention have on non-signatory States?
How do non-signatory States engage with and help shape developments within the international refugee law regime and its institutions?
What lessons can be drawn about the complex effects of international conventions through an examination of the role of non-signatories vis-à-vis the Refugee Convention?
What challenges are faced by UNHCR, other international institutions and States in promoting ratification of the Convention and how can these be addressed?
In what ways, and on what basis, does UNHCR operate in non-signatory States? How does it implement its mandate of international protection? How do non-signatory States influence the understanding and implementation of this mandate?
How do local courts and legal aid providers in non-signatory States engage with international refugee law norms and principles? Under what circumstances and for what reasons is the Refugee Convention used?
What advantages and disadvantages are there for civil society operating in non-signatory States?