1951 Refugee Convention Definition of Refugee

1951 Refugee Convention Definition of Refugee

(2) As a result of events occurring before 1 January 1951 and for a reasonable fear of being persecuted on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, of being outside the country of which he is a national and of not being able to avail himself of the protection of that country because of this fear; or who, as a result of such events, is not a national and who is outside the country of his former habitual residence is unable or unwilling to return because of that fear. The 1967 Protocol abolished time limits and applied to refugees « without geographical restriction », but declarations previously made by Parties to the Convention on Geographical Scope were grandfathered. [6] Although the Convention is no longer the only international refugee protection regime, it has set an important moral and legal precedent in the global response to refugees. It continues to serve as a reference point for refugee rights agreements around the world. This is one of the reasons why belonging to a particular social group usually means that you have a quality or trait that you can`t change to stay where you are. You have to flee, that`s the only alternative. I think it`s those two things. One of them is that nuanced messages tend not to be used in political and national security discourse, otherwise they will be misunderstood. But secondly, these statements are made with full knowledge that people who have bona fide refugee rights will apply for and seek asylum because they have no choice. That is their only option. They will listen and they will understand, and they will probably agree with the basic principle, but that does not apply to them because they are refugees. Nations sometimes offer « temporary protection » in the face of a sudden and massive influx of people, as was the case during the conflict in the former Yugoslavia in the early 1990s, and their usual asylum systems would be overwhelmed.

In such circumstances, people can be quickly admitted to safe countries, but without any guarantee of permanent asylum. Therefore, « temporary protection » can benefit both governments and asylum seekers in certain circumstances. But it does not complement or replace the broader protections, including refugee asylum, that the Convention provides. The United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees – also known as the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees – was officially adopted 70 years ago, on July 28, 1951. The agreement is considered the « core of international refugee protection » and legally obliges countries` signatories to recognize and protect people fleeing their country of citizenship due to persecution or conflict. We look forward to your comments and questions on the relevance of refugee inclusion to achieving the objectives of the Convention at the age of 70. And is accompanied by Yael Schacher, Senior U.S. Attorney at Refugees International, where she focuses on asylum, U.S. refugee admissions, temporary protected status, and immigration practices that impact protection. Prior to Refugees International, Yael spent a decade researching the relationship between immigration and refugee policy for his next book on the history of asylum. She has also taught at the University of Connecticut and has taught immigration history and refugee politics at Harvard Law School and the University of Minnesota. Go gophers and the Connecticut Institute for Refugees and Immigrants focused on direct legal representation for asylum seekers.

Refugees International expressed the hope that all States, recognizing the social and humanitarian character of the refugee problem, would do everything in their power to prevent the problem from becoming a cause of tension between States, and held a debate on the seventieth anniversary of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. How do governments interpret their obligations under the Convention today? Does the Convention adequately address displacement due to natural hazards, which are often exacerbated by climate change, gang violence, gender-based violence and trafficking in human beings? Should governments and international organizations do more to protect people forced to flee their homes, and by what means? How can DISPLACED people themselves be more meaningfully involved in decision-making on these issues? 4. States Parties shall give favourable consideration to the possibility, in the absence of reciprocity, of granting refugees rights and benefits that exceed the rights and benefits to which they are entitled under paragraphs 2 and 3 and of extending the exemption from reciprocity to refugees who do not meet the conditions set out in paragraphs 2 and 3. Yes of course. Hello everyone, it is a pleasure to join you all in a prestigious panel and it is a pleasure to be invited by Refugees International. I think I really wanted to highlight what Senior Councillor Koh said about the nature of the convention, the fact that it was developed at a different time and for it. But, of course, although the convention`s criteria are limited and outdated, as one would expect with any international treaty, and their wording is vague, a refugee`s definition of convention has proven capable of dynamic interpretation over time. We have seen this common pattern in Western countries, or a creative interpretation and expansion of convention grounds by the judiciary, which seeks to include modern people and situations under their protection that reflect the times in which we now live. For example, gender-based persecution is now accepted worldwide in asylum claims and even in U.S. jurisdiction.

[iii] Although the 1984 Cartagena Declaration on Refugees is a non-legally binding document, it influenced several national laws in the Latin American region to adopt its broader definition of refugees. Every refugee has duties towards the country in which he is present, which require, inter alia, compliance with its laws and regulations and with the measures taken to maintain public order. The Convention relating to the Status of Refugees is based on Article 14 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which recognizes the right of individuals to seek asylum from persecution in other countries. A refugee may enjoy rights and benefits in a State that go beyond those provided for in the Convention. [3] Hello everyone. My name is Eric Schwartz and I am the president of Refugees International. Tomorrow will mark the 70th anniversary. First, the adoption of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees.

We are pleased that you are participating in our commemoration of this event today and discussing the implications of the 1967 Convention and the Refugee Protocol. According to its provisions, the Convention and its Protocol aim to ensure the protection of those who have fled their country of origin and who have a well-founded fear of persecution on the basis of their race, religion, nationality, membership of a social group or political opinion. But the convention has also served as an essential guide to assess both progress and failures in efforts to protect those who must flee. And with an estimated 80 million people worldwide today displaced as a result of persecution, human rights violations, conflict and the world grappling with new drivers of displacement, the Convention deserves our consideration. It was the first truly international agreement to cover the most fundamental aspects of a refugee`s life. It has established a set of fundamental human rights that should be at least equivalent to the freedoms of aliens legally residing in a given country and, in many cases, to those of citizens of that State. He recognized the international magnitude of refugee crises and the need for international cooperation, including burden-sharing among States, to resolve the problem. For a complete overview and analysis of refugee rights, see: « The Law of Refugee Status, » James Hathaway (1991) and « The Rights of Refugees under International Law, » James C. Hathaway (2005), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 936. On behalf of the Biden-Harris administration, I would like to thank Dean Eric Schwartz, who, as he mentioned, is my longtime brother in the fox hole, and your valuable organization, Refugees International, for giving me the opportunity to reflect on the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees at the age of 70.

For me, this 70th anniversary, which we are celebrating tomorrow, as you mentioned, is both a personal and a professional step. It`s a personal life because congressional life included my own life, going back to the `60s, when America welcomed my late father, a political refugee from South Korea, when the Democratic government was overthrown by a military coup.

No Comments

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.