The principle of responsibility-sharing in refugee protection - an emerging norm of customary international law (original) (raw)
Related papers
Refugee Survey Quarterly, 2019
This article provides a detailed examination of the gap in international refugee law regarding burden sharing and reviews the measures on international cooperation in the Global Compact on Refugees. In doing so, the article seeks to establish the extent to which the Global Compact on Refugees will address the normative gap on burden sharing. By arguing, from the outset, the Global Compact on Refugees seems unlikely to fill this gap in an adequate and a comprehensive manner, the article concludes with a proposal on how to improve the burden sharing aspect of the Compact and its prospect of filling the gap on burden sharing.
Welcome, Support, Pledge, Resettle: Responsibility sharing in the Global Compact on Refugees
In 2018, less than 5% of those identified as needing resettlement by UNHCR were resettled-just 0.2% of the global refugee population. Four-fifths of refugees live in neighbouring states. The 2019 Global Refugee Forum offers an opportunity for states to live up to their commitment to equitable and predictable responsibility sharing. There is no single formula for responsibility sharing. This paper sets out a menu of policy options available to governments as they gather in Geneva. It calls for refugees to be meaningfully included in discussions and decisions about their future, and for higher-income countries to do their fair share by increasing their commitments to resettlement, humanitarian admissions and family reunification.
BURDEN-SHARING IN INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE LAW -TAKEAWAYS FROM THE PAST AND THE ROAD AHEAD
ISIL Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law and Refugee Law, 2021
Effective refugee protection and assistance necessitates a sharing of responsibilities and close coordination between wealthier and poorer states. While the richer states may wonder why they should share the burden with 'Southern' countries of first asylum, it will be demonstrated in this article that the same is in their best interest for several good reasons.The present article analyses the international burden-sharing normative framework including the latest Global Compact. The article also explores prominent past and contemporary refugee crises and the corresponding response by the coordinating states.The goal of the exercise is to cull out key takeaways and plan for a better and a more operational refugee assistance regime.
2019
In 2016, the leaders of 193 governments committed to more equitable and predictable sharing of responsibility for refugees as part of the New York Declaration, to be realized in the upcoming Global Compact on Refugees. To encourage debate, this paper presents the first global model to measure the capacity of governments to physically protect and financially support refugees and host communities. The model is based on a new database of indicators covering 193 countries, which assigns a fair share to each country and measures current government contributions to the physical protection of refugees. The model also proposes a new government-led global platform in support of refugee protection and human development.
Global Compact on Refugees: Dilemma Between National Security and Human Security
Interdisciplinary Social Studies, 2023
Background: The refugee crisis have been an international concern as it is considered a multidimensional threat to security issues, both national and human security. States increased the level of protection that aims 'to maintain and to protect' their borders on behalf of sovereignty. On the other hand, refugees have the right 'to seek and to enjoy' asylum from persecution in other countries. In this context, refugee crisis implies the paradigm clash between national security and human security. The Global Compact on Refugees (GCR) is presented as the product of a "States Plus" approach to multilateralism that brought together several states, other stakeholders, and refugees to solve the dilemma above with the principle of burden and responsibility-sharing. Aim: This article analyzes the legal mechanism that impacts the financial resources and fulfilment of the GCR objectives. Method: The researcher combined a qualitative approach with a methodology for conducting a literature review. The majority of the articles and other sources used to compile the study's data were books and academic publications that examined relevant subjects. Findings: Previously, refugee handling in the global refugee regime (1951 Convention and 1967 Protocol) tended to be state-centred. In contrast, GCR tends to be people-centred and comes from the refugee crisis realities (bottom-up). However, from the implementation aspect, there is a significant gap between the targets made in the Global Refugee Forum and its achievements. This discourse was dominated by a traditional state security perspective, while the humanitarian language emerged only in design framework of GCR.
The New York Declaration foresaw adoption of a Global Compact on Refugees (GCR). UNHCR is tasked to prepare this Compact, which consists of two components: the Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework (CRRF) and the programme of action. The latest draft of the GCR namely, the Third Draft was published on 4 June 2018. The final text of the Compact will be adopted by the UNGA later this year. This EJIL:Talk! post reviews the Third Draft with a view to establishing whether the Global Compact on Refugees will fill the gap in the existing global refugee protection regime relating to burden sharing.
GroJIL 9(1), 2021
The global refugee protection system is founded on two core values, assuring a safe and dignified life away from violent regimes and conflicts: the right to asylum and the non-refoulement rule. While there are no internationally agreed definitions for these concepts, their fragmentation affects the equitable and predictable burden- and responsibility-sharing, and subsequently, successful international cooperation in refugee matters. By analysing the right to asylum in legal theory and examining its application in the jurisprudence of international human rights monitoring bodies, this article seeks to explore the complexity of heterogeneous approaches with regard to refugees. Furthermore, the impediments to the functioning of the current refugee protection regime is identified by analysing the complicated nature of its umbrella maxim - the non-refoulement rule. The article examines how the lack of clarity on the contents of the right to asylum and the non-refoulement rule causes different, sometimes contradictory, approaches regarding the corresponding international obligations of states. It further explores how the diversified understanding of these foundational principles makes it difficult to identify common protection needs and the responsibilities of states with regard to international cooperation and burden- and responsibility-sharing on refugee matters. Eventually, the fragmentation of these core values threatens their unequivocal application and results in failing refugee protection regimes. Consequently, this article argues that a common understanding on the right to asylum and non-refoulement rule represents a condicio sine qua non for securing equitable and predictable burden- and responsibility-sharing mechanism in refugee matters.
The UN Global Compacts and the Common European Asylum System: Coherence or Friction?
Laws
This paper examines the “protective potential” of the Global Compacts on Refugees and Migrants vis à vis existing commitments to fundamental rights within the European Union (EU). The relationship between the two normative frameworks is scrutinised to establish the extent to which the two might be mutually supportive or contradictory, since this determines the Compacts’ capacity to inform the interpretation of EU fundamental rights within the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). This paper explores this protective potential through three of the Compacts’ key guiding principles: respect for human rights and the rule of law, the principle of non-regression, and the principle of non-discrimination. The Compacts’ commitments to the first two are presented as sites of coherence where the Compacts concretely express pre-existing protections within EU law and provide a blueprint for implementation in the migration sphere. However, the Compacts’ principle of non-discrimination reveals an a...