Delve into the intricate world of International Refugee Law, a vital legal framework established to protect the rights of displaced individuals. This comprehensive analysis explores the fundamentals, key aspects, and developmental history of this significant field of law. It scrutinises the complex differences between asylum and refugee status, while also examining the challenges and potential reforms in refugee protection globally. Through a comparative lens, you are guided to understand diverse international approaches to refugee law and policy; and the pivotal role of international organisations. Additionally, the article elucidates key concerns like the 'Safe Third Country' concept and the real-world enforcement of refugee rights. Finally, it returns to the guiding principles underpinning International Refugee Law, including the crucial principle of non-refoulement.
Understanding the Basics of International Refugee Law
International Refugee Law is a crucial aspect of modern legal systems. It encapsulates the key principles and guidelines that govern the rights and responsibilities of individuals who have been compelled to leave their native countries owing to various circumstances.
Defining International Refugee Law
For clarity, here's a brief description:
International Refugee Law refers to a set of international legal regulations which dictate the obligations of nations towards individuals who are forced to flee their home countries due to life-threatening circumstances such as war, conflict, and persecution.
The foundation of International Refugee Law centres on ensuring that such individuals, referred to as refugees, are given the required protection and aid without discrimination.
Comprising primarily of various legal instruments like international treaties and conventions, this branch of law also extends to customary international law and soft law instruments.
Key Aspects and Principles of International Refugee Law
International refugee law revolves around a few crucial principles:
- Non-Refoulement
- Non-Discrimination
- Non-Penalization
- Cooperation of States
Non-Refoulement: This most vital principle prohibits the expulsion or return of a refugee to territories where they are likely to face danger.
Non-Discrimination: This precept advocates that refugees should not be disadvantaged or treated differently based on their race, religion, or country of origin.
Non-Penalization: Here, penalties should not be inflicted on refugees who have entered a country without legal authorisation, provided their intention is to claim asylum.
Cooperation of States: All states are obligated to work collaboratively in ensuring the safety of refugees.
Origin and Development of International Refugee Law
The evolution of international refugee law has been a gradual process, with traces dating back to post-world war periods. The unprecedented number of Europeans displaced as a result of World War II necessitated the formation of a legal framework that would protect the rights of these individuals.
For instance, the adoption of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees was a significant milestone that not only set the definition of ‘refugee’ but also laid down the minimum standards for the treatment of refugees. Later, in 1967, the protocol of the same convention removed geographical and temporal constraints of the definition, making it more globally applicable.
Role of Major International Conventions in Shaping Refugee Law
Generally, certain key conventions play an instrumental role in shaping the contours of international refugee law. Below is a table outlining a few of these conventions and their key contributions:
| Convention |
Key Contributions |
| 1951 Refugee Convention |
Established the term 'refugee' and set minimum standards for their treatment. Also introduced the principle of non-refoulement. |
| 1967 Protocol |
Expanded the reach of the 1951 Convention by eliminating geographical and temporal restrictions. |
| Convention Against Torture |
Expanded the principle of non-refoulement to prohibit expulsion to a place where an individual could face torture. |
These conventions collectively form a part of the larger legal framework that governs refugee protection at an international level. However, it's worth noting that the execution of principles stated in these conventions relies heavily on regular interpretation and state practice.
Examining International Asylum and Refugee Law
International Asylum and Refugee Law encompasses the collective legal norms, standards and principles that regulate who is officially considered a refugee, what rights they have, and the legal obligations of states towards these individuals. This section will delve into the distinction between asylum and refugee status, the legal critria for recognition, rights and responsibilities, as well as appraise the challenges and criticisms present within this legal framework.
Difference Between Asylum and Refugee Status
Although Asylum and Refugee statuses both encompass instances where individuals seek protection outside their home country, there are key differences between the two.
Refugee Status: Predominantly, individuals are granted Refugee status following a comprehensive assessment by an authorised international body or government entity, which ascertains whether their claim aligns with the definition stipulated in the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol.
Asylum: On the other hand, granting Asylum predominantly falls within the purview of governments. Asylum typically indicates the broader protective status granted to individuals who are unable to return to their home country due to well-founded fears of persecution.
Important to note is that while all refugees are asylum seekers since they seek protection, not all asylum seekers will be certified as refugees. The determination processes for these statuses, although somewhat similar, bear distinctions that will be discussed in the ensuing section.
Legal Criteria for Asylum and Refugee Recognition in International Law
The legal recognition of Asylum or Refugee status necessitates the satisfaction of a set of criteria, classified under international law.
For Refugee Status, the 1951 Refugee Convention stipulates that the fear of persecution must be well-founded and owing to reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion. The inability to avail protection from one's home country is another critical consideration.
In contrast, the criteria for Asylum varies across jurisdictions heavily dependent upon the domestic legislation in force. Nevertheless, a common criterion is the presence of a legitimate fear of persecution.
Rights and Responsibilities under International Asylum and Refugee Law
The International Asylum and Refugee law advocates a range of rights and holds responsibilities for refugees.
| Rights of Refugees |
Responsibilities of Refugees |
| Right to non-return (Non-Refoulement) |
Abiding by the laws and regulations of the host state |
| Right to life and liberty |
Maintaining respect for the rights and liberties of others |
| Right to work |
Cooperating with authorities in asylum procedures |
| Right to housing |
Furnishing accurate and comprehensive information necessary for their asylum claim |
These rights and responsibilities entail an intricate balance, and both states and refugees are expected to uphold their respective roles and obligations.
Challenges and Criticisms of Asylum and Refugee Law
While International Asylum and Refugee Law provides a significant structure for the protection of vulnerable individuals, they do endure several criticisms and challenges.
- Inconsistency in Implementation: Effective implementation of asylum and refugee law varies significantly across states and regions due to discrepancies in interpretations, domestic legislation, and levels of compliance.
- Refugee Determination Process: The process of adjudicating refugee status often includes prolonged waiting periods and may impose significant burdens on applicants.
- Lack of Pathway for Resettlement: While international law envisages protection for refugees, it does not guarantee a permanent solution such as resettlement, which can lead to prolonged periods in limbo.
- Climate Refugees: The phenomenon of 'climate refugees' – people displaced due to climate change or natural disasters, presents a legal conundrum as the current refugee law framework does not encompass them.
A poignant example that brought these challenges to the fore is the Syrian refugee crisis. It laid bare the vast inconsistencies in international response, with some countries more welcoming than others, leading to an unequal distribution of responsibility. The delay in refugee determination and insufficient pathways for resettlement have resulted in many refugees languishing in camps for many years.
Refugee Protection in International Law
The cornerstone of International Law lies within the tenet of human rights, which categorically incorporates Refugee Protection. This robust system comprises numerous mechanisms, including treaties, customs, and principles which advocate the rights and welfare of refugees on a global platform. However, various challenges and hindrances mar its effectiveness, calling for reformation and improved solutions.
Mechanisms for Refugee Protection under International Law
International Law, encompassing a broad array of conventions, customary laws, and soft law frameworks, presents an assortment of mechanisms catered towards effectuating areas of Refugee Protection.
The most renowned treaty establishing standards for refugees is the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol. The conventions elucidate the definition of a ‘refugee’ and stipulate the minimum standards for their treatment, with the cornerstone principle being non-refoulement.
Non-refoulement: The principle that a refugee should not be returned to any country where they are likely to face persecution, torture, or cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment.
Several additional international human rights treaties indirectly contribute to refugee protection by specifying the rights of all individuals, including refugees. These include the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Convention Against Torture, amongst others.
There exists the concept of subsidiary protection as well, providing international protection for persons who do not qualify as refugees yet face significant threats if returned to their home country.
Effective Refugee Protection - An International Perspective
The effectiveness of refugee protection is primarily reliant on the compliance of states with their obligations under international law. This includes adhering to the principle of non-refoulement, ensuring non-discrimination in treatment, and providing effective access to justice and fair procedures for determination of refugee status.
The situation in Uganda serves as a laudable illustration of effective refugee protection. The country hosts over 1.4 million refugees and maintains a progressive refugee policy, allowing freedom of movement, the right to work and establish a business, and access to public services such as education and healthcare. This approach aligns strongly with the tenets of international refugee law.
Legal and Non-Legal Challenges in Refugee Protection
Refugee protection in the context of international law, although conceptually robust, encounters numerous hurdles, both legal and non-legal, which often compromise its effectiveness.
Legal challenges often originate from restrictive interpretations of the 1951 Refugee Convention – for instance, the definition of 'refugee' as a person who fears persecution owing to race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion. This definition is believed to be overly constrictive and excludes persons displaced due to factors like climate change, gender-based violence or generalized violence.
Non-legal challenges are abundant and could encompass a lack of resources or capacity to host vast numbers of refugees, political and societal resistance towards refugees, and ongoing conflicts which hamper protection efforts.
Interception and push-back strategies, undertaken by many countries as an attempt to mitigate irregular migration, can significantly jeopardize refugee protection. These practices involve intercepting boats full of migrants, including potential refugees, and pushing them back to their departure points without any legal or procedural safeguards.
Solutions and Reforms for Better Refugee Protection
Addressing the deficiencies in the current refugee protection regime requires comprehensive and multifaceted solutions.
- Expanding the Definition of 'Refugee': There is a growing call to revise the definition of 'refugee' to accommodate the evolving reasons for forced displacement, including climate-induced migration and generalized violence.
- Sharing Responsibility: The concept of shared responsibility needs to be translated into practice, with wealthier, typically non-neighbouring countries, taking up larger roles in hosting refugees.
- Addressing Root Causes: Working towards resolving the root causes of displacement, like conflicts, poverty, and climate change, could be the most sustainable solution to the refugee crisis.
Canada's Private Sponsorship of Refugees Program serves as an innovative approach to refugee protection, where private citizens or organizations can assume the financial and emotional support responsibility for refugees for one year. This initiative has led to the successful resettlement of thousands of refugees in Canada and is an excellent instance of burden-sharing.
Refugee Law and Policy: A Comparative and International Approach
Given the global reach of refugee crises, nations have developed varying laws and policies to manage refugee issues, creating a complex and diverse landscape of refugee protection. International organisations play a pivotal role in shaping, executing and overseeing these refugee laws and policies. By conducting a comparative and international study, we can evaluate the effectiveness of these frameworks and identify areas for improvement.
Analysing Different Countries' Approach to Refugee Law and Policy
It's essential to understand that the subject of refugee law and policy is governed differently by countries around the world, each influenced by factors like historical context, geographical location, and political climate.
For instance, nations such as Germany and Sweden in the European Union have been particularly receptive to refugees, exemplified through their robust asylum laws, financial assistance, and integration facilities. In contrast, some countries, including various Southeast Asian nations, haven't signed the 1951 Refugee Convention, leading to approaches that often lack formal asylum procedures and adequate refugee protection.
Other nations have fluctuating stances on refugee law and policy, often influenced by changing political climates. For example, the U.S. under different administrations has varied considerably in its approach to refugee admissions and treatment.
Refugee Integration Policies - A Comparative Analysis
Refugee integration policies manoeuvre the pathway for refugees to contribute positively to their host countries. The nature and efficacy of these policies, however, diverge globally, leading to unequal refugee experiences.
Let's consider two vital aspects of refugee integration: access to the labor market and opportunities for education.
| Access to Labor Market |
Opportunities for Education |
| In countries like Canada, refugees enjoy immediate access to the job market. However, in some nations, including various Gulf countries, employment options for refugees are heavily constrained. |
Educational opportunities also vary. Northern European countries, such as Sweden, offer broad access to all levels of education for refugees. Conversely, in regions dealing with massive refugee influxes like Bangladesh and Lebanon, strained resources lead to limited educational access. |
It's crucial to recognize the impact of different integration policies on a refugee's life and future possibilities. Enhancing national practices drawing from successful examples elsewhere could be an effective way to alleviate the worldwide refugee crisis.
Role of International Organisations in Refugee Law and Policy
International organisations, such as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the International Organization for Migration (IOM), play a crucial role in defining and implementing refugee law and policy across the globe.
UNHCR: Otherwise known as the UN Refugee Agency, UNHCR leads international action to protect people forced to flee their homes due to conflict and persecution. They offer life-saving assistance, safeguard rights and well-being, and strive to ensure that everyone can seek asylum and find safe refuge.
IOM: The IOM is committed to the principle that humane and orderly migration benefits migrants and society. It assists in meeting the operational challenges of migration, advances understanding of migration issues, and promotes international cooperation.
In addition to these agencies, various non-governmental organisations (NGOs) significantly contribute to refugee response efforts. NGOs often offer on-the-ground support in crisis situations, provide legal assistance and advocacy, and fill gaps when governments' responses are insufficient.
Although these entities play a pivotal role, numerous constraints, including funding shortages and political barriers, often hinder their operations. Therefore, enhancing the capability of these organizations is a profound need for an effective global response to refugee crises.
Understanding Safe Third Country International Refugee Law
It's crucial to dissect the concepts underpinning the 'Safe Third Country' stipulation within International Refugee Law. This regulation relies heavily on geographical contingencies, which consequently affect asylum applicants and their status as refugees.
Interpretation and Implementation of Safe Third Country Concepts
It's key to dissect what we mean when we refer to the 'Safe Third Country' concept:
The 'Safe Third Country' notion in International Refugee Law refers to the premise that an asylum seeker should seek refuge in the first safe nation they arrive at, rather than transiting through multiple countries. A ‘safe’ country is typically defined as one that adheres to key human rights and refugee protections, with an efficient and fair system for determining refugee status.
This concept is rooted in key international refugee law instruments and is often enshrined in the domestic asylum laws of individual countries. At European Union (EU) level, it is central to the Dublin Regulation, which stipulates that the first member state into which an asylum seeker arrives is generally responsible for processing their asylum claim.
This concept is implemented through the return of asylum seekers to the 'safe third country' from which they first travelled. These returns can occur before the person's asylum claim is considered in-depth, effectively outsourcing the responsibility for refugee protection to other countries.
The Impact of Safe Third Country Concept on Refugees
The implementation of the 'Safe Third Country' concept can have significant impacts on refugees and their rights.
While the concept is ostensibly designed to improve the efficiency and fairness of asylum procedures, it can in practice result in the shifting of responsibilities from countries with stronger asylum systems to those with weaker systems. This can lead to substandard conditions, prolonged processing times and, in the worst cases, refoulement - returning refugees to countries where they face danger.
The impact of this concept was highlighted in the European refugee crisis, where countries like Greece, being an entry point to the EU, were saddled with disproportionate numbers of asylum seekers. The overstretched Greek asylum system struggled to cope, leading to substandard living conditions, mental health crises, and human rights concerns.
Critiques of Safe Third Country Provisions in International Law
There are several critiques of the 'Safe Third Country' provisions from a legal and humanitarian perspective.
- Shifting Responsibility, Not Sharing: Critics argue that the 'Safe Third Country' concept allows countries to evade their protection responsibilities by shifting the burden onto countries often less equipped to host refugees.
- Implications for Human Rights: The concept can result in violations of asylum seekers' human rights, particularly when asylum seekers are returned to countries with fragile asylum systems and poor living conditions.
- Undermining Asylum Seekers' Agency: The concept also limits the autonomy of asylum seekers by reducing their choice in deciding where to seek asylum. This often separates them from supportive diaspora communities or family links in other countries.
Revisiting Safe Third Country Concept for Enhancing Refugee Protection
Reforming the Concept: In response to these critiques, calls have been made to revisit the 'Safe Third Country' concept. Rather than discarding the concept entirely, revisions could focus on ensuring that it is applied in a way that respects the rights and autonomy of asylum seekers and achieves genuinely equitable responsibility-sharing between countries.
- Checking Safe Status: There could be more rigorous checks to ascertain the 'safe' status of countries, considering the quality of their asylum system and the living conditions of refugees.
- Agency and Choice: Flexibility could be introduced to allow asylum seekers some degree of choice over where their claim is processed, especially taking into account family or diaspora connections, which can greatly aid their integration process.
Sweden practices a slightly altered version of the safe third country concept. It provides exemptions to the Dublin Regulation for unaccompanied minors, allowing them to apply for asylum in Sweden even if they have transited through other 'safe' countries. This approach may signal ways to reform the 'Safe Third Country' concept to better balance the rights of refugees, the responsibilities of states and the realities of migration routes.
Discussing Refugee Rights Under International Law
Under International Refugee Law, individuals granted refugee status are afforded certain unalienable rights. These rights serve as protection measures, ensuring these vulnerable individuals are treated with the dignity and respect that are fundamental to all of humanity. Understanding these rights, their application, limitations, and the steps taken towards securing them forms a significant aspect of refugee studies.
Rights Granted to Refugees Under International Law
The rights of refugees under international law are enshrined primarily within the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol. These rights provide a paramount safety net for refugees and aim to secure their access to crucial resources and opportunities.
The 1951 Refugee Convention is a key legal document and the cornerstone of refugee protection, outlining the rights of refugees and the obligations of the state hosting them.
Following are some of the essential rights granted to refugees under International law:
- Non-Refoulement: The cornerstone principle of non-refoulement prohibits the expulsion or return of a refugee to an environment where their life or freedom would be at risk.
- Access to Courts: Refugees should have access to the judicial system in the host state equivalent to the access provided to foreign nationals in regular circumstances.
- Work: Refugees have the right to seek paid employment and engage in self-employment in the host country.
- Educational Access: Refugee children should be granted the same accessibility to primary education as the nationals of the country, while adults should have equal access to tertiary education.
- Freedom of Movement: Unless national security dictates otherwise, refugees should have the freedom to move freely within the territory of the host state.
The Enforcement and Advocacy for Refugee Rights
The enforcement and advocacy of refugee rights mainly depend on the willingness and ability of national governments and international bodies to uphold the standards set by refugee conventions and other human rights instruments.
On a global level, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) plays a significant role in this regard.
The UNHCR provides legal advice, oversees conventions' application, advocates for fairer policies, and intervenes as a third party in pivotal court cases, thereby playing an instrumental role in the advocacy and enforcement of refugee rights.
Notwithstanding, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), international tribunals, and Courts also contribute substantively to the enforcement of refugee rights by holding violators accountable, raising awareness about refugee rights, and providing crucial support services.
An instance of enforcement and advocacy is the significant role played by the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) in the US, which filed lawsuits challenging the Trump administration's policies affecting asylum seekers, culminating in the Supreme Court blocking restrictions on asylum applications at the southern border.
The Limitations to Refugee Rights
Although International Law prescribes a comprehensive set of rights for refugees, numerous limitations sometimes hinder the full realization of these rights.
Varying interpretations and applications of International Law by different countries present a significant limitation. National legislation, policy practices, administrative discretion, and judicial interpretation result in differing levels of refugee rights protection.
For instance, while refugees have the right to work under the 1951 Refugee Convention, various countries impose restrictions like special work permits, limited professions, or local hiring preferences, effectively limiting refugees' ability to secure meaningful employment.
Besides, other limitations may include instances of discrimination, socio-economic barriers, language barriers, or simply the lack of awareness among refugees about their rights.
Steps towards Ensuring Greater Respect for Refugee Rights
Given the obstacles in translating refugee rights from paper to practice, various steps can and need to be taken to ensure better respect and realization of these rights.
- Promoting Compliance: Encouraging countries to codify the principles of international refugee law into their national legislation and ensuring adherence to it is a crucial step.
- Supervision & Monitoring: Regular supervision of state practice and policies by international bodies like UNHCR, paired with constructive dialogues can contribute to greater compliance with refugee rights.
- Empowerment & Education: Empowering refugees by educating them about their rights and providing them with the means to advocate for themselves can be an effective way to ensure greater respect for their rights.
- Advocacy & Litigation: NGOs and human rights bodies should continue using advocacy, litigation, and other strategies to challenge violations and ensure governments comply with their obligations towards refugee rights.
SEAL (Socioeconomic Empowerment and Legal Assistance), an initiative launched by the UNHCR in Kenya, aimed to empower urban refugees by educating them on their rights, provided legal advice and vocational training. The initiative successfully enhanced refugees' awareness of their rights and access to formal employment, embodying the steps towards ensuring greater respect for refugee rights.
Exploring the Principles of International Refugee Law
On the profound journey of understanding International Refugee Law, it's vital to delve into the instrumental principles that essentially govern this sphere. These principles are the building blocks, upholding the structural integrity and ensuring the protection of the rights of refugees.
Fundamental Principles Governing International Refugee Law
International Refugee Law, much like other subsets of international law, is chiefly guided by certain fundamental principles. These principles collectively contribute to the sturdy framework necessary for protecting the rights and interests of displaced individuals. They provide an ideological compass, guiding states towards the adoption of laws and policies that respect refugee rights and humanitarian principles.
- Non-refoulement: The principle of non-refoulement prohibits states from expelling or returning a refugee to an environment where they may face threats to their life or freedom. This is widely accepted as a rule of customary international law and is considered the cornerstone of refugee protection.
- Non-Discrimination: This principle ensures that refugees are treated without discrimination on any grounds such as race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or social group.
- Civil and Political Rights: Refugees are entitled to all fundamental civil and political rights under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), ranging from the right to life and liberty to freedom of thought and expression.
- Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights: Refugees, like others, are entitled to enjoy their economic, social, and cultural rights, as outlined in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).
The Principle of Non-Refoulement in Refugee Law
The non-refoulement principle serves as the heart of the International Refugee Law per its recognition in the 1951 Refugee Convention.
Non-refoulement prohibits the expulsion, return, or extradition of a refugee to their country of origin, or any other territory where they are likely to face persecution or serious threats to their life or freedom on account of their race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion.
This principle is articulated in Article 33 of the 1951 Refugee Convention, and further reinforced as a rule of customary international law, rendering it applicable to all states regardless of whether they are parties to the 1951 Refugee Convention.
The principle of non-refoulement carries an absolute character, meaning it applies irrespective of the refugee's conduct or the national security concerns of the host state. Only in exceptional circumstances, such as when a refugee poses a serious threat to national security, could a breach of this principle be justified.
Interpreting Principles of International Refugee Law in Practice
Practical application and interpretation of the principles of International Refugee Law can be highly complex. It requires countries to navigate a fine balance between respecting international obligations to protect refugees and handling domestic concerns and responsibilities.
For instance, the principle of non-refoulement obligates countries to provide access to their territory to those seeking asylum and to refrain from returning them to unsafe situations. This often involves processing asylum claims and ensuring fair and efficient proceedings - taking into account the specific needs and vulnerabilities of the asylum seekers.
It's also key to understand that the scope of these principles extends beyond the initial provision of refuge. This includes ensuring that refugees are treated with dignity and granted access to basic rights such as food, housing, education, as well as opportunities for self-reliance and integration.
The Role and Importance of Principles in Refugee Protection
Principles in International Refugee Law serve a central role in shaping the normative framework for the protection of refugees.
These principles aim to provide a minimum standard of treatment for refugees, shielding them from harm, guaranteeing their human rights, and enabling dignity in their lives.
Notwithstanding, these principles also assist in fostering a system based on international cooperation and shared responsibility, avoiding any single country bearing a disproportionate burden of hosting refugees.
A notable exemplification of principles in action is the Tanzania's practice in the 1990s, when the country hosted hundreds of thousands of refugees from neighboring Burundi and Rwanda. Drawing upon the principles of non-refoulement and non-discrimination, Tanzania provided
International Refugee Law - Key takeaways
- Non-refoulement principle: A key tenet of International Refugee Law, the principle that a refugee should not be returned to any country where they are likely to face persecution, torture, or cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment.
- Subsidiary Protection: An important concept in International Asylum and Refugee Law that provides international protection for persons who do not qualify as refugees yet face significant threats if returned to their home country.
- Legal and Non-Legal Challenges to Refugee Protection: Factors such as restrictive interpretations of the 1951 Refugee Convention's definition of 'refugee' and lack of resources or capacity to host refugees constitute significant challenges to Refugee Law and Policy.
- 'Safe Third Country' Concept in International Refugee Law: The rule that asylum seekers should seek refuge in the first safe country they arrive in, which has significant implications on asylum applicants and their status as refugees.
- Role of International Organisations in Refugee Protection: Entities like the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the International Organization for Migration (IOM) play an essential role in defining and implementing Refugee Law and Policy across the globe.
Explanations 
Exams 
Magazine 
