Academic literature on the topic 'Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees – Decision making'

The global refugee regime encompasses the rules, norms, principles, and decision-making procedures that govern states' responses to refugees. It comprises a set of norms, primarily those entrenched in the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, which defines who is a refugee and the rights to which such people are entitled. It also comprises an international organization, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), which has supervisory responsibility for ensuring that states meet their obligations toward refugees.

AbstractThe role of international organisations in international law-making tends to be downplayed in this largely State-centric world. The practice of UNHCR, however, is reason enough for a more sophisticated appreciation of the role that operational entities can play in stimulating State practice, and of how they may interact with and guide domestic courts in treaty interpretation and application. The ILC's recently completed projects on customary international law and subsequent agreements and practice encourage a cautious approach, but the high degree of judicialisation in refugee decision-making, the strong legal content in the international protection regime and the impact of UNHCR's operational activities open the way for institutional and grass-roots developments, keeping the law in closer touch with social and political realities and with the needs of those displaced.

In autumn 2005 a group of Sudanese asylum seekers and refugees discontented with the unbearable conditions in the United Nations High Commissioner for Refuges (UNHCR) office in Cairo started a sit-in protest near the office. The protesters were, besides venting their anger at the suspension of Refugee Status Determination procedures for Sudanese refugees due to the ceasefire between the Sudanese government and Sudan's People Liberation Army, also making their frustrations heard regarding UNHCR's lengthy procedures, its failure to provide them with proper assistance, the high numbers of rejected applications, improper interviews and their general treatment by UNHCR's personnel as well as their difficult social and health conditions which had been aggravated by the lack of proper assistance. They were demanding that this situation be remedied and calling for transparent and fair procedures. Shortly thereafter they were joined by many more protesters so that in the following three months a group of between 1,800 and 2,500 people stayed around UNHCR's premises. However, meetings and negotiations with UNCHR eventually failed. The crisis ended in a tragedy. On December 30, 2005 the Egyptian security forces proceeded with the forcible removal of the protesters from the venue in an action in which 28 refugees were killed, more than half of which were children and women, with several protesters missing after the events. The Cairo incident illustrates what the cited report on the events has rightly called “a tragedy of failures and false expectations” regarding international humanitarian and human rights institutions.

The challenge of ensuring the full reintegration of refugee women and returnees in post-conflict societies is an important one, yet there is gap in the literature that evaluates interventions designed to assist them. This article seeks to narrow this gap by examining the gender policy of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (unhcr) as applied to reintegration programs in Sierra Leone, particularly in Kailahun district. Using Amartya Sen’s concept of agency, the paper begins with an exploration of the pre-war status of women and girls in Sierra Leone and their marginalization in flight and exile. The paper then argues that the conceptual framework ofunhcr’s Community Empowerment Projects (ceps) created a foundation for an open, democratic process that, in theory, could lead to enhanced well-being for women as beneficiaries and greater political agency for them as decision-makers. In practice, thecepsresulted in the implementation of projects that benefited women both directly and indirectly, especially in the areas of water and sanitation and education. The lack of emphasis on health projects, however, especially when compared to the strong support for rebuilding community buildings controlled by elders, shows the impact of traditional, patriarchal decision-making on thecepprocess. The paper further argues that special women’s centers constructed or supported byunhcr, though small in number, both enhanced the well-being of and promoted political agency for women; this intervention contributed to the high levels of females elected as local officials in Kailahun district in the 2012 elections.

While gang violence, community violence, and domestic violence have been recognized as contributing factors to Central American migration, less is known about the intersection between child maltreatment and migration. This article uses secondary data from United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) interviews with unaccompanied minors from Central America and Mexico to examine child maltreatment. It provides information on the abused children, their abusers, and the questions that led to their disclosure of maltreatment. It finds that girls reported maltreatment at higher rates than boys; only girls in this sample reported sexual abuse and intimate partner violence; and boys experienced physical abuse more than any other form of maltreatment. Overall, girls experienced all forms of abuse at higher rate than boys. Fewer than half of this sample described maltreatment as an explicit reason for migration, even those who viewed it as a type of suffering, harm or danger. In addition, some disclosures suggest that childhood transitions, such as in housing, schooling, or work status, warrant further inquiry as a potential consequence of or contributor to maltreatment. The article recommends that professionals engaged with migrant children in social services, legal services, or migration protection and status adjudications should inquire about maltreatment, recognizing that children may reveal abuse in complex and indirect ways. Protection risks within the home or family environment may provide the grounds for US legal immigration protections, such as Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) or asylum. Practitioners working with unaccompanied migrant children should use varied approaches to inquire about home country maltreatment experiences. Maltreatment may be part of the context of child migration, whether or not it is explicitly mentioned by children as a reason for migration. Policy Recommendations US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) should update SIJS regulations to reflect changes in the law, and modify application procedures to incorporate research knowledge on the impact of trauma on children. The US Departments of Homeland Security (DHS), Justice (DOJ), and Health and Human Services (HHS), should ensure that all children in immigration proceedings receive legal representation through public-private partnerships overseen by the HHS Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR). Passage of Senate Bill 3108, the Fair Day in Court for Kids Act of 2021, 1 would at least guarantee legal representation for unaccompanied minors. Codify legal standards (via USCIS regulation, or Congressional statute) for granting asylum based on gender and gender-based violence, and include standards for children and youth. Adjudicators from USCIS, Asylum Offices, and the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) should consider new information about painful, traumatic, or shame-inducing experiences—such as child maltreatment—as part of the gradual process of disclosure, rather than negatively reflecting on the credibility of the applicant. Federal agencies with immigration responsibilities such as USCIS, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and ORR, should be included in the federal government’s Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration’s (SAMHSA) Interagency Task Force for Trauma-Informed Care. These agencies should require new trainings for immigration adjudicators, including immigration judges, asylum officers, Border Patrol agents, and Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) officers, on interviewing and making decisions related to children. Legal service providers should adopt a holistic approach to service provision that includes social workers as part of the child’s legal team.

The right to a nationality is well established in international human rights law. In 1954 and 1961, the United Nations adopted the Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons and the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, respectively. Inspired by Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the two Conventions provide for a right to nationality and prohibit deprivation or denial of nationality. In 2012, the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) drafted four guidelines on statelessness that expand on provisions of the 1954 and 1961 UN Conventions. They contain guidance sections directed specifically at governments, civil society organizations, legal practitioners, decision-makers and the judiciary as well as UNHCR and other UN agency staff involved in addressing statelessness.

Based on ethnographic research with over four hundred Congolese refugees in Kampala and Kyaka II refugee settlement, Uganda, this article interrogates the politics of education—both historically in the Democratic Republic of Congo and currently in migration contexts in Uganda. Formal education was an aspiration for all young people in the study, irrespective of current educational level. Moreover, it is a priority for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and many other organizations working with refugees. Drawing on the experiences and views of Congolese young people, this article analyzes the socio-political importance they accord to formal schooling. It then analyzes the degree to which these political aspects of education are manifested in daily decision-making processes in families, households, communities, and high-level politics. The author concludes with some reflections on how researchers and practitioners working in migration contexts can recognize and take into account the politicized nature of education.

Over the past decade, millions of refugees have fled their countries of origin and asked for asylum abroad. Some of these refugees do not receive asylum, but are not deported. Instead they are detained, or denied basic rights of residency, some forced into enclosed camps. Hoping to escape such conditions, they wish to return to unsafe countries, and ask for help from non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. In such cases, should NGOs and the UN assist refugees to return? Drawing on original data gathered in South Sudan, and existing data from around the world, I argue that they should assist with return if certain conditions are met. First, the UN and NGOs must try to put an end to coercive conditions before helping with return. Secondly, helping with return must not encourage the government to expand the use of coercive policies to encourage more to return. Finally, NGOs and the UN must ensure that refugees are fully informed of the risks of returning. Organizations must either conduct research in countries of origin or lobby the government to allow refugees to visit their countries of origin before making a final decision.

Aliens — Refugees — Applicants seeking refugee status in Hong Kong — Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951, and 1967 Protocol (“Refugee Convention”) — Article 33(1) of Refugee Convention — Non-refoulement principle — Whether part of customary international law — Whether acquiring status of jus cogens — Determination of refugee status by Hong Kong Sub-Office of United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (“the UNHCR”) — Exercise of discretion by Director of Immigration — Whether Director of Immigration under legal obligation to determine refugee status — Whether Director of Immigration having legal obligation to inquire into non-refoulement claims Relationship of international law and municipal law — Refugee Convention — Refugee Convention not extended to Hong Kong — Immigration Ordinance Cap. 115 1972 — Customary international law — Whether rule of customary international law prohibiting refoulement of refugees — Whether rule acquiring peremptory norm status — Whether rule incorporated into Hong Kong domestic law — Judicial review — Whether decision to refoule subject to judicial review — Whether high standard of fairness applicable Sources of international law — Customary international law — Jus cogens — Whether rule of customary international law prohibiting refoulement of refugees — Whether rule acquiring peremptory norm status — The law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China

Abstract The notions of refugee participation and empowerment are core—but highly debated and poorly implemented—standards of humanitarian response. Drawing on empirical research in Lebanon, this article offers an account of the ways in which—and which not—meaningful refugee participation and empowerment are achieved through representative committees. Spotlighting the case of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)-supported Sudanese refugee committee in Beirut 2014–2015, it focuses on three intricate and interrelated concerns—refugee participation, representation, and autonomy. The article finds that the design and function of the committee made it difficult for refugees to share authority with UNHCR over decisions that impact their lives. The committee was primarily seen by UNHCR as a good in and of itself rather than as an opportunity to actively involve refugees in decision-making processes. The article suggests that there is ample room for the development of more meaningful participation that better integrates the capabilities, preferences, and agencies of persons living as refugees.

Defence date: 6 May 2005
Examining board: Prof. Gil Loescher (Oxford University) ; Prof. Bertjan Verbeek (Radboud University Nijmegen) ; Prof. Adrienne Héritier (EUI) ; Prof. Jan Zielonka (Oxford University/EUI)(Supervisor)
First made available online 9 September 2016

The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) was established by the General Assembly in 1950. UNHCR was initially created for a provisional period of three years, its being provided in the Statute that the arrangements for the Office were to be revisited at the eighth regular session of the General Assembly ‘with a view to determining whether the Office should be continued beyond 31 December 1953’. Between 1953 and 2003, the mandate of the UNHCR was extended periodically, for a period of five years at a time, making it more difficult for it to engage in long-term planning of its work. Only in 2004 did the General Assembly remove the temporal limitation attached to the UNHCR, authorizing the continuation of the Office ‘until the refugee problem is solved’. This chapter discusses the UNHCR’s position within the UN system, its structure, location, mandate, and role.

This chapter addresses the role played by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in the making and implementation of international refugee law. It begins by considering UNHCR’s mandate responsibilities and operational functions to better understand the structures that condition the scope of UNHCR’s engagement with the functioning of international law. While UNHCR’s 1950 Statute and the Refugee Convention both mandate UNHCR to serve particular functions, such as its supervisory responsibility relating to the Refugee Convention, its Statute also places particular constraints on UNHCR, especially in terms of the scope of its activities and its reliance on voluntary contributions from States to perform its mandated functions. The chapter then looks at how the roles UNHCR has played in the making and implementation of refugee law at the global, regional, and national levels, through its operations, and how these functions have evolved over time. By illustrating the various instances where UNHCR has demonstrated power, along with those instances where UNHCR has exhibited pathologies and has been constrained by the interests of States, the chapter points to the importance of understanding international refugee law within the political environment in which it functions.