Global Perspectives on Strengthening the Refugee Convention

By: Rachel Ryu, Staff Attorney, Humanitarian Legal Services

Contributors’ words and views are their own. Commentary by the author should not be attributed to contributors. Some contributions were edited for length. Read the unabridged versions here.

On July 28, 2026, the world marks the 75th Anniversary of the Refugee Convention. The 1951 Refugee Convention (“1951 Convention”) was one of the first international conventions discussed and drafted at the United Nations. One of the most important aims of the newly-founded United Nations was to address the status of over one million stateless people in Europe, people who could no longer return to their countries of origin nor acquire the nationality of the countries where they settled. A legal solution was needed to address apathy among host nations. For years, inaction kept people in limbo and without protection.

Although the 1951 Convention mainly applied to refugees in Europe displaced before 1951, a wave of colonial independence and Cold War conflicts prompted the United Nations to expand the refugee definition to offer global protection through the 1967 Protocol. The 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol (together, the “Refugee Convention”) are important legal documents that dictate which migrants are afforded international protection as “refugees.”

For 75 years, most of the rules and terms of the Refugee Convention have stayed the same. Global migration, however, is in perpetual change. Today, there are 149 countries that are State Parties to the 1951 Convention, the 1967 Protocol, or both. The largest and most acute displacement situations are in Sudan and Afghanistan, not central Europe. People are still fleeing war and religious persecution, but they are also fleeing climate change, gender apartheid, and gang violence. Furthermore, generations of families have been born and raised in refugee camps where they are essentially warehoused, a human rights issue that USCRI has long campaigned against. The number of people who need refugee protection continues to outpace the number of people who reach a durable solution, creating a widening population of people in limbo with no legal status in their host country.

At a time when the need for protection is high but durable solutions are rare, legal advocates have stepped up to strengthen local, regional, and global commitments to the Refugee Convention. At USCRI, the Humanitarian Legal Services team advocates for the rights of individual clients every day in the hopes of strengthening U.S. refugee law. But our work is part of a larger ecosystem that is fed by the work of legal advocates around the world. So, on the 75th anniversary of the Refugee Convention, we asked legal advocates: What part of the Refugee Convention are you championing or working to strengthen in your country?

What follows are contributions from legal advocates around the world. On this 75th Anniversary, we share these global perspectives as examples of a collective commitment to the Refugee Convention during UNHCR’s year of action and dialogue.

Locally Led Legal Solutions

Some contributors stated the need for tailored local responses. One contributor writes that their strategy is to promote regional coordination in the Great Lakes Region, a large geographical area that spans Central and East Africa. Another contributor writes about the ability of refugees to support themselves in Malawi and is advocating for a national legislative effort that could lead to meaningful change. Both contributions explore what it means to implement a high-level international document at the local level in a way that is sensitive to local needs.

Organization: International Conference on the Great Lakes Region (ICGLR) Regional Durable Solutions Strategy Process

Organization Mission: The International Conference on the Great Lakes Region (ICGLR) is a regional intergovernmental organization that promotes peace, security, stability, democracy and development among Member States of the Great Lakes Region through regional cooperation and collective action.

Contributor: Dr. Kalyango Ronald Sebba, Senior Drafter, ICGLR Regional Durable Solutions Strategy (RDSS)

Summary of the Mentioned Articles of the 1951 Refugee Convention

Article 17 – Refugees shall have the right to wage-earning employment.

Article 22– Refugees shale have the right to elementary education

Article 23– Refugees shall have the right to public relief.

Article 24 – Refugees shall have workers’ rights and social security rights.

Article 26 – Refugees shall have the right to move freely within the territory.

Article 27 – States shall issue identity papers to refugees who do not possess a valid travel document.

Article 28 – States shall issue travel documents to refugees.

Article 34 – States shall facilitate the assimilation an naturalization of refugees.

To view the full Refugee Convention, see UNHCR’s page.

Through the development of the ICGLR Regional Durable Solutions Strategy (RDSS), we are working to strengthen the practical implementation of the Refugee Convention by advancing a comprehensive and regionally coordinated approach to durable solutions across the Great Lakes Region. While individual provisions of the Convention remain critically important, our experience has shown that durable solutions cannot be achieved through the implementation of a single right in isolation. Refugees require access to legal identity and documentation, education, health care, livelihoods, social protection, freedom of movement and pathways to long-term legal status. These rights and opportunities are reflected across multiple provisions of the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol, including Articles 17, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28 and 34. The challenge today is not only protecting refugees from harm, but ensuring that Convention rights translate into meaningful opportunities for inclusion, self-reliance and solutions.

The RDSS recognises that both refugees and States are differently situated. Some refugees may wish to return home when conditions permit; others may seek local integration, local inclusion, resettlement or complementary pathways. Likewise, countries in the Great Lakes Region simultaneously serve as countries of origin, asylum and return, each with distinct capacities, responsibilities and realities. The Strategy therefore promotes a combination of durable solutions tailored to different contexts, while strengthening regional cooperation on issues such as legal identity, mobility, recognition of documentation, service inclusion and reintegration. An important dimension of this work is the recognition that women, children, youth, older persons, persons with disabilities and other groups often experience additional barriers in accessing their rights. By combining an intersectional approach with regional cooperation, the RDSS seeks to demonstrate how the principles and rights embodied in the Refugee Convention can be translated into practical, equitable, and sustainable solutions for refugees, host communities, and States across a region characterized by protracted and interconnected displacement.

Organization: Inua Advocacy (Malawi)

Organization Mission: We are a refugee rights organisation working to ensure that refugees are treated as rights holders rather than passive recipients of aid, through legal aid, strategic advocacy, public awareness, and reforms that promote freedom, dignity, and self-reliance.

Contributor: Innocent Magambi, Founder and CEO

At Inua Advocacy, we are working to strengthen the implementation of refugee rights in Malawi by advocating for legal and policy reforms that align domestic refugee governance with the principles of the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol. In particular, we champion the practical realisation of rights protected under Articles 17, 18, and 26 of the Convention, concerning wage-earning employment, self-employment, and freedom of movement. We recognise that durable protection includes the ability of refugees to support themselves and participate fully in society. Our advocacy includes support for reform of Malawi’s Refugee Act so that domestic law better reflects constitutional values, international obligations, and the realities of protracted displacement. We support reforms that would enable refugees to reside outside camps, access employment opportunities, and contribute more fully to their host communities.

Our work combines legal aid, public education, and policy advocacy. We work closely with refugee leaders to ensure that refugee voices inform reform efforts while raising public awareness to foster understanding and acceptance of greater inclusion. In addition, we speak out against discrimination, corruption, human trafficking, and smuggling that undermine refugee protection. Through legal aid, public engagement, and collaboration with refugee communities, we have helped strengthen awareness of refugee rights and contributed to growing calls for a more inclusive and rights-based refugee protection framework in Malawi. Our goal is to advance a system in which refugees are recognised as rights holders with the opportunity to live in dignity and contribute to society.

Political Rights

The Refugee Convention includes explicit terms on the civil and political rights guaranteed to refugees, many of whom are de jure or de facto stateless. Stateless persons, or those who are not protected as a citizen of any country, often face hurdles when trying to access civil and political rights because a precondition to enjoying those rights is often citizenship. That is why the right to nationality is a fundamental human right, but it’s one that many refugees are denied. The contribution below focuses on Article 16, the right to have free access to courts of law, and the dire consequences when civil and political rights are denied to refugees.

Organization: UMUNTHU: Access to Justice for All (Malawi)

Contributors: Misheck Jere, Legal Manager & Alexious Kamangila, Founder & CEO (Lawyers)

The situation in Malawi starkly illustrates how the right to effective remedy and adequate representation can be severely undermined. Key instances where the right to effective remedy and representation was denied include: arbitrary detention and loss of property.

In relation to arbitrary detention, between 17 May and 26 May, 2023, Malawi’s Homeland Security Ministry stated that it had detained 902 refugees and asylum seekers. Worryingly, 117 of these detainees were children. The Ministry further affirmed that the sole purpose of arrest and detention was to screen their documentation and ascertain their status either as illegal immigrants, asylum seekers or refugees. During this period, refugees and asylum seekers found themselves separated from their families, endured overcrowded conditions, physical abuse, lack of access to legal representation and family, detention without trial, and limited access to basic amenities such as food and menstrual pads.

Regarding the loss of property, the massive relocation of refugees resulted into a widespread looting and plunder of the property belonging to asylum seekers and refugees. [C]ases lodged on behalf of the victims have either been dismissed for lack of effective prosecution by the State or not been resolved expeditiously by the judiciary three years after the violations occurred. This situation speaks of the extent to which the right to an effective remedy for refugees in Malawi continues to be suppressed especially when it is the State, or individuals with links to powerful interests, who are the perpetrators of the rights violations.

This systematic denial of effective protection, as seen in cases of arbitrary detention and procedural shortcomings, directly undermines the protective framework of the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol. To better protect these rights, Malawi must: Ensure Access to Legal Aid, Strengthen Judicial Oversight, Combat Impunity, and Uphold International Obligations. By championing and strengthening the right to adequate representation and effective remedy, we can ensure that the promise of protection enshrined in international law and Malawi’s Constitution becomes a reality for all forcibly displaced populations.

Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights

Other parts of the Refugee Convention guarantee economic, social, and cultural rights to refugees. The Refugee Convention requires countries to provide to refugees at least the same enjoyment of rights as it does to its citizens. In addition, some rights, such as the right to elementary education, is a universal human right that must be provided for free to all human beings.

Contributor: Dr Cristiano D’Orsi, Lecturer and Senior Research Fellow at the University of Johannesburg (South Africa)

As an educator, I am particularly sensitive to the application and implementation in South Africa, country where I have been living for the past 12 years, of Article 22 (“Public Education”) of the 1951 Refugee Convention.

Under South African law and international conventions—including Article 22 of the Refugee Convention—refugees and asylum-seekers (such as Section 22 permit holders of the South African Refugee Act of 1998) have a guaranteed right to access basic public education. For example, in The Centre for Child Law Judgment (2019) an Eastern Cape High Court ruling declared that undocumented children cannot be barred or expelled from public schools due to a lack of permits or birth certificates. The court struck down discriminatory clauses in school admission policies, affirming immigration status is immaterial to receiving basic education. The court ordered the education department to admit all undocumented children into public schools in the Eastern Cape and provide funding for them.

While the law is clear, however, refugee and asylum-seeker children often face barriers enrolling in public schools due to administrative friction, particularly regarding admission requirements and processing delays with the Department of Home Affairs (DHA). Schools typically request a birth certificate, passport, or a valid permit. However, the lack of these documents should not prevent a child from being admitted. If children lack valid documentation, schools may admit them provisionally while the parents are given time to regularize their status with the DHA.

Yet, if refugee parents encounter obstructions such as a school principal refusing to admit a child without an identity document, parents should ask the school for a formal letter on their letterhead stating why the child is being denied. Once issued, the refusal letter should be taken to the provincial or regional Department of Basic Education (DBE), which is legally obligated to find a suitable placement for the child. In this scenario, organizations like Lawyers for Human Rights (LHR) or Section 27 provide free legal advocacy and advice for families fighting for their children’s right to learn.

Contributor: Adson Kalipita Mphepo, Advocate for Refugee Children’s Rights (Malawi)

Umodzi Katudza School: A Snapshot of the Education Challenges in Dzaleka Refugee Camp

Umodzi Katunga School provides a clear illustration of the educational challenges confronting primary school education in Dzaleka Refugee Camp, as it is overcrowded with an enrolment of 3,225 learners (1,705 boys and 1,520 girls) and a pupil-to-teacher ratio of approximately 75:1, which undermines effective teaching and learning. The welfare of girls is further compromised by inadequate sanitation facilities, as the school has only one changing room, making it difficult for learners to manage menstrual hygiene with dignity. Although sanitary pads are provided during the school term, no such support is available during school holidays, meaning that when schools close, many girls are left without access to these essential supplies.

Learning is also hindered by language barriers because many refugee learners speak Swahili and French, while instruction is delivered in English and Chichewa, making it particularly difficult for newly arrived learners to follow lessons and integrate into the classroom. The school also faces shortages of essential teaching and learning materials, including stationery, which negatively affects the quality of education. These challenges are further exacerbated by security concerns arising from the collapse of part of the school’s perimeter fence, exposing learners, staff, and school property to potential risks.

Non-Refoulement

The principle of non-refoulement is a human rights norm that is found in numerous international and regional treaties, conventions, and charters. Perhaps unique to other responsibilities found in the Refugee Convention, multiple human rights bodies and courts can hold countries who violate this principle accountable. Despite the absolute nature of the prohibition of refoulement, however, countries continue to propose and implement migration controls that put refugees at risk.

When governmental policies gamble with human safety, civil society actors have responded in various ways to uphold and defend against unjust deportations. One contributor advocates for a science-based approach to promote fair credibility assessments in asylum claims. Another offers a global perspective and a reflection after serving at the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Finally, another contributor expresses concern for the safety of refugees after camp closures.

Organization: Centre for the Study of Emotion and Law at Royal Holloway, a university of social purpose, tackling global challenges through socially impactful research (United Kingdom)

Contributor: Dr Amina Memon, Professor of Psychology

Since 2005 researchers at the Centre for the Study of Emotion and Law (CSEL) have been highlighting the psychological factors that can impact those fleeing persecution and seeking asylum. Trauma can result in fragmented, inconsistent, or delayed recall of events, which can be misinterpreted as deception or unreliable testimony. By working closely with policy and practice across Europe, CSEL is promoting fair and accurate assessment of credibility in asylum claims. CSEL have also impacted trauma-informed and culturally sensitive interviewing and training for all those involved in refugee status decision making.

The asylum interview is a critical step in determining whether an individual qualifies as a refugee and thus deserves protection under Article 33. CSEL advocates for a humane science-based approach to interviewing following the Mendez Principles. Currently available in 24 languages, the Mendez Principles bring together foundations in scientific and empirical research on information gathering with legal and ethical standards. It is highly suited for application gathering reliable information in high stakes interviews with vulnerable interviewees. Drawing on lived experiences and professional insight, resources are also being developed to help asylum seekers navigate how AI and technology is impacting the processing of their application for asylum and the use of their personal data.

Contributor: Manpreet Singh, Former Protection Officer, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)

One crucial aspect of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol that I am actively championing is the principle of non-refoulement, as outlined in Article 33 of the Convention. This principle, which prohibits states from returning refugees to territories where their lives or freedom would be threatened, remains the cornerstone of international refugee protection. In a world increasingly challenged by complex displacement crises, ensuring robust, consistent application of non-refoulement is more urgent than ever. Across regions, political pressures and evolving migration policies sometimes risk undermining this fundamental safeguard, making it vital for legal advocates to reinforce international and domestic commitments to it.

From a global perspective, because I have more than a decade of Refugee Status Determination (RSD) and protection experience with the UNHCR, I work to highlight the indivisibility of non-refoulement from other core rights enshrined in the Convention, such as access to fair asylum procedures, legal assistance, and protection from discrimination. Strengthening these guarantees requires not only legal advocacy but also fostering a culture of compassion and responsibility-sharing among states. As we mark the ongoing relevance of the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol, I believe that upholding and fortifying the principle of non-refoulement is key to preserving the integrity and humanity of the international protection regime for all people forced to flee.

A “Refugee Status Determination” is a thorough process where authorities assess whether an asylum seeker meets the legal definition of a refugee. It involves prescreening of the application and submitted documents, a thorough interview following a PEACE Model (Preparation and Planning, Engaging and Explaining, Taking Account, Closure of Interview, and Evaluation) and examination of the evidence following a legal assessment to argue if a person has a well-founded fear of persecution upon his/her return to his/her country of origin.

Organization: Legal Refugee Center (LRC) (Tanzania)

Organization Mission: The work of Legal Refugee Center (LRC) focuses on strengthening protection, legal assistance, and access to fundamental rights for refugees, asylum seekers, and other forcibly displaced populations across Burundi, Tanzania, and South Africa.

Contributor: Mr. Gaspard Atibu, Chairman & Executive Director

In Tanzania, LRC remains concerned about the situation affecting Burundian refugees following restrictive refugee policies and the closure or downsizing of refugee camps, including the situation surrounding Nduta camp in Kigoma region.

Many refugees and asylum seekers continue to face uncertainty regarding:

Access to legal status and documentation.

Voluntary repatriation procedures.

Freedom of movement.

Access to education and livelihoods.

Risks of forced or pressured return.

LRC advocates refugee protection approaches that fully respect the principles of voluntary repatriation and non-refoulement under international refugee law.

Social Protection

The barriers to accessing human rights may be caused by both legal and societal forces. When societal forces prevent refugees from the full enjoyment of human rights, legal advocates have had to branch out of traditional legal advocacy to seek community support and provide humanitarian assistance.

Organization: Legal Refugee Center (LRC) (South Africa)

In South Africa, LRC is increasingly alarmed by the worsening protection environment affecting refugees, asylum seekers, and migrants.

In recent years, refugees and asylum seekers have faced:

Xenophobic violence and discrimination.

Community hostility against foreign nationals.

Threats, assaults, and forced displacement.

Barriers to documentation and asylum procedures.

Limited access to employment, healthcare, and social services.

Many refugees report fear for their safety due to anti-foreigner sentiments and attacks targeting non-South Africans. These conditions undermine the protections guaranteed under the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, particularly principles related to non-discrimination, legal protection, and human dignity.

LRC continues to provide legal referrals, advocacy support, and humanitarian assistance to vulnerable refugees and asylum seekers affected by xenophobia and social exclusion.

Organization: Legal Refugee Center (LRC) (Burundi)

In Burundi, LRC currently provides community-based protection services within refugee sites including Musenyi, Busuma and Urban Refugees. Our work includes:

Legal orientation and protection referrals.

Psychosocial support for survivors of gender-based violence (GBV).

Child protection and recreational activities.

Community awareness on human rights and refugee protection.

One of the major concerns observed in Burundi is the growing vulnerability of women, children, persons living with disabilities, and survivors of violence who continue to require urgent protection services, healthcare access, and psychosocial assistance.

LRC continues advocating for stronger protection coordination mechanisms and increased humanitarian support for refugee communities living in difficult conditions.

Conclusion

Our contributors’ global perspectives illustrate how the Refugee Convention is both flexible and durable. On the Refugee Convention’s 75th anniversary, USCRI’s Humanitarian Legal Services team celebrates the incredible work global legal advocates have done to strengthen local, regional, and global commitment to protecting refugees.

For further reading:

Defining “Refugees”—An Exclusionary Legacy

What is Statelessness?

The 1951 Refugee Convention: Displacement Caused by Climate Change

The 1951 Refugee Convention: Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

Education Interrupted: Refugee Children in Burundi Fight for Their Future

The Mental Health Cost of...

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text css=""]Since January 2025, a wave of new policies has reshaped daily life for refugees, asylum seekers, and immigrant families...

READ FULL STORY

Policy and Advocacy Newsletter

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text css=""]Last month, the Policy & Advocacy team launched Their Future, Their Voice: Centering Displaced Children in Global Protection and...

READ FULL STORY