Symposium on the 1951 Refugee Convention at 75: (Re)Centering the Right of Asylum and Refugees in the 75th anniversary of the 1951 Refugee Convention

[Liliana Lyra Jubilut and James Milner are Co-Chairs of the Global Academic Interdisciplinary Network from the Global Compact on Refugees]

The global refugee regime is experiencing two relevant 75^th anniversaries: first of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) last year; and, second, of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees in July 2026. Celebratory dates are always interesting milestones to inspire reflections, but it seems to be even more relevant as the refugee regime faces a time of polycrisis and existential threats.

The ever-increasing number of forcibly displaced persons in the world in the last decade, combined with efforts by key actors to undermine the protection regime, have led to constant challenges for the protection of refugees, with practices of, for instance, securitization, externalization, criminalization and misinformation eroding the normative foundations of the regime. All of this has led, in turn, to the questioning of the continued relevance of the 1951 Refugee Convention.

A product of World War II, with an arguably Eurocentric orientation, the 1951 Refugee Convention is one of the earliest human rights treaties in contemporary international law. It can be said to sit in the intersection between International Refugee Law and International Human Rights Law, establishing minimum standards of protection. The first paragraph of the Convention’s Preamble situates the text in relation to the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights while Article 5 notes that the rights afforded by the Convention are additional to other rights already enjoyed by refugees.  

In setting standards of protection, the Convention has three key features: 

1) it establishes the universal concept of refugee (protecting those with a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership in a particular social group, who are outside their country of origin, and are both in need and deserving of protection, i.e. those responsible for serious crimes or acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations), 

2) it reaffirms and strengthen the core principles of International Refugee Law, especially those of non-discrimination and non-refoulement, and 

3) it sets the minimum standards of protection in several human rights and fundamental freedoms to be granted to refugees.

The 1951 Refugee Convention has been criticized for being a product of its time, not able to respond to the needs of other forcibly displaced persons that are not covered by the refugee definition, and due to mounting challenges relating to its implementation. Despite these trials, the 1951 Convention remains the cornerstone of International Refugee Law, being the most relevant document in defining refugee status and, therefore, the implementation of the right of asylum. Without the 1951 Refugee Convention, the right of asylum, a core feature of human society and a central right articulated in Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, would collapse.

Moreover, the 1951 Refugee Convention is a part of the global regime of protection that established human beings as subjects of International Law, as the holders of rights, and, more specifically, of rights that aim to protect their dignity, including through refugee status.

Responding to the current challenges facing the protection regime must be rooted in two core elements: (re)centering efforts around the right of asylum and centering the focus of the regime on refugees themselves.

(Re)centering the right of asylum would mean going back to a focus on the core aspect of International Refugee Law: protection. More specifically, this involves an understanding of protection that defends an integral implementation of the right of asylum, meaning safe access to safe territories, access to adequate and timely refugee status determination procedures, with proper consideration for different needs of protection and vulnerabilities, access to legal status and rights, and access to solutions that are inclusive and sustainable.

Centering the focus of the regime on refugees themselves means granting, facilitating and amplifying access by persons with lived experience of displacement to the governance of the regime, in all its phases and settings: from the design to the implementation of policies, from debates of issues to decision making, from local organizations to global platforms. The expertise and experience of those with lived experience of displacement would help identify protection and solutions that are seen as effective and legitimate in the eyes of those they are intended to benefit, enhance autonomy and agency in the seeking of solutions, and bringing about meaningful participation.

These seem to be central in facing the issues today, as well as key in both protecting the central aspects of the regime but also convincing those most reluctant to see the continued relevance of the 1951 Refugee Convention. Articulating the pivotal roles of the right of asylum and its implementation through refugee status, and amplifying the expertise of those most affected by displacement are critical foundations in understanding how the protection regime can face the challenges of today. 

Academic actors have a central role to play in this process, by supporting research that provides solid evidence that is responsive to the diverse contexts of displacement, by identifying and diagnosing issues, and supporting a process of principled debate on options. Academic actors and institutions can also facilitate the participation of refugees and others with lived experience of displacement in the production and the sharing of knowledge, and be a part in implementing a whole-of-society approach, by connecting different stakeholders and actors, taking their views into consideration and presenting analytical and critical assessments.

The relevance of strengthening the voices of refugees and of academia have already been recognized by the international community. For example, paragraph 34 of the 2018 Global Compact on Refugees (GCR), affirmed by the UN General Assembly, states that:

“responses are most effective when they actively and meaningfully engage those they are intended to protect and assist”.

Paragraph 43 of the GCR established the Global Interdisciplinary Academic Network (GAIN), with a mandate to:

“facilitate research, training and scholarship opportunities which result in specific deliverables in support of the objectives of the global compact.”

These efforts came together in a pledge made by a group of academic and refugee-led initiatives at the 2023 Global Refugee Forum. Through the “Shifting Power” pledge, partners agreed to contribute to more effective and rights-based responses to forced displacement by “investing in and amplifying locally produced knowledge” to help find concrete solutions to displacement today. The pledge argued that 

“research led by those with local knowledge and/or lived experience of forced displacement produces evidence that reflects local realities, is considered more legitimate by local stakeholders and leads to more effective and reliable interventions in protection, assistance and solutions.”

This is the kind of evidence that is needed to uphold the institution of asylum and the practice of protection today. 

Leveraging the capacity of academic institutions and actors to defend the right of asylum and to enhance the participation of refugees in the global protection regime is more relevant than ever. It is not only a morally-desirable approach, but a way to ensure that the expertise and experience of key actors can be mobilized to counter the range of arguments being leveled against the regime today. At the same time, it is a way to propose efficient and effective responses to the real challenges confronting the refugee protection regime that are seen as legitimate and accountable in the eyes of those who the regime is intended to serve. 

In this way (re)centering the right of asylum and refugees (and Academia) is also a manner of protecting and reinforcing the 1951 Refugee Convention, and assuring that it is not only still relevant but also a key part in the actual and integral protection of refugees, in its 75^th anniversary and beyond.

[Photo by Pawel Czerwinski on Unsplash]