Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

The refugee problem - time for a “new order”

By Guy Goodwin-Gill - posted Friday, 3 March 2006


The notion of responsibility to protect is thus essentially “needs driven”. Applied to the forced migration context, it would see no necessity to distinguish between different types of refugees.

What it doesn’t do in its present state of evolution is provide answers to the institutional questions. Moreover, its internal logic suggests humanitarian relief operations could take the place of refugee protection, with the present rights-based approach being substituted by something else that is more discretionary or “political”. Experience tells us this approach can’t be trusted.

Humanitarian need is not the only characteristic of the refugee who is - in a very direct sense - serarching for his or her rights to be protected against violations, or simply to be recognised. For these and other reasons, the necessity for an international refugee protection system will continue.

Advertisement

If the institutional means are also to continue, they will need to draw on some of the qualities identified in the UNHCR’s current Statute, and on others inferred from eight decades of practice - independence, authority, impartiality, humanitarianism and accountability.

So long as borders remain and states are seen as sovereign, the international dimension will be relevant even in small things. And because serious interests of the state receiving refugees will be involved, the individual will continue to require protection.

That protection, in turn, must be provided not only by national institutions, but also by an agency with the authority, standing and competence to insist on the fulfilment of international obligations.

A “law-based” approach to international protection already exists, beginning with the 1951 Convention and other relevant treaties. And while protection is often wider than rights, it still begins with rights which ought to permeate the whole.

It is here, on the solid foundation of rights, that a truly protecting agency must make its stand and prove its worth.

The responsibility-to-protect approach should surely galvanise the international community to recognise the gaps in the UN’s humanitarian response system, but it cannot substitute for the rights-base of the present international protection regime.

Advertisement

Still, as former UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali presciently observed, an evolving UN system will require greater transparency and accountability, and more democracy.

This also applies to a future refugee protection agency, whether in deciding individual claims, administering refugee settlements, or planning grand solutions such as repatriation or resettlement.

Too often today and in the recent past such matters have been kept behind closed doors and guarded against effective review. Too often the voice of the refugee has not been sought out, and if raised, has not been heard.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

Article edited by Allan Sharp.
If you'd like to be a volunteer editor too, click here.

This article is an edited and abridged version of the third of three lectures Dr Guy Goodwin-Gill gave in Australia in 2005 for the Kenneth Rivett Orations. Part 1 and part 2 have also appeared in On Line Opinion.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

33 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Dr Guy S. Goodwin-Gill is currently a Senior Research Fellow at All Souls College at the University of Oxford. He was previously the Professor of International Refugee Law at Oxford, the Professor of Asylum Law at the University of Amsterdam, and worked for over a decade for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Guy Goodwin-Gill
Related Links
Beyond self-interest: Australia’s post-Tampa choices - On Line Opinion
Refugee Council of Australia
Refugees - we’d like to help, but … - On Line Opinion

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Guy Goodwin-Gill
Article Tools
Comment 33 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy