This article contests claims of Asian exceptionalism by examining the unique case of Bangladesh, a principal refugee hosting state in South Asia which came close to acceding to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees in 1989. Using a general inductive approach, drawing on materials from the Archives and Records Division at the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) headquarters, together with interviews conducted during fieldwork in Bangladesh, the article offers a socio legal historical examination of the moment when Bangladesh formally decided to accede to the Convention. By framing this episode as a ‘near accession’, the article concludes that the traditional understanding of the Asian rejection of the 1951 Convention remains fluid; some states in the region may have different views beyond this notion.
Using Bangladesh as the case study, the article identifies three interconnected factors that influenced the overall process of ‘near accession’ to the 1951 Convention: (1) concerted efforts by the UNHCR to promote accession, premised on the expectation that Bangladesh’s membership would create a persuasive regional precedent; (2) authorities’ quest to acquire domestic and international legitimacy for the military backed Government; and (3) the pivotal roles played by key individuals within both the Government and UNHCR in the accession process. Although this single example cannot provide a complete understanding of non-signatory states’ engagement with the 1951 Refugee Convention, the article argues that each case should be investigated considering these three significant components that shape state behaviour.
The article also relates how despite the formal decision to accede to the 1951 Convention, the Bangladeshi Government did not follow through with formal accession. To this day, Bangladesh remains a non-signatory state. The empirical study of Bangladesh’s ‘near accession’ challenges the notion of uniformity in South Asia in relation to the 1951 Convention and thereby provides new insights into our understanding of non-signatory states and, more broadly, into the study of international refugee law.