The two-day workshop held at Lysebu Hotel marked a key step towards the publication of the edited volume Non-signatory States in International Refugee Law. The open access book, under contract with BRILL as part of its International Refugee Law Series, is co-edited by Professor Maja Janmyr, Dr. Arjumand Bano Kazmi, and Dr. Özlem Gürakar Skribeland.
During the workshop, 18 authors, several of whom are based in or have a background from states non-signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention, engaged in productive discussions about their draft chapters.
Alternative protection regimes
The edited collection brings together research examining the interplay between international legal norms and institutions dedicated to the protection of refugees, and states that are non-signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol. By exploring over 15 non-signatory states across 7 regions, the book aims to demonstrate how international refugee law manifests itself in dynamic ways also in non-signatory states and how those states in turn contribute to its development both in substance and in practice.
The volume engages in the topic of non-signatory states from diverse perspectives. In her contribution, Georgia Cole uses theories from Science and Technology Studies to assess the commonalities across the growing body of literature on non-signatory states and their influence on international refugee law. The chapter by Aneesha Johnny and Gamze Ovacık, on the other hand, provides empirical insights into how domestic courts in non-signatory states engage with international refugee law by focusing on jurisdictions in India and Türkiye; while also considering several other non-signatory states.
Reflecting on the challenges of conducting empirical research on asylum practices in non-signatory states, Simon Behrman and Dallal Stevens draw lessons from their experiences in Jordan and Bangladesh. Their work underscores the complexities and difficulties researchers face in these contexts, contributing valuable insights into the practical realities of non-signatory states' asylum practices.
Challenging the narrative of an 'Asian exceptionalism,' Brian Barbour suggests an alternative analysis grounded in Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) scholars, offering an empirical and comparative analysis of existing legal frameworks and state practice.
Exploring the rationale behind non-accession
Until now, there has been modest scholarly attention to the internal dynamics of individual states as well as to the engagement with the international refugee regime by domestic political actors. Using Indonesia as a case study, Bilal Dewansyah explores the complex interplay between historical contexts and contemporary legal practices, in order to identify reasons for the country's non-accession.
Also exploring the rationale behind non-accession, Natalie Dietrich Jones uses a socio-legal approach rooted in post-colonial studies to study the case of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, constituted by the metropole state of the Netherlands as well as its former colonies Aruba, Curaçao and Sint Maarten.
Maja Janmyr, M. Sanjeeb Hossain and Lewis Turner examine the role of Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) between UNHCR and host states, which they argue often constitute alternative protection regimes to the 1951 Refugee Convention. Jittawadee Chotinukul investigates UNHCR's role from another perspective, examining the handover of refugee status determination from UNHCR to non-signatory states by focusing on the case of Thailand.
Overlooked contributions to international refugee law
Arjumand Kazmi and Sikander Shah delve into the case study of Pakistan to explore how international refugee law principles are deliberated and disseminated in non-signatory states. Despite the lack of national legislation and non-signatory status, they argue that advanced pedagogic practices are aligning Refugee Convention principles with the state's constitutional and international human rights frameworks.
Another unique case is Lili Song's examination of the Republic of China (ROC), also known as Taiwan. Despite being excluded from the UN treaty system and unable to become a state party to the Convention, the ROC has played a significant role in drafting the 1951 Refugee Convention. This highlights Taiwan's significant, though often overlooked, contribution to international refugee law.
Together, these perspectives demonstrate the rich diversity and complexity of refugee protection practices and legal interpretations in non-signatory states, while seeking to instigate further debate on the function and impact of international refugee law beyond treaty obligations.
