Migrants and refugees: why draw a distinction?

REFUGEES ARE "MIGRANTS" in the broadest sense of the term; yet, they continue to be a distinct category of people. As specified in the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, they are outside their country of nationality and are unable or unwilling to return due to a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality or membership of a particular social group or political opinion. Over the years, the refugee concept has been broadened to encompass other people who have fled events that pose a serious threat to their life and liberty. What makes refugees different from other categories of migrants is their need for international protection and their right to seek and enjoy asylum in another State.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Refugee and migratory movements intersect in a number of different ways. People who are on the move from one country to another, even when they meet the criteria for refugee status, increasingly engage in unauthorized or undocumented movement, making use of similar routes, employing the services of the same smugglers and obtaining fraudulent travel documents from the same suppliers. While these similarities have no bearing on the fundamental difference between refugees and non-refugees, they have contributed towards a blurred distinction between the two.

Concerns about national security in the wake of 9/11 (2001) and State efforts to stem abuse of asylum systems, as well as the growing interstate cooperation to curb irregular migration, have made it harder for refugees to seek and enjoy protection. Many States have introduced measures intended to prevent and deter foreign nationals from arriving on their territory and submitting claims for refugee status. Interdiction of boats on the high seas is a growing practice. It is also of grave concern that the restrictive measures introduced to curb irregular migration and combat human smuggling and trafficking are applied indiscriminately and prevent refugees from gaining access to asylum procedures of another State and entry to the territory.

The numbers speak for themselves. According to the latest asylum statistics for 36 industrialized nations published in September 2006 by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the downward trend in most of these countries continues unabated; 2005 saw the lowest number of asylum-seekers since 1987. During the first months of 2006, applications dropped a further 14 per cent, compared to the same period last year. While this continued decline can be partially attributed to improved conditions in some of the countries of origin, it may also be due to the introduction of more restrictive asylum policies, notably in Europe.

The High-level Dialogue on International Migration and Development, held by the UN General Assembly in September 2006, has undoubtedly put international migration higher on the global agenda. Participants broadly agreed that it can be a positive force for development in both countries of origin and destination, provided that it is supported by the right set of policies. They also recognized that it is essential to address the root causes of international migration to ensure that people migrated out of choice rather than necessity; the same can be said for the root causes of refugee movements. Many participants pledged to work more closely to stem irregular migration.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

The presence of refugees among a larger group of migrants, some of whom may also use the asylum channel as a means of entering a foreign country, confronts the international community and UNHCR with some important challenges. High on the list of goals is an effective and coherent response to "mixed" migratory movements, including the protection of refugees and asylum-seekers. Boat movements of sub-Saharan Africans across the Mediterranean provide a good example. While the pattern of migration that we see in the Mediterranean today is not in essence a "refugee" situation, the movement of people seeking asylum and protection is one of its features. In addition to the immediate task of saving lives, systems and procedures have to be established to identify those who are in need of asylum. It is also important to ensure that any measures taken to curb irregular maritime migration do not prevent refugees from gaining the protection to which they are entitled. Equally needed is a clearer understanding of the roles and responsibilities of the different actors involved--such as the countries of origin and transit, international organizations and shipping companies--when people are intercepted or rescued at sea. It is also important to ensure that people who have travelled or who hope to travel find a lasting solution to their situation, whether or not they are recognized as refugees.

It is, of course, the legitimate right of States to control and secure their borders, but this right is not unfettered. Interception at sea and other measures to curb irregular migration should not result in violations of the non-refoulement principle, which is the cornerstone of the international refugee regime and prevents people from being returned to countries where their life and liberty would be at risk. It is therefore noteworthy that the European Union's Justice and Home Affairs Ministers agreed in October 2006 that measures to reinforce the Union's southern external maritime borders and to counter migration on the high seas must be "without prejudice to the principles laid down in the international legal framework on the law of the sea and the protection of refugees".

It is important to bear in mind that refugees over time may also become "migrants". Many have been able to establish livelihoods and become productive members of their communities in countries of asylum. They may choose to remain in that country, even if the causes of their flight have been removed in their homeland, or they may move on and enter the labour market in another country. In such contexts, it is important to ensure that all refugees are able to benefit from the human rights and labour standards to which they are entitled as migrants. In addition, blurring the distinction between a refugee and a migrant may even be advisable, as long as refugees, who are unable to return to their country of origin, continue to receive the protection to which they are entitled under international law.

Jose Riera is Senior Policy Adviser in the Policy Development and Evaluation Service at UNHCR. He joined UNHCR in 1985 and has since served in a number of positions in field offices and at Headquarters.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]