Search results

Cover Page -- Half Title Page -- Series Page -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Contents Page -- Foreword Page -- Preface Page -- List of cases Page -- List of international, regional and national instruments Page -- List of abbreviations Page -- 1 Introduction -- 1.1 An historical overview of refugee movements within Southeast Asia -- 1.2 Existing analysis of refugee protection in Southeast Asia -- 1.3 Southeast Asia and international refugee law: a new perspective -- 1.3.1 The importance of the practice and opinio juris of states in international law -- 1.3.2 The practice of Southeast Asian states as a law-making factor -- 1.4 Structure of the book -- 2 Explaining Southeast Asian resistance to the ratification of the 1951 Convention -- 2.1 Refugees as a threat to national security -- 2.2 Refugees as a threat to social cohesion -- 2.3 The 'burden' of hosting refugees -- 2.4 The principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of other states -- 2.5 The 'Eurocentric' nature of the Refugee Convention and the 'Asian values' -- 2.6 The 'manipulation' argument -- 2.7 Conclusion -- 3 A 'legal limbo'? Overhauling the normative framework for the protection of refugees in Southeast Asia -- 3.1 The international refugee regime -- 3.1.1 The 1951 Convention and its 1967 Protocol -- 3.1.2 The role of UNHCR in Southeast Asia -- 3.2 International human rights law as the main vector of refugee protection in the region -- 3.2.1 International human rights law as an alternative framework in non-signatory states -- 3.2.2 Human rights monitoring mechanisms and the protection of refugees -- 3.3 The protection of refugees under customary international law -- 3.4 The role of soft law -- 3.5 Regional approaches to refugee protection -- 3.5.1 The development of regional approaches to refugee protection.

Abstract
The 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, supplemented by its 1967 Protocol, is the most comprehensive and universal instrument adopted to date to safeguard the fundamental rights of refugees and to regulate their status in countries of asylum. Yet, 70 years after its adoption, many countries – most of them in Asia – are unwilling to accede to it. Focusing on the ASEAN States, this article explores the reasons behind Southeast Asia's resistance to the Refugee Convention, thereby highlighting some of its limitations. Contrary to the so-called 'rejection' of the international refugee law approach that currently prevails in the region, this article argues that Southeast Asian States have long recognized that refugees, as defined in the Refugee Convention, need protection. This is evidenced by their de facto different treatment of refugees compared to other irregular migrants, especially when it comes to arrest, detention, and deportation. The fact that non-signatory States act in conformity with the provisions of a treaty by which they are not bound reinforces the relevance of the Convention, if not as a formal source of obligation, at least as a model to delineate the contours of refugee protection. Somewhat ironically, their practice also contributes to the strengthening of international refugee law.