What is the Refugee Convention and why does it matter?

What is the 1951 Refugee Convention? 

The 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (Refugee Convention) and the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees (1967 Protocol) are the core international treaties on refugee protection. They establish a global legal framework which defines the term ‘refugee’ and sets out minimum standards for refugees’ treatment, rights and responsibilities.  

To date, 146 countries have ratified the Refugee Convention and 147 have ratified the 1967 Protocol. Together, this means that 149 countries have agreed voluntarily to be bound by one or both instruments, which is roughly three-quarters of the international community.

Each year, millions of people use the international protection framework to seek and be granted protection in countries across the world.

How did the Refugee Convention come into effect?

The Refugee Convention was adopted in July 1951 and was initially drafted to meet the needs of millions of refugees who had been displaced during World War II. While a number of earlier refugee agreements, created from the 1920s onwards, had focused on refugees fleeing particular countries, the Refugee Convention was the first to include a ‘universal’ definition (see ‘Under the Refugee Convention, who is a refugee?' below).

Scope and limitations

Originally, the Refugee Convention included two key limitations which can still be seen in its text:

1. It applied only to people who had been displaced by events occurring before 1 January 1951 (a temporal, or time-based, limitation); and
2. States could elect to further confine their obligations by applying it only to refugees who had fled ‘events occurring in Europe’ (an optional geographical limitation, in Article 1B(1)(a)).

Expansion via the 1967 Protocol

After 1951, new refugee situations arose around the world and many of these refugees did not fall within the scope of the Refugee Convention. This protection gap led governments to create the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees (1967 Protocol) because they considered it ‘desirable that equal status should be enjoyed by all refugees covered by the definition in the Refugee Convention, irrespective of the dateline of 1 January 1951’ (Protocol Preamble).

The 1967 Protocol removed the Refugee Convention’s temporal and geographical restrictions so that the Refugee Convention would essentially apply universally. Countries that ratify the Protocol agree to this wider scope and to abide by the rest of the Refugee Convention as well – even if they are not a party to it. For instance, the United States has not ratified the Refugee Convention but has ratified the 1967 Protocol, which means it must also apply the Refugee Convention’s provisions. 

States that originally chose to limit the Refugee Convention’s application to European refugees are still allowed to maintain this limitation, but only a few do: Congo, Madagascar and Türkiye. Additionally, Saint Kitts and Nevis has not adopted the Protocol so retains the temporal restriction.

Under the Refugee Convention, who is a refugee?

A person is a refugee if they meet the definition in Article 1A(2) of the Refugee Convention. It states that a refugee is a person who:

• has a well‑founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of their race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion;
• is outside their country of nationality; and
• is unable or unwilling to seek protection from that country because of this fear.

This definition sets the international legal standard for identifying and protecting refugees under the Refugee Convention.

What rights and responsibilities do refugees have under the Refugee Convention?

Refugees are given a special status in recognition of the fact that they have lost the protection of their own country. Losing that protection does not necessarily mean that people are stateless  – many refugees are not – but rather that their own government is unable or unwilling to protect them from persecution or other serious harm.

According to the Refugee Convention, refugees should be afforded a range of rights – from the right not to be sent to a place of danger, through to rights that support daily life and independence, such as access to work and education. The Refugee Convention requires that refugees abide by the law in the country that grants them protection.

What rights do refugees have?

Under the Refugee Convention, refugees are entitled to rights that support both their immediate protection and longer-term integration and stability.

These include but are not limited to:

• the right to non-discrimination (Article 3);
• the right to work (Article 17);
• freedom of religion (Article 4);
• the right to housing (Article 21);
• the right not to be penalised for illegal entry (Article 31);
• the right not to be expelled from a country unless the refugee poses a threat to national security or public order (Article 32); and
• the right not to be sent back to a country where their life or freedom would be threatened (the principle of non-refoulement) (Article 33).

Some rights apply as soon as a person seeks protection, while others arise progressively over time as their legal status becomes more secure.

What responsibilities do refugees have?

Under Article 2 of the Refugee Convention, refugees are required to:

• Respect the laws and regulations of the country in which they are living

• Comply with measures taken to maintain public order 

By setting out both rights and responsibilities, the Convention aims to create a balanced, rules-based system. It is designed to protect people who have been forced to flee and promote fairness and consistency across countries.

What are countries required to do under the Refugee Convention?

When countries choose to become a party to the Refugee Convention, they take on obligations concerning the treatment and protection of asylum seekers and refugees. These obligations include:

• respecting the principle of non-refoulement – that is, the requirement not to send an asylum seeker or refugee to a place where they face a well-founded fear of persecution, or to a country that might send them onward to danger;
• granting refugees a recognised legal status, with access to employment, education and social security, among other things; and
• not punishing people for entering ‘illegally’ (without passports or visas), recognising that people fleeing danger often cannot access travel documents or regular travel pathways.

These obligations collectively establish a baseline standard of treatment while allowing countries some discretion in implementation.

How do countries apply the Refugee Convention?

Countries become bound by a treaty (including the Refugee Convention or the 1967 Protocol) through an act of ratification or accession. Both processes essentially mean that the country voluntarily agrees to the treaty's terms.

However, agreeing to be bound by a treaty does not always mean that its rules automatically apply within a country. How the Refugee Convention operates domestically depends on the country’s legal system.

• In countries with a ‘dualist’ system, international and domestic law are separate, so governments must pass national laws that give effect to treaty obligations.
• In countries with a ‘monist’ system, international obligations automatically become part of domestic law.

Who keeps countries accountable for their compliance with the Refugee Convention?

There is no specialist international refugee court or tribunal that monitors countries’ compliance with their obligations under the Refugee Convention. In theory, the International Court of Justice could hear a dispute between countries about alleged violations of the Refugee Convention or Protocol, but to date, this has never happened.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has a supervisory responsibility to oversee how countries apply the provisions of the Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol. This includes monitoring refugee situations and engaging with governments about issues of concern. While UNHCR cannot compel countries to take particular action, countries do agree to cooperate with UNHCR under Article 35 of the Refugee Convention.

Is the Refugee Convention the only international instrument concerning refugees?

The Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol are supplemented by a number of regional refugee protection frameworks. Key regional instruments include the 1969 OAU Convention on Refugee Problems in Africa and the 1984 Cartagena Declaration on Refugees (which applies in the Americas), which contain broader refugee definitions extending to such situations as generalised violence, massive violations of human rights and events seriously disturbing public order. In the European Union, the 2024 EU Qualification Regulation (based on earlier 2004 and 2011 Directives) seeks to ensure a harmonised approach to international protection across the region, in part to reduce incentives for people to move to other European countries which might provide higher standards of protection.

While no new global treaties on refugees have been adopted since the 1967 Protocol, in December 2018, States affirmed the Global Compact on Refugees in the UN General Assembly. Although the Compact is not legally binding, it contains important political commitments to create more predictable and equitable responsibility-sharing. Its four core objectives are to ease pressures on host countries, enhance refugee self-reliance, expand access to third-country solutions, and support conditions in countries of origin so that refugees can return in safety and dignity.

Is the Refugee Convention still relevant today?

The global context has changed considerably since the Refugee Convention was drafted, so it is understandable that people sometimes wonder if the treaty is still relevant today. The short answer is: yes. The Refugee Convention remains a crucial protection tool, providing a common set of agreed principles about who needs protection and the rights they should receive. Through dynamic legal interpretation by courts, governments and international bodies, the Refugee Convention has proven to be flexible enough to respond to a range of issues including gender-based violence, persecution on the basis of sexual orientation, and harms linked to the impacts of climate change and disasters.

While some politicians suggest that the Refugee Convention has reached its use-by date, their criticisms often target things that the Refugee Convention was never designed to do. For example, the Refugee Convention was not meant to be a migration management tool: it was designed to protect refugees from persecution and ensure that they had a secure legal status. The Refugee Convention does not increase refugee movements: failing to address the root causes of displacement does. The Refugee Convention does not require States to grant refugee status to people who have committed serious crimes: Article 1F of the Convention deliberately excludes this.