Four Decades of Scholarship on International Refugee Law: Future Directions for the IJRL

We are delighted and honoured to be taking on the editorship of the International Journal of Refugee Law from Professors Jane McAdam and Geoff Gilbert, whose stewardship of the journal over the past decades has seen it develop into the leading peer-reviewed journal on all aspects of international law relating to forced migration. We will continue this great legacy through publication of rigorous legal scholarship and through furthering the trend of expanding the focus, authorship, readership, and editorship of the journal, as Professors McAdam and Gilbert have done so presciently over the past years. In this respect, we would like to take this opportunity to present the journal’s Editorial Board. The recent initiative of Professors McAdam and Gilbert to expand the Board is very welcome, and we look forward to working with colleagues old and new in the years ahead. A very warm welcome to new Board members Associate Professor Catherine Briddick, Associate Professor Yulia Ioffe, Dr Daniel Mekonnen, Professor Violeta Moreno-Lax, Dr Cristina Saenz Perez, Dr Nikolas Feith Tan, and Associate Professor Janna Wessels. A warm thanks also to our continuing Board Members Professor Catherine Dauvergne, Dr José H Fischel de Andrade, Dr Madeline Garlick, Professor Guy S Goodwin-Gill, Associate Professor Meltem İneli-Ciğer, Professor Maja Janmyr, Emeritus Professor Boldizsár Nagy, and Dr Marina Sharpe. We are also delighted that Professor McAdam and Professor Gilbert will remain on the Editorial Board, and that we will continue to benefit from their experience. And indeed, we would like to warmly thank them for their ongoing support throughout this transitional period for the journal. We would also like to make particular mention of Emeritus Professor Guy S Goodwin-Gill, the founding Editor-in-Chief of the journal some four decades ago, and a continuing member of the Editorial Board, without whom this publication would simply not exist. Without Professor Goodwin-Gill’s vision and labour, it is fair to say international refugee law as a discipline would not be where it is today. The 2016 special issue of this journal in conversation with his work on international refugee law aptly engaged with some, but certainly not all, his contributions to the field.1 His indefatigable contributions to refugee litigation, scholarship, and the academic community are simply outstanding and we are delighted to continue to reap the benefits of his experience and insight through his membership of the Board. In addition, we are thrilled to welcome two new Associate Editors to the journal, Dr Gillian Kane and Dr Paul McDonough. We would also like to express a special welcome to our new Book Review Editors, Associate Professor Bríd Ní Ghráinne, and Madeline Gleeson, who continues her time with us at the IJRL in this new function. Special thanks to Aidan Hammerschmid who continues his excellent convenorship of the Case Law Editorial Team, that is made up of Dr Brian Barbour, Dr Regina Jefferies, Dr Tamara Wood, and Felix Peerboom as its newest member. We look forward to working with the entire team. Moreover, we look forward to a productive collaboration with our colleagues at Oxford University Press (OUP); OUP has embraced the journal since its inception and its team are seminal in its running and production, especially Dr Laura Jose and Deborah Wardle. Our deep appreciation also goes to Editorial Board members who have recently stepped down – some of whom accompanied the journal for over two decades – for all their work supporting the journal during their tenure: Allehone Mulugeta Abebe, Associate Professor Chaloka Beyani, Professor Emeritus Jean-Yves Carlier, Professor Thomas Gammeltoft-Hansen, Professor Kate Jastram, Professor Emeritus Walter Kälin, Professor Emeritus Vitit Muntarbhorn, Professor Ryszard Piotrowicz, and Dr Lili Song. We hope this will not be the end of their engagement with the journal and we look forward to working with them, in different capacities, in the years ahead. We would also like to express special thanks to Professors Dallal Stevens and Kirsten McConnachie, who have recently stepped down as Book Review Editors, as well as their predecessor in this function, Professor Ryszard Piotrowicz. And, finally, an extra special thanks to Jean Kingett for all her work with the journal over many years and for so kindly supporting us through this transitional phase. Looking forward, we are excited to have the opportunity to support and facilitate the growing scholarship in the refugee and forced migration law fields. As noted by Professors McAdam and Gilbert in their outgoing editorial, the journal today ‘is not only about refugee law but rather the role of international law in governing forced migration more broadly’.2 In the next few pages, we highlight seminal foci that we wish to continue developing, with reference to publications and special issues of the journal. In doing so, we of course cannot do justice to the breadth of scholarship that has been published in the IJRL to date, nor exhaustively delimit the journal’s future focus. Rather, we hope these illustrative examples will help provide an indication of the future direction of the journal as we retain the platform’s nature as a dynamic forum that responds to an evolving scientific and policy environment. The 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (Refugee Convention), and the United Nations system underpinning the protection of refugees more broadly, will remain central points of scholarly analysis. Scholarship published in the journal in this field is vast, ranging from critical analysis of the interpretation and domestic implementation of different elements of the refugee definition, of administrative practice and judicial decision making, of the scope and realization of refugee rights, and of the evolving function of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Rather than seeking to exhaustively capture the richness of this scholarship, we highlight some recent examples to illustrate the journal’s dynamism. The adoption of the 2018 Global Compacts on Refugees and Migration was a point of sustained academic analysis through a special journal issue.3 Contributions fleshed out the Compacts’ potential,4 and normative impact,5 questioned what their bifurcation might mean for refugee mobility,6 and pertinently critiqued their limitations in effectively addressing some of the most pressing challenges of the international refugee regime, such as access to international protection,7 and responsibility sharing.8 The debate has remained alive with a recent contribution analysing how the faithful implementation of the Global Compact on Migration would enhance the rights of refugees and other protection-seeking migrants.9 Two special sections on the 70th anniversary of the Refugee Convention10 engaged with key elements of the Refugee Convention such as exclusion,11 cessation,12 advanced novel arguments on discrimination,13 and leveraged critical approaches to international refugee law.14 Scholarship has also engaged with contemporary themes such as the risks and opportunities involved in the application of artificial intelligence in refugee status determination,15 an area that we expect will receive increasing scholarly attention. The intersections between gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and refugee protection have also emerged as focal analytical points. In a recent special double journal issue,16 authors critiqued international refugee case law on domestic violence,17 analysed judicial practice in Turkey for Afghan women asylum seekers,18 and looked at challenges to the legal promotion and protection of the rights of LGBTIQ+ asylum seekers and refugees in Uganda.19 Individual contributions have also analysed areas such as how discourse on ‘fake’ asylum seekers affects those claiming asylum on grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity,20 and critiqued the implementation of the Difference, Stigma, Shame, and Harm (DSSH) model.21 We are not only keen to support scholarship which addresses refugee law stricto senso. Much as UNHCR’s mandate has expanded over the decades to encapsulate groups beyond those covered by its original mandate, such as internally displaced or non-refugee stateless persons, so too the scholarship of this journal squarely addresses forms of displacement beyond those which fall within the scope of the Refugee Convention per se. The journal has featured a special issue on internal displacement,22 including both scholarly analysis23 and reflections from practitioners, such as previous UN Mandate Holders on internally displaced persons (IDPs).24 Further individual contributions have critiqued issues ranging from the origins of the dichotomy between IDPs and refugees through historical analysis,25 to the analysis of regional IDP law in Africa,26 and its inclusiveness and responsiveness for internally displaced women.27 Statelessness has also constituted an analytical focus of the journal over the decades,28 with contributions framing statelessness under a human rights lens,29 analysing its impact on accessing rights,30 and exploring challenges facing specific stateless populations.31 Movement in the context of climate change and disasters has also engaged scholarship in the journal. Authors have debated the merits of adopting a distinct regulatory framework on climate-related displacement,32 explored legal and institutional impediments to protection,33 reflected on the potential of human rights law to protect individuals from expulsion to areas facing the adverse effects of climate change,34 and argued for the potential of the Global Compact on Refugees to address displacement in the context of climate change.35 We look forward to retaining the journal’s focus on such contemporary pressing issues in the forced migration field, while also remaining attentive to the importance of exploring as yet uncharted developments in the law on forced displacement. Another strand of burgeoning scholarship relates to the engagement of non-signatory States, that is, countries which are not signatories to the Refugee Convention or its 1967 Protocol, with the international refugee regime. Research in this journal has explored how the Refugee Convention influences norms and practice in non-signatory States, and how they, in turn, have participated and continue to participate in the evolution and interpretation of international refugee law.36 Authors have shed light on issues such as the evolving practice in Jordan through the protection of forcibly displaced populations from Iraq;37 have explored the role of courts in Pakistan38 and in India;39 have traced Saudi Arabia’s involvement in refugee standard setting;40 and have analysed the de facto protection of refugees in Southeast Asia.41 This research, involving historical, empirical, and doctrinal analysis, has contested strict binaries between signatory and non-signatory States, and reveals the dynamic relationship between the Refugee Convention regime and the practice of non-signatory States on the protection of refugees and other forcibly displaced populations. Regional practice through multilateral cooperative frameworks, and domestic implementation of law and policy at the national level, is also a growing analytical focus of the journal that we aim to further deepen. Research published in the IJRL has explored a wide array of issues. This included a dedicated special issue on regional refugee law and practice in Africa,42 including contributions on the interpretation of Africa’s regional extended refugee definition,43 the supervision of the 1969 Organization of African Unity Refugee Convention,44 and national judicial practice.45 Individual contributions have addressed a further broad spectrum of regions across the globe, for example regional cooperation and refugee protection in Latin America,46 the protection for refugee women and girls in South Asia,47 and the protection of Palestinian refugees by the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).48 In addition, the Case Law Summaries section of the journal encompasses judicial practice at national and supranational levels from a wide array of regional bodies, such as the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the Inter-American Court on Human Rights, the European Court of Human Rights, the Court of Justice of the European Union, and domestic cases from countries as diverse as Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, India, Japan, Kenya, Malaysia, New Zealand, Pakistan, the Philippines, South Africa, South Korea, Uganda, the United Kingdom, and the United States. This approach allows a genuinely global reach for the journal and the sharing of scientific analysis on State practice that often falls under the radar of legal scholars and practitioners. Scholarship in the journal has also problematized the rich interplay between international refugee law and other branches of international law. Contributions have reflected on the impact of a human rights-based approach to persecution on asylum-seeking children,49 debated the scope of non-refoulement obligations based on violations of socio-economic rights,50 snd holistically explored and critiqued challenges to the human rights-based approach to persecution.51 Beyond international human rights law, contributors have analysed the links between international humanitarian law and the refugee definition,52 the application of international criminal law in the framework of refugee exclusion,53 international child law and international refugee law in the framework of family reunification,54 and have explored the implications of international law of the sea on refugee protection in the framework of border control and search-and-rescue operations at sea.55 We expect to continue the debate on both the synergies and limitations of the interactions between different branches of international law and refugee law. Another cluster of scholarship has focused on the intersection between emergencies, including mass influxes, and refugee protection. These watershed moments often test the limits of the international refugee protection regime. In some instances, they inspire legal and policy evolution that advances protection imperatives. Contributions in the journal have reflected on the legality and conditions for derogations from the Refugee Convention in emergencies linked with mass influx,56 contested crisis framings,57 and scrutinised national temporary protection regimes in Turkey for Syrians,58 or in various South American States for Venezuelans.59 The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, and its impact on the provision of asylum and on the conditions facing forced displaced populations across regions, was another point of specific scholarly attention for the journal through two dedicated special sections,60 with contributions analysing responses and impact in different regions and countries such as the EU61 and India.62 As States increasingly adopt crisis or emergency framings in relation to asylum and migration more broadly, further critical reflection on legal and policy practice will be warranted. Finally, there is increasing political contestation surrounding the very right to asylum. This has led scholars published in the journal to reflect whether this, for example, signals the end of the right to asylum with reference to practice in different regions,63 asylum provision at the United States southwest border,64 and the end of human rights dynamism by supranational courts in Europe,65 as well as to point out instances of systemic non-compliance in Greece.66 Other scholars have reflected on the links between securitization and externalization,67 and have scrutinised the expansion of various externalization mechanisms such as the safe third country concept.68 These thoughtful contributions highlight and critique systemic trends or broader directions that national practice and legislation, or supranational adjudication, seem to be taking. The increasing politicization of protection, often combined with broader rule of law backsliding at the national level, makes such scrutiny invaluable and the journal will seek to remain present in these debates. Despite this contestation, like the previous Editors-in-Chief of the journal, Guy S Goodwin-Gill,69 Geoff Gilbert,70 and Jane McAdam,71 we acknowledge the enduring relevance of the concept of asylum, of the institutional refugee regime, and of international law, to respond to current and future trends in forced displacement, and to provide international protection in practice. We hope this brief overview has revealed some of the richness – both thematic and geographic – of scholarship in the journal. As we traverse legal and policy territory both familiar and new, we are keen to continue the exceptional work of the outgoing Joint Editors-in-Chief, Jane McAdam and Geoff Gilbert, and of the Founding Editor, Guy S Goodwin Gill, in exploring the enduring relevance of international law to the protection of refugees and other forced migrants, and in supporting scholarship on and from different countries and regions, and from a broad range of researchers at different stages of their careers. In this sense, we look forward to continuing the drive towards making the International Journal of Refugee Law an inclusive and innovative academic forum, while preserving its continuing relevance for practitioners across the globe.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.