Building the Infrastructure for the Observance of Refugee Rights in the Global South
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Refugees in the Global South face many serious violations of their rights. Several major host states have failed to ratify both the Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol. However, even among those states that have ratifi ed one or both, few have enacted the domestic legislation to implement the provisions, and no state in the South has made a serious effort to bring domestic law in other subjects—immigration, health, labour, education—into harmony with the rights of refugees and their international commitments. This article presents a multi-faceted proposal, a guide to building a new global infrastructure for the protection of refugees. An important precursor is the rapid expansion in the teaching and studying of refugee law. Today’s studentsof refugee issues are tomorrow’s researchers, lawyers, and scholars, all of which are desperately needed to help refugees navigate the process of status determination and resettlement, to advocate more generally for the rights of refugees, and to monitor states’ compliance with international obligations. Also, human rights NGOs need to embrace the fact that refugees are human beings, and refugee rights are human rights. Furthermore, advocacy groups, legal aid organizations, and other NGOs need to understand that advocacy, legal assistance, and research must go hand in hand: the provision of legal assistance to individual refugees not only makes the use of their life stories for research and advocacy more ethical, it improves the quality of the research and advocacy as well. Perhaps most importantly, all the groups working with refugees throughout the South must communicate with and assist each other. In an eff ort to facilitate this crucial networking and communication, sixteen refugee advocacy and legal aid NGOs from the South attended a fi ve-day workshop in Nairobi in January 2007. Th e group decided to form the Southern Refugee Legal Aid Network, and to produce a charter for membership. I have been acting as the group’s moderator informally since that time. In the coming months, SRLAN will attach itself to Fahamu, an advocacy NGO that publishes Africa’s largest circulation magazine and has a proven track record of facilitating emerging advocacy networks. Fahamu will do fearless advocacy, oft en too dangerous for individual NGOs, and the SRLAN will facilitate the communication and co-operation necessary to begin the construction of the new global infrastructure for the protection of refugees. Working together, as a network of organizations throughout the South, we truly can transform this broken and unjust system.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.019 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.043 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.033 | 0.005 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".