Revisiting Temporary Protection as a Protection Option to Respond to Mass Influx Situations

Abstract This article assesses Temporary Protection (TP) in Europe in response to refugee crises. In 2001 the European Union (EU) adopted a Directive for TP to provide a regional response to a mass influx. It was considered that TP offered a double-win: addressing protection needs of asylum seekers, while enabling states to maintain control based on the understanding that asylum seekers would return home after a short period of stay. The Directive has been endorsed in UNHCR Guidelines on ‘Temporary Protection or Stay Arrangements’ (2014). Notwithstanding, the analysis in this article indicates that TP was a strategy that failed: it did not give states control nor promote solidarity between them. Failure explains its absence in the responses to the 2015–16 crisis. However, national forms of TP have re-emerged signalling efforts to re-assert control in the face of an enduring problem.

Download Full-text

A Temporary Protection Regime in Line with International Law: Utopia or Real Possibility?

International Community Law Review ◽

10.1163/18719732-12341332 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 18 (3-4) ◽

pp. 278-316

Author(s):

Meltem Ineli-Ciger

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Legal Framework ◽

Refugee Convention ◽

State Response ◽

Temporary Protection ◽

Mass Influx ◽

Forced Return ◽

Basic Minimum ◽

The Relationship

Temporary protection has long been a state response to mass influx situations offering persons seeking refuge immediate protection from refoulement and basic minimum treatment. Today, temporary protection is still relevant: Since 2011, Syrians in Turkey have been protected under a temporary protection regime. Despite this relevance, there is no structured legal framework regulating temporary protection at an international level. Furthermore, conformity of temporary protection regimes with the Refugee Convention, international law and human rights is largely undefined and unsettled. This article takes a step towards clarifying the relationship between temporary protection and international law by discussing whether states can implement a temporary protection regime which does not undermine the Refugee Convention, deprive temporarily protected persons of their basic human rights and lead to premature forced return of the protected persons. Building on the premise that such a temporary protection regime would be in line with international law, this article provides guidance to states on how they should regulate rights and entitlements of the temporarily protected persons, maximum time limit of protection and withdrawal of temporary protection.

Download Full-text

Protection Gaps and Temporary Protection

Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law Online ◽

10.1163/13894633_02001013 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 20 (1) ◽

pp. 408-435

Author(s):

Meltem Ineli-Ciger

Keyword(s):

Armed Conflict ◽

Large Scale ◽

Forced Migration ◽

The United States ◽

The European Union ◽

Effective Protection ◽

Temporary Protection ◽

The Status ◽

Mass Influx ◽

Forced Migrants

The Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (the 1951 Convention) does not address all the challenging questions posed by contemporary forced migration. The 1951 Convention does not deal with persons fleeing armed conflict, admission and large-scale movement of forced migrants in a clear and comprehensive manner. In addition to this, restrictive interpretation of the refugee definition provided in Art. 1 A (2) of the 1951 Convention by State authorities, popularity of non-entrée policies and the absence of solidarity in response to large-scale forced migration movements create protection gaps. A number of initiatives have been adopted at the national, regional and international level to remedy these gaps and one of them is temporary protection. This article focuses on protection gaps and temporary protection. The first part of the article explores the extent to which the 1951 Convention deals with persons fleeing armed conflict, admission and mass-influx situations, and it seeks to clarify the reason why there are protection gaps concerning these issues. Building on this analysis, the second part of the article defines temporary protection by reviewing temporary protection policies in Turkey, the United States and the European Union and it explores to what extent temporary protection regimes can remedy protection gaps and provide effective protection to forced migrants.

Download Full-text

The EU Response to the 2015 Refugee Flows: A Missed Opportunity to Use the Temporary Protection Directive?

IALS Student Law Review ◽

10.14296/islr.v7i1.5123 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 33-52

Author(s):

Lara Krayem

Keyword(s):

Asylum Seekers ◽

Arab Spring ◽

Burden Sharing ◽

The European Union ◽

Temporary Protection ◽

Mass Influx ◽

Jus Cogens ◽

The Arab Spring ◽

Missed Opportunity ◽

The Eu

Following the mass influx of people in Europe after 2011 and the Arab Spring uprisings, Europe has been admitting refugees into its borders predominantly under the Dublin III Regulation. However, Dublin III was never intended to be an emergency tool for asylum seekers, but became one as most entries take place through irregular routes. Europe received around 1.3 million asylum seekers in 2015 which is the highest number of asylum applications in its history. Questions are raised as to why Europe refrained from using the Temporary Protection Directive which serves exactly the purpose of establishing minimum standards for giving temporary protection and promoting a balance of efforts between Members States when receiving displaced persons. This Directive arguably provides a solution for the burden sharing issues that Europe has been facing which cause the rise of nationalism in many border States such as Italy and Greece as they are the main hosts of asylum seekers. Europe has also been entering into questionable agreements such as the EU-Turkey deal that does not necessarily comply with International Humanitarian Laws or jus cogens principles such as non-refoulement. Europe’s avoidance of the use of the Temporary Protection Directive raises a lot of questions. It brings to the surface the politics that surround the asylum process of the European Union and sheds light on the growing need of the EU to close its borders and avoid offering protection to people in need. This notion of border strengthening controls seems to be growing. As a result, the Union continues to use questionable agreements and the implementation of the Dublin III Regulation as an emergency measure instead of using the Temporary Protection Directive to promote fair sharing and solidarity. This article will examine the reasons behind the non-implementation of the Temporary Protection Directive to demonstrate that Europe does not wish to assist asylum seekers but keep them out of its territory. Moreover, this article supports that the mass influx of asylum seekers during the Arab-Spring uprisings was a missed opportunity to activate the Directive that has now become obsolete as it is unlikely to ever be activated.

Download Full-text

Is Temporary Protection Eternal? The Future of Temporary Protection Status of Syrians in Turkey

BORDER CROSSING ◽

10.33182/bc.v9i2.718 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (2) ◽

pp. 125-134

Author(s):

Esra Yılmaz Eren

Keyword(s):

International Society ◽

The Other ◽

Burden Sharing ◽

Open Door ◽

Open Door Policy ◽

Temporary Protection ◽

Short Period ◽

Peace And Security ◽

Mass Influx ◽

The One

Turkey has provided temporary protection status for the Syrian people, who were accepted by "open door policy" and sheltered as “guests” until the situation in Syria ameliorates. Temporary protection, a convenient tool to respond to the mass influx and provide protection while a permanent solution is sought, is indeed designed as an interim solution. After seven years of conflict, it can be assumed that peace and security cannot be established in Syria in a short period of time, as a consequence, Syrians shall continue staying in Turkey longer than anticipated. Therefore, congruent with the meaning of temporary protection status, it is time for Turkey to collaborate with international society in terms of burden-sharing on the one hand, to terminate temporary protection regime, and to determine its own strategies to provide permanent solution on the other.

Download Full-text

The 1969 Convention

10.1093/oso/9780198826224.003.0003 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Marina Sharpe

Keyword(s):

Prima Facie ◽

Refugee Status ◽

Temporary Protection ◽

Key Features

Chapter 3 first addresses the regional refugee definition according to the 1969 Convention , beginning with a description of article I(2)’s international influence and an interpretation of the definition using orthodox methods. The context and object and purpose of the 1969 Convention are discussed, followed by analysis of the ‘every person’ term and each of the 1969 Events and the test for refugee status under article I(2), including a discussion of internal flight alternative, ongoing risk, and sur place claims. Section B then addresses how article I(2) has been invoked in practice. Section B also addresses prima facie refugee status determination. Section C covers further key features of the 1969 Convention: whether it advances an individual right to asylum; non-refoulement; the formalization of responsibility sharing, temporary protection, and voluntary repatriation; and the Convention’s prohibition of subversive activities. Section D concludes.

Download Full-text

Politics of Asylum Seekers and Refugees in Turkey: Limits and Prospects of Populism

The Oxford Handbook of Turkish Politics ◽

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190064891.013.22 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Fatih Resul Kılınç ◽

Şule Toktaş

Keyword(s):

Foreign Policy ◽

Soft Power ◽

Asylum Seekers ◽

Right Wing ◽

Syrian Civil War ◽

Turkish Politics ◽

Right Wing Populism ◽

Mass Influx ◽

Asylum Seekers And Refugees ◽

The Eu

This article addresses the international movement of asylum seekers and refugees, particularly Syrian immigrants, and their impact on populism in Turkish politics between 2011 and 2018. The article argues that populist politics/rhetoric directed against Syrians in Turkey remained limited during this period, especially from a comparative perspective. At a time when rising Islamophobia, extreme nationalism, and anti-immigrant sentiments led to rise of right-wing populism in Europe, populist platforms exploiting specifically migrants, asylum seekers, and the Syrians in Turkey failed to achieve a similar effect. The chapter identifies two reasons for this puzzling development even as the outbreak of the Syrian civil war triggered a mass influx of asylum seekers and irregular immigrants into Turkey. First, the article focuses on Turkey’s refugee deal with the EU in response to “Europe’s refugee crisis,” through which Turkey has extracted political and economic leverage. Next, the article sheds light on Turkey’s foreign policy making instruments that evolved around using the refugee situation as an instrument of soft power pursuant to its foreign policy identity. The article concludes with a discussion of the rise of anti-Syrian sentiments by 2019.

Download Full-text