Exploring Dilemmas about the 1951 Geneva Convention and the 1967 Protocol under Modern Refugee Trends: International Refugee Law in Perspective

The study explores the 1951 Convention’s dilemmas to assess whether it is abreast with modern refugee trends or not. Mixed-bag migration is explored under the Convention, unlike previous studies that concentrated on pull and push factors. Mixed-bag migration adoption sets this study apart from others. Aims- The study is necessary due to the open arms and solidarity of Europeans to receive Ukrainian refugees. In contrast, Syrian and Afghan refugees were discriminated against. Design- Grounded in Civil Solidarity as a Transformative Practice, and Building an infrastructure of Dissent, to explore the Convention’s dilemmas. The study adopts a literature review, otherwise known as a ‘‘meta-study. Findings-The findings reveal that the Convention is outdated with modern refugee trends; mostly children, women, and ordinary men. They commit no crimes to warrant any persecution. They migrated due to unbearable conditions, whereas in the 1950s, refugees were intellectuals, Soviet dissident men with different political opinions. The Protocol’s implementation triggered a ‘‘refugee floodgate. Refugees nowadays are non-Europeans, unlike 1950s. Refugees' floodgate led to civil solidarity withdrawal, and financial costs outweighed human rights, which contravenes the non-refoulement principle. Unsuccessful applicants are repatriated. The Convention neglects internal but protects international refugees. Contribution-I argue that a seventy-four-year refugee policy on inclusivity is needed with refugee-led organizations and governments for a public-private partnership. I recommend the Convention’s re-examination to ensure modern refugee law, which should contain burden-sharing mechanisms. Conclusion-In-depth academic debates on the Convention’s dilemmas and factors that trigger current refugee situations are needed. Since refugee demography has changed, but non-refoulement remains static.