

|
UNHCR procedural standards |
|
UNHCR’s Procedural Standards for RSD under UNHCR’s Mandate Quick reference guide
The following is a RSDWatch summary and analysis of UNHCR’s Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination under UNHCR’s Mandate, published by UNHCR in September 2005. All references (i.e. section x.x) are to these Standards, unless otherwise noted.
Cancellation procedures
The 1951 Refugee Convention provides for the cessation of refugee status when circumstances change so that a person no longer needs protection from persecution. However, governments and UNHCR also sometimes cancel a person's refugee recognition where evidence indicates he or she should not have been recognized as a refugee in the first place.
Circumstances may, however, come to light that indicate that a person should never have been recognized as a refugee in the first place; e.g. if it subsequently appears that refugee status was obtained by a misrepresentation of material facts, or that the person concerned possesses another nationality, or that one of the exclusion clauses would have applied to him had all the relevant facts been known. In such cases, the decision by which he was determined to be a refugee will normally be cancelled.
In its own RSD procedures, UNHCR’s policy incorporates a similar rule:
Cancellation procedures permit UNHCR to invalidate the refugee status of persons who, at the time of recognition, were not entitled to refugee status, either because they did not fall within the inclusion criteria or the exclusion criteria applied. (section 10.1)
· Misrepresentation or concealment of relevant facts · Misconduct, such as threats or bribery against UNHCR staff · Misconduct or administrative error by UNHCR staff · Error of fact or law by UNHCR UNHCR's standards prohibit cancellation based solely on a change of opinion about a person's credibility unless new and reliable evidence comes to light (section 10.2).
However, UNHCR's standards also permit UNHCR officials to continually re-assess the factual and legal reasoning of a decision to recognize a refugee, even if there is no indication of any bad faith. This could be subject to legal objections, though it should be noted that UNHCR compromises the principle of res judicata in ways that benefit refugees as well. UNHCR standards permit the re-opening of closed files in limited circumstances. Strict application of res judicata might limit cancellation procedures, but would also limit the chance to re-open closed files by rejected applicants.
|
|
Fairness Transparency Accountability |
|
This site is not associated with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, and does not reflect the views of UNHCR. |
|
RSDWatch.org An independent source of information about the way the UN refugee agency decides refugee cases.
|
|
A project of Asylum Access |