The international community's affirmation of the 1951 Convention's centrality in the international refugee protection regime is difficult to reconcile with the practical reality: large groups of refugees living in sub-standard conditions, even in countries that are party to the Convention. It is a sad but common feature of mass influx situations that refugees are denied many of the economic and social protections stipulated by the Convention. While some rights restrictions may be justifiable during the initial emergency phase of a mass influx, protection should, in the spirit of the Convention, improve over time rather than stagnate or deteriorate. Yet it appears that the price States have demanded in admitting large numbers of refugees is a de facto suspension of all but the most immediate and compelling protections provided by the Convention. Thus, non-refoulement extends through time, so that although persons are not returned to persecution and other situations of harm, they are essentially left in a legal limbo. This article discusses traditional legal and policy responses to large-scale refugee situations, which illustrate States' difficulties in effectively managing the passing of time in such situations. The challenge, it seems, lies in regulating the manner in which the passing of time affects the accrual of States' obligations under the Convention, beyond non-refoulement alone. Emergency situations must be acknowledged and catered for, but must also be justified, and their attendant restrictions on rights must be limited to the strictly necessary. Human rights law contains an important tool for acknowledging, and strictly regulating, certain situations in which States cannot fully comply with their obligations: the derogation clause. This article argues that the incorporation of a derogation clause in the Convention would provide States facing mass influx situations with some valuable 'breathing space', as a prelude to full, albeit gradual, implementation of the Convention's standards. © Oxford University Press 2004. All rights reserved.

[No Keywords available]

refugee immigration policy human rights immigrant population