It has been many years from now, for many people across the world, migration is not a choice but a matter of survival. Years of military rule, ethnic discrimination, and political violence have forced families to leave behind their homes, communities, and livelihoods. When members of the different community cross borders into their neighbouring countries or travel further in search of safety, they are not simply immigrants. They are trying to get a safe place, getting protection under the 1951 Refugee Convention.
The Refugee Convention was formed to protect people who can no longer trust their own governments for safety. It defines a refugee as someone who has a well-founded fear of persecution because of their race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership of a particular social group. For many people from different civil war countries, this definition reflects lived reality. Ethnic minorities such as Karen, Chin, and Kachin from Myanmar, from Syria, Afghanistan and Bangladesh have faced long-term violence and discrimination, while students, journalists, and activists have been targeted for opposing their governments.
It can be confused about the meaning of persecution; it will be clarified here: persecution is the systematic mistreatment of an individual or group by another individual or group. When it comes to the decisions, there are four limbs of test of HJ Iran which can be used as a reference, which explained: A decision maker deciding whether a person (‘X’)
- Is it reasonably likely that X is gay [or LGBQ] or will be perceived to be gay [or LGBQ]?
- Is there a real risk that gay men [or LGBQ people] would face persecution if they lived openly in X’s country of origin?
- Would X in fact live ‘openly’ (or would X conceal X’s sexual orientation) if returned to the country of origin?
- If the answer to question
- is that X would conceal X’s sexual orientation, why would X do so?
In this situation, there should be any other reason as well and not only for this membership of a particular social group. The decision maker will use the same methods in different opinion such as race, religion, nationality, political opinion.
One of the main vital protections in the Refugee Convention is the principle of non-refoulement. It means that no one should be sent back to a country where they are likely to be harmed. For people fleeing from their countries, this protection can be the difference between life and death. Since the global crisis during these years across globe, thousands have been arrested, tortured, or killed for expressing political opinions. Returning asylum seekers to their own country in such conditions would expose them to danger.
The human impact of this principle can be seen in the experiences of ethnic minority group, who have fled mass violence and persecution from their own countries. Entire villages were burned, families were separated, people are dying during the peaceful protests and many witnessed killings before escaping across borders. In asylum cases around the world, many of the refugees from conflicts and civil war countries have been recognised as facing persecution based on their ethnicity and religion and political opinion, both protected grounds under the Refugee Convention. For them, asylum is not about better opportunities but about safety and dignity.
The Refugee Convention also recognises that protection does not end at the border. Refugees are entitled to basic rights, including access to work, education, healthcare, and legal protection. For the people from the conflicts and civil countries, who are granted asylum, these rights allow them to rebuild their lives. Being able to work legally, send children to school, and live without constant fear of arrest helps restore a sense of normalcy after years of trauma.
However, the reality is often more difficult. Many of the refugees live in countries that are not parties to the Refugee Convention, where legal protection is limited. In places like Thailand, refugees may not be allowed to work legally and risk detention, even though returning to their original countries is unsafe. This uncertainty creates daily stress and leaves families vulnerable to exploitation and poverty.
Despite these challenges, the 1951 Refugee Convention remains a powerful symbol of international responsibility. It reminds states that behind every asylum claim is a human story — a parent trying to protect their children, a student afraid to speak freely, or a community forced to flee persecution.
In conclusion, for the community from different civil war and politically complicated countries, the Refugee Convention is more than a legal document. It represents hope for safety, recognition, and dignity. By upholding its principles, especially non-refoulement and fair access to asylum, the international community can ensure that people fleeing persecution in their own country are treated not just as migrants, but as human beings in need of protection.
