# Geneva convention requires countries to accept refugees? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [January 14, 2020, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/geneva-convention-requires-countries-to-accept-refugees/846425 "2020-01-14T21:16:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Zyada](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zyada/32/3028_2.png) [@Zyada](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zyada)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2020, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/geneva-convention-requires-countries-to-accept-refugees/846425/1 "2020-01-14T21:16:28Z")
I read this on the wilderness that is social media. Is there any truth to it? If so, where do I point people to, if I want to let them know that we really should be taking in refugees? ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2020, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/geneva-convention-requires-countries-to-accept-refugees/846425/2 "2020-01-14T21:26:35Z")
I believe it applies only during a time of war. “Article 33 provides that: No contracting state shall expel or return a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.” ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2020, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/geneva-convention-requires-countries-to-accept-refugees/846425/3 "2020-01-14T21:30:39Z")
> **[Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_Relating_to_the_Status_of_Refugees)** > > The Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, also known as the 1951 Refugee Convention or the Geneva Convention of 28 July 1951, is a United Nations multilateral treaty that defines who a refugee is and sets out the rights of individuals who are granted asylum and the responsibilities of nations that grant asylum. The Convention also sets out which people do not qualify as refugees, such as war criminals. The Convention also provides for some visa-free travel for holders of refugee trave And not what you were specifically asking about but probably also useful: > **[Founders Online: From George Washington to Francis Adrian Van der Kemp, 28...](https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/04-06-02-0266)** > > From George Washington to Francis Adrian Van der Kemp, 28 May 1788 ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2020, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/geneva-convention-requires-countries-to-accept-refugees/846425/4 "2020-01-14T22:03:32Z")
The Geneva conventions are a set of treaties that govern warfare- there’s probably some provision about not attacking refugees or something along those lines. But at their core, the “Geneva Conventions” are rules governing warfare between two combatants and don’t apply here. You’re probably thinking of the “Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees” (1951) and the “Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees” (1967), both of which are multilateral UN treaties that define refugees and how they should be treated. The difference between them is that the Convention was limited to pre-1951 European refugees (i.e. WWII related ones), while the Protocol removes the temporal and geographic restrictions. I suspect that there’s some legalistic wrangling going on w.r.t. the actual refugee status- it’s defined as: > [@](#): > > “someone who is unable or unwilling to return to their country of origin owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion.” There’s a lot of legal wiggle room there for saying that the border migrants aren’t refugees, but merely migrants wanting a better life, I’d bet. ---
**Author:** ![zimaane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a3d4f5/32.png) [@zimaane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zimaane)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2020, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/geneva-convention-requires-countries-to-accept-refugees/846425/5 "2020-01-15T15:51:52Z")
> [@](#): > > There’s a lot of legal wiggle room there for saying that the border migrants aren’t refugees, but merely migrants wanting a better life, I’d bet. As I understand it, that is exactly the issue - whether fear of e.g., criminal violence from street gangs fits the definition of refugee. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2020, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/geneva-convention-requires-countries-to-accept-refugees/846425/6 "2020-01-15T16:11:06Z")
There have been rulings from domestic courts in other countries interpreting the meaning of refugee in the treaty, which have concluded that if the authorities in an individual’s country can’t or won’t protect the individual from drug gangs or politically motivated violence, that individual may qualify as a refugee. The failure of the local government to protect its citizens can trigger the rights under the treaty. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2020, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/geneva-convention-requires-countries-to-accept-refugees/846425/7 "2020-01-15T18:09:42Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > There have been rulings from domestic courts in other countries interpreting the meaning of refugee in the treaty, which have concluded that if the authorities in an individual’s country can’t or won’t protect the individual from drug gangs or politically motivated violence, that individual may qualify as a refugee. The failure of the local government to protect its citizens can trigger the rights under the treaty. Sure, but a local domestic court decision in say… Ireland, isn’t binding on the US, and nor is it necessarily even pertinent. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2020, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/geneva-convention-requires-countries-to-accept-refugees/846425/8 "2020-01-15T19:26:42Z")
Not saying those court decisions are binding on US courts. The US courts are obviously not bound by foreign courts. But, it is significant, if you’re a court interpreting an international treaty, to consider how other domestic or international courts have interpreted that same treaty, because one principle of implementing treaties is that they should have a consistent interpretation. A US court may find the reasons given by other courts to be helpful in interpreting the treaty obligations. Always subject, of course, to whatever US federal statutes have been adopted to implement the treaty. ---
**Author:** ![gnoitall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gnoitall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnoitall)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2020, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/geneva-convention-requires-countries-to-accept-refugees/846425/9 "2020-01-15T20:39:10Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > …one principle of implementing treaties is that they should have a consistent interpretation. This clashes with another principle of implementing treaties: interpreting them as advantageously to your own interests as possible. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2020, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/geneva-convention-requires-countries-to-accept-refugees/846425/10 "2020-01-16T16:14:19Z")
> [@gnoitall](#): > > This clashes with another principle of implementing treaties: interpreting them as advantageously to your own interests as possible. Yes, but then the element of “whose own interests” comes into play. The people not wanting to let in the refugees and the courts that would be required to interpret the treaty are not the same people.