What are the Global Consultations on International Protection? A background paper prepared by UNHCR describes the consultations in terms of three concentric circles, each circle having separate content, different interlocutors, and with different expected outcomes. These “circles” are now called “tracks”. UNHCR envisages that the outcome of the first track will be an affirmation by States Party to the Refugee Convention supporting the underlying principles of the Convention. This affirmation will now take place at a Ministerial Meeting hosted by the Swiss Federal Council and UNHCR in Geneva on 12 December 2001. It is the first such meeting of States Party since the adoption of the Convention: discussions are on-going about how to make the meeting more substantive in terms of outcome. A number of NGOs will be invited to attend the meeting.

The subjects for consultation in the second track are described by UNHCR as contentious areas which needed further guidance as to their interpretation: the subjects include “membership of a particular social group,” state obligations under Article 31 of the Refugee Convention (concerning non-penalisation of illegal entry) and the role of UNHCR to supervise the implementation of the Convention (Article 35). These subjects would be discussed by governmental and non-governmental experts in a series of round-tables hosted by research institutions.

The third track subjects are described by UNHCR as areas not felt to be adequately covered by the Refugee Convention, such as protection in cases of mass influx and fair and efficient status determination procedures. These subjects were seen as areas for discussion by the Executive Committee of UNHCR.

A fourth theme has been added to the 3rd track. At the organisational meeting on 12 December 2000, it was decided that the protection of refugee women and refugee children should be taken out of the subject of mass influx situations and treated as separate subjects, although women and children’s issues would cut across many of the subjects coming up.

A full list of the subjects in each track and a schedule of when they will be discussed is available at www.unhcr.ch under Global Consultations. A calendar and NGO papers related to subjects in the Global Consultations is also available at www.icva.ch/parinac .

What is the expected outcome of the Consultations? A key question is the expected result of the Consultations. This effects how much effort NGOs will put into the consultations.

• The intended outcome of Track 1- an affirmation of the value of the Convention- is fairly clear.

• The outcome of the Track 2 expert meetings will be a compilation of expert papers and conclusions of the meeting, perhaps leading to some guidance to supplement the existing UNHCR Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for determining refugee status. This will be published by UNHCR.

• The outcome of the Track 3 meetings in EXCOM is not yet defined. Various options, from an additional Protocol to EXCOM Conclusions, have been mooted. The intended results tend to develop and it is important to keep track of where discussions are going. There is still an opportunity for the nature of the outcome to be shaped.

• UNHCR has stated that the work produced by all of the three tracks will be collated and turned into an Agenda for Protection, carrying on the underlying purpose of the Consultations, which is to focus attention on the protection of refugees. What the Agenda for Protection actually is is not quite clear at the moment and, no doubt, the idea will be developed further.

How do the tracks relate to each other? From the agendas of the various meetings it is obvious that the results of meetings feed into others, although it is inevitable that in a process based on parallel tracks that there will be some disjunction and mistiming of subjects and that some issues will not be followed up in other meetings.

For example, the results of the Track 2 meeting on cessation and exclusion in May 2001 will feed into the Track 3 EXCOM meeting on asylum procedures in June 2001. Similarly, the results of the regional meeting in Pretoria on separation of armed elements from a refugee population were endorsed by the Track 3 EXCOM meeting in March 2001. However, it is hard to see how the Track 2 meeting on UNHCR’s supervisory duty in November can feed into the Track 1 Ministerial Meeting in December 2001 due to lack of time and preparation of diplomatic conferences way in advance.

Will the Consultations actually achieve anything? It is clear from the discussions at the organisational meeting on 12 December 2000 that, aside from collapsing under the weight of the agenda, the consultations also risk being hijacked by groups of states with their own agendas. They also risk being dominated by a North-South divide. The overburdening of the agenda may be intentional. The prospect of achieving anything of substance within the time allowed is rather remote. There is the distinct possibility that the consultations may turn into another recitation of issues of interest to capitals instead of a true debate on the meaning and content of international protection.

In general, the consensus view after the first round of the consultations is that they went better than expected. As ICVA predicted after the 12 December planning meeting, there was not enough time to take an in-depth look at the agenda items. However, states engaged well in the process. Statements were generally short, and although most were prepared in advance there was some interaction between the delegations. In particular, it was very good that African delegations made strong contributions and were sometimes sharply critical of the (lack of) assistance from western states.

Where do IDPs fit into the agenda? It is unclear how IDPs fit into the agenda of the consultations. The push by several delegations at the 12 December 2000 organisational meeting, including the Netherlands and the US, to have “internal flight” discussed in the second track roundtables should ring alarm bells, particularly for those organisations concerned with IDPs. Interestingly, the Russian Federation was the only delegation to mention explicitly the protection needs of IDPs and the stateless as omissions from the agenda. The Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC), dealing with humanitarian affairs, is debating the protection of IDPs and, in particular, where the institutional home for such protection activity lies. It is unclear how this important debate links to the Global Consultations.

What about holding the Global Consultations outside Geneva? Aside from the EXCOM meetings on the subjects in Track 3, which are held in Geneva, there are also a number of regional meetings on related subjects. A full list of scheduled regional meetings is available at www.icva.ch/parinac .

A helpful indication of how the regional meetings are going to feed into the Geneva meetings came in the 8-9 March session of the Global Consultations when most states endorsed the conclusions of the regional meeting in Pretoria, a report of which was made available just in advance.

What is the NGO role in the Global Consultations? In view of the uncertain outcomes of the Global Consultations and the limited formal participation which NGOs can play in all of the tracks, many NGOs have questioned whether they should participate in the Global Consultations or, if they do, how many resources they should devote to the process.

In a sense, these are not new questions. Indeed, they are questions which are frequently raised about international policy-making processes, not only in the refugee sphere. Inevitably, the answers are much the same.

• In terms of participation in international meetings concerning refugees, especially the UNHCR EXCOM, NGOs have been lobbying for increased access both to the meetings themselves and to the Conclusions drafting process for a number of years. In many ways, the Global Consultations are EXCOM meetings but on a large scale. Their specific difference is that they concentrate wholly on protection policy; in short, NGOs who have been demanding access to EXCOM should grasp this opportunity to play a part in protection policy-making.

• Given the developing plans for the outcomes of the Global Consultations it is important that NGOs are not wrong-footed by a new development towards, e.g. another Protocol to the Convention or by decisions to make the December 2001 meeting a focus for substantive decisions about refugee protection. It is necessary, therefore, to monitor developments.

• Resources are clearly an issue for most NGOs, and it is obviously too expensive to attend meetings in Geneva unless strictly necessary. However, there is some money available to pay for the travel of smaller NGOs who would not be able to otherwise attend the consultations. The schedule of meetings is also timed to coincide with the Standing Committee and EXCOM meetings, thus avoiding having to travel to Geneva too many times. NGOs can also attend the regional meetings, although these are limited by invitation.

• Between sessions themselves, there is still a question as to how much time to put into working on the subjects raised in the Global Consultations. Looking at the subjects, it is obvious that many NGOs have already been working on most of the issues for several years and will not necessarily have to devote time and effort to new research or writing new papers; and it may be simply a case of putting forward positions already taken, although the optimum is to present new thinking.

What is ICVA doing? The International Council of Voluntary Agencies is facilitating NGO contributions to the Global Consultations by:

• Hiring an extra staff person to expand ICVA’s refugee programme; this is Simon Russell, formerly of Amnesty International UK and the Refugee Legal Centre in London. Simon's role in the consultations is, inter alia, to try and pull together NGO statements on the subjects in the consultations, use the PARinAC network as a motor for contributions, post contributions on the PARinAC website at www.icva.ch/parinac and keep NGOs informed of developments. Simon can be contacted at simon@icva.ch or tel: +41 22 950 9600;
• Deploying a consultant to the Department of International Protection at UNHCR to act as NGO liaison for the Global Consultations. She is Eve Lester, formerly of the Lawyers’ Committee for Human Rights in New York and the Jesuit Refugee Service. Eve’s role in the consultations, inter alia, is to solicit contributions from NGOs, ensure that NGO views are fed into UNHCR thinking at an early stage, provide information to NGOs and ensuring an NGO perspective at all stages of the consultations. Eve can be contacted on lester@unhcr.ch or tel: +41 22 739 8279;
• ICVA has received some funds to enable greater NGO input by holding pre-sessional meetings in Geneva and to pay for the travel of NGOs who would otherwise not be able to afford to attend the consultations.

What can NGOs do to influence the Global Consultations? There are a number of practical things which NGOs can do to influence the discussions in the Global Consultations. Inevitably, most work is more usefully done outside Geneva, in advance.

• As states are sending delegations from capitals to the Global Consultations, NGOs should seek a meeting with their governments in advance, to discuss positions and suggest ideas. It is worth reminding governments that the consultations are supposed to provide a forum for the exchange of ideas, thus a them/us attitude between governments and NGOs should be reduced. State delegations are usually made up of Justice and Home Affairs, Development and Aid, Foreign Affairs Departments and members of the Permanent Mission in Geneva. The composition will likely change with each session according to subject, so repeated meetings will be necessary.
• If NGOs have existing policy or other papers on the subjects in the Global Consultations then these can be sent directly to Eve Lester at UNHCR or Simon Russell at ICVA, who will ensure that the papers are directed to the right staff person at UNHCR and posted on the PARinAC website (if necessary).
• As NGOs are allowed to attend the Global Consultations according to the usual EXCOM rules, they can register as observers with the NGO co-ordination unit at UNHCR. Contact Fabienne Philippe at UNHCR for registration details on PHILIPPE@unhcr.ch . EXCOM rules state that observer NGOs must either hold consultative status with the UN Economic and Social Committee or be members of ICVA. If any NGO has a problem in registering for the consultations then they should contact Simon Russell at ICVA as soon as possible on simon@icva.ch .
• NGOs are allowed to make one statement per agenda item in the Global Consultations. The South African chair of the consultations is attempting to make the process as interactive as possible and to give delegations and NGOs more than one chance to say something. Given the number of speakers, the agenda, and the lack of time, this is a difficult job. It is wise, therefore, for NGOs to prepare to make one statement. As it is inconceivable that there will be a consensus view amongst NGOs on concrete proposals relevant to the subjects in the Global Consultations, statements should focus on questions of human rights principles and raise practical difficulties in policy implementation.
• NGOs have agreed to form groups to work together in advance of each session of the consultations in preparation of statements. If you are interested in contributing to the statements then contact Simon Russell at ICVA, who will direct you to the focal person for each statement on simon@icva.ch who will direct you to the focal point for each statement.
• Following on from each session of the consultations NGOs can also follow up with their governments what has been said in the sessions, in order to, e.g. challenge statements or request clarification.

General advocacy tools for the Global Consultations:

All the papers for the Global Consultations are available at www.unhcr.ch/issues/asylum/globalconsult/main.htm or www.unhcr.ch/prexcom . The schedule of meetings is available at either site or also at www.icva.ch/parinac. NGO papers are also available at the PARinAC website, and there is a Global Consultations discussion forum there too.

For human rights materials, check out the web-site of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights at www.unhcr.ch and in particular the section related to racism at www.unhcr.ch/html/racism/index.htm and also the web-site of the International Council on Human Rights Policy at www.international-council.org and of Amnesty International at www.amnesty.org and Human Rights Watch at www.hrw.org .

For refugee specific material check the web-site of the Refugee Studies Centre at the University of Oxford at www.geh.ox.ac.uk/rsp and especially its very good links.

Of general use also is the web-site of the European Council on Refugees and Exile at www.ecre.org. The International Catholic Migration Commission web-site has useful links and is also helpful for material on the connexion between asylum and migration: www.icmc.net