The big idea: Refugees and migrants test human rights at their sharpest: these are people outside their own state's protection, so whether their rights are honoured depends on other states' willingness to help.
The key distinction is why they move. A refugee is forced to flee war or persecution and has special protection in law. A migrant chooses to move (often for work) and has fewer special protections — though both are human beings with human rights.
- Refugee vs migrant — forced flight (protected) vs chosen movement (fewer protections).
- The 1951 Refugee Convention — defines refugees and their rights.
- Non-refoulement — states must NOT send refugees back to danger.
- Asylum — the right to seek safety in another country.
Rights where the state has failed: Normally your own state protects your rights. Refugees are precisely the people whose state has failed or attacked them — so their rights depend on the international system and on other states honouring their obligations, which is why this is such a hard test of rights.
Free preview
This is the free notes preview
You're reading the free notes. Aimnova Pro unlocks the full study experience — and you can try it with your first topic free to keep:
- FlashcardsLock in vocabulary and key terms with spaced repetition.
- Practice questionsAnswer exam-style questions and get instant AI marking.
- Mock exams & past-paper vaultSit full mocks and see exactly how examiners award marks.
- Personalised study planA daily plan built around your exam date and weak areas.
The clearest example is a large refugee crisis — millions forced to flee, testing whether the world honours their rights.
Case study — the refugee crisis and non-refoulement: Wars and persecution — as in Syria after 2011 — have forced millions to flee, creating one of the largest refugee movements in modern history.
The legal duty
- Under the 1951 Refugee Convention, states must not return refugees to danger (non-refoulement).
- States should offer asylum.
What many states do
- They try to push refugees back.
- They build walls.
- They pay other countries to hold them.
This shows the gap between the legal duty to protect refugees and the political will to do so.
Refugee crises expose a tension between human rights (everyone fleeing danger deserves safety) and sovereignty (states claim the right to control their own borders). This clash is at the heart of the theme.
The key point: Refugees and migrants test rights beyond borders. The 1951 Convention and non-refoulement give refugees real legal protection, but states often resist honouring it — so refugee rights sit on the fault line between human rights and border sovereignty.
Know your predicted grade
Take timed mock exams and get detailed feedback on every answer. See exactly where you're losing marks.
Do states have a duty to protect refugees, or a right to control their borders? A genuine clash of principles. Weigh it.
Why the refugee/migrant line is contested
Governments may label people 'economic migrants' to avoid protecting them, while campaigners argue many are genuine refugees fleeing danger — the label decides who is protected, so it is fiercely disputed.
The burden-sharing problem
A few countries (often poorer neighbours of a conflict) host most of the world's refugees, while richer states take far fewer — raising a justice question about who should share the responsibility.
Two perspectives — weigh them: One view: protecting refugees is a binding human-rights duty that overrides border control. Another view: states have a sovereign right to control their borders. Strong essays evaluate both — often concluding the legal duty to protect genuine refugees should hold, even as states manage borders.
How refugees & migrants come up in Paper 2: A Paper 2 essay might ask how far states must protect refugees. Weigh the duty to protect against border sovereignty, then reach a judgement.
The 15-mark markband (what moves you up)
Bands 1–6
Mostly descriptive; perspectives not identified.
avoid
Bands 7–9
Clear knowledge, but perspectives identified, not explored.
7–9
Bands 10–12
Well-supported argument; perspectives explored.
10–12
Bands 13–15
Balanced, compelling; perspectives explored AND evaluated.
13–15
To what extent do states have a duty to protect refugees?
Model answer plan
See the mark-by-mark plan — for / against / judgement, with marking guidance — in study mode.
Common mistakes: 1. Confusing refugees and migrants. One is forced (protected); one chooses.
2. No real case. Use a refugee crisis / pushbacks.
3. Missing non-refoulement. It's the core legal duty.
4. Reciting obligations under the Refugee Convention. Weigh them against a state's border interest.
5. No judgement. Conclude on the duty vs border control.