UNHCR’s refugee status determination -

Abstract

Immigration is one of the most debated topics in domestic and international politics. But how is a refugee differentiated from a migrant? With the current refugee crisis and the mass migration of persons seeking refuge and asylum in European as well as surrounding countries, it is important to analyze the procedure by which ‘migrants’ are granted refugee status. Having previously worked at the International Rescue Committee (IRC) in the United States on the receiving end of resettlement, I then moved to the Middle East and found myself in the middle of the refugee crisis. Three individuals in Lebanon awaiting resettlement in the US and Europe—whom I would consider economic migrants rather than refugees—sparked my interest in UNHCR’s vetting process. For this research, I will focus on the Refugee Status Determination (RSD) process at the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), as UNHCR is the primary international organization which screens migrants before they are deemed refugees legally. This process is made available to the public in the UNHCR Resettlement Handbook, however, I want to determine whether there is a discrepancy between guidelines and implementation for the RSD interview. I then interned at UNHCR in Amman, Jordan, where I conducted research on the RSD process to determine how individuals are granted refugee status. The Gambler’s Fallacy theory is the lens through which the RSD process is conceptualized, however, I was not granted access to the RSD interviews but I am providing this paper as background material which can be utilized by those researching UNHCR’s vetting process. This preliminarily study suggests that although UNHCR claims the RSD process is transparent and without bias—the only form of supervision of this decision-making process is conducted through the compiled report by the interviewer. Therefore, the decision-maker controls the outcome of the applicant’s RSD. UNHCR should therefore re-evaluate the established R