Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways: Get help with access Institutional accessĪccess to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. Since burden-sharing constitutes a pressing issue, which will consequently remain on the agenda until properly addressed, it is worth dwelling on this past attempt to secure equitable burden-sharing among states from the perspective of the regime itself, the parties to it, and the separate responsibilities of UNHCR. In addition, the initiative placed UNHCR on a par with the states parties to the relevant instruments, disregarding UNHCR's own distinct responsibilities. It was a futile attempt at piecemeal engineering where structural adjustment was required.
FROM THE OUTSET PLUS
Besides the fact that the Convention Plus initiative failed to address the question of why states parties to the present refugee regime should commit themselves to burden-sharing, the Convention Plus initiative was doomed to fail from the outset for systemic reasons. Three years later, the initiative ended without having accomplished its goal. It proceeded from the assumption that the present refugee law regime – in this context, the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees – was not sufficient to cope with current needs. In September 2002, the High Commissioner for Refugees outlined the contours of a new initiative: the Convention Plus initiative, which set out to develop a normative framework for global burden-sharing.
0 kommentar(er)
