Non-Refoulement in Refugee Law: To Be or Not To Be?

SOCHUM Afternoon Session: Day 1

Picking up debate on the topic of Non-Refoulement in Refugee Law, the delegates of SOCHUM returned with several super resolutions compiled of key points from individual resolutions. After quickly discovering new ideas and joining together with both contrasting and like-minded nations, the delegates proposed new resolutions to aid refugees and provide resources for them. As reiterated by the delegate from the United Kingdom, the goal of the Social and Humanitarian Committee is to find peace and resolve conflicts that directly and indirectly affect human lives. The super resolution from the delegates from Switzerland, Chile, and India moved to do just that. A 1951 Convention allegedly spelled out the rights and abilities of refugees, and the delegate from Switzerland argued that allowing nations to reject refugees on any basis degrades that convention's decision. On the other hand, many other delegates brought to attention the fact that the economic sustainability of some countries were not equivalent to others, and thus they could not adequately support a large influx of people, refugees or not. Still others declared that it was difficult to exactly pinpoint refugees and differentiate real ones from even fugitives. With recent events in the real world considering the Syrian Refugee [crisis], the issue of Non-Refoulement and whether or not to expel refugees is a hot topic. With differing perspectives from states based on their economic and developing statuses, coming to a final agreement on such a controversial topic is assuredly difficult. Updates will continue streaming from SOCHUM as the delegates work hard on their debating and drafting of new resolutions.