Human Rights Council passes resolutions to improve refugee conditions

In light of the less than optimal conditions and problems associated with refugee camps, especially with Syrian refugees, the Human Rights Council passed three resolutions: resolution 1.1 worked in tandem with 1.2 to combat the structural and societal problems of refugees, while paper 1.3 aimed to resolve long term difficulties, focusing on Latin America.

Hungary summed up the first resolution, which was sponsored by Saudi Arabia, Hungary, Nigeria, Philippines, Cameroon, and Belgium. He stated that refugee camps should have all basic necessities such as clean water and shelter, to produce a “state of well-being.”

The resolution established a “multi-national framework” to collaborate in handling the logistical aspects of obtaining money and transporting relief supplies.  Hungary added that the use of the international community would “minimize the impact on the host countries” that hold refugees by taking away some of the difficulty in providing for the large influxes of people that they encounter.  To resolve the criminally unsafe conditions of refugee camps, a “multi-national police force” was created, which would curb the rampant violence present in the makeshift towns.

            The second resolution was explained by Saudi Arabia and outlined plans for refugees after conflict in their home country had abated. It separated governmental actions based on the refugee’s intent.

  He stated that if they choose to stay in the host country, refugees would be granted “[political] asylum, citizenship, and permanent residency” and would be integrated into that society.  If the refugees do not want to stay, then the host country has a right to relocate them using “reasonable non-coercive” force, but only with UN approval. Each country would develop their own method for the return of refugees, which must be approved by the UN.

These two resolutions were formed out of a compromise between Saudi Arabia, Hungary, Cameroon, and Bangladesh, who had initially disagreed over the permanency of camps and the focus of the solutions.

            The final resolution, put forth by Peru, Cuba, and Guatemala, proposed the building of permanent settlements as opposed to tents in order to “involve and integrate more refugees,” as Peru said, into the host countries.  This resolution would also provide more long-term settlements for chronically displaced refugees, a concern in Latin America.

 

Despite its passage, Saudi Arabia and Hungary opposed the focus on Latin America in this resolution. They maintained the position that the refugee situation in the region did not call for immediate action or UN intervention.