Great leap forward or status quo?

R-SEAT’s initial reflections on the 2023 Global Refugee Forum

Some 4,200 delegates gathered in Geneva last week for the second Global Refugee Forum (GRF). This included representatives from 168 governments and 427 organizations. Was it worth the time, money, and carbon emissions? Did it represent a great leap forward in realizing the goals of the Global Compact on Refugees, to ease pressures on refugee-hosting states, to empower refugees and to find solutions? Or was it more of the same, reflecting the perpetuation of the status quo, and business as usual for a frail global refugee regime?

R-SEAT will be conducting a systematic analysis of the 2023 GRF in the coming weeks, including content analysis of the program, list of participants, statements, and pledges. We believe that such a deeper analysis is required to make an evidence-based analysis of the impact of the week, especially in relation to what was achieved during the first GRF in 2019. Based on R-SEAT’s active engagement in many aspects of preparations for this year’s GRF and the experience of our team in many aspects of the event itself, we have compiled an initial reflection on the GRF to support partners in the global refugee response community digest the week that was, and start thinking about what was gained and what work remains as we start planning for the 2027 Global Refugee Forum.

Areas of progress for meaningful refugee participation...

When compared to the 2019 GRF, the scope and scale of refugee participation this year immediately indicates what progress had been made. In 2019, there were just 72 refugee delegates, constituting just over 2% of all participants. Just one country, Canada, included an official Refugee Advisor as a member of their delegation to that meeting. In response, many highlighted how this low level of inclusion brought into question the legitimacy of the gathering.

The 2023 GRF saw significant gains in the level of refugee participation. Some 300 refugee delegates participated in the meeting, representing more than 7% of all participants. This is an encouraging increase since 2019 but indicates how much work remains to be achieved in levels of participation. More encouraging was the level of refugee participation within national delegations. In the aftermath of the meeting, UNHCR reported that 13 governments included refugee advisors in their delegations: Armenia, Australia, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Switzerland, Uganda, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

R-SEAT worked closely with the majority of these governments, partnering with 9 out of the 13 states, in the lead-up to the Global Refugee Forum (GRF) to develop mechanisms to promote the meaningful participation of refugees in national delegations, and we are encouraged to see this significant increase in the practice in this critical aspect of refugee inclusion in the governance of the refugee regime.

The inclusion of refugees by delegations from refugee-hosting states in the Global South, such as Brazil and Uganda, and the fact that several governments, including Brazil, shared part of their plenary speaking time with refugee advisors is an encouraging indication of the progress being made in the emergence of a global norm on meaningful refugee participation. Further analysis, however, is required on the substantive nature of refugee participation within these delegations. Given that refugee participation must be substantive and sustained to be meaningful, R-SEAT will include the experience of refugee advisors in its overall assessment of the 2023 GRF.

Another significant area of progress was the presence of a refugee-led space in Geneva during the GRF. With the support of foundations, including Bosch, Hilton, and Open Society Foundations, a group of refugee-led organizations co-designed a parallel program of refugee-led events at the Geneva Impact Hub. Called R-Space, the parallel program featured more than 40 sessions led by refugees and addressing issues of priority to refugees. R-Space served as an alternate site of engagement during the GRF, where refugee-led initiatives and their allies could meet to offer mutual support and to advance their own agenda. It was a powerful space of collaboration during the GRF, and it would be impossible to imagine the 2027 GRF not including a similar space that is genuinely refugee-led.

Also notable at the GRF was the substantive nature of refugee participation. Since its inception, R-SEAT has been urging for an approach to refugee participation that recognizes the expertise of refugees in relation to the many issues and themes on the agenda of the global refugee regime. We also heard from many of the 120 refugees that participated in the R-SEAT pre-GRF training program that the training they received equipped them with the tools needed to more effectively navigate the politics of the meeting and raise the issues that mattered to them.

Gone are the days when refugee participation means that refugees are asked to tell their story then move aside as others get into the substance of the agenda. This form of tokenization is no longer accepted. Refugees participated in many official side events and many more linked and parallel events bringing their expertise on issues ranging from education and health to finance and governance.

This form of inclusion points to the real goal of refugee participation: to leverage the expertise of refugees to improve the refugee response system as a whole. Refugee participation is not an end unto itself. Rather, it is a means to an end, and that end is more reliable protection and solutions for all refugees.

... But with so much work still to do

Despite these many gains, there were glaring and distressing gaps in refugee participation. The most notable was the number of refugee delegates that were denied visas to enter Switzerland. While the scope of the problem is not yet fully known, reports emerged in the early days of the GRF that entire refugee-led delegations were denied visas.

Most embarrassing for UNHCR, one member of COHERE’s advisory board, whose photo featured prominently on the GRF banner, website and branding for the event, was denied a visa. For many, visas were denied on very short notice, despite their application including all required letters of support, including a letter of invitation from UNHCR.

Reports also emerged of refugee delegates being stopped during travels to Geneva and being stuck in transit for long periods as airlines denying them from boarding their flights due to questions about their documentation, including traveling on a Convention Travel Document.

These issues of access led many to call for the 2027 GRF to not be hosted in Geneva, but instead to be hosted in a country with a more permissive visa regime for refugees. This is a critical issue that needs to be addressed, not only for the future of the GRF but for the meaningful participation of refugees in all future meetings of the global refugee regime.

Critical questions must also be asked about the inclusion of refugees and the need to diversify refugee perspectives on those panels where refugees were included. There were many issues of priority to refugees that were not included in the agenda, with LGBTQI+ issues and perspectives being notably absent. There was limited scope for refugees to help shape the agenda of the GRF itself, a stark contrast to the role refugees play in shaping the agenda of the annual Consultations on Resettlement and Complementary Pathways.

Finally, it was notable that individual refugee leaders were included on multiple sessions on the program, speaking on a wide range of topics. It will be important for future programs to include as many diverse refugee perspectives as possible, and to include refugees as speakers on panels only when they have an established record of expertise on the issue being discussed.

These questions point to the need to continue the hard work of ensuring that refugee participation in the governance of the global refugee regime is substantive, sustained, diverse, legitimate, and meaningful. The participation of refugees in the governance of the refugee regime is far behind what we see in the governance of other issue areas within the UN System, including responses to advancing Indigenous rights and the rights of persons with disabilities.

R-SEAT remains committed to working with all stakeholders to ensure that the participation of refugees contributes to a more effective international refugee system and to realize the principles of Paragraph 34 of the Global Compact on Refugees: “Responses are most effective when they actively and meaningfully engage those they are intended to protect and assist.”

Ultimately, the value of the 2023 Global Refugee Forum will need to be measured by the implementation of commitments made and a broad recognition of the work that still needs to be done. Yes, over 1,600 pledges were made at the GRF, including an estimated US$2.2 billion in financial commitments, and a commitment to resettle 1 million refugees by 2030, and to offer complementary pathways for another 3 million refugees. In contrast, the first GRF gathering in 2019 saw around 840 pledges, a number that subsequently grew to over 1700 after the forum.

However, the lack of a strong follow-up process and accountability mechanism continues to pose a significant concern and raises serious questions about the effectiveness of the forum and underscores the need for more robust mechanisms to ensure that pledges translate into concrete actions. These commitments will be meaningless if they are not implemented. They will also not address the core limitations of the refugee regime itself.

R-SEAT remains hopeful and committed. There were important gains witnessed at this year’s GRF. The norm of meaningful refugee participation is gaining momentum, and the substantive value of refugee participation is increasingly recognized. While barriers remain, we believe that collaboration and cooperation, coupled with sustained support for refugee-led initiatives that are working to improve the refugee response system, will help ensure that refugees themselves contribute to building a better system, more capable of ensuring protection and finding solutions, with and for refugees.

We’re All In. Are you?