Through her groundbreaking scholarship and tireless advocacy, Professor Delphine Nakache has emerged as a global leader in migration law. Her work ensures that the lived experiences of migrants and refugees inform legal frameworks, policy decisions, and public discourse.

The Royal Society of Canada’s College of New Scholars, Artists and Scientists recognizes the nation’s emerging intellectual leaders. Members—Canadian citizens or Permanent Residents—are elected for a seven-year term in recognition of early-career excellence.

Professor Nakache will be formally inducted at the RSC’s Celebration of Excellence this fall.

Please join us in congratulating Professor Nakache on this well-deserved and remarkable achievement!

Read more:

Professor Nakache is a leading voice on issues of refugee protection. She has dedicated her career to amplifying the voices of vulnerable populations in migration systems, along with making a substantial impact on the protection of their fundamental rights. In this position, she will focus on the relationship between Canada’s actions domestically and internationally regarding temporary migrants and asylum seekers, as there has been little assessment of how Canada’s commitments have translated into concrete action.����

For more information on this incredible achievement please visit

��

The Migrant Vulnerabilities in the Canadian Protection System��Workshop��held at the University of Ottawa on Wednesday March 15, 2023, sought to bring together practitioners, community partners, and civil servants to discuss the various research findings of this project. In the morning session, 23 participants, consisting of both practitioners and the research team met to converse about vulnerabilities experienced by migrants with on-the-ground practitioners, in addition to recommendations that if implemented, would be helpful in addressing migrant vulnerabilities both in Canada and in cases of overseas resettlement. This session was followed by an afternoon session, consisting of 36 participants, comprised of the research team, on-the-ground practitioners, and civil servants from the federal government, which included members of the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) and those working for Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC). There was also one member joining us from abroad, providing a necessary perspective on how vulnerability is understood and applied in overseas resettlement cases. Both sessions included a discussion about common themes that emerged throughout our discussions: these included what a trauma-informed approach for vulnerable migrants looks like, concerns with delays and communication with federal agencies, concerns around access to justice, the problems with employer-specific��work��permits and recommendations to provide more open-work��permits for vulnerable workers, and lastly, a discussion around creating a regularization program to better address migrant vulnerabilities.

From the 27^th to the 29^th of October 2021, LERRN participated in two sessions at the annual conference of the . Project Director James Milner also participated in the closing plenary – – where he highlighted the value of virtual spaces for facilitating conversations among refugees, scholars, and civil society members across borders. In case you missed the conference, here are some key takeaways.

Event details and recordings available here.

Detalles del evento y interpretación en español se pueden encontrar aquí.

Détails de l’événement et interprétation en français sont disponibles ici.

On 21 January 2021, the (LERRN) hosted two webinar panels for the North American component of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees’ (UNHCR) virtual conference: commemorating the 70^th anniversary of the UNHCR. The first panel, “Realizing Protection and Solutions Within North America” brought together co-moderators Jennifer Hyndman and Michaela Hynie and presenters Alejandra Macías Delgadillo, Delphine Nakache, and Eskinder Negash to discuss challenges relating to refugee protection in North America and the future role of UNHCR in the region.

North America may not be the first region that comes to mind when thinking about refugees and the UNHCR, but as the panel made clear, it is not for lack of concerns. A key theme of the presentations was what co-moderator Jennifer Hyndman referred to as the region’s “thickening borders” – or the set of new state policies and practices that work to limit asylum seekers’ access to legal protection. Delphine Nakache, Associate Professor at the University of Ottawa, provided examples of these processes at work in Canada. She argued that while Canada has become a world leader in refugee resettlement, “there is a growing gap in Canada between the treatment of refugees selected overseas versus those claimants who arrive at the Canadian border.”

A key issue is the Safe Third Country Agreement (STCA), which dictates that refugee claimants entering Canada or the US at an official land port of entry must request protection in the first country in which they arrive. In the past 5 years, the number of claimants at the border has increased, resulting in greater numbers of individuals being sent back to the US. But as Nakache pointed out, the US cannot always be considered ‘safe’. Many unsuccessful claimants in the US face deportation to countries where there is a high risk of persecution, and there is currently no way for the Canadian government to ensure their protection and safety. In addition, many claimants who are returned to the US are put into detention. On these grounds, the Federal Court of Canada ruled in July 2020 that the STCA violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and should therefore be suspended. The Trudeau government, however, filed an appeal, keeping the STCA in force for the time being. Nakache underlined how the pandemic has magnified these safety risks. In December 2020, the Canadian government resumed deportations of unsuccessful refugee claimants, despite their own policies which have closed the borders to non-essential travel.

The scale of Canada’s ‘spontaneous’ arrivals, however, is minor compared to that of Mexico’s. Recent economic, environmental, and political crises in Central America have put Mexico at the centre of one of the world’s major migration corridors. Alejandra Macías Delgadillo, Executive Director of Asylum Access Mexico, described how the Mexican government’s response has been driven by security concerns. The military presence at the southern border has been dramatically increased, and large numbers of arrivals are detained and deported, including families and unaccompanied minors.�� In fact, between 2017 and 2019 the Mexican government has deported 87% of claimants who have been detained at the border. Delgadillo highlighted how reversing these policies will not be easy. There is currently a lack of political will in the country, but a desperate need to improve the legislative environment to ensure greater protection for asylum seekers and refugees, particularly the most vulnerable. Additionally, the Mexican Commission for Refugee Assistance (COMAR) – Mexico’s refugee agency – faces significant staffing and resource limitations. As a result, there is a backlog of 80,000 asylum cases.

There is one country in North America, however, that may soon see dramatic changes in a positive direction. “The United States is back in business” claimed Eskinder Negash, President and CEO of the US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants. Negash highlighted how President Biden has signalled his intention to overhaul the country’s immigration system and repair the moral reputation of the US on the global stage. During his campaign, President Biden announced his administration would admit 125,000 refugees per year, a number that would once again make the US the world leader in refugee resettlement. On the day of his inauguration, he rescinded the controversial ‘Muslim ban’. Larger changes are evident in President Biden’s proposed immigration bill, which would offer pathways to citizenship for the country’s 11 million undocumented immigrants, extend legal protections for families and unaccompanied minors, and provide additional resources to relevant federal departments, including $4 billion for an inter-agency plan to address the underlying causes of migration in Central America. While Negash recognized it will take time to repair the damage done by the previous administration, he was optimistic that these changes will soon have a positive global impact.

Panelists also offered insights into what role the UNHCR might play in North America in the coming years. In terms of country specific activities, this role will depend on context. As emphasized by Nakache, we do not have a good idea of what happens to refugee claimants sent back to the US from Canada, and Canada’s practices at the border are not without fault. Here, the UNHCR could play a key role in terms of monitoring and advocacy. The same goes for the US, where the detention of families and unaccompanied minors has been in practice for several years. In Mexico, there may be room for a more hands-on approach. While advocacy is still critical, Mexico’s refugee agency COMAR requires more financial and human resources to cope with the growing number of asylum applications and refugees continue to face considerable barriers to integration.

But North America also has common concerns. The biggest issue facing the region is displacement from Central America. Individuals travelling this route face considerably health and security risks, and the scale of movement places strain on the immigration system of Mexico and to a lesser extent the US. Delgadillo stressed that a regional approach, guided by human rights principles, is critical. Considering a potential windfall of resources in the US for activities in Central America, the UNHCR could play a key role in bringing players together to develop, implement, and monitor a regional approach that increases the health and safety of migrants. Here, the UNHCR can also play a key role sharing information, lessons, and best practices between policy-makers and advocates of the region. As stated by Negash, the UNHCR has done incredible work in North America and worldwide over the past 70 years, but they may require new tools, ideas, and strategies to address the challenges of the future.

This report was prepared by Tyler Foley, PhD Student, �Ӱ�ԭ�� University, with assistance from ��Rachel McNally, LERRN Knowledge Mobilization and Translation Officer.

These panels and the LERRN-IDRC Webinar Series on Forced Displacement are coordinated by Jennifer Kandjii, LERRN Research Officer. For further information or ideas please contact us here.

To read the report on Panel 2, “North America within the global refugee regime,” click here.

To learn more, visit the VULNER Project’s and��.

Midori Kaga, PhD Candidate, School of International Development and Global Studies, University of Ottawa

Delphine Nakache, Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa

Executive Summary

Attempts to bridge the Humanitarian-Development (HD) nexus are not new, but in recent years this idea has received renewed interest in light of the failure of traditional approaches to adequately respond to and manage complex, protracted crises. While these major policy shifts take place at the global and national levels (for example, see the 2016 World Humanitarian Summit, the Grand Bargain, the 2018 Global Compact on Refugees, or the Regional Refugee and Resilience Plan (3RP)), few studies have considered the implications that an HD approach could have on one of the core mandates of humanitarian assistance: protection. This literature review therefore examines the potential protection implications of an HD approach to complex, emergency situations. It discusses current gaps and areas for future research that were identified in our review of the literature. Highlighting both the risks and benefits that this approach could have towards the protection outcomes for affected persons, we find that these outcomes largely depend on who is involved and whose interests are prioritized in decision-making processes in an HD approach. Consequently, this approach raises additional questions that lead us to an unresolved and ongoing debate within the humanitarian sector around its role in non-traditional humanitarian situations. This debate centres around whether the humanitarian sector should maintain a needs-based approach or shift towards a rights-based approach, which in turn raises important questions about when (and which of) the humanitarian principles are relevant and what protection really means, particularly when the perspectives of other stakeholders – such as affected persons – are taken into consideration. These issues remain unresolved and become complicated by the addition of multiple actors (humanitarian, development, civilian, private, affected persons etc.) with different roles, interests and mandates in an HD approach. We therefore propose that both the humanitarian and development sectors engage with the concepts, objectives and principles behind this debate head-on, in order to strengthen our understanding of what they mean practically. As HD approaches are likely to become the new way of addressing complex crises, finding clarity on how humanitarian and development actors can work together through shared principles and objectives is critical to ensure that affected persons are adequately protected.

View the full LERRN Working Paper Series here:

DOI

Citation

Kada, M., Nakache, D. (2019).Protection and the Humanitarian-Development Nexus: A Literature Review. Local Engagement Refugee Research Network (LERRN).