1

Table of Contents

1) Letter from the Secretariat

2) Letter from the Committee Board
3) Agenda Item 1: Strengthening Accountability
Mechanisms For Human Rights Violations In
Conflict Zones

3.1. Introduction to the Agenda

3.2. Definitions
3.3. Key Vocabulary
3.4. Current Situation of the Refugee Crisis
3.5. Major Parties Involved
3.6. Problems Experienced by Refugees in Host Countries
3.7. The impact of refugees on host communities and reasons
to ease pressure
3.8. Questions to be Answered

4)Bibliography

2
Letter from the Secretariat

Dear Delegates

Welcome to this years Model United Nations conference. It is an honor to have

so many devoted and enthusiastic people to take up global issues through
diplomacy and cooperation.

In the days to come, you will deliberate on urgent issues at variance with
climate change, human rights, and other areas that demand thoughtful debate
and solutions that are innovative in their own right. The conference is an
unusually good avenue in which you will get to develop skills in communication,
negotiation, and leadership because you will assume the roles of diplomats and
advocates.

For that, let me extend my gratitude to our organization team and advisors
without whom this would not be possible. Lean into this experience, respect
others' thoughts, and work together in pursuit of solutions that are so much
more personal.

Thank you for your presence and let me see how you turn this into an impact.

Sincerely,
Deniz Egemen İlmaz
Secretary General

3
Letter from the Committee Board

Dear Esteemed Delegates,

On behalf of the organizing UNHRC committee of the CALDEBATE’25 , we are

thrilled to welcome you to this year’s conference! It is our pleasure to invite you
to engage in insightful discussions, foster diplomacy, and collaborate with
like-minded peers from across the globe.

As members of the committee board, we are committed to ensuring that this

experience is both enriching and rewarding for all delegates involved. Over the
course of the conference, you will have the opportunity to develop your public
speaking, critical thinking, and negotiation skills, while addressing some of the
most pressing issues facing the international community today.

Sincerely,
Duru Adal Gündüz
President Chair

Dear Esteemed Delegates,

We are so excited to welcome you to our phenomenal conference! It's an honor

to invite you to have perceptive discussions,
promote negotiation, and unite with
harmonious peers from around the world.

As the chairs of the UNHRC board, our goal is to assure that this experience is
both fulfilling and worthwhile for all the delegates in the committee.
Throughout the conference, you will be able to improve your social speaking,
cognitive thinking, and diplomacy skills, while expressing one of the world's
most dire issues.

Sincerely,
Alp Tüysüzoğlu
Deputy Chair

4
Agenda Item 1: Strengthening Accountability
Mechanisms For Human Rights Violations In
Conflict Zones

Introduction to Agenda Item

In the face of escalating conflicts worldwide, the protection of human rights has
become increasingly precarious. Conflict zones are often characterized by
egregious violations, including torture, extrajudicial killings, and the targeting of
civilians, which leave lasting scars on affected communities. This agenda item
focuses on the urgent need to strengthen accountability mechanisms for such
violations, recognizing that without accountability, impunity reigns, and the
cycle of violence perpetuates.

Strengthening these mechanisms is not only essential for delivering justice to

victims but also for fostering a culture of respect for human rights and deterring
future abuses. This session will explore effective strategies for enhancing
international and national legal frameworks, improving monitoring and
reporting systems, and ensuring the meaningful participation of victims in
accountability processes. By bringing together diverse
stakeholders—governments, civil society, international organizations, and
affected communities—we aim to develop actionable recommendations that will
contribute to a more robust and effective response to human rights violations in
conflict zones. Together, we can pave the way for a future where accountability
is the norm, and justice is accessible to all.

5
Definitions

Refugees; Refugees are outside their country of origin due to fear of

persecution, conflict, violence or other circumstances which have seriously
disrupted public order and which, therefore, require "international protection" .
The 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, but also regional
instruments and the UNHCR statutes make it possible to give a definition of a
refugee.

Migrants; According to the United Nations, this term designates "any person
who has resided in a foreign country for more than one year, whatever the
causes, voluntary or involuntary, of the movement, and whatever the means,
regular or irregular , used to migrate. However, it is common to include certain
categories of short-term migrants, such as seasonal agricultural workers who
move during planting or harvest time.

Asylum Seekers; Just like a refugee, an asylum seeker is a person seeking

protection because of dangers in their home country. Although every refugee is
initially an asylum seeker, not all asylum seekers will ultimately be recognized as
refugees.
Indeed, the right to be recognized as a refugee is determined by law after an
asylum seeker has requested protection in the country of refuge

Key Vocabulary

Asylum:Legal protection granted to refugees by a country where they seek

safety.

Displacement: Forced movement of people from their homes due to conflict,

persecution, or disaster.

Forced migration: Movement of refugees or displaced people due to threats to

their security or well-being.

Asylum seeker: A person seeking international protection but whose refugee

status has not yet been determined.

6
Integration: The process by which refugees become an integral part of the host
country's society, including social, economic and cultural aspects.

Repatriation: Return of refugees to their country of origin when conditions

permit.

Resettlement: Transfer of refugees from the country where they requested

asylum to a third country which agrees to welcome them permanently.

Resettlement Program: A government-led initiative allowing refugees to settle

permanently in a host country.

Integration policies: Regulations and programs designed to facilitate the

inclusion of refugees in the society of the host country.

Asylum policies: laws and procedures governing the granting of asylum to

refugees.

Naturalization: Process by which a refugee becomes a citizen of the host country

Buffer Zones: A buffer zone is a neutral zonal area that lies between two or more
bodies of land

7
Current Situation of The Refugee Crisis

Wars and violence had led to the forced displacement of around 114 million
people by the end of September 2023. The main factors driving forced
displacement in the first half of 2023 were: the war in Ukraine and conflicts in
Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Myanmar; a combination of
drought, floods and insecurity in Somalia; and a protracted humanitarian crisis
in Afghanistan, according to UNHCR's Biannual Global Trends Report, which
looks at forced displacement in the first six months of this year. Low and middle
income countries host 75% of refugees and others in need of international
protection. Globally, 1.6 million new individual asylum applications were filed in
the first six months of 2023, the highest number ever recorded.

1) High-income nations only take in 24% of all refugees. Just 24% of

the world's refugees are hosted by the richest nations. The remaining 76% are
hosted by underdeveloped, middle-class, and low-income nations. The largest
nation that hosts refugees is Turkey. Since 2011, families have been displaced by
a continuous conflict in Syria, which is home to the majority of refugees living in
Turkey.

2) The majority of refugees reside in nearby nations

3) Just three nations accounted for 52% of all refugees worldwide

by the end of 2022: Syria, Afghanistan, and the Ukraine.

4) There is a global accord to safeguard refugees; under the 1951

Refugee Convention, 149 nations have committed to offer refugee safeguards.
After World War Two, when a great number of refugees escaped persecution
and violence in Europe, this agreement was created.

Major Parties Involved

Türkiye
The situation of refugees in Türkiye is complex and significant due to the large
number of people seeking refuge in the country. In 2023, Türkiye welcomed one
of the largest refugee populations in the world, mainly Syrians fleeing civil war in

8
their country. With nearly four million registered Syrian refugees, Türkiye has
made considerable efforts to meet their basic needs such as education, health
care and housing. However, this massive influx has also created socio-economic
challenges, including pressure on local resources, social tensions and integration
difficulties. Despite aid programs and government initiatives, many refugees in
Türkiye continue to face difficulties in rebuilding their lives and adapting to a
new environment.

According to UNHCR data in 2022, there are more than 3.6 million refugees
registered in Türkiye, mainly Syrians. However, it is important to note that this
figure may vary due to the presence of unregistered migrants and asylum
seekers, which makes it difficult to accurately estimate the total
migrant population in the country.

Germany
In Germany, the situation of refugees is marked by a complex reception system
but also by relatively open integration policies. The country has welcomed a
significant number of refugees in recent years, especially after the 2015
migration crisis, where nearly one million people arrived, mainly from countries
such as Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Germany has endeavored to put in place
infrastructure to accommodate and support these newcomers, with reception
centers and programs to provide them with housing, health care and language
courses to facilitate their integration. Nevertheless, the integration process is
complex and time-taking, with challenges such as job search, cultural and
linguistic adaptation, as well as social and political issues related to the
acceptance of refugees in German society. Despite these challenges, Germany
has shown a continuous commitment to helping and integrating refugees into its
society.

According to UNHCR data, the number of refugees in Germany varies over time
due to arrivals, departures and ongoing asylum application processes. In 2022, it
is estimated that there were about 1.5 million refugees in Germany. However,
these figures may fluctuate and do not take into account unregistered migrants
or asylum seekers awaiting processing of their file.

Iran
In Iran, the situation of refugees is notable because of the presence of a large
population of refugees, mainly from Afghanistan. Iran is home to one of the
largest refugee populations in the world, with Afghans representing the vast

9
majority of this population. Most Afghan refugees in Iran have fled their country
because of conflicts, political unrest and persistent economic difficulties in
Afghanistan. Despite refugee status, many Afghans in Iran face socio-economic
challenges, such as limited access to education and formal employment. About
780,000 Afghan refugees were registered in Iran according to UNHCR data in
2022, if we consider unregistered migrants and those living in Iran without
official refugee status the number is reaching 2.6 million. Iran has made efforts
to provide assistance to refugees, but there are still many challenges to ensure
their integration and long-term well-being.

Pakistan
Pakistan hosts around three to four million Afghan refugees and migrants, at
least 600,000 of whom have crossed the border since August 2021, when the
Taliban seized power for the second time in Afghanistan. Of these, 1.3 million are
registered as legal refugees, holding proof of registration cards, while another
850,000 have received Afghan citizen cards from Pakistani authorities, granting
them some, but not all, protections. to registered refugees. An additional 1.7
million Afghans are estimated to reside in the country without any
documentation. The Pakistani government recently intends to start deportations
for those who reside illegally in the country. That decision, according to the
international law and the United Nations regulations, should not include those
who have refugee status but because of the complications in the region, these
acts could possibly cause problems.

Uganda
Uganda, the largest refugee-hosting country in Africa, provides shelter to more
than 1.5 million people. Most refugees come from South Sudan (57%), the
Democratic Republic of Congo (32%), Somalia (3%) and Burundi (3%). Refugees
live primarily in camps across twelve districts, alongside host communities,
leading to economic and environmental challenges. From January to September
2023, Uganda received more than 73,460 new arrivals, including 20,693 from
South Sudan, 19,522 from the Democratic Republic of Congo and 33,245 urban
arrivals from Sudan, Eritrea, Somalia and other countries.

Poland
Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022, more than 7.2
million refugees fleeing Ukraine have been recorded across Europe, with the
vast majority initially fleeing to the nearest countries of its western border.

10
According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR),
nearly 1.5 million people have fled to neighboring Poland.

Bangladesh
In August 2017, armed attacks, mass violence and serious human rights violations
forced thousands of Rohingya to flee their homes in Rakhine State, Myanmar.
Today, more than 960,000 people have sought refuge in Bangladesh, the
majority living in the Cox Bazar region, home to the world's largest refugee
camp.

Sudan
By October 2023, the fighting that erupted in Sudan in April 2023 had driven out
over 4.3 million residents and forced over 1.1 million others into five neighboring
countries: South Sudan, Ethiopia, Egypt, Chad, Egypt, and the Central African
Republic (CAR). Prior to the current crisis, Sudan and its neighbors were already
housing sizable numbers of internally displaced people and refugees. The new
situation produced major extra needs for the six UNHCR country operations
engaged, which made it difficult for them to appropriately respond to the
increasing number of persons who are forcibly displaced. These operations were
already severely underfunded. Due to continuous warfare, severe shortages of
food, fuel, and water, poor access to electricity and communications, and
exorbitant costs for basic needs, the humanitarian situation in Sudan is still
catastrophic. Medical care has been

Problems Experienced by Refugees in Host Countries

There are several problems that refugees are still experiencing in their host
countries. Some of these difficulties cannot even be prevented by governments.
Social construction of a nation may not be easy to get used to by the people who
came from another culture. Even though UN frameworks to help refugees are in
progress, those who have entered the actual society of the host country face
crucial difficulties.

1) International Legal Frameworks on the resettlement of the refugees

2) National Legal Reforms
3) Engagement with Civil Society
4) International Cooperation

11
International Legal Frameworks on the resettlement of the
refugees

Resettlement is cited as ‘a tool for protection of and solutions for refugees, a

tangible mechanism for burden and responsibility sharing and a demonstration
of solidarity’ in the Global Compact on Refugees. Despite this importance,
neither the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (1951 Convention) nor
any other international instrument explicitly obliges states to provide durable
solutions including resettlement.Furthermore, no structured international legal
regime specifying state responsibilities in relation to resettlement exists
although the 1951 Convention obliges its parties to provide refugees with a
number of core rights as well as ‘an expanding array of rights as their
relationship with the asylum state deepens’. This means, states retain sovereign
competence to decide if, who and how many persons to resettle and which
status persons will receive once resettled. Nevertheless, this does not
necessarily mean that states owe no duty towards refugees and asylum seekers
who are subject to resettlement procedures in the territories of third states or
those who are already resettled under international law.

Resettlement is regarded as a permanent or durable solution and, as advocated

by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), resettled
refugees get permanent settlement with the opportunity for eventual
citizenship. Is this still the case? The European Commission submitted a
proposal for a Regulation establishing a Union Resettlement Framework and
amending Regulation (EU) No 516/2014 of the European Parliament and the
Council (hereinafter the Resettlement Regulation Proposal) on 13 July 2016 to
complement the Union’s resettlement programmes by providing common rules
on resettlement. According to the Proposal, resettled persons are to be granted
either the refugee status or the subsidiary protection status in the Member
States. This, inter alia, makes one question whether the Resettlement Regulation
Proposal regards resettlement as a durable solution for refugees. Although the
Proposal has yet to be adopted, the Commission, as part of the new Pact on
Migration and Asylum presented in 2020, called for its swift adoption. There are
other recent developments which make one question the extent to which today’s
resettlement practices offer refugees a durable solution. Tan notes that a
considerable number of resettled refugees receive complementary and
temporary protection statuses in Denmark and recently Denmark subjected 32

12
resettled refugees primarily from Somalia to cessation proceedings. Moreover,
although the evacuation and resettlement efforts by the United States following
the Taliban takeover in Afghanistan are still going on, at the time of writing, it is
not clear which legal status evacuated and resettled Afghans will receive in the
US. In light of these recent developments, it might be the right time to
investigate whether resettlement is still a permanent or durable solution.

Is There a Right to be Resettled in International Law?

No structured international legal regime governing resettlement exists.The 1951

Convention is largely silent on the issue of resettlement save for its Article 30
which requires contracting states to permit refugees to transfer assets to
resettlement countries though this provision in no way be interpreted to oblige
state parties to offer resettlement to refugees. Considering resettlement is a tool
of responsibility or burden sharing one may question whether there is a state
duty to resettle under international refugee law. The short answer is no.

A reference to international cooperation was made in the Preamble of the

Geneva Convention though the Convention does not oblige its states parties to
participate in responsibility sharing arrangements. In other words, neither the
1951 Convention nor any other international treaty or customary international
law principle obliges states to share the asylum-related burden of others. As a
result, resettlement is not a right and states are not obliged to offer resettlement
to refugees or any other category of persons in need of international protection
under international law. Put it simply, resettlement is more of ‘a discretionary
policy option’ for states than a legal responsibility.

The absence of a binding duty on states to resettle refugees together with the
lack of unified standards with regard to resettlement leaves much discretion to
states to regulate different aspects of resettlement. As a result, states retain
sovereign competence to decide if, who and how many persons to resettle. This
also leads to divergences between national resettlement practices with regard to
the selection criteria including eligibility and exclusion criteria; resettlement
procedures; length of resettlement procedures; pre- and after- departure
orientation programmes and the status granted to resettled persons and
if/when this status can be withdrawn.

Considering resettlement is a tool of responsibility sharing that has the capacity

to reduce the negative impact of large-scale displacements on host countries

13
and in view of the fact that global resettlement needs are much greater than the
resettlement places available worldwide it might be the right time to discuss the
need to draft a legally binding instrument specifying duties of states in relation
to resettlement. Adoption of such an instrument, although unlikely in the near
future, may also contribute to the streamlining resettlement selection
procedures and the legal status and rights granted to refugees in the
resettlement states.

Conclusion

Resettlement is not a right and states are not obliged to offer resettlement to
refugees or any other category of persons in need of international protection
under international law. Yet, this does not necessarily mean that states owe no
duty towards persons who are being considered for resettlement or those who
are resettled. Section 2 concluded that, provided that the resettled person is a
refugee as defined by the 1951 Convention and the resettlement state is a party
to this Convention, the resettlement state should grant resettled refugees at
least the refugee status and rights of refugees lawfully staying. If a resettled
refugee is granted only the refugee status in the resettlement state but not
permanent residency or citizenship this means his/her refugee status can be
withdrawn in line with Article 1 C of the Convention and this will not violate 1951
Convention. Though withdrawing refugee status of the resettled refugees in line
with Article 1 C of the 1951 Convention does not necessarily violate the 1951
Convention, it casts doubt as to reasonableness of such practice in light of the
long and detailed resettlement procedures refugees are being subject to before
being resettled. It is also concluded in section 2 that if the resettled person is not
a refugee as defined by the 1951 Convention, resettling states are bound by even
less rules in determining which status to grant to resettled persons and when to
withdraw them.

Section 3 concluded that when refugees receive a permanent status in the

resettlement state be it permanent residency or citizenship, as advocated by
also the UNHCR, this suggests resettlement offers refugees a permanent and/or
durable solution. When one analyses the European Commission’s Proposal for
Regulation establishing a Union Resettlement Framework in light of these
criteria, following conclusions are reached. The Resettlement Regulation
Proposal foresees not just refugees but a broader category of forced migrants
being eligible for resettlement. As a result, the Proposal envisions subsidiary
protection in addition to the refugee status be granted to resettled persons in

14
the Union. Whether the Proposed Regulation will offer refugees a permanent or
durable solution will ultimately depend on the final text to be adopted by the
Council and the implementation of the Regulation. Nevertheless, if the
Commission Proposal is adopted as is, it is doubtful whether resettled persons,
especially those holding subsidiary protection status, will have access to
permanent and/or a durable solution in the Union. The recent practices of
Denmark and the US show that others might follow this suit and grant resettled
refugees a status that falls short of the refugee status, permanent residence or
citizenship and withdraw these statuses when they see fit.

As for the question of whether the humanitarian character of resettlement is

being replaced by pragmatic considerations, the Commission Proposal indeed
regards resettlement as a tool to manage irregular migration, prevent future
mass influx situations and achieve Union’s foreign policy objectives and if the
proposal is adopted, as is, this will be the official EU policy. However, it is not too
late for the EU to address the shortcomings identified in this article and adopt a
Regulation which will reinstate the humanitarian character of resettlement,
grant resettled refugees a durable solution and reverse the trend towards
restricting permeance and durability that resettlement provides to refugees.

Legal Reforms and Development

Through much of the 1980s and early 1990s academics and policy makers
interested in development focused on policies that had little or nothing to do
with the legal system. The overriding goals of development policy were
macroeconomic stabilisation, privatisation and ‘getting prices right’. Recently,
however, the focus of attention has shifted to institutions, which Douglas North
(1995) defines as ‘the rules of the game of a society’. Those rules of the game
include formal legal rules, and consequently the new reform agenda—the
Second-Generation Reforms—is typically understood to include legal reforms.

To the extent that the new agenda includes legal reforms it is premised on the
notion that legal institutions play an independent and significant role in
development. Ironically, just over 25 years ago this notion was discredited and
renounced by scholars who had once been its most ardent proponents (Trubek
& Galanter, 1974). In the light of this historical record we believe that it is
essential to analyse critically the theoretical and empirical bases for current
assertions that legal institutions play an important role in development.

15
We should mention at the outset that in our opinion this question—what role do
legal institutions play in development?—is merely the first of three critical
questions that ought to be explored by scholars interested in law and
development. The second question is: to the extent that law does play a role in
development, why is it that some countries have developed the types of legal
institutions that are conducive to development while others have not? The third
and final question is: what steps, if any, can be taken to encourage the
emergence of the legal institutions that facilitate development in countries
where those institutions have not evolved? This paper confines itself to the
initial question on the premise that, unless there is reason to believe that legal
institutions matter, the other two questions need not be answered.

Our analysis proceeds in two stages. First, we survey some of the theoretical
literature concerning the relationship between law and development. Since the
definition of development is highly contested, our strategy is to canvass a wide
variety of perspectives on development with a view to identifying claims about
which legal institutions play a role in development and what sort of role they
play. In the second stage of our analysis we examine the extent to which those
theoretical claims are validated by the relevant empirical literature.

Theoretical perspectives on law and development

The following sections outline six theoretical perspectives on development and

the insights that each purports to yield about the relationship between law and
development. In our view each of these perspectives has been particularly
influential in that each has not only shaped thinking about development in
general but has also been adopted—either explicitly or implicitly—by scholars
who have made theoretical claims about the relationship between law and
development.

International cooperation and development: a conceptual

overview

Introduction

16
Realising the objectives of a widening agenda for global development – such as is
currently being discussed in the process leading up to a new framework of
development goals for the time after 2015 – will require global collective action
(UN 2013a; ODI / DIE / ECDPM 2013). Stressing the significance of the broader
structure of international cooperation and global collective action for
development appears to be a commonplace argument given challenges like
climate change, financial instability, transnational health challenges or food
insecurity. The argument for improved international cooperation needs to be
considered against the background that the domestic and local contexts are the
main focus of action to promote development. This is why the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs) have focused primarily on domestic policies in
developing countries and aid to support their implementation.

Beyond that, there is broad, but vague consensus that global framework
conditions influence the prospects of these efforts. Considerations to make the
global context more development friendly have been part of earlier development
debates, from demands for a New International Economic Order (NIEO) in the
1970s to MDG 8 for a global partnership. Since the end of the 1990s, the
prominence of the concept of global public goods (GPGs) in the development
discourse has reflected the growing attention towards global collective action.
Yet, the global development agenda is still far from being consistently linked to
the broader framework of international cooperation.

Integrating this framework more solidly with development efforts is one of the
main challenges for making claims on implementing a global development
agenda credible. The implementation of a broadening development agenda –
such as might emerge from the combination of a post-MDG agenda and the
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (HLP 2013) – relies on two strands of
cooperation (Kaul 2013a, 2013b). On the one hand, development cooperation
focuses on supporting domestic policies in developing countries with the main
focus on poverty reduction. On the other hand, all countries irrespective of their
level of development have an interest in engaging in international cooperation in
order to provide and preserve GPGs, such as a stable climate. Both strands of
cooperation function according to their respective logics, but are also highly
interdependent. This paper provides a conceptual overview of the relationship
between development and the broader framework of international cooperation
by looking into two particular aspects:

17
The first part of the paper illustrates how the broader framework of
international cooperation and global collective action fits into the overall
context of goals and actions in development. Drawing on a conceptual
distinction between domestic and global public goods as enablers and goals of
development, the paper presents a framework that illustrates the role of
international cooperation and its interdependence with domestic action from a
GPG-perspective. The framework identifies contact points in the relationship
between domestic and global action and goals with the categories of provision,
support, access and preservation.

As a consequence of this close interconnection between domestic and global

actions and goals, understanding how international cooperation works is an
integral part of development research. To explore these questions, development
studies can draw on an extensive body of literature on international relations,
global governance, economic theory (global public goods) and other disciplines.
The second part of the paper reviews key concepts from some of this literature
describing patterns of international cooperation. The conceptual overview is
structured according to the main categories of aggregation technology, types of
contribution, governance mechanisms, the role of different stages in the
policy-making process, and institutional complexity. The overview highlights
patterns of international cooperation representing basic elements of the global
governance framework that the implementation of a broadening development
agenda needs to take into account.

The conclusion discusses implications derived from the conceptual overview for
making the broader framework of international cooperation and global collective
action a truly integral part of a joined-up approach to reaching development
objectives. The conclusion highlights two sets of challenges: First, the
interdependence between the broader framework of international cooperation
and development moves the question why international cooperation fails or
GPGs are underprovided to the centre of development studies. Many of the
global structures of cooperation have not kept pace with global changes and
face pressure to adapt. At the same time, the analysis of cooperation is not a
fundamental departure from research questions traditionally addressed in
development studies. Collective action and cooperation have always been central
to understanding development processes within and beyond the state. Second,
concerns about the prospects of international cooperation stand in contrast to
the abundance of cooperation that can be observed and the elaborate
architecture and processes of cooperation reflected in the conceptual overview.

18
Therefore, an equally important challenge is to steer the broader framework of
international cooperation towards being an integral part of the implementation
of a global development agenda, instead of merely an extra or a vague set of
pledges.

Questions To Be Answered,

How can the international community address the growing global refugee crisis
while ensuring the protection of human rights for migrants and asylum seekers?

How can the UNHRC balance the protection of freedom of speech with the need
to prevent hate speech and misinformation, especially in the digital age?

What steps can the UNHRC take to combat systemic racism and ensure equal
treatment for all racial and ethnic groups, especially in countries with histories
of racial discrimination?

How can the UNHRC hold state actors and non-state armed groups accountable
for human rights violations during armed conflicts, such as genocide, war
crimes, and crimes against humanity?

What are the key factors that contribute to a safe and stable environment in
their home regions?

How can we address the root causes of conflict and instability to create lasting
peace?

What steps can be taken to rebuild infrastructure and essential services in their
home regions?

Are there any specific economic opportunities that can be developed to

encourage voluntary return?

How can we ensure the protection of human rights and provide justice for those
affected by the conflict?

19
4) Bibliography

UNHCR - The UN Refugee Agency. (n.d.). Refugees and the Environment |

UNHCR. UNHCR.

https://www.unhcr.org/publications/refugees-and-environment Nearly 50,000

migrants assisted to voluntarily return home: 2021 Return and Reintegration key
highlights. (2022, July 28). International Organization for Migration.

https://www.iom.int/news/nearly-50000-migrants-assisted-voluntarily-return
-home-2021- return-and-reintegration-key-highlights Bradley, M. (2021).

Realising the right of return: Refugees’ roles in localising norms and socialising
UNHCR. Geopolitics, 28(3), 979–1006.

https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2021.1994399 Paloutzian, R. F., & Sağir, Z.

(2019). Forgiving, Reconciling, and Peace-Building in Refugee Contexts: Theory,
Research, and Data from the War in Syria. In Peace psychology book series(pp.
181–200).

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14943-7_12 Statista. (2023, December 11).

Refugees - major hosting countries worldwide as of 2023.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/263423/major-refugee-hosting-countries-
worldwide UNHCR - The UN Refugee Agency. (n.d.-a). |

UNHCR. UNHCR. https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275061692_Explaining_ASEAN's_E
ngagement_of_Civil_Society_in_Policy-making_Smoke_and_Mirrors

https://brill.com/view/journals/emil/24/1/article-p27_2.xml

https://labordoc.ilo.org/discovery/fulldisplay?vid=41ILO_INST:41ILO_V1&docid
=alma993461153402676&context=L&adaptor=Local%20Search%20Engine

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2430206

20