Creative Commons: Seeing beyond the surface of discrimination

The modern definition of “refugee” has been drafted by the United Nations 1951 convention relating to the status of refugees after the mass persecutions and displacements from the second World War. While some countries argue that ratifying this convention and any other agreement may challenge the state’s sovereignty, it may also be seen as an avenue for the country to expand its international policy scene that demonstrates solidarity towards protection of displaced people at a global level. State and citizens’ duties towards each other determine the extent to which the country’s achievements of a life with dignity for all are enforced with human rights mechanisms. But what really happens to these responsibilities when the State’s space is invaded? 

The etymology of the word refugee comes from the first oxford definition in 1671 “a protestant who has fled France to seek refuge elsewhere” meaning people who have fled the revocation of the Edict Nantes by Louis XIV, where the suppression of the reformed church in France has forced protestants into exile. Over the years, the word refugee has gained broader political spectrum, in which it became “a person who has fled his or her country to escape war, violence or persecution, and can prove it”. Hence, the language used in any context is a trivial crisis factor in which it dictates how people are defined. 

International protection of human rights vs state sovereignty

The 1951 Refugee convention acts as a legal document that outlines the rights of the displaced, of which States are expected to follow. It has been argued that this document does not answer to present challenges facing displaced people and host countries, as an example refugees need to seek assistance only from signatory countries or it does not consider the impact of receiving large refugee influx on host countries. 

Currently, the political environment around refugees is heated and charged. Country’s sovereignty, political stance, and domestic laws are the concern of many of host countries, where in most cases limits the country’s role in defining a better response towards refugees.  Various States are working towards achieving a balance between the call for human rights of individuals and State’s stability and security.

The contradictory intentions between States’ willingness and domestic policies present uncertainties and a state of limbo for asylum seekers. Governments are faced with decisions to circumvent the challenges that come with accepting non-registered citizens. Thus, their judgment shall be based on creating a safe space for all. “All actions towards refugees should be on a basis of human rights in an unconditional basis meaning unrelated to a place or adjective, every human being has the right to have a decent life, right for education, right for safe and healthy life, and right of participation”, stated by Mr. Hassan khazaaleh president of Afaq Jordan for development and training in a video published by the WANA Institute on human security in action: social cohesion and the preservation of human dignity.

Refugees and Human Dignity

Countries’ leadership, and commitment values are put to test with their acceptance of refugees into their land. The country is at a crossroad of ensuring access to a dignified life for all (same human rights to refugees and citizens) or they choose to limit refugees of any access. Recent study conducted by WANA researchers on living standards of refugees in host communities of Mafraq and East Amman highlighted that refugees with Syrian origins are often faced with racism and low living standards in host communities.

For an exemplary way to assess needs of an area, a statistical English model has been presented by the English Ministry of housing, Communities & Local Government to calculate local measures of deprivation in England. The model calculates an Index of Multiple Deprivation, it identifies areas deprived in the following domains income, employment, health and disability, education, skills and training, barriers to housing services, living environment, crime, and geography. This index is used by the government and external actors to direct their support and funds for the most deprived areas. But in Jordan’s case, most host communities already face deprivation in basic domains of livelihood, education and health services, with the addition of extra population that area undergoes extra pressure. As well as in refugee camps which are confined places that also pose specific standards of dwelling such as living in caravans or tents. Both scenarios are dependent on aid received from UN Refugee agencies, therefore the amount provided for each refugee may vary according to the aid allocated for that year.

A life with dignity goes beyond ensuring financial stability and safety, it covers aspects of social, cultural, political and economic inclusion. The jurisdiction of the concept has been quite new with different national and international laws and constitutions, as it has been seen subjective and difficult term to be applied on legal aspects. Therefore, two different morals views on the principle of dignity has been quite recognised through human rights and legal notion. Equal human rights aspect of dignity represents the ethos of what it means to be a human being, and from a legal point of view it represents the ethos of humanity that must be recognised and respected in equal quantum.

Conclusion

As the world has been caught up in defining the different meanings of “migrant” and “refugee”, which hold a specific political meaning and perspective, it failed to give proper attention to the fact that countries are addressing human lives with obligations, rights and responsibilities. Over the past couple of decades, Jordan like many other countries faced a massive leap of population growth. This can be seen as tool to strengthen a country’s regulatory system where every person residing in the country share equal responsibilities and rights. The autonomy of the state can be based on considering the factor of the human dignity as an essential one in defining a safe life for all, where discrimination should be eliminated. As HRH Prince El Hasan of Jordan continuously emphasises “When discrimination stops, plurality is seen as a celebration of creative commons rather than hatred”.

Asylum seekers have a lot to offer their societies and their full capacity and potential should be embraced where their responsibilities contribute directly to the economic growth of the country in which they can strengthen their social, environmental and economic ownership. It has been recognised that Jordanians have a core based on ethical perspective, for the past decade it witnessed a series of historical events that welcomed an array of nationalities such as Circassians, Armenians, Palestinians, Iraqis, and Syrians. It has always been embodied with a sense of respect and harmony to everyone no matter of their background, nationality, language, ethnicity or religion.