Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

This paper attempts to address the questions of when and how protection should end and the impact of the highly individualized 1951 Convention on mixed-motive, mass refugee flows. Using the Ethiopian caseload in Sudan as a case study, the paper surveys the Cessation Clauses of the 1951 Convention and the criteria developed by the UNHCR to assess fundamental change in the country of origin. The paper grapples with the difficulties in assessing fundamental change in protracted and complex civil conflicts and points out the challenges of delivering fair cessation procedures during mass refugee influxes. The paper also discusses the consequences of ill-conceived cessation declarations on refugees and recommendations on the role of the UNHCR, which has an influential presence in Africa. I argue that the 1951 Convention cannot address the complexities of cessation declarations in Africa on its own. The paper asserts that cessation declarations in Africa must be considered within the framework of durable solutions and with due regard for the OAU Convention.

More information


Working paper

Publication Date




Total pages